RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive243
[edit] Annoying republicans keep trying to sell me bush socks
I keep getting emails from the GOP attempting to get me to join the Tea Party, as well as buy George H.W. Bush socks, mugs and other assortments. Anyone know how to get them to stop selling me their bullshit'Legionwhat do you want from me 08:24, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Isn't there an 'unsubscribe' link or similar? ₩€₳$€£ΘĪÐ
Methinks it is a Weasel 08:27, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- This reminds me of the time we put dozens of Obama signs on my (very conservative) former science teacher's lawn. I think someone has signed you up as a prank. PacWalker 08:29, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Of all the presidents to merchandise... --Miekal 18:40, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Not to mention the (probably unintentional) homophonic[wp] hilarity of Bush socks/sucks. I wonder if this has been thought through. ScepticWombat (talk) 08:38, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- He socks and he mugs! Narky Sawtooth
(Nyar~) 23:54, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Note that socks and sucks may not be homophones to the target consumer demographic. PacWalker 03:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Socks and sucks homophones? So you pronounce cocks as 'kucks' then? o_O 141.134.75.236 (talk) 15:10, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Note that socks and sucks may not be homophones to the target consumer demographic. PacWalker 03:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- He socks and he mugs! Narky Sawtooth
- In response to what weasaloid said, no it does not appear that there is.'Legionwhat do you want from me 20:15, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- That's strange because laws on email marketing usually mandate some sort of consumer opt-out. You could look into reporting it if it does violate anti-spam laws, but it would probably be better to just write to the Republicans asking to be removed from their mailing list. ₩€₳$€£ΘĪÐ
Methinks it is a Weasel 14:07, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- That's strange because laws on email marketing usually mandate some sort of consumer opt-out. You could look into reporting it if it does violate anti-spam laws, but it would probably be better to just write to the Republicans asking to be removed from their mailing list. ₩€₳$€£ΘĪÐ
- Not to mention the (probably unintentional) homophonic[wp] hilarity of Bush socks/sucks. I wonder if this has been thought through. ScepticWombat (talk) 08:38, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Of all the presidents to merchandise... --Miekal 18:40, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- This reminds me of the time we put dozens of Obama signs on my (very conservative) former science teacher's lawn. I think someone has signed you up as a prank. PacWalker 08:29, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, at least that's the official GOP mailinglist. If you got on the list that's passed between unofficial right-leaning sites, you'd be faced with more scams than you could possibly bear. Regardless, no. You can't get unsubscribed: political emails are exempt from CAN-SPAM. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 15:47, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] Do comedic parodies like the Onion reinforce rape culture?
I'm reading the Onion and one of their satire pieces was "little pussy takes call in other room." Seriously? ConservapediaEditor (talk) 18:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- It's easier to answer that if i can actually read the article you mention--Miekal 18:46, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry. [1] ConservapediaEditor (talk) 18:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- If I were the editor, that piece wouldn't have run. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:00, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- What in the devil has that to do with rape culture?!--Arisboch (talk) 19:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- What does it have to do with -anything-. It looks like something i'd see on 4chan. --Miekal 20:09, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Huh, wut? That stuff wasn't funny at all, but reinforcing rape culture? How was that supposed to work? ScepticWombat (talk) 20:36, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Given that pussies can take a rough beating for far longer than penes can give it, plus the whole "childbirth" thing, you'd think that "pussy" would mean "tough".CorruptUser (talk) 21:11, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- I've heard, but do not believe, that it's derived from pusillanimous. This sounds like a "nuh uh, I'm not misogynist" excuse more than a real derivation. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 16:42, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Given that pussies can take a rough beating for far longer than penes can give it, plus the whole "childbirth" thing, you'd think that "pussy" would mean "tough".CorruptUser (talk) 21:11, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Insulting articles seemingly written by awful people is a classic Onion joke. For example: Spoiled, Doughy Brat Makes Local Parent Feel Spiritually Whole. Frederick♠♣♥♦ 05:10, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Huh, wut? That stuff wasn't funny at all, but reinforcing rape culture? How was that supposed to work? ScepticWombat (talk) 20:36, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- What does it have to do with -anything-. It looks like something i'd see on 4chan. --Miekal 20:09, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- What in the devil has that to do with rape culture?!--Arisboch (talk) 19:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- If I were the editor, that piece wouldn't have run. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:00, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry. [1] ConservapediaEditor (talk) 18:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- The answer is... Well, how close is the header to a headline? I'm not making accusations of intent like the law implies, though. Narky Sawtooth
(Nyar~) 02:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Of course they can and do sometimes. One of those misconceptions people have about the concept of rape culture is that it should have some zero tolerance threshold for exacerbating. Instead, it should be understood as a cultural mistake that requires gradual reform. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 13:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
While there are many different profiles of rapists, one common thread is rape is about power, not love and sex. When men are ridiculed for showing compassionate qualities, that's how more men get pushed into proving their masculinity through misogyny and rape culture. ConservapediaEditor (talk) 01:14, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- But in this case, the insults were supposed to be viewed as extreme and unreasonable. The humor is in the absurdity of viciously belittling someone for doing mundane things, such as excusing themselves from a meeting to take a call. The person being made fun of is the narrator, not the main character. Frederick♠♣♥♦ 05:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] Link your favorite heading for a Daily Mail article.
Devout Christian mother-of-three, 31, becomes first woman in Britain to DIE from cannabis poisoning after smoking a joint in bed to help her sleep Master Necromancer(fear me!) 02:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think it would have more impact if it was done with the headline as a link instead of the URL. Narky Sawtooth
(Nyar~) 03:04, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think it would be better if the Daily Mail was never linked to - horrible rag that it is. Scream!! (talk) 10:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Fixed headline thing, and the content is of course absolutely uncorroborated speculation by a Daily Heil numpty (essentially: She smoked cannabis and got a heart attack, OMG the weed killed her!!!1!). ScepticWombat (talk) 10:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think it would be better if the Daily Mail was never linked to - horrible rag that it is. Scream!! (talk) 10:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Eggselent Samstr. Scream!! (talk) 23:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think cannabis is all too toxic, and the kidneys/liver should have filtered out the cannabis poisoning over a 24 hour period, especially at half a joint a night, if she did die of cannabis poisoning she would have to smoke a lot more as it says here http://drsircus.com/medicine/marijuana-toxicity “Marijuana has remarkably low toxicity and lethal doses in humans have not been described." therefore it is unlikely she actually died from the cannabis itself, and is most likely unrelated, also "high" is a relative term as the normal amount of cannabis is 0 so any amount of cannabis can be considered "high" Bubba41102 (talk) 02:11, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Eggselent Samstr. Scream!! (talk) 23:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] The list of evolutionary holdovers/errors posted to the RW twitter some time ago
Some time ago, there was a list of 100 or so evolutionary oddities (possibly as a "if creationism is true, god is a lousy designer" thing) that was posted to (or retweeted by) the RW twitter. I believe one of the thing was about how poorly adapted the human spine is for standing erect (and the resultant issues with back pain everyone has). I ran back through the account's history, but I can't seem to find it. Anyone know the thing I'm talking about? Compro01 (talk) 07:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- We have a list of mistakes made by God. ΨΣΔξΣΓΩΙÐ
Methinks it is a Weasel 08:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Who is this God person, anyway? 86.184.43.115 (talk) 14:17, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] Sites to find Pseudoscience and alternative medicine bullshit
Can anyone give me links to sites that will give me lots of pseudoscience to write about, im interested in writing about isome of this pseudoscience Preemptive thanks for your help Bubba41102 (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Look at the foot of the Clogs page, there's a list there. Dunno how up-to-date it is or if it's even been maintained at all. Scream!! (talk) 17:06, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] Reading Thomas Wolfe?
| "more like a realist" |
|---|
|
Does anyone here like Tom Wolfe? I find him pretty interesting because SJWs hate him and call him racist, even though he was more of a realist in his writings. What are some of his books you like?Deofex (talk) 22:11, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
|
[edit] cs source jailbreak
any of you guys ever played jailbreak on the old cs source, taht game was the bomb, i recently picked it back up, anyone else still playing? Bubba41102 (talk) 12:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- I don't know about CS:S, but there's a Garry's Mod version that's pretty active. Frederick♠♣♥♦ 17:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- CS:Source? wowowow, best counterstrike evar! Although who am I to talk, I mostly play tf2, though I have heard of a jailbreak mod for that. My favorite tf2 mod is probably the equalized randomizer (it's basically arena where everyone starts out with the same random loadout and a random effect such as permanent jarate). You've also gotta love x10 servers where for some reason the grenade launcher lets you launch about a million pills at a time.Samstr (talk) 03:10, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] "Females"
A question: I understand that "female" as a noun has ugly MRA connotations ("I was talking to this female..."). Does it have the same problems when used as an adjective ("Female guitar students sometimes struggle with larger instruments like Jumbos and Dreadnoughts and might consider looking at smaller guitars like the popular Martin OM size...") Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- I assume it would depend on the context of what you are saying. --Miekal 16:27, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- That "female" is somewhat pejorative when used as a synonym for "woman" probably well precedes MRAs. I don't think it's ever been trouble as an adjective, though. Perfectly fine in your example, because some female guitar students may not qualify as "women" yet. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 16:54, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, the thing about "female" as a dismissive term for woman, is that it takes a person, and deprives them of personhood and agency(instead reducing them to a biological construct) in a manner that can only be called intentional. If it's not got that intent of reduction it's not the same problem. Female, as an adjective, describes biology. As a noun, it reduces to biology(which is okay for non-sentient animals). It could even be an occasional cute flippant use of language if its abuse weren't so widespread. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 18:11, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Agreeing that it strongly depends on context and speaker. That's language for you. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 19:12, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- That "female" is somewhat pejorative when used as a synonym for "woman" probably well precedes MRAs. I don't think it's ever been trouble as an adjective, though. Perfectly fine in your example, because some female guitar students may not qualify as "women" yet. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 16:54, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- I don't see any problem with 'female' as an adjective, but the latter example does sound kinda innuendo-ish. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 18:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- I agree the connotation isnt there wen used as an adjective, bu in the first one i dont think it is proper grammar, well at lest it doesn't sound right. Bubba41102 (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- As far as I'm aware, it's not used like that often (probably because, as you say, it doesn't sound right), but it is used like that from time to time nonetheless. A quick Google search reveals the exact phrase that AgingHippie posted, for example, in the "relationship" book, The Re-Education of the Female by Dante Moore ("I was talking to this female I'd met at the gym."). ℕoir LeSable (talk) 19:27, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- (EC) There's nothing grammatically wrong with it. Nominalization[wp]/substantivization of adjectives is common and accepted in many languages. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 19:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- I agree the connotation isnt there wen used as an adjective, bu in the first one i dont think it is proper grammar, well at lest it doesn't sound right. Bubba41102 (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm going to second the "context" thing. Anything can be wrong in the wrong context.CorruptUser (talk) 20:15, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, this. If, for example, you say about somebody "she's a female guitarist" (or "female lawyer", "female firefighter" etc.) that's generally going to be redundant (since female is implied by "she"), patronising and reinforce gender expectations: that these things are male roles by default & there's something notable about women doing them. Same goes for "male nurse", "male model", etc. and for using unnecessary gender specific adjectives. Thankfully, pointless variants like "manageress" and "poetess" are falling out of use, but others like "actress", "waitress", "hostess" and "stewardess" are too ingrained to disappear in a hurry. Wėąṣėḷőįď
Methinks it is a Weasel 20:48, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Wait... does this mean we need to alter gender based aristocratic titles like "princess" too? Going to make the "Disney Prince" criticism a bit confusing.CorruptUser (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- "Poetess" is too damn useful to drop. Adrienne Rich is a poetess. Emily Dickinson is a poet. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 22:30, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- What's the difference? ΨΣΔξΣΓΩΙÐ
Methinks it is a Weasel 22:32, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- One part of the difference is discussed here: Unfortunately, during the currency of "poetess," femaleness was equated with various diminutive perceptions of femininity: domesticity, emotionalism, weakness, virginal purity, and so on, and these qualities were transferred onto, or demanded in the "poetess'" work. More here, Also Stevie Smith's Miss Snooks, Poetess. In these more liberated times, a "poetess" is just as likely to be inditing odes to intersectional sisterhood or conveying TMI about her minstrel cycles. But there is a difference that's still occasionally useful. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 02:42, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- What's the difference? ΨΣΔξΣΓΩΙÐ
- "Poetess" is too damn useful to drop. Adrienne Rich is a poetess. Emily Dickinson is a poet. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 22:30, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Wait... does this mean we need to alter gender based aristocratic titles like "princess" too? Going to make the "Disney Prince" criticism a bit confusing.CorruptUser (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, this. If, for example, you say about somebody "she's a female guitarist" (or "female lawyer", "female firefighter" etc.) that's generally going to be redundant (since female is implied by "she"), patronising and reinforce gender expectations: that these things are male roles by default & there's something notable about women doing them. Same goes for "male nurse", "male model", etc. and for using unnecessary gender specific adjectives. Thankfully, pointless variants like "manageress" and "poetess" are falling out of use, but others like "actress", "waitress", "hostess" and "stewardess" are too ingrained to disappear in a hurry. Wėąṣėḷőįď
[edit] Cricket question
I have progressed from watching T20 to 50-over ODI and have been watching my first Test this week (England-West Indies). One thing I don't get -- they say the WI have 20 overs left. Why the limit on the number of overs? I thought they played until they got the entire side out. Thanks. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:49, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
- in One Day games there are a limited number of overs, otherwise the game wouldn't fit into one day. In proper cricket the play as many as it takes, and that's the one you were thinking of. Bicyclewheel
20:23, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
- No, no. I'm watching Day 5 of the WI-England Test, and they definitely flashed a "West Indies have 20 overs left" message on screen. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 20:28, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
- Never mind -- it's the "minimum overs." As in they need to play at least 90/day, right? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 20:32, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yup, the basic limit is 90 overs/day. It gets a bit more complicated based on scheduled times, wickets taken and various other factors, but naturally, this being cricket, the rules are incredibly detailed and complex. Worm (talk) 08:40, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- "Incredibly complicated" is a bit of an overstatement :) Usually 90 overs have to be bowled in a day's play in test cricket - however each wicket taken takes time, the end of an innings, interruptions for rain, injury, etc. all take up time that cannot be used to bowl - all these have a standard allowance of time - eg 10 or 15 minutes to change sides at the end of an innings, 2 minutes perwicket, rain and injury as the actual time, etc. IIRC games will have a 30 minute period they can be extended to try to get the 90 overs. And each over is taken as (IIRC) 2 or 3 minutes. So at any point you can calculate how much time is left available for play, and how many overs SHOULD be left to be played. So to answer your question, they had 20 overs left because the number of overs they HAD bowled plus the number of overs lost to interruptions added up to 70 - leaving 20 required for that day's play. Teams that bowl slowly and fail to achieve the required over rate can face fines in the thousands of $$ of UKL. It's a bit long winded sorry - but it's not particularly complicated as a concept or mathematically. Unlike Duckworth-Lewis!! :)--Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 22:29, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- Laws 16.6 and 16.7 are the relevant ones here:
- "Incredibly complicated" is a bit of an overstatement :) Usually 90 overs have to be bowled in a day's play in test cricket - however each wicket taken takes time, the end of an innings, interruptions for rain, injury, etc. all take up time that cannot be used to bowl - all these have a standard allowance of time - eg 10 or 15 minutes to change sides at the end of an innings, 2 minutes perwicket, rain and injury as the actual time, etc. IIRC games will have a 30 minute period they can be extended to try to get the 90 overs. And each over is taken as (IIRC) 2 or 3 minutes. So at any point you can calculate how much time is left available for play, and how many overs SHOULD be left to be played. So to answer your question, they had 20 overs left because the number of overs they HAD bowled plus the number of overs lost to interruptions added up to 70 - leaving 20 required for that day's play. Teams that bowl slowly and fail to achieve the required over rate can face fines in the thousands of $$ of UKL. It's a bit long winded sorry - but it's not particularly complicated as a concept or mathematically. Unlike Duckworth-Lewis!! :)--Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 22:29, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yup, the basic limit is 90 overs/day. It gets a bit more complicated based on scheduled times, wickets taken and various other factors, but naturally, this being cricket, the rules are incredibly detailed and complex. Worm (talk) 08:40, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Never mind -- it's the "minimum overs." As in they need to play at least 90/day, right? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 20:32, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
- No, no. I'm watching Day 5 of the WI-England Test, and they definitely flashed a "West Indies have 20 overs left" message on screen. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 20:28, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
- 6. Last hour of match - number of overs
- When one hour of playing time of the match remains, according to the agreed hours of play, the over in progress shall be completed. The next over shall be the first of a minimum of 20 overs which must be bowled, provided that a result is not reached earlier and provided that there is no interval or interruption in play.
- The bowler’s end umpire shall indicate the commencement of this 20 overs to the players and to the scorers. The period of play thereafter shall be referred to as the last hour, whatever its actual duration.
[edit] Language policy
LTR has written maybe 25 articles in a language nobody else here often reads. Is this OK? FuzzyCatPotato™ (talk/stalk) 22:06, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- I am in favor of expanding RW to make it accessible to people who do not read English. I do not think having a one-person operation nested within the project with collaboration rendered virtually impossible is the way to do it. Yes, we can plug stuff into a Google bot and get a good sense if the guy is writing outrageous or libellous material, but that does not count as either decent quality control or meaningful collaboration. I would rather see people interested in producing a project in a different language develop a community of interested parties to create their own websites that have zero connection to the RMF. They can use our stuff as a launching-pad and do what they want with it in a genuinely collaborative manner. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 22:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- This is 'murca, we dont need no other stinkin' languages I barely speak englich, and tha'ts good enuf fer me. Samstr (talk) 23:38, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- We've already asked if other users speak Portuguese. One person said yes.
- Well here's my proposal for a change to our language policy. Articles in other languages can only be created if they are translations of articles that already exist in English. They cannot just be about the same subject as articles that already exist in English, they must be primarily translations of the English text. They must include a template which links back to the original English version. Obviously, after their creation, those articles could then start to differ a bit from the English originals due to editing (although there probably wouldn't be much of that) and a bit of localization would be expected. All articles in other languages which aren't based on translations of English ones are to be deleted. (That includes everything that LTR has created, some of his articles are on the same subjects as English ones but none of them are translations). I think that's a way we can try to regain a degree of quality control. Spud (talk) 04:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- What about РациоВики? Wëäŝëïöïď
Methinks it is a Weasel 08:35, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Russianal-Wiki has a degree of separation from the main body of RW that the Portuguese articles don't. I don't know if that guy has put together a community of contributors or anything, but hey, we're CC, so he can take our content and hive it off and do as he will with it. It's its own website, with its own url and own front page. I'd really rather see that as a model. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 12:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- There are also at least a couple of articles in French; Pensée magique, possibly more. It would appear that we used to invite the creation of articles in other languages. Now that someone is busy doing that, it apparently becomes a problem. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 18:23, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think we should have thought that idea through a little better. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 18:31, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- It became a problem because we have one person who can actually read anything LTR says, and LTR is questionable on quality. As well, LTr apparently can't speak any english enough for a colab between us (As evidenced by his defense being entirely in a different language). Having other languages is nice, but not if there is only one person and nobody can understand that person. --Miekal 18:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- As the one other person here who speaks Portuguese, I too conclude that LTR's quality is questionable. The reasons why are really boring but if you guys want, I can give a detailed explanation. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
It took him 0.2 seconds to lock the door. 23:51, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Regardless of any problems with the quality of the writing, it's pretty obvious that an article can't be much good if it's just made up of a couple of lines of text, a YouTube video and some links to other wikis (which may include Conservapedia, Uncyclopedia and Metapedia). Spud (talk) 12:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Should we vote on what to do about LTR? FuzzyDogPotato (talk/stalk) 17:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think reasons, however boring, would be a good thing to have in case there is need to take action. Explanation, then? --Castaigne (talk) 18:57, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- ? FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 19:49, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Raysenn, yes, please, go into the boring details. Google translate can't tell us much about style or how a piece fits within cultural context. Alec Sanderson (talk) 02:47, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Regardless of any problems with the quality of the writing, it's pretty obvious that an article can't be much good if it's just made up of a couple of lines of text, a YouTube video and some links to other wikis (which may include Conservapedia, Uncyclopedia and Metapedia). Spud (talk) 12:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- As the one other person here who speaks Portuguese, I too conclude that LTR's quality is questionable. The reasons why are really boring but if you guys want, I can give a detailed explanation. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
- There are also at least a couple of articles in French; Pensée magique, possibly more. It would appear that we used to invite the creation of articles in other languages. Now that someone is busy doing that, it apparently becomes a problem. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 18:23, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Russianal-Wiki has a degree of separation from the main body of RW that the Portuguese articles don't. I don't know if that guy has put together a community of contributors or anything, but hey, we're CC, so he can take our content and hive it off and do as he will with it. It's its own website, with its own url and own front page. I'd really rather see that as a model. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 12:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- What about РациоВики? Wëäŝëïöïď
Well, here's a rundown on LTR's work:
- First, he's not doing any direct translation of English RW. This would normally not be a bad thing, but see the reasons below.
- His writing tone is really, really abrasive. Like, not SPOV like a regular RW article, but ranting, angry stuff.
- Related to the above, instead of debunking the article's subject, he instead has some ax to grind about Brazilian politics (and against Olavo de Carvalho in particular). And it's bizarrely and randomly shoehorned in articles.
- Related to the above, multiple irrelevant articles about Brazilian politicians.
- He seems hellbent on promoting some Brazilian YouTube science shows (and their Patreons). I don't know if the guy is LTR himself, and I'll say he isn't because I can't prove it's him. I also can't judge the quality of the videos, since I still have one hell of a time understanding spoken Portuguese (much like I knew how to read and write English before I got around to actually understand spoken English).
- Generally thin on article substance.
- Miscellanous grammatical errors.
Feel free to ask more details. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
This taste... it's of a liar! 03:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Right, so regardless of how we feel about one-person operations being part of the RW brand, it's pretty clear this isn't a person we'd want to entrust such a one-person operation to. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 03:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Appears so, unfortunately.
- I'm wondering if we can just "freeze" the Portuguese articles. Prohibit LTR from creating new articles in this vein and prohibit major changes; ask him to work exclusively on the English side until/if a Portuguese community on RW develops. ʇυzzγɔɒтqoтɒтo (talk/stalk) 03:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- I doubt LTR's ability to work on the wiki in english, if only because the nature of their edits in Portuguese strikes me as carrying over to english, and because he seems to only want to use Portuguese to talk. --Miekal 04:12, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think prohibiting major changes to the Portuguese articles we;ve already got would be a good idea. It seems they need to be extensively rewritten. Or nuked.
- How about a vote on a change language to our policy? I see three possibilities
- No change.
- Like I said before, articles in other languages must be based on translations of articles in English. They shouldn't just be on the same subject as articles in English. Any articles that don't have an English equivalent or aren't based on translations of an English equivalent will be deleted.
- Make this an English only wiki. All articles in other languages will be deleted. Anybody who creates an article in another language in the future and everybody who's created articles in other languages in the past will be sent a message saying that they might like to start a new wiki in that language instead.
- It's also starting to look to me like LTR could be a case for the coop. Which would be interesting. Spud (talk) 11:33, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Coop plus bot translation... dear lord. PacWalker 11:36, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- I doubt LTR's ability to work on the wiki in english, if only because the nature of their edits in Portuguese strikes me as carrying over to english, and because he seems to only want to use Portuguese to talk. --Miekal 04:12, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think making sweeping rules like these based on a single problem user is a terrible idea. We do have other languages camping out on this wiki and doing just fine (and Loi de Poe gets linked around, e.g. in the Francophone Twittersphere) - David Gerard (talk) 11:39, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- If Raysenn's readings are correct, that is one problem that needs to be dealt with, and hopefully before the poor sod writing all that stuff wastes more of his time working on articles that I'll bet are gonna get nuked. I don't think that means we should automatically delete all non-English articles. I do think our failure to make sure this guy was doing decent work does reveal that we need better quality-control practices for non-English content. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 12:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- The proble mseems to be that the Portuguese articles aren't direct translations of English ones, like Loi de Poe. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 14:52, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Perhaps I should say that I don't like the third option I suggested either. But we certainly do need to learn from this experience. As I said before, the next time someone comes along and creates loads of articles in another language, don't just assume that user is translating articles out of English and tell him or her to keep up the good work. Take a look at what's being created. Spud (talk) 15:11, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- As I understand it, the point of the article about Portuguese Wikipedia is that this version of the site has (or is perceived to have) problems with quality control & administration which are different from or worse than those on English Wikipedia. This seems to me like a legitimate reason for a new article rather than a direct translation of our existing Wikipedia article (much of which relates specifically to the English version). ωεαşεζόίď
Methinks it is a Weasel 18:34, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- As I understand it, the point of the article about Portuguese Wikipedia is that this version of the site has (or is perceived to have) problems with quality control & administration which are different from or worse than those on English Wikipedia. This seems to me like a legitimate reason for a new article rather than a direct translation of our existing Wikipedia article (much of which relates specifically to the English version). ωεαşεζόίď
- Perhaps I should say that I don't like the third option I suggested either. But we certainly do need to learn from this experience. As I said before, the next time someone comes along and creates loads of articles in another language, don't just assume that user is translating articles out of English and tell him or her to keep up the good work. Take a look at what's being created. Spud (talk) 15:11, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- The proble mseems to be that the Portuguese articles aren't direct translations of English ones, like Loi de Poe. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 14:52, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- If Raysenn's readings are correct, that is one problem that needs to be dealt with, and hopefully before the poor sod writing all that stuff wastes more of his time working on articles that I'll bet are gonna get nuked. I don't think that means we should automatically delete all non-English articles. I do think our failure to make sure this guy was doing decent work does reveal that we need better quality-control practices for non-English content. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 12:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think making sweeping rules like these based on a single problem user is a terrible idea. We do have other languages camping out on this wiki and doing just fine (and Loi de Poe gets linked around, e.g. in the Francophone Twittersphere) - David Gerard (talk) 11:39, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
I gather that he's an axe-grinder. So are several other editors. He's apparently come here as a refugee from the Portuguese Wikipedia, and sees Rationalwiki as a place to continue his crusade. This too doesn't strike me as altogether rare. Abrasiveness, humorlessness, and poor quality are ... how should I put this? ... not confined to the Portuguese articles. All of the material he's written seems obviously topical if not top drawer. I'm still not averse to working with him, even if we have to use the unreliable medium of Google Translate to do so. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 04:40, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- If by "topical" you mean "on-mission", that's not the case. I've deleted plenty of "off-mission" Portuguese articles. Otherwise, you're absolutely right, Smerdis. On that related note, to save us further tears from more "exiled encyclopedists" in the future, I think our guide to newcomers should include a word of warning to people who've been banned from Wikipedia and other wikis. Spud (talk) 14:02, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that's how we should deal with it but I agree with the idea that we should do something about the bitter Wikipedia bannees. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Burning this game would be an insult to fire. 03:49, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- I meant adding something to explain that stuff which you added to Wikipedia which got removed or deleted might not necessarily be welcome here either (if it's "off-mission", unsourced. potentially libelous or just plain crap). And a polite warning that if you got banned for rubbing other users up the wrong way on another wiki to please try not to do the same thing here. Spud (talk) 04:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- Did somebody say bitter Wikipedia bannees?? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 13:57, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- Wot 'e sed. Scream!! (talk) 15:07, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- I was thinking of a certain exiled encyclopedist who claims to be a censored scribe, but works too. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Advocate for the liberation of Willzyx 16:43, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- Also: For some reason the "Peace" in AH's sig just ties that whole post together. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
It's like human misery in video game form 16:45, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- Did somebody say bitter Wikipedia bannees?? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 13:57, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- I meant adding something to explain that stuff which you added to Wikipedia which got removed or deleted might not necessarily be welcome here either (if it's "off-mission", unsourced. potentially libelous or just plain crap). And a polite warning that if you got banned for rubbing other users up the wrong way on another wiki to please try not to do the same thing here. Spud (talk) 04:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that's how we should deal with it but I agree with the idea that we should do something about the bitter Wikipedia bannees. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
[edit] Vote
We've got a lot of different policy ideas. Put it to a vote? αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 22:48, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- Please don't. Wèàšèìòìď
Methinks it is a Weasel 22:56, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- Guess we just let the subject die and do nothing then. *shrugs* 141.134.75.236 (talk) 23:15, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- Give an alternative, Weaseloid. FuzzyCatTomato (talk/stalk) 02:55, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
- Guess we just let the subject die and do nothing then. *shrugs* 141.134.75.236 (talk) 23:15, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] So, will we do something about that Brazilian dude? (Result: Nuked)
In light of these two recent deletions of LTR's work, I think we should definitely evaluate his output and decide whether we should leave his articles or kill them with fire. I've already stated my criticism of his work, which will be reprinted here for convenience:
- First, he's not doing any direct translation of English RW. This would normally not be a bad thing, but see the reasons below.
- His writing tone is really, really abrasive. Like, not SPOV like a regular RW article, but ranting, angry stuff.
- Related to the above, instead of debunking the article's subject, he instead has some ax to grind about Brazilian politics (and against Olavo de Carvalho in particular). And it's bizarrely and randomly shoehorned in articles.
- Related to the above, multiple irrelevant articles about Brazilian politicians.
- He seems hellbent on promoting some Brazilian YouTube science shows (and their Patreons). I don't know if the guy is LTR himself, and I'll say he isn't because I can't prove it's him. I also can't judge the quality of the videos, since I still have one hell of a time understanding spoken Portuguese (much like I knew how to read and write English before I got around to actually understand spoken English).
- Generally thin on article substance.
- Miscellanous grammatical errors.
I vote for us to ice the fuck out of those articles. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Hahaha, what a story Anonymous user 15:43, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I have said this in a few places, so I'll keep it short: while I think the possibilities for a multilingual project should be explored, articles that can not be verified and collaborated upon by critical mass of regular and trusted users should not be on the wiki. We're CC, let him take our stuff and run with it on his own. Peace. EDIT: I've removed a bunch of the videos and the Patreon links. We're not here to advertise the fund-raising efforts of unknown entities. AgingHippie (talk) 16:25, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I completely agree with AH. LTR has in fact created ten articles that have been deleted. Most of them were deleted on sight for being obviously off-mission. He would be much better off creating his own wiki where he can write whatever he likes about anything he likes. Spud (talk) 16:32, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- And I've only just found out what Patreons is. I'd say those links make him a spammer. Spud (talk) 16:42, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I would concur, myself. --Castaigne (talk) 16:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- Wow, just realised the Patreon thing. Mentioning such a thing once or twice is probably fine, mentioning it lots probably isn't. Yeah. Kill this. What would be sufficient bureaucracy to assure all the mob that mobocracy has been properly served? - David Gerard (talk) 18:05, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- Put it up to vote and put up a notice at some prominent place, that RW would love anyone having command of, i.a., the Portuguese language to work together to create and verify articles in that language?--Arisboch (talk) 18:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- For mobocracy reasons, I've put a vote below. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Kyubey stares into your soul. /人◕‿‿◕人\ 20:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- For mobocracy reasons, I've put a vote below. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
- My suggestion? Leave a small section open for counter-arguments, and if it's dead for a week, purge their creations, warn them against recreating them. Ban if they violate that. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 18:10, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- The fact most of the people who care have came out and talked about it should probably be enough, tbh. --Miekal 18:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- My two cents: this should be a policy discussion with a clause added to the editing practices first, then nuke 'em. Now it looks like you're picking on a guy cause he's ferner writing in a language regular users don't read. There is something to be said about preventing someone like ISIS, for example, from posting up a bunch of jihadist bullshit in Arabic. nobsI was in Bagdad when u wer swirling in yur Dads' bag. 03:01, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Put it up to vote and put up a notice at some prominent place, that RW would love anyone having command of, i.a., the Portuguese language to work together to create and verify articles in that language?--Arisboch (talk) 18:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] לְבַעֵר (delete)
- See my criticism above. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT MY HAIR? 20:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- There's already a deletion process for articles. This isn't it. Ŵêâŝêîôîď
Methinks it is a Weasel 20:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- Piecemeal is painful. We're trying to decide if they can all go. Do you still want to use the process for that? It's not really made for it ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 20:34, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- It ain't a deletion, it's a nukin'. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Fuck you! And your eyebrows! 20:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- There's already a deletion process for articles. This isn't it. Ŵêâŝêîôîď
- Nuking them seems like a good idea ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 20:34, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- IF this is where we gonna vote, then yes. --Miekal 20:49, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- Sadly - David Gerard (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- From what I can get with Google translate they're not RW mission at all. Scream!! (talk) 21:30, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I can back this, as someone who can speak Spanish's ugly cousin. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM!? 23:57, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I can back this, as someone who can speak Spanish's ugly cousin. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
- Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 21:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- David's comment. 32℉uzzy, 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 02:50, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- LTR< the reason your articles are all going to get nuked is because they;re crap. It has nothing to do with any Zionist conspiracy, you bloody idiot! Spud (talk) 02:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Não é teoria conspirativa. Existe motivação política na proposta. Inclusive quem está propondo a exclusão disse que meus verbetes possuem erros de gramática. Uma mentira. LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 02:59, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- You aren't going to win this by telling us the reason the person who started this discussion is a Jew. --Miekal 03:01, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Political motivation my arse! LTR, I've had my doubts about you ever since you described Metapedia as an "enciclopedia alternativa". You've just confirmed them, you anti-semitic twat! Spud (talk) 03:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- That did make me raise a few eyebrows, but I let it slide, since it is an "alternative" encyclopedia for a broad enough definition of "alternative" (and I thought he was just being soft-hitting). Well, I guess I had to hold on to those suspicions.
- If LTR is indeed a bitter Wikipedia banee, I wouldn't be surprised if he got booted from there for reasons related to his anti-Semitism. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Burning this game would be an insult to fire. 03:57, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Also: He didn't mind me insulting his language. Huh. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
My wishes over their airspace 04:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Shoot, I insult mine all the time. PacWalker 04:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Political motivation my arse! LTR, I've had my doubts about you ever since you described Metapedia as an "enciclopedia alternativa". You've just confirmed them, you anti-semitic twat! Spud (talk) 03:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- You aren't going to win this by telling us the reason the person who started this discussion is a Jew. --Miekal 03:01, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Não é teoria conspirativa. Existe motivação política na proposta. Inclusive quem está propondo a exclusão disse que meus verbetes possuem erros de gramática. Uma mentira. LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 02:59, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I can't see much point in keeping them, especially since we don't seem to have much of a Portuguese-speaking readership, and I doubt articles like these will attract one. I also have qualms with letting one guy have his own RW, and it being an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist doesn't inspire confidence. PacWalker 04:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Having followed (well, half-lurked, really) several earlier objections to LTR and his responses, I have long been concerned that some serious axe grinding seemed to be flourishing under the cover of a foreign language. LTR's response to the criticism here was what convinced me to add my vote to the delete scales. I would suggest a prudential nuking, though. Anything worth saving should be salvaged,if possible. ScepticWombat (talk) 05:12, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- By now it's clear that RW will lose nothing of value if everything is deleted.--ZooGuard (talk) 06:52, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Exorcise! Narky Sawtooth
(Nyar~) 06:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Oh look, here's some fire, KILL IT! --Castaigne (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Eliminate it with orbital weaponry.--Arisboch (talk) 20:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] לשמור (keep)
- I don't see them as remarkably different from many of the English language articles. At minimum, they should be archived somehow to make them available to a Portuguese language skeptical Wiki, assuming one is ever made. Whatever their flaws, they represent a body of work worth preserving somehow. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 21:07, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think most of his articles can be nuked with great prejudice, but some articles that are more than just a few lines of text and a video or some quotes and clearly document topics that are missional, e.g. Cientologia, Criacionismo, Associação Racionalista de Céticos e Ateus (português) (maybe), might deserve closer scrutiny before throwing them in the trash bin. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 21:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- Muitos verbetes possuem textos equivalentes em língua inglesa, por exemplo, homeopatia, geocentrismo, aquecimento global etc. LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 02:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Meus verbetes não possuem erros de gramática. Ao que parece, quem está propondo a exclusão dos verbetes é um judeu. E chamou o Olavo de Carvalho de "político". O Olavo de Carvalho é um astrólogo embusteiro, sem formação acadêmica, que trabalhou na mídia brasileira. Como eu escrevi um verbete sobre Ahmed Rami (um antissionista que mora na Suécia) e sobre Olavo de Carvalho (um sionista brasileiro), por motivo de perseguição, foi proposta a exclusão de todos os verbetes. Isso é censura! LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 02:33, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- ". Apparently , who is proposing the deletion of the entries is a Jew. "--Miekal 02:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, a zionist jew. LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 02:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yah, no. That's really not going to do yourself any favors. --Miekal 02:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Seriously? I am done with this guy. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 02:43, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I have no patience with anti-semitics/Nazis. Nuke from orbit. --Castaigne (talk) 15:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Esclarecendo, meus verbetes não possuem erros de gramática. LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 02:42, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Right now, I am much more concerned about your anti-semitism than I am your grammar. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Não é antissemitismo. Eu não tenho motivo para apoiar a extrema-direita de Israel ou os banqueiros brasileiros. O Olavo de Carvalho faz isso, mas não é o ponto de vista das pessoas sensatas que moram no Brasil. LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 02:51, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Know who talks like that? Anti-semites--Miekal 02:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Didn't you hear him? His grammar is impeccable, therefore he's not an antisemite! |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Everybody betray me! I fed up with this world! 03:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Didn't you hear him? His grammar is impeccable, therefore he's not an antisemite! |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
- Dude, you're on the public grill right now and you bring up Zionism? It also really doesn't help that you always talk in Portuguese. Really, you shouldn't let people's interpretation of what you're saying rely on Google Translate. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 03:05, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I know you guys are less amused than me, but when he said "the guy proposing deletion is a Jew" I laughed for four minutes straight. It just came out of left field. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Everybody betray me! I fed up with this world! 03:09, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- He also insinuated that all Brazilian bankers are Jewish.
- I know you guys are less amused than me, but when he said "the guy proposing deletion is a Jew" I laughed for four minutes straight. It just came out of left field. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
- Know who talks like that? Anti-semites--Miekal 02:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Não é antissemitismo. Eu não tenho motivo para apoiar a extrema-direita de Israel ou os banqueiros brasileiros. O Olavo de Carvalho faz isso, mas não é o ponto de vista das pessoas sensatas que moram no Brasil. LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 02:51, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Right now, I am much more concerned about your anti-semitism than I am your grammar. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yah, no. That's really not going to do yourself any favors. --Miekal 02:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, a zionist jew. LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 02:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm not really surprised, since his article about Radio Islam founder sais he was sued because he "displeased Zionist circles"— Unsigned, by: 66.249.88.188 / talk / contribs 03:49, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
[edit] עיזים (goat)
I wouldn't be terribly averse to providing one final "shape up, don't keep doing x1, x2, and x3, and for Christ's sake, write decent articles" type of warning, but that is the absolute maximum amount of leash I care to grant. PacWalker 20:37, 28 April 2015 (UTC)עוֹד לֹא אָבְדָה תִּקְוָתֵנוּ (because there's always a block button...) PacWalker 03:33, 29 April 2015 (UTC)- As a quasi-lusophone, I feel obliged to say something here, but do not feel competent to evaluate LTR's articles. Unfunny abrasiveness or axe-grinding should not be part of any RW mainspace. Spamming is right out. Best I can say is, I wouldn't object to mass deletion. In a kinder world, some sort of "shape up soon, pal, or else" message would come before that. That's all I got. Alec Sanderson (talk) 20:49, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I've said it before but I find the culture of talking about people rather than to them pretty shitty. Ŵêâŝêîôîď
Methinks it is a Weasel 20:53, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- LTR doesn't speak enough English to talk to him. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Now I'm not tense anymore, I'm just miserable. Hooray! 20:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- Go for it - David Gerard (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- Please say it again; it's a good sentiment, but the thing is, this user doesn't like to engage the community at all. Saloon bar is an open forum. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 21:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I left a message (in Portuguese) on his page notifying him of this ongoing discussion. God bless college language electives! |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Antonio stella bottom tile 21:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- LTR doesn't speak enough English to talk to him. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
[edit] He's LANCB'd
In a message posted on his Facebook page 7 hours ago, LTR says that he's not going to edit RationalWiki anymore. Is it time to nuke yet? Don't delete the Portuguese global warming article. That one predates him and is largely a translation of the English equivalent. Spud (talk) 10:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think it's time to nuke, especially if, as the BoN above suggests, he managed to slip a little crypto-anti-semitism into his articles. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 12:48, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think I got them all. Thanks to Pac/Spud/Raysenn for the deep cleaning. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 13:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think that, as per 141's suggestions, we should evaluate some of his articles that deal with missional topics and see if they're of high enough quality to be worth a damn. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
Burning this game would be an insult to fire. 13:40, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- If you want to go back and read them and make sure they're both up to par and devoid of Jew-baiting, I won't object. Maybe protect them at at least the autoconfirmed level so we don't have to wait for the rare established Lusophone editor to verify new content? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 13:44, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Regardless of their titles, weren't they all just ranting about Olavo de Carvalho and the Brazilian government? Still, if you want to try to turn any of them into anything half-way decent, Raysenn, I wish you the very best of luck! Spud (talk) 13:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- A lot of them, sure, but not literally all of them. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 14:07, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- #notallportuguesearticles.. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think that's a valid retort when we're talking about the merits of individual articles. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 19:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- #notallportuguesearticles.. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- A lot of them, sure, but not literally all of them. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 14:07, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Regardless of their titles, weren't they all just ranting about Olavo de Carvalho and the Brazilian government? Still, if you want to try to turn any of them into anything half-way decent, Raysenn, I wish you the very best of luck! Spud (talk) 13:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Raysenn - anything you think is recoverable, please do so, that'd be excellent - David Gerard (talk) 16:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- If you want to go back and read them and make sure they're both up to par and devoid of Jew-baiting, I won't object. Maybe protect them at at least the autoconfirmed level so we don't have to wait for the rare established Lusophone editor to verify new content? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 13:44, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think that, as per 141's suggestions, we should evaluate some of his articles that deal with missional topics and see if they're of high enough quality to be worth a damn. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦
- I think I got them all. Thanks to Pac/Spud/Raysenn for the deep cleaning. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 13:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)