User talk:WatcherIntheDark/Archive1
Greetings, WatcherInTheDark, and thank you for joining the eerie coke sacker of wikis! I hope you enjoy your time here.
Radioactive Misanthrope 01:34, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Per the traditional "mostly harmless" criteria and that your watching in the dark, you have been demoted, see RationalWiki:Sysop guide for deatils. Tmtoulouse (talk) 06:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks--WatcherIntheDark (talk) 06:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Couldn't help wondering about your name
A reference to Warhammer 40k?: [1] Nullahnung (talk) 11:20, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yes it is. I didn't expect anyone to it up so quickly, I'm pleasantly suprised. --WatcherIntheDark (talk) 11:27, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- I like the image of a Watcher in the Dark roaming about the place! Nullahnung (talk) 11:37, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
[edit] Hi!
Hi there! I was just wondering why you reverted my edits on Genetic modification. Cheers!--Lixxx235 (talk) 03:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- Much the same reason your other fact tags were removed, this isn't Wikipedia and they clutter up the place. They are also not needed on the opening sentence that gives a short definition. --WatcherIntheDark (talk) 03:42, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- OK then, could you point me in the direction of the policy on usage of such tags? I couldn't find any, so I used old habits. Cheers! --Lixxx235 (talk) 03:46, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- To be completely honest I'm not sure where to you'd find it. The best I can offer is advice to limit them to statements you think are false or controversial which is my approach but I expect someone else knows better than me. --WatcherIntheDark (talk) 03:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- OK then, could you point me in the direction of the policy on usage of such tags? I couldn't find any, so I used old habits. Cheers! --Lixxx235 (talk) 03:46, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- Okay, sorry for the bother. I don't mean to sound rude, but I just found this from the help desk, and although that might be a rule rarely followed, reverting the edit seems wrong, especially if the rules explicitly state that "any fact should be referenced", so if it's fine with you I'll be reverting back to my version. Not that I know anything about exactly how seriously policy is taken at RationalWiki. Cheers! --Lixxx235 (talk) 04:15, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- Now it's fine. Provided you don't stick them on the first sentence you should be ok. WatcherIntheDark (talk) 04:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- Okay, sorry for the bother. I don't mean to sound rude, but I just found this from the help desk, and although that might be a rule rarely followed, reverting the edit seems wrong, especially if the rules explicitly state that "any fact should be referenced", so if it's fine with you I'll be reverting back to my version. Not that I know anything about exactly how seriously policy is taken at RationalWiki. Cheers! --Lixxx235 (talk) 04:15, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
[edit] Holocaust denial
Hope you don't mind, but I dropped the hammer on that shitbird of an IP who was arsing about with Holocaust denial. 24 hours in the shitter. --MtDNotorious Sodomite 04:41, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- I don't mind. The statement was just so blatantly false I couldn't be bothered to engage. WatcherIntheDark (talk) 05:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
[edit] Yudkowsky page
Hey there, any particular reason you undid all my edits on this page? All I did was clean up a number of mis-characterizations and outright false statements that really detracted from the wiki's credibility. Don't really have a dog in this fight, just seems like if you want to criticize someone or point out their shortcomings, you should be able to do it without exaggeration or lying, no? There's still plenty of other things to criticize without adding irrational attacks. — Unsigned, by: 66.115.62.186 / talk / contribs 17 April 2014, 19:08 (UTC)
[edit] At least keep G.W. Bushie.
Hello, WatcherIntheDark. I noticed that you reverted my edits on the page John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory. I spent much time and effort on them, especially the one about G.W. Bushie. Would you mind elaborating on your reasoning for this action, and even, if you may be so kind, provide advice as to how said edits or a version of them would be able to be posted again without immediately being reverted.
Also, taking out Bushie's part was just cruel. Surely people have done enough to steal all his well-deserved credit without online wiki editors like you ruthlessly selling him short.
Thank you very much, WItD, and I hope you have a wonderful day. HelloIDislikeYou (talk) 04:13, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
[edit] Honestly I can't tell
If it'd be better to just leave heartland unlocked just to see if the BoN doesn't spill out into every other article --Mikal | lakiM 02:10, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
- Worth a shot but I'm not optimistic. WatcherIntheDark (talk) 02:13, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
[edit] Why the edit reversion
in Argument from incredulity? Thanks. Bgates747 (talk) 06:08, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
[edit] WatcherIntheDark
But... the wiki has a white skin, there's no darkness to be watching from! (Would love if this site had a dark skin, so much better on the eyes)--Miekal 05:14, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- Yes but WatcherIntheWhite would sound ridiculous.WatcherIntheDark (talk) 05:19, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
[edit] Alexander Lukashenko
Good job nuking that article. Do you have any interest in collaborating on writing up an actual article on Lukashenko? He is a quite the nutjob Lager (talk) 14:13, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
- I would but I know nothing about him. I just saw the contents of the article created talking about "the Zionist-American Empire", "ZOG" and "the Jewish agenda of capitalist privatization" (my favourite stupid comment for a while) and assumed it probably wasn't a constructive wiki contribution. WatcherIntheDark (talk) 00:54, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
[edit] Why were edits undone?
I found a very slanted page that makes my political affiliation look ridiculous in a very dishonest way. Understanding that this website is "snarky" by nature, I added language that provided political symmetry, giving examples and other subtle changes to more evenly balance the topic, and you removed them. Why do you consider the liberal slander of conservatives ok, but cannot tolerate a snarky bit of the opposite, that adds balance overall in the article's content? For example, the article mentions Fox News reporters as refusing to be wrong, and refers to them as "ilk". Since this behavior is certainly not confined to Fox News, I replaced it with "MSNBC" whom conservatives revere with identical feelings, yet it was undone. Why? Is my point less valid or are you simply intolerant of a different opinion? Please elaborate on your reasoning so we as a community can gain a better understanding of your motivations, since you are evidently permitted to censor speech that I believe is in the spirit of this website. Your reasoning is quite opaque, and cannot be well understood by newcomers like me. As a newcomer, I am assuming that liberals do not have a monopoly on snarkiness within this website, or do they -- certainly your edits have enforced just such a monopoly within this article. And I am maintaining anonymity for good reason as will eventually become quite evident. I suggest you choose your words carefully regarding this valid content that you trashed. You never know who is watching.
[edit] just curious (not disputing)
Why did you delete Drotsky's page? Aside from the recent brouhaha, I think I'm missing some history/culture. Was it his "go all the way" comment or just disruptiveness? Again, I'm not disputing this! MarmotHead (talk) 21:45, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- It was one of the talk pages of the current troll and he kept linking back to it as he cannot get his magnum opus through the edit filters. And since he is so sure he is being censored I decided to do it properly. I don't mind if anyone restores it though, currently its just one less thing for him to spam the bar with. WatcherIntheDark (talk) 21:56, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- I certainly won't, but I also won't raise a ruckus if someone does. He was starting to trigger me (in a small way), so I appreciate the wiping you and others have done. MarmotHead (talk) 23:13, 4 August 2014 (UTC)