User talk:X-Factor

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, X-Factor!

Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards.

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

--It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:33, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, though I'm not sure how much help I will be. X-Factor (talk) 03:44, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm fairly new here, though I think your edits are all good so far. I'm just not into the topics you're talking about like the Catholic Church and only know about some parts of right-wing extremism (which is a broad subject), but any edits you make, they're mostly fine. You don't need to go out there and masterfully construct an article that turns gold in three days, ha ha. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:34, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] New Zealand

I rolled back your edits to NZ. All of the information you provided is some 20+ years old. --DamoHi 02:50, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Also, it would be helpful if you added references to your edits when appropriate. Bongolian (talk) 02:52, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Damo-Historical information is always going to be old, but I know more recent demographic data is preferred unless it's to establish some kind of changing historical trend. If I can find more recent studies on the same statistics I will add them, but I need to know the acceptable age range. Personally I think the information should be restored just as a place holder for the update, but that's really not up to me to decide.
Bongilian-The article cited does include the references which I should have added in addition will add them before another further main space editing.
Sorry for any inconveniences this may have caused, it won't happen again. X-Factor (talk) 03:44, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
OK, thanks! Bongolian (talk) 05:01, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
No need to apologise, just wondering where you got all that information from? Things have moved on considerably since then, though mostly for the worse. In any case I'm very sceptical that it is fair to say that the Maori are not mentioned in the Constitution. Since NZ doesn't have a formal constitution this is a largely meaningless statement, but it's also misleading since it ignores the constitutional conventions that do exist which refer to Maori (ie Maori seats/roll; reference throughout SOE legislation etc). --DamoHi 05:48, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] To do list

Hentai is popular with Gamergaters and MRA's, but there's little scientific analysis of it in Japan, or by the academia of other countries.
Aesthecization of violence considering how many GamerGate articles with references mentioning sexism, elaborating more on violence in fiction in general seems appropriate and on mission and this topic would cover more mediums than just video games, stretching back well into antiquity. There's a number of fairly reputable news sources commenting on this as well as some claims by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry whom appear to be academic and don't seem to be religiously founded like the Parents Television Council. It would be nice to establish if there's a scientific consensus on this.
Catholicism and far-right politics, the wikipedia category includes quite a few entries from the modern era. I don't think simply adding this to the page for Catholicism is a good idea because it will most likely end up almost as long as rest of the page, like how Child sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church has 55 references compared to Catholicisms 56.
Eastern Orthodoxy and far-right politics, ditto for this one. X-Factor (talk) 19:13, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] um bro

ur kinda being weird around the wiki so

might wanna calm down bro Koi "The spelling's on purpose!" development 21:21, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Will do, I don't have any more painful questions to ask anyways. though they still seem valid. I'll admit the phrasing was too snarky and I apologize for that much, calling the catholic church pirates is one thing. Why church sponsored artistic depictions of hell ignore a particular hellish topic, whether 2 BDSM studies are well researched enough to include yet, whether we should have a section about the science of alcoholism and mental illnesses effect on the capacity to consent from a scientific rather than jurisdiction by jurisdiction legal standpoint and whether there's child custody cases that cite religion are all interesting topics and on mission.
I'm ready to take a break as I'm not in the mood for studying any more atrocities at the moment, until I feel up to going through Eastern Orthodox and Catholic right wing extremism at a much later date. Fake medicine and cult leaders really much of a light hearted alternative either, I noticed there are a couple of Fun: articles, but I think I'll just call it quits for now, I accomplished what I set out to do. I honestly do appreciate your concern. X-Factor (talk) 02:13, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
It's all good! You made good edits and your attitude is fine. Keep up the good work. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:32, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Sandbox

I'm not entirely sure if LGM was done in the sandbox, so use this sandbox instead. Thanks. Vive Liberté! 11:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll stick to my sandbox; I was hoping someone else would have something to add about driver less cars because I'm having my doubts that there's enough on mission information for anything more than a stub. There only seems to be one injury case so far [1], it was the 14th accident in six years and about 1.9 million miles of testing, and according to Google it's cars have not caused any of the collisions. Chris Urmson head of Google's self-driving car program says 11 of 14 of the incidents were being rear ended by drivers distracted by their phones and that an automated honking system would be annoying. Mountain View police responded to the most recent incident, but did not file an accident report thus it appears none of the incidents have ever been major enough to make it to court. X-Factor (talk) 17:12, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Talk pages

Hey there, talk pages are there for a reason. Please use them! Thanks! Vive Liberté! 14:58, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Hmmm.. I'm feeling weird today. Sorry to send mixed signals. Anyway, you obviously don't have to use talk pages for every single edit, just super major ones. I re-read that medival edit and it looks good to me. Vive Liberté! 15:22, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
I think it would also be appropriate to comment on the killing of cats due to their association with witchcraft being a contributing factor after the Vox in Rama declaration from Pope Gregory IX in 1233, however his wikipedia page says there is some debate that the plague was not bubonic and rather a pneumonic plague spread from person to person so I think it's alright if it remains where it is for now as an alternative explanation that's seriously considered. Bubonic plague is mainly spread by infected fleas whose bite pierces the skin, although someone with open sores bleeding into the baptismal font could possibly spread the illness to someone else with open sores, I'm guessing that making the holy water wont filled visibly with blood probably wouldn't have been allowed similar to vomiting out the Eucharist being something that get's people thrown out, though the written records on day to day church hygiene are scarce so it's hard to say. However the 1854 Broad Street cholera outbreak makes me think the church itself, particularly the baptismal font would have probably acted as a focus of infection at some point, like the pump on broad street.
I agree that making a bunch of new sections is something which should really be discussed on the talk page beforehand, particularly when there's already a discussion about how to organize the article. Thanks for your input, it's been helpful. X-Factor (talk) 17:12, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Copypasting from Wikipedia is NOT permitted

Stop doing so this instant. Yes, including single sentences. And unratwikified refs.

I'll be checking, believe you me — and if I run across one more submission from you that's taken outright from Wikipedia (without as much as the ordering of the ripped words having been tossed about by you first) there will be hell toupée.

But seriously; do it once more and you're officially in the drunk tank. Consider this your stern, but fair, warning. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 10:39, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Understood, I read what a rationalwiki article is and is not. Combining select text from multiple wikipedia entries can present a better overview, but large stretches of a NPOV desert of dry encyclopedic facts does not help with humor or with supporting an arguable thesis. Sorry about that, I'll go through some of the edits I've made recently rewording and weighing the effectiveness of the supplemental info. X-Factor (talk) 18:25, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Much appreciated. Good and bad edits regardless, I will be following yours closely. Th hug.gif All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 17:47, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
support
Community
Tools