User talk:Cosmikdebris/Archive3

Paleolibertarian Page
The Paleolibertarian page includes quotes and descriptions from a Paleoconservative. The article needs to be updated with actual Paleolibertarian quotes and descriptions. As of right now neither Paleolibertarian, Paleoconservative, Libertarian, or even Paleo is mentioned once on Phyllis Schlafly's page. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 73.77.144.189 / talk

Accidentally blanked a page, and luckily you fixed it!
Hi, I've posted this on technical support and the mod talk page, so this might be overkill; but I'm new to wiki and rationalwiki and had no idea intention of screwing over the page and have no idea what I was doing. Is there anyway I can have my IP hidden? I won't be doing anything ever like it again and I'll stay away from the site once it's resolve as the situation has really scared me. Again, I had no idea what I was doing and I'm really sorry. It happened at this page Thank you! and I'm really sorry! &mdash; Unsigned, by: Flaberjake / talk / contribs

it was weird though(balderdash)
It accurately described a real thing that exists, but wasn't a copy from elsewhere, and was wikified. Someone typed that by hand. Cited real sources, not spam pages. What was that? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 23:13, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

What's wrong with McToon?
I'm not sure why his havilng only 200 views is all that relevant, he's still a prominent activist and has so far provenn 4 Flat Earthers wrong. I mean, he does it right in front of their faces with his Coffee series. You can't say he hasn't dsone his part. He's a smart guy and I'd say he deserves a page here. I can re-write the page without the image if you think it's copyrighted. Smokinwheat (talk) 00:58, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No one cares. Cosmikdebris (talk) 03:19, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Why did you delete my edits?
https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Jehovah%27s_Witnesses&diff=2053206&oldid=2053191

Cosmikdebris, please tell me why did you delete my edits? What did I do wrong? What's wrong with my edits? If you don't tell right on time, I may undo the deletes that you made base on my editsCoolguy10038 (talk) 23:36, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The option-choose code you put in there doesn't appear to be valid wiki markup. Regards, Cosmikdebris (talk) 00:03, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I was using the same code that is put on Conservapedia ,where the article CHOOSES one the quotes that is added to the article.

It turned out to be fine, it just that I had to fix. Look here:https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Jehovah%27s_Witnesses&diff=2053191&oldid=2053190

But if you do not want the option-code to be added on the article I was editing(even though i fixed it so it can look perfect),that's fine ,maybe I could add extra quotes instead on this article(like I did to the other articles). Coolguy10038 (talk) 21:22, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I see by looking at Special:Version that the RandomSelection extension is indeed enabled here. I've never seen it used before, which alarmed me when I saw it in your edit.


 * I'm nor particularly opposed to its use as you propose on that page, though. Regards, Cosmikdebris (talk) 21:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Legal FAQ
I know they were trolling and the ban is basically justified either way, but in general, I think a permaban for legal threats is only warranted if they literally threaten to sue(they didn't) or they are trying to use the implicit threat of legal action to dictate wiki content(they didn't). Again, I'm okay with the ban on the grounds that they were never going to contribute anything useful, but don't overdo it with bans where the reason given is the legal faq.

There's no specific policy, but I thought the idea of such bans was we want to route legal requests to the appropriate entities, namely the rationalwiki board, and not have regular editors try and mediate the law, a task most of us are not equipped to do. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 19:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Point well taken. I'll try and be more graceful with the banhammer and choose the reason appropriately. Cosmikdebris (talk) 20:02, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and I'll try not to nitpick so much when it's entirely justified anyways. (I'll fail, I'm an awful pedant at heart)  ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 21:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It's a good thing we can rely on others to police our use of the sysop tools. I'm always learning something new. Cosmikdebris (talk) 22:08, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Delete comments all you want
It's still the truth. 2A02:1810:4D34:DC00:B5DF:7DC1:C41:AA5 (talk) 00:15, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure. Thanks for the one liners, they really contribute positively to the conversation. Cosmikdebris (talk) 00:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Calling people shouting their conspirational groupthink a conversation seems a tad charitable. But I'm the bad guy for pointing out the insanity. This is Obama-is-a-secret-Muslim level nuts. 2A02:1810:4D34:DC00:B5DF:7DC1:C41:AA5 (talk) 00:36, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, this place does tend to the left quite a bit, but inserting random one liners on the pages doesn't do any good. Why not engage these people in reasonable discourse instead of dismissing the whole group as "nuts"? Cosmikdebris (talk) 00:41, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

possible ban evader
I just banned User:Endless_pestilence for pi days for wandalism, but then noticed User:Oversensitive_manlady had wandalized the same page, Episcopal Church, and you had banned him for ban evasion, so it's possible this is the same guy again. CogitoNotStirred (via telepathy) (talk) 04:06, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Ninja
You have ninja rights, use it. — Oxyaena   Harass  03:53, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Improving Draft:Bobby Henderson
Hi Cosmikdebris. I created Draft:Bobby Henderson as a good faith editor wanting to improve this site. I'm kind of new to this site, so let me know how I can write a better article. I want to improve Bobby Henderson to full article status and write some other FSM-related articles. Where do I get started? Monotremic (talk) 18:00, 9 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Sorry if I had made any newbie mistakes. Hope you guys aren't like Wikipedia, which bites newbies like crazy. I'll be sure to get settled in first. Monotremic (talk) 18:03, 9 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, I appreciate your efforts. The draft namespace was just created a year or so ago and is used as a place to start new articles and refine them so the wiki's main space is not cluttered up with tiny stubs. There are lots of good references on this site that should help you out. Check the welcome message I put on your user talk page for more details. Also, my editor's guide might be helpful. Cosmikdebris (talk) 18:05, 9 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Cool. I'm pretty experienced with Wikipedia, so I guess this should be a smooth transition. Monotremic (talk) 18:08, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Board of trustees nomination
Bongolian (talk) 05:05, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Another "why'd you delete my edits" question
https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki:Webshites/Conspiracy&diff=prev&oldid=2093862

What did I do wrong? Does Truthism.com not count as a conspiracy theory? Does it not count as a webshite? Or did I just get the wiki syntax wrong somehow? Pyro (talk) 21:50, 14 July 2019 (UTC)


 * truthism.com does qualify as a conspiracy site. But I noticed that the website domain expired and is a dead link now. If they manage to pay their hosting bill, we can add them back to the list. Cosmikdebris (talk) 01:49, 13 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks. I probably should've looked at the actual site. I just remembered it from after viewing it way back when. Pyro (talk) 21:50, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Some good Mario svgs here
https://www.mariowiki.com/File:Mario_jumping_front_vector_art.svg

This one is an svg and those who do work with svg can use this as a base, though they probably have to screw around with the eyebrows and mouth a bit before they can get a result. 23:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Board election
Since you are one of the people that accepted their nomination to the 2019 RationalMedia board of trustees election, you should go to the campaigning page and post your best propaganda post-haste. Good luck! 12:16, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Answers in Genesis
Hello, I hope I am doing this correctly. You last edited the section "Hatred of other religions" under Answers in Genesis.

Missing from this discussion is that Ken Ham/AiG is also at war with most of Christianity.

I've compiled a table of major Christian figures denounced by Ham/AiG and posted it on my website.

Any interest or opposition to adding something to reference this?

I'm trying to peel off some of their support by showing just how anomalous they really are, that even among their "base" they are outliers.


 * I think you've done an excellent job documenting this topic. We could either add a reference to your page, or, with your permission, incorporate your research into the Answers in Genesis page itself. If you would like to do this, feel free to do so. If you aren't comfortable with how markup works on RationalWiki, let me know. Cosmikdebris (talk) 16:12, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

I inserted one paragraph with a link, and had to insert a phrase in the closing sentence to make it consistent. Please see if this is OK.Sjwilling (talk) 17:27, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Troll complaining about being blocked for trolling.
Is the original account that's blocked prevented from editting their own talk page? Because that's the usual way to appeal, which is what they seem to be trying to do. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:43, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I left the permission to edit their talk page intact. --Cosmikdebris (talk) 16:46, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Moderator elections
i set up all the pages for the election and added the dates to the schedule template. you should look at how to use the openstv program in advance of the election tho. EK (talk) 13:09, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I was going to set up all the election pages later this week, but you've saved me the effort. In the meantime I'll make sure I have a working openstv instance. Cosmikdebris (talk) 13:13, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * oh ye i also made u a tech. there actually isnt much u can do with it thats interesting tbh but u never know when u might need the extra buttons. EK (talk) 13:42, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Nassim Haramein page - validity of claims and sources
Hi, since you commented on the Nassim Haramein page, along with Ace, I wanted to get your thoughts after I've followed up on your comment on the Talk page of the Nassim Haramein page, regarding the validity of Haramein's claims and use of sources to back up such claims. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Nassim_Haramein#physicsessays.org Based on my points on this Talk page, let me know if this meets your guidelines and if this information and reference can be added again to the page without flagging or removing it. Thanks. Jahub (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

As follow-up to your removal of the Wharton Business Radio source on the Nassim Haramein page, I'd like to get a better idea of why this was removed. I see that previous sources were removed due to their position as a scientific source, but in the case of Wharton Business Radio, it's hard to see why this would be dismissed. Also, the text that this Wharton source was backing didn't include any claims, but simply what his research background included. Please advise. Thanks. Jahub (talk) 19:06, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Crime statistics
I have to bring it to your attention that the claim that acid attacks, sexual assaults, and domestic violence are on the rise in India is not supported by the latest data available. In the latest crime report from 2017, 140 acid attacks with 140 victims, 101675 cases of domestic abuse with 104548 victims, 82947 assaults with 84837 victims, and 31237 rapes with 32334 victims were reported. 2016's report had 187 acid attacks with 202 victims, 106341 cases of domestic abuse with 106395 victims, 80410 assaults with 80978 victims, and 36657 rapes with 36762 victims. Further, the report linked regarding this is very out of date, being from 2008. Please look at the information and consider rectifying this. 183.83.135.201 (talk) 23:06, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Well? Are you going to respond? 183.83.135.201 (talk) 00:42, 3 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I have no problem updating the article to reflect the more recent statistics you site. My only problem earlier was the removal of the reference. I would have accepted without comment an update that rephrased the statements but took offense at vaporizing the reference and text. Cosmikdebris (talk) 14:34, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I updated the section in question based on your inputs. Thanks. Cosmikdebris (talk) 15:38, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

JP Talk Page
I saw that you locked Jordan Peterson's Talk page as a consequence (I guess) of the posts of "Low carb" and "Ernie". I agree that those posts are disruptive, but why locking the talk page instead of blocking the users? I was having a relatively productive talk with and  about some changes to do to the pages, but now I cannot continue. Tokyo (talk) 15:33, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * We'd ban and keep unlocked but disruptive users have abused reregging to continue disruptive activity. I do hate the inconvenience but I hope you at least get autoconfirmed status so we can at least catch the trolls and not more constructive newer users. 15:37, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

What happened to my page?
I saw that you deleted my page

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:Tokyo

and that now I cannot edit it. Why? Tokyo (talk) 14:14, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * A banned user/troll created content there and given he has a habit of persistently re-creating content the page was likely locked to prevent edit warring. 14:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

People United Means Action Edit Rollback
As it stands currently, the PUMA page makes an almost entirely irrelevant and highly spurious assertion that a marginal number of Bernie Sanders supporters are somehow "responsible" for the election of Donald Trump. Finding this below site standards at best to assert wholly without evidence (however much I may agree that a contingent of Bernie supporters behaved absurdly in the lead up to that election) I marked the statement with a "citation needed" flag. You then almost immediately chose to roll this edit back without providing any evidence in support of the idea. Why?

The rollback in question

King Curtis Kong (talk) 23:23, 6 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Polluting an article by putting cn's all over the place does nothing to improve it. If you disagree with the statements, provide alternative text. Cosmikdebris (talk) 00:03, 7 November 2019 (UTC)