User talk:IWantTheTruth

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, IWantTheTruth!

Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards.

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

Pull up a goat, and have fun! Alec Sanderson (talk) 12:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I have taken you out of the vandal bin, so you may edit freely. Kindly play nice, now, Alec Sanderson (talk) 12:59, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Signing talk page posts[edit]

On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. Alec Sanderson (talk) 13:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. IWantTheTruth (talk) 13:31, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
OK, so you want a discussion. Don't rush in with a revert template and then get involved in an edit war. If you act like a vandal you will be treated like on. Take it to the talk page. And then start a reasonable discussion. "You're doing this all wrong" and variants on "I thought this was rational wiki" are not part of a reasonable discussion. They make you look like a concern troll. Start by being nice. Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 13:42, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
And if you're going to dump AFD templates then at least finish the job. Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 13:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I was working on it. But I can't complete step 4 (Lastly add RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/ReplaceMeWithTheArticleName to top of this list. Don't forget to change the ReplaceMeWithTheArticleName to the proper article name from step 3.) because that page is locked.


It seems I've been banned for proposing deletion of the Tea Party Movement page with this argument:

"May I suggest that RationalWiki should perhaps devote itself to rational, fact-based criticism (even if snarky), and avoid such obviously biased discussions of politics? I've enjoyed laughing at the Tea Party as much as anyone, but articles like this (with far more insults and political bias than facts and rational arguments) make me wonder if RationalWiki has a political agenda beyond rational criticism."

Thanks for your input. Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 14:18, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Nope, for continuing to do significant edits after being warned repeatedly by multiple people to stop. Can't play with the editing tools if you don't listen to how to use them correctly as part of the terms and conditions and other editors warning you repeatedly. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 14:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Because of our infinite patience for concern trolls, you have been unbanned, by not me. Best wishes! Hipocrite (talk) 14:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, "RationalWiki has a political agenda beyond rational criticism", but probably not what you think it is. Sorry about your difficulty with completing the AfD process, but really— there is not a snowball's chanceWikipedia of altering that article's tone, much less deleting it. It may or may not help to read Tone argument. Alec Sanderson (talk) 14:57, 24 June 2015 (UTC)