User talk:NoPetrol

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, NoPetrol! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

I notice you copying templates from WP. I think that they are rather unnecessary and too complex for or (small) wiki. _and marmite 01:10, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

Also: please copy the documentation & wikify. _and marmite 01:13, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

PLEASE STOP YOUR WHOLESALE COPYING. These templates are NOT necessary. _and marmite 01:15, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

Well they were needed for some stuff I copied from Wikipedia, but I guess I got a little carried away. Copying the documentation from the templates on Wikipedia would mean copying yet another template, and this template (Template:Documentation) has already been copied here and deleted twice. --NoPetrol 01:16, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

We are a rather disorganised mob & most editors don't want to be bothered by complex templates. Just edit the stuff you copied to use ref tags. _and marmite 01:19, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

In fact you could just ref to WP. :-) _and marmite 01:25, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

Any templates, whether copied or otherwise, should have complete documentation, otherwise they're useless. This is specially true in the case of such complex ones. I repeat these templates are not necesssary for the purposes of this wiki (IMHO). _and marmite 01:34, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

Should I nominate the templates I uploaded for speedy deletion? How does that work here? --NoPetrol 21:43, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

I'll delete 'em. Thanks for offering. _and marmite 21:45, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

I've copied some from WP in the past but only after a need has been demonstrated. If you want to copy anything from there please copy the doc as well. ;-) _and marmite 21:49, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

Sysop

You are one. In exchange for this awesome privilege, please consider putting something to de-red your user page...TheoryOfPractice 20:36, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

I do it the other way around, a carrot and stick approach. Anyway NoPetrol, good luck with your new found abilities. - User $\pi$ 20:38, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

Well that was easy. Thanks.--NoPetrol 21:04, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

Now the hard work starts. - User $\pi$ 21:08, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

Welcome back!

Wow, until may, it had been over a year since you'd been here. Welcome back, man! The Spikey Punk ^{I'm punking my punk!} 01:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. --NoPetrol (talk) 01:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Bigotry

I advise you to get a dictionary and look up the correct meaning; you seem to be rather confused. Time word Hoover! 15:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

From Oxford English Dictionary:

2. a. A person considered to adhere unreasonably or obstinately to a particular religious belief, practice, etc.

b. In extended use: a fanatical adherent or believer; a person characterized by obstinate, intolerant, or strongly partisan beliefs.

No, I'm pretty sure I have it right. I've not included some archaic definitions, but nowhere does it say that a bigot is "someone who believes that simulated sex between two men is dangerous". The definitions do, however, state that someone who who adheres unreasonably to beliefs, or someone who is obstinate or intolerant, is a bigot. Would you not say that attempting (and succeeding) to silence someone you disagree with instead of engaging them in debate is intolerant? --NoPetrol (talk) 17:37, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, tolerating bigots and haters. What a great topic. ħuman 03:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)