User talk:Wildkitten1205
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have two requests:
- 1. please sign your talk messages to me with four tildes ~~~~ using the tildes results in your signature being posted: -Simsy 16:17, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
- 2. please if you add another topic to page which isn't relevent to the topic that is being discussed please change the topic on your message
Contents |
[edit] WikiProjects
Does anyone know if i Need to write a proposal before i start a wiki project? and if so how do i go about this? Simsy 08:49, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] User/Talk page
Help yourself to my user/talk page. I've been meaning to improve it and make it better. If you do anything good when making it your own I may steal it and update my own page! :) - Tεxτurε 00:07, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] CVU
Hi! The CVU is pretty informal — all you need to do is add your name to the list of participants. Placing the tag on your user page is nice, but is by no means required. Hope that helps; if you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask! Kirill Lokshin 23:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Smile!
[edit] Wiki's blocking policy has got you thinking
Wikipedia has no policies, applied consistently. All the admins on en-l openly admit counting any shred of persanal fairness as mattering less than developing Wikipedia as they wish. Blocking of only 1 side when 2 sides have done exactly the same thing that the block is supposed to have been for, is routine. It's what happened to me too, and claiming to have any rights against a biased 2-day block actually was the offence that got me permablocked, after only 5 weeks' membership. Look at all these:
a voice from within Wikipedia's own system describes how the ArbCom and dispute resolution systems are rigged with discretionary catch-alls that always enable admin to win http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-June/024230.html on how force of group numbers dictates Wikipedia pages's content http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-July/025936.html this is actually called "don't bother reporting abusive admins"
http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-July/025921.html I was wary of how the umpiring of pages the whole world can fight over could possibly work well, but I was drawn into Wikipedia by a friend who was briefly (and no longer is, already!) having good experiences with sharing his medical concerns on a couple of pages on medical subjects. On the nature of Wikipedia: http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-July/025583.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/08/322087.html http://spectrum-fairness.blog.co.uk/
messages of support: "some of the people on there do seem pretty sarcastic and bullying .... some of the right-wingers on there seem to think mentioning anything negative but factual about Reagan or Bush constitutes bias and there do seem to be some nasty characters on there." - from Aspievision, http://s13.invisionfree.com/aspievision/index.php "You are not the only one who has had problems with Wikipedia taking sides in a dispute, and being blatantly unfair to the other side without even giving them a chance to defend themselves." from FAMSecretSociety, a Yahoo group " of late I've noticed that some independent contributions have been either radically edited or censored. I've not had time to check articles on 9/11, the London Bombings, the assault on Falluja etc, but judging from the way content was edited promptly out of articles on SSRIs, schizophrenia and Asperger's, there definitely seem to be operatives in place ready to clamp down on anything that may cast doubt on establishment canards." from Medialens, http://www.medialens.org/board/ 195.188.254.82 16:03, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
That is why the ArbCom is being revamped, it is acutally too complex. but wikipedia is working to address that so far i have not had a problem with any admin's on wikipedia but that is because i've followed the rules & applied some common sense unlike the sockpuppets and vandals that like to disrupt things on here ;)... - Simsy 20:22, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Australia resources
Hi, I see from your note on the New user log that you are Australian residing in Australia. Just thought I'd let you know about the Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board. Always interesting stuff to read there, and I personally find that it helps you to feel more like part of a community. Also, there is a Wikipedia:WikiProject Sydney that I am sure people would love assistance on. If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line on my Talk page. cheers! pfctdayelise 06:39, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] F1 portal featured article
The F1 portal (in which I assume you have some degree of interest, as your name is listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Formula_One) is intended to have a regular rotation of a 'featured article'. I've swapped a few in and out over the last couple of months, but I think it would be better if there were more of a community attempt at deciding this, proposals, votes, that kind of thing. So - why not pop over to Portal_talk:Formula_One#Suggestions_for_Featured_Article: and make a suggestion. Ta. 4u1e 00:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Selected articles on Portal:F1
Hello again.
I dropped notes round a while back to those who have listed themselves at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Formula_One to ask for suggestions for selected articles on portal:Formula One. There was a pretty good response, both in terms of how it might work and of articles suggested. Damon Hill came out with the most support and was brought up to Good Article standard after a lot of work by Skully Collins and others before going on as the F1 portal selected article a couple of weeks ago. It is now at Featured Article Candidates as a Featured Article candidate (why not drop by and see if you can help polish it further?).
Several people who responded to the original request suggested that a monthly or bi-weekly 'Selected Article' could act as a catalyst for an improvement drive to get more articles up to a higher standard. Although it wasn't quite what I had in mind when I started, this seemed to work pretty well for the Damon Hill article, so I've drafted up a process for doing this more regularly. See Portal_talk:Formula_One/Management_of_selected_articles for details. Essentially the suggestion is that we vote for an article to improve every couple of weeks and at the end of the improvement process the article goes on the portal as the new 'Selected Article'. I'd be grateful for any comments on how this might work - I'm sure some of you are more familiar with things 'Wiki' than me - as well as your votes for the next candidate (by 16 July).
You may also want to help with the article Gilles Villeneuve, which was the next most popular after Damon Hill. The idea is to try and get it up to GA standard by 16 July and then put it on the portal as the 'Selected Article'. I hope you can help! 4u1e 18:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
