Talk:Notable Usenet personalities/Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive

Inappropriate mention of Alt Usenet Kooks

There is mention of a crazy newsgroup called alt.usenet.kooks. That is like the Pope listing notable saints and having a reference to adolf hitler and several serial killers. Alt. Usenet. Kooks is a bully network of creeps who hide under psuedonames and have no place as reference to anything except degeneracy.

So any Wikipedia item that has reference to a alt.usenet.kooks is an item not worth having at all. The only spot in Wikipedia where alt.usenet.kooks can be mentioned is an article solely about a newsgroup of worthless bullies who hide behind false names or a article about insanity or bully behavior.

Alt. Usenent. Kooks is perhaps a initiation parade ground for those in schools who go on gun rampages where they train to be bullies in High School or College.

So the editors of Wikipedia to to screw off their heads and check to see if their marbles are seated correctly before they mention alt usenet kooks anywhere. 216.16.57.48 02:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

That's the "see also" section. For example, if we mentioned Winston Churchill, we might have a "see also" to Adolph Hitler. In fact, we do (in the form of a link in-text, instead, since see-alsos should not repeat links already in the text). A see also section is where related topics are listed, for users to further investigate things. Things that are opposites of or opposed to an article's topic can go in the "see also" section. Also, please keep your comments neutral and civil. --Cheeser1 02:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Imbalance of Respect

By even mentioning alt usenet kooks as something lends more respect to that creepish newsgroup and tears down the respect of every person listed. John Baez, even though a crumby physicist deserves more respect than alt usenet kooks but is denied that respect because of the listing of alt usenet kooks

If one were to look at the school shootings to see if the Virginia Tech killer was a active member of alt usenet kooks. Anyway, one future day, there will be a lawsuit on this newsgroup because it fosters bullism and when young high school kids find the newsgroups and get sucked into this particular newsgroup begins to train their minds into becoming a worthless creepy bully that the other particants of that newsgroup have become.

Some of the editors of Wikipedia are members of alt usenet kooks and they are mentally unfit to be editors of Wikipedia. 216.16.55.227 20:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't a WP:CRYSTAL, we report what is now, not what you apparently think and hope will happen in the future, or how you perceive things. Note that insulting other editors is not a good way to get anyone to listen to you. DMacks 21:57, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

For the record, there is no law against "fostering bullyism" - furthermore, there is no conspiracy out to get you by having kooks invade Wikipedia and suppress your opinion. No, what's going on is simple: alt.usenet.kooks has an article. It's related to this article. That's why there's a "see also" link to it. Please do not continue to hurl accusations and use Wikipedia as a pulpit to preach against a usenet board. Thanks. --Cheeser1 02:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia confers respect to a newsgroup that is a blight to Usenet. Wikipedia does not even see the objective reality of "what is alt.usenet.kooks" it is a gang of cabal, noisemaker worthless bullies who hide behind false names. And the tremendous harm and damage that Wikipedia does is confer some sort of respect and legitimacy to this worthless newsgroup. Part of the reason is that a fair number of the editors of Wikipedia are themselves these goons that raise raucous and bully tactics on other posters and regulars of alt.usenet.kooks. It is only a matter of time when some High School or College school shooting occurs where the victims and the shooter can be tied back and connected to posts on the Internet where the killer was bullied by these creeps of alt.usenet.kooks. Noone bothered to look whether the Virginia Tech killer or the Amish school killer was harrassed by creeps of alt.usenet.kooks. But one day, if things stay the same, that a school shooting can be blamed because of this crazy phenomenon of the Internet where BULLY BEHAVIOUR can be overboard. The State of IOWA and other states have policies where bullies in schools are given guidance counseling, in recognition that bully behaviour is the prime cause of School shootings. In fact, as the Internet has increased so has the rise in school shootings. Not that bullies are the shooters, but that bullies commit their bullying so as to infuriate victims to the point where they do killing.

So for Wikipedia to write glowingly or even respectfully of a newsgroup such as alt.usenet.kooks is like the newsmedia writing glowingly about criminals.

Part of the problem is that several of the editors of Wikipedia are regulars in these decadent and bully newsgroups and they do not have the brains to know better.

Wikipedia should not even have a article on alt.usenet.kooks because none of that behaviour is commendable.

signed Archimedes Plutonium and posted to sci.edu,news.admin.net-abuse.misc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.16.54.21 (talk) 03:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has established quite clear process for removing pages that editors feel do not belong. Feel free to follow the process and start a discussion in the appropriate forum. Whining about the page on an unrelated page is not part of that process and will not accomplish your goal. Note that wikipedia is not censored and is not subject to local school policies. Note also that insulting other editors will only accomplish getting you banned from editing. DMacks 03:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

If "a gang of cabal, noisemaker worthless bullies who hide behind false names" merits an encyclopedia article, then it gets an encyclopedia article. Please stop making personal attacks and at this point, hurling legal accusations at people. It's extraordinarily inappropriate. --Cheeser1 03:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Your appropriate response should have been "Yes Mr. Plutonium, we'll get right on it and fix it."

Your inappropriate response will only insure you being a Wikipedia editor for a longer period of time. 216.16.54.21 03:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

In the next School Shooting that has a connection to alt.usenent.kooks then civil suit Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia for fostering that School shooting

Look at that. Wikipedia has no article on sci.physics or sci.chem or sci. anything but it has a long extensive glowing written report on alt.usenet.kooks which is none other then a worthless cabal of nameless bullies.

Wikipedia adores bullies and writes glowing of them as they prance around with their fake names attacking innocent people.

So if the Virginia Tech killer or Columbine killer or Amish school killer or the next school killer becomes known. Then snatch their computers and see if these killers were bullied. And if there is a connection then name Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia as defendents in a wrongful death civil suit.

This is a trouble, when you have editors who do not see objective reality and who are too young and dumb to be responsible editors.

As States across the USA are trying to put a lid on bullyism, there is Wikipedia sugar coating and encouraging bullyism.

216.16.55.143 16:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Archimedes Plutonium posted to sci.edu because Wikipedia often tries to erase their foul mistakes and wrongdoings.