User talk:Redthoreau

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


… This user is addicted to ellipses and has been known to use them indiscriminately....
This user thinks that registration should be required to edit articles.
<ref> This user recognizes the importance of citing sources.






Warning Warning: If you're not a species that utilizes synapses and neural processing, you may not be able to understand this page in the same logical order that humans are capable of, nor manipulate its visual structure to relate to conceptual arrays. Actually... you wont be able to get here or comprehend this sentence, either. DOH



Sarcasm: the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded.

—Fyodor Dostoyevsky


Contents

[edit] WELCOME

[edit] Feel free to email me     RedThoreau@gmail.com


Note: (I do not archive discussions and delete them when they are no longer active or relevant)

Note II: Trying to avoid "Lame Edit Wars"

Note III:

Undue weight --- NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each. Now an important qualification: Articles that compare views should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and will generally not include tiny-minority views at all.

We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by a small minority deserved as much attention as a majority view. Views that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in articles devoted to those views. To give undue weight to a significant-minority view, or to include a tiny-minority view, might be misleading as to the shape of the dispute. Wikipedia aims to present competing views in proportion to their representation among experts on the subject, or among the concerned parties. WP:UNDUEWEIGHT

Note IV:

“ Proper capitalization is the difference between ~ "I helped my uncle Jack off a horse" and "I helped my uncle jack off a horse". ”

Note V:

Mmm, nuts! Nutshell of Wisdom:
If you are the only person left beating the horse after it has died, consider the possibility that you should stop.

Note VI:

[edit] State of the Wiki Nation

“ Wikipedia isn't governed by the thoughtful or the informed - it is governed by anyone who turns up. There are a small core of people who like playing wiki as an inhouse role-playing game and simply deny real-world consequences that might limit their freedom of action. There are a larger group who are too immature or lazy to think straight. And then there are all those who recognise "something must be done", but perpetually oppose the something that's being proposed in favour of a "better idea". The mechanism is rather like using a chatshow phone-in to manage the intricacies of a federal budget - it does not work for issues that need time, thought, responsibility and attention. I doubt this problem can be fixed - since it needs structural change to decision making - which is impossible for precisely the same reasons. ”
—User:Doc glasgow
“ In short there are too many idiots and too few people prepared to tell them to fuck off. And yes, that is precisely what we should tell them, because anything less encourages endless debates and Wikilawyering. Want to tell the world that Lance Armstrong takes drugs? Fuck off. At least until he has stopped successfully suing the newspapers for saying it. Want to tell the world about the evil world Jewish conspiracy? Fuck off, forever, and never even think about coming back. Want to tell the world how the scientists are all wrong? Fuck off - until it's in Nature, anyway. Want to out someone as a paedophile? Not here. Want to explain how 9/11 is a conspiracy and no plane crashed into the pentagon? Web space is cheap, get some of your own. ”
—User:JzG

Note VII:

The Wikipedia philosophy can be summed up thusly: "Experts are scum." For some reason people who spend 40 years learning everything they can about, say, the Peloponnesian War -- and indeed, advancing the body of human knowledge -- get all pissy when their contributions are edited away by Randy in Boise who heard somewhere that sword-wielding skeletons were involved. And they get downright irate when asked politely to engage in discourse with Randy until the sword-skeleton theory can be incorporated into the article without passing judgment.

– Lore Sjöberg [1]

Note VIII:

 No Wikipedia editor may climb the Reichstag building dressed as Spider-Man in order to gain advantage in a content dispute.

WP:NCR

Note IX:

= "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously."


Note X:

What Makes A Fuckhead ? --- by David R. Kendrick

[edit] Fidel Castro image

The Photographer's Barnstar
Thanks for finding a free image for Fidel Castro, and for your tireless efforts in replacing the previous infobox image. I agree, it does look much better now! Here's a little token of my appreciation. Happy editing! JeffBillman (talk) 06:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks!

RfA: Many thanks
Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 06:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Re The Motorcycle Diaries (film)

Amigo...good comment...we'll solve the problems....we have a good article going there...and you helped tremendously...si se puede.... Luigibob (talk) 03:09, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Muchas gracias amigo..."Hasta la Victoria Siempre" .. . Best -- Luigibob (talk) 13:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Many thanks!

Thanks ever so much for The Che 'Beret'star! Much appreciated. I will continue to work away at these articles as more details come out about the films.--J.D. (talk) 15:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Guerrilla (film)

Hey bro. Someone removed the poster on this film I helped edit. Is this person correct about this, the poster is no longer applicable because it's changed somehow? Let's find A poster for this article.... Best -- Luigibob (talk) 17:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I know that at one time that was the poster for the film ... but that was 2 years ago ... and listed the film as coming out in 2007. I will locate you a promotional photo released by the film to be used.   Redthoreau (talk) RT 17:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Che

Hey, I left a response on the Che article, but I feel it came off sounding a little callous, which was not my intention, I admire the extraordinary work you have done on the article and have decided to make it my new pet project, so I will spend the next while trying to improve the article to get it to GA or even, hopefully FA status, with your help of course. ;) Taifarious1 06:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! I'll comb over the article tonight, but you all have done justice to my hero! :D Jmole (talk) 23:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proofreading?

Hi, in case you find the time to read Karin Schäfer, it would be more than welcome. TX, WeHaWoe (talk) 10:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Seems, it's been done. lg, --WeHaWoe (talk) 20:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)