User talk:TK

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search
‎


“ To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.---Thomas Paine ”

Contents

Don't Be A Paste Eater! This Means You.





Archive #1 Archive #2 Archive #3
Archive #4 Archive #5 Archive #6
Archive #7 Archive #8 Archive #9
Archive #10 Archive #11 Archive #12


Thanks

Hi, Thanks a lot for the advice. I hadn't realised that the changes I addressed had been made by the site owner - I feel pretty embarrassed now! I've read the info you gave me and I'll make sure I stick to it.

By the way, when you reverted what I had changed on Red-Letter Christians, you also reverted a spelling error that I'd corrected on Cambridge University - just letting you know in case you hadn't mean to revert that also!

Sorry - one other thing. You (or another administrator) might like to look at deleting the article entitled 'UBS'. UBS (University of Bums on Seats) is a fake university -in the UK it's a widely known satire of educational policy. Haniyagaz

Thanks for the information! You can correct the spelling, if you've a mind to. No I wasn't aware of the spelling reversion. --₮K/Admin/Talk 08:03, 29 May 2009 (EDT)
Hi, Just one further point on this. I discovered that another minor revision I had made (correcting a translation from Russian on the Alger Hiss article) had also been reverted, at the same time as the others. I presumed this was an error (like the Cambridge University revert) and so I reinserted my correction. You've now reverted it again. I'm not really sure why, so I just wanted to mention it here in case it had been a misunderstanding.
Jurist is a closer match, as originally used by FOIA, than Lawyer, IMO. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:43, 12 June 2009 (EDT)
Ah okay, thanks for clarifying. To me that doesn't seem right in terms of the translation, so I'll open it up on the Talk page. Sorry about the revert before: I just presumed it was an error like with the Cambridge University article.
This isn't Wikipedia, Haniyagaz. Please read our Guidelines. I already made the decision about the translation, weighing that and our users best interests/clarity and conveying the best meaning. Thanks. Please be sure to always sign your posts. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:17, 13 June 2009 (EDT)
Absolutely, I do appreciate that reverting Administrators is both unhelpful and against the guidelines; I really did only revert you because I thought you had reverted my edit accidentally. Sorry for having taken up your time with this. I'll move on to other things. Haniyagaz

Nuc Wpns Accidents

Thanks for the advice. Added notes and references, will be adding more very soon!Mhmm 08:23, 24 May 2009 (EDT)

My block

After being inactive for a while, I noticed that you blocked me for using multiple accounts? WesleyS emailed me just the other day to inform me that you had suspicions of us being the same person. I'm from West Virginia and he's from Pittsburgh. It's only about a 30-mile difference, so I understand why you would suspect. I would have emailed you, but my email feature has been disabled. If you could please reply I would really appreciate it. I always have (and still do) had the best of intentions for this site. Thanks. --JLauttamus

Hopefully I was wrong. I have unblocked you. For others who find themselves in the same position, my contact information is given in a prominent box at the top of my User page. --₮K/Admin/Talk 15:01, 9 May 2009 (EDT)

Uighurs

I emerged it with RJJensen's Uighur article because his was more detailed and full of information, and there were three Uighur articles, making it redundant. Sorry about that. RKLuffy

Atheism Talk Page

You contributed yesterday to the Atheist talk page on 'Atheist definition' and in it you not only provided a completely irrelevant subject (how children are born pure and are corrupted by liberals) but also insulted the original asker by insinuating that he corrupts little children and, by proxy, causes them to go to hell (OK, the very last bit is a complete exaggeration).

There are also many other points on there that require editing, if you have the ability to edit it would you mind cleaning out the un-necessary bits? (If you want I can probably list them here). Hobohodo 13:16, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

  • I doubt you will find any Administrator here at Conservapedia interested in diluting that article, with the end-game being to obfuscate and present in a better light, the agenda of Atheists, Liberals and Socialists. Personally, I leave it to God to decide who is going to Hell and who isn't, FYI. However I very much meant to say (not merely insinuate) that those supporting, or wishing us to present Atheists and Liberals in a more positive light, do indeed corrupt the innocent. You should ask that your account be re-named to something less silly, by the way, if you ever expect to be taken seriously. --₮K/Admin/Talk 13:35, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
    • Using someone's name as a reason to reject a logical and valid point isn't a very good argument. I understand you're an administrator and have various jobs to perform and stuff, but you have no real proof, no REAL proof that atheists do corrupt the innocent. Taking on board you are a Christian and believe the Bible 100%, is totally fair enough and you're allowed to use that in an argument. I know several atheists would disagree but allow me to point out that whilst you can use it as evidence, you cannot use it as proof. As such, your statement should be retracted. Add to that, WHY did you say that in the first place? It was totally irrelevant to the subject matter. Deeer 14:55, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

landmarkean no lamarckean in baptist article

Hello Brother in Christ TK, in that article it must to be landmarkean after landmarks;because lamarckeans after Lamarck-a french surname- is name from a trend in biology, no relation to baptists.

Please ban RightOn

As judging from [1] and [2], he's out to be silly and malicious.--Woloct 01:01, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Moving Pages, Consolidation

My most sincere apologies, TK. I was unaware that certain issues required administrator approval, and I believed that organizing articles in what I feel is a more efficient and more user-friendly manner would be well-received. If you or any of the other admins have any specific objections as to why you believe my undertaking is unwarranted, please let me know so that we can resolve the differences in our views and work toward a solution that everyone can agree on. --Economist 22:49, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

Ping-ponging a convo? Up until this, I swear my hand was nowhere near that block button! :P It isn't a matter of me disagreeing, but because of the unceasing vandalization here, it is more a matter of not wanting "surprises" or adding to the duplication of efforts. In this case, the remnants of your consolidation could be moved or deleted, working with you. It is like an editor re-directing instead of just asking if an article can be moved...and that keeps the revision history intact. Thanks for responding, and just let me, or another Admin know what needs to be deleted/moved, etc. --₮K/Admin/Talk 01:57, 28 May 2009 (EDT)

Wowzers!

That's a lot of blocks. JY23 16:42, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

? LOL! If you think four or five blocks is "lots" you haven't been watching.....--ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:20, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Image upload

Sorry to bother you, but I wanted to add a photo of some saffron I took to use on the saffron page, but I note that only administrators can upload files. Could you possibly copy the file from here and upload it for me please? Thank you in advance. MattS 17:44, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

I would need to see the full link, not just to the specific image, to see if it is under copyright. You might want to see if the United States Department of Agriculture has such an image.....--ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:49, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
I just took the photo myself in my kitchen, so it's OK, it really isn't copyrighted by anyone (other than me I suppose) MattS 17:54, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
Cool....can you add that to the page where it is? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 18:11, 1 June 2009 (EDT)
Can you embed images directly into a wiki from a URL? I've never tried before. Bear with me and I'll give it a try. MattS 18:14, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Well one will always go wrong thinking I have any particular technical ability! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 18:19, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

No, doesn't seem to work. I tried:
[[Image:http://s3.amazonaws.com/mattstafford/saffron.jpg|thumb|200px|Spanish Mancha Saffron]]
But it just shows a hyperlink to the image. Don't fret about it, if it's a problem to upload images then it really doesn't matter too much. I just started an article on saffron because I was using it in a rice dish and thought the historical aspect of it would appeal. As I have some saffron at the moment I thought an image would soften the article a bit, but it isn't essential. Thank you for your time anyway. MattS 18:23, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Take a look. AddisonDM 18:51, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Replied on my user page. Thank you. MattS 19:01, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

--ṬK/Admin/Talk 19:12, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Quick Question

Hello! I was just wondering why you got rid of my relatively minor edit to the article Judaism. Judaism is indeed considered to be an ethnic religion. I made similar edits to the pages on Taoism, Islam, and Christianity (making it clear that the first is also an ethnic religion while the other two are universalizing religions), and none of those edits were reverted. In fact, both the pages on Christianity and Islam were edited multiple times by high-ranking administrators (Andy Schlafly himself in the case of Christianity) and my edits were not removed, so I'm kindly asking that you revert the page to the way it was when I last edited it, as there have been no revisions since (except for your reversion of my edit to the one before it). If there's some specific reason as to why you're opposed to having that particular factoid on the page, I'd be happy to hear it. Please respond on my talk page because I probably won't check yours. Thanks! -Ilikecake 00:56, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

  • You should check here. Your edit said: "Though there is some controversy, Judaism is generally considered to be an ethnic religion." Generally? By whom? Controversy? About that term being applied to Judaism? I wonder if that is because there are hundreds of thousands of non-Semites who practice Judaism? I don't always have time to stop whatever I am doing and go digging around for citations to back up statements inserted into articles as you did. In our Manual of Style it clearly instructs editors to back their assertions/content with sources. In the example I just gave you, about non Semites who practice Judaism, you merely saying it is so, clearly is not. I left you a clue in the Christianity article to show you why your edits were reversed. Finally, thanks for pointing out your edits that I failed to revert! Here we don't ping-pong responses, keeping everything where it began, so it is easier for all to follow, so my response is here, and I do hope you find it! If you have further questions, just ask. Thanks! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:34, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
I properly sourced the claim that you disputed on the Christianity page, as well as on the pages for universalizing and ethnic religions. I am now asking your permission to restore my edits on the pages for Taoism, Islam, and Judaism using the same source that I used on the pages I just mentioned. It's a very well-respected textbook on the topic of Human Geography, which is quickly becoming a general education requirement in many of the country's leading universities, authored by a man named James M. Rubenstein (economist, professor at Miami University, and consultant for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago). I believe this to be an adequate source, as it is the same information that is being taught to young people around the country. -Ilikecake 13:45, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
Also, I know this has nothing to do with what we've been discussing, but I have an additional request: can you please rename the article Paul Cezanne to Paul Cézanne? I have explained why in the talk page here: [5]. Thanks! -Ilikecake 15:22, 5 June 2009 (EDT) (And P.S.—I know now to check here for responses!)
  • You sourced it? Where? Did you add the ref link with your information? I did not see a reference link. Please do not add information from what you consider to be a "good" source. Textbooks are liberal sources of information. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:10, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
...I did add a reference link on the Christianity page, unless I am mistaken. If you click the little superscript "2" next to the sentence in question, you are directed to the bottom of the page where I properly cited the book that I drew the information from. Whether or not textbooks are liberal sources of information, I used the book in question as my primary resource because I cannot see any way in which the topic at hand can be influenced by politics in any way. The tone of the textbook does not indicate in any way that the author intends to bash Christianity, Judaism, or any other religion, just provide in a matter-of-fact way the status quo as it relates to the study of human geography. -Ilikecake 19:40, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
...and the plot thickens. I saw that you deleted my redirect from The Metropolitan Museum of Art to Metropolitan Museum of Art, stating that it was unauthorized. I was not aware that it was "unauthorized" or that I had to get authorization to do so, but regardless, was it not a helpful edit? Would you not make the same redirect if you came across two pages that differ only as it relates to a definite article? I'm very sorry if I violated a rule, but I'm requesting now that you restore the redirect. I can't see any reason why you wouldn't other than to spite me personally, which I can't imagine you'd do. -Ilikecake 19:46, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
I don't see merit to the above criticisms. We avoid public-school-textbook style jargon here. The term "ethnic religion" is unfamiliar to most people and it's unclear what it means.
As to "Paul Cezanne," that is the English spelling of his name, and this encyclopedia is in English.--Andy Schlafly 19:17, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
The Paul Cézanne thing seems to have blown over at this point because it has been kindly renamed by Joaquín Martínez. The accent is present on the "e" in virtually all sources consulted, including the databases of several major art museums in America and elsewhere (the links that I provided on the talk page are for database queries from The Metropolitan Museum of Art and The Art Institute of Chicago). Also, I don't understand how "universalizing religion" and "ethnic religion" are "public-school-textbook style jargon." Beyond the fact that I've only ever encountered the textbook in question in private universities (though I guess I can conceive of its use at a public school because the author, James M. Rubenstein, is a high-ranking professor at the public Miami University in Ohio). Whether or not "most people" are familiar with the term "ethnic religion" is inconsequential (and I would actually argue that many people are familiar with the term)—it is the term preferred by the majority of human geographers today. Furthermore, I'm sure you can open any encyclopedia to any page and encounter a term that "most people" are unfamiliar with—aren't encyclopedias supposed to be databases jam-packed with all information that could be considered helpful to know about the world? Even if "ethnic religion" is a term unknown to most people, why inhibit people from learning more about it? -Ilikecake 19:40, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
Before I block you, Ilikecake, please prove to me you inserted properly formatted citations for the edits I reverted. I cannot see your citations. Also, you were previously blocked for diluting conservative articles with your insistence on world-view, internationalist so-called consensus....don't make the same mistake twice. You have received an instruction about proper sources from two Administrators now, including the site owner. That's it. It is over, complete, done, finished. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 19:46, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
I don't want to be blocked. I will stop now and I will never again touch upon the issue of universalizing or ethnic religions. I still believe that my original block was unmerited, but I will not argue that here nor will I ever argue it because it is in the past. As stated above, I inserted a properly formatted citation on the Christianity article alone. As stated above, currently reference #2 on the page Christianity is a citation from the book The Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography by James M. Rubenstein. I did not source my claims for the Islam or Judaism article because I was waiting to see if you approved of the way that I cited in the Christianity article. If you have any more questions I'll be happy to answer them. -Ilikecake 19:57, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
Never mind, you removed my citation. At least I know, then, that you saw it. I'll take that to mean that you feel it's inadequate and I'll stop now. I'd still like to hear back from you as to what I was doing wrong. -Ilikecake 20:04, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

My problem is, Ilikecake (Please post to Aschlafly's talk page and ask him to change your user name to your real first name and last initial) you added the material, based only upon your own word, without a link to verify the book says what you say it does, or any ability to check the book out. That is not an acceptable primary source for the information you wanted to add. You are not some lone wolf, like they allow on Wikipedia, making policy decision about what pages will say, or what their titles will be. You will need to discuss plans to vacate pages, re-direct them, or even create disambig pages, which you would have known if you had bothered to read our Manual of Style, and ancillary pages.

Your help is needed and appreciated, I want to be clear about that. But usually, here, that means editing articles from our conservative perspective only, and asking and discussing major changes first. I consider re-directing pages to be major. I consider disambiguation pages to be major, especially when filled with silly, small European cities on an American encyclopedia. I consider labeling an entire religion to be ethnic-specific as major, and misleading. Personally I also find it slightly anti-semitic as well, perhaps marginalizing is a better word.--ṬK/Admin/Talk 20:17, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

Thank you very much for clearing that up. I will definitely seek help from administrators before making large changes like that in the future. My intention was not to be anti-Semitic nor was it to offend anybody or violate the rules of Conservapedia. I'll be sure to do my reading from now on. You can tell me no, but I'd really much rather keep my username. If I recall correctly, it's Conservapedia policy to mandate that usernames are based on real names—growing up my schoolyard name was "Illinois Ike," which is actually where the "Ilike" part comes from (and the "cake" part was just me trying to be clever). -Ilikecake 20:37, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
  • Yes, I well remember seeing that cleverness elsewhere. Thanks for cooperating.--ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:17, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

Template Unprotection

Sir, could you please unprotect Template:Calculus? I need to remove a link to a protected article. JY23 15:52, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

Yes sir, done. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:18, 7 June 2009 (EDT)
Finished, thanks. JY23 16:35, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

Articles for deletion

Hi TK, I nominated the article modal tonalities for deletion a while back, but wasn't able to put it on the current discussion list in Articles for Deletion, which is locked. Would you be willing to help out with this? JDWpianist 18:24, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

  • Deleted. Thanks for the heads-up. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:14, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

Thanks for the welcome

I do have a question, can you tell me how to make those little boxes that users put down the right side of their user pages? I'd like to express myself so people know who they are dealing with. Thanks again --CJHallock 23:12, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

Check here. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:20, 7 June 2009 (EDT)
Thanks, and I'm sorry if I misunderstood you, no hard feelings? --CJHallock 13:30, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
I'm in Colorado not Sheffield, but I was stationed in Shannon for two years before I retired from US customs. I'm sorry that I didn't realize that disagreeing with administrators was forbidden. --CJHallock 14:04, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
  • My comment was to the user Alain, CJHallock. And you should have known that, since you never raised a question needing my response, about email. Perhaps you forgot who you were logged in as? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:09, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
I figured you would reply to him on his own talk page. I was quite confused, sorry I got it wrong. This is my only conservipedia account. and I added my e-mail account, which I did think was optional. --CJHallock 14:24, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
  • Thanks, CJHallock. Email isn't optional, but apparently when we upgraded the software recently, changing the sign-up page was overlooked. Here we prefer users not to "ping-pong" conversations, so that all exchanges are in one place. I have let the Webmaster know of the issue. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:58, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

Block reasons

Why don't you make sure my edits to the block reason drop down list are OK.... AddisonDM 15:40, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

  • Will do, Addison! You like minefields, do you?  ;-) --ṬK/Admin/Talk 15:53, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
  • The changes seem just fine to me, Addison. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:05, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

Hi

Why did you delete my comment on the main page talk? ConservativeCanuck 21:31, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

  • I am indeed sorry, but thanks for reminding me. I thought I had blocked you, got busy elsewhere, and forgot completely about it! Enjoy your summer and Godspeed to you. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:52, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

Re: Czars

Sorry for the cross-talk page post -- how do I correctly respond on my own talk page to a discussion? In any case, I'd be happy to merge the Obama czar articles. I was only filling them all in since the main page had a link "See Conservapedia's list of the 16 czars . Editors can start writing articles on each of these czars." Do you think it would be better to merge all to one article or to continue to expand the individual pages? I'm not sure how much there is to say about some of these folks, as they haven't really done anything before or after appointment.

Yes, we prefer you to answer where the question is asked, but no big deal. Continue doing what you are as another Admin created the empty links. Later tonight I will create a blank page, and you can copy and paste over your work, so it shows your edits. I don't think I can move multiple pages into one. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 22:27, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

Thanks for the welcome message :)

I hope I can prove worthy of it :) MaryC 17:47, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

  • You're welcome! Follow your principles, believe in your Christian Faith, and the rest will take care of itself. Politics is the art of the possible, and all things are possible for people who can resist the constant temptation to betray their ethics. Sarah Palin is a good example for you (and all of us) to follow. It isn't going to be easy, because the battle is literally between good and evil. I too was bitten by the political bug when very young. To be of service to our country is one of the highest callings. Good luck to you! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:55, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

About that debate

It seems Ed is away on a vacation or something. Could I at least get your approval to start a debate page? I intend to call it Debate:Correct attitude towards the existence of a god? -- non-controversial enough, I think. PaulCM 17:49, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

  • It seems the only way you know how to communicate is to make socks and force your ideas upon others. Typical of liberals and atheists. My (and Ed's, as I have his 100% proxy here on CP) response is still the same as it is on Ed's talk page, when I responded to your PaulMC persona. You and your little vandal site friends do not have a right to force people to debate you, or even listen to your ideas. If people really wanted your liberal drivel, your site would be more popular than CP or other leading Conservative sites. But it isn't. Godspeed to you. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 18:04, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

A Storehouse of Knowledge article

I looked at the article on aSK a couple of days ago and I didn't see anything attacking CP's owner and Admins. Isn't it possible this was simply added by a vandal? Wouldn't it be better in this case to just remove the offensive part, rather than delete the entire article? --OscarJ 08:20, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

  • It is the site itself that does the attacking and tries to legitimize lies, not the article. Why is this so important to you? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:25, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

I'm sorry, I thought you were referring to the article. I was just confused why it was deleted. Thanks for the explanation --OscarJ 07:07, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

Andy is fine with it

I received Andy's permission to start the debate page. Please stop banning me for no reason. It would also be nice if you unbanned my original account (PaulMC), since I believe it was closed because of a mistake (I'm not a member of any vandal site and neither did I vandalize CP). DannyC 09:37, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

But of course you never informed Andy you have previously been blocked several times, and you have refused, contrary to our rules, to abide by the decision of two Admins, Ed Poor and myself. You are a deceitful troll. Bye. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:28, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

AuroreF's edits to Apple-related pages

Why was AuroreF blocked and her edits reverted? They seemed to be in good faith. HarriettO 21:34, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

  • Do you really consider inserting ridiculous statements, one about the i-Phone being called the "Jesus Phone", without so much as one citation or reference, editing in good faith? I don't. Since you lack the judgment to realize that (and I suspect you are the blocked user socking it up to post here, rather than contact me with the info on my user page per the message on the block screen) you shouldn't be editing here as well. A person of good faith would have read our Manual of Style and followed its instructions. If you make yet another account here, try reading it. Articles without supporting citations belong in a magazine, not in an encyclopedia. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 21:57, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

Media on Obama

A quote by (pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, pro Islamic magazine) Newsweek editor Evan Thomas may be of interest, referring his perception of the President after his recent speeches overseas,

"I mean, in a way Obama's standing above the country, above the world. He's sort of God." http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/26445/

Perhaps this belongs in the MSM page, but i thought it might be pertinent on his own, as illustrative of the effect he has on many.

(Acts 12:21-23) "And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. {22} And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. {23} And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost."

Daniel1212 17:32, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

  • Yes, it got lots of media play, both MSM and Conservative sites and blogs. It is pretty typical, isn't it, of how the media makes excuses for Obama? Please feel free to add it, Daniel...perhaps a "cquote" would be appropriate? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:19, 14 June 2009 (EDT)
Added substantial statistical data on listing of MSM to port side, as well as above quote. On another subject, it bothers me to even reference certain sources in the History of homosexuality article, as being liberal pro homosexual they often describe lewd practices. Can i add some some sort of warning to them?Daniel1212 23:16, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
Yes, of course. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:23, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

Hello TK

Not to criticise, but the word "that" should be included between "it has come to my attention" and "some vandal sites". Godspeed. TPatterson 13:51, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

Is it okay if I ask about this revert?

I've been lurking for a while and am not looking for a MYOB block but I saw you [revert] a post in a talk section that didn't seem to break any commandments to me. If you read the article there is a large block quote about white racist intellectually elite liberal eugenics proponents from the 1930's-40's, I think that sounds like Nazi stuff to me, was there something else that I missed? Thanks for your time --JerriahD 23:34, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

  • I can only explain it as trying to throttle back some inflammatory language, and if you stop and look at the users total edits and actions, its something you get a feel for. We have been under seige for a few years now, and it never gets better, so long as there are people out there who insist on stopping POV's they have decided shouldn't exist. We're pretty skittish about re-directs as well, especially with no edit note explaining. PLEASE take a moment to read our Style Manual and Editors Guide....things are not the same here as WP. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:01, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

Thought for the day....

One cannot say the most inhumane and vile things about a person hundreds of times, and publicly, then turn around and state they have sympathy for that person, or extend condolences. If you made policy criticism personal, you cannot go back. Trying to do so smacks as the worst kind of deceit. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:29, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

I wanted to inform you...

...of the fact that I was not "trolling" when I posted my thoughts on the Main Page's talk section. I would have accepted a plausible answer to my question and, if satisfied, or at the very least, threatened, wouldn't have dredged up the issue again. On a Christian wiki, the idea of posting graphically violent images just below the scroll cut-off (for most computer monitors, anyway) seems extremely unintelligent. However, if my post had been left there for a number of people to comment on, I, as well as potentially other users with similar concerns, might reach a consensus about why, exactly, those images belong there. Thank you for taking the time to read this, and, one imagines, replying in a helpful manner. GregP 20:42, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

  • Violent images? Were you not talking about smoking? When you get older, GregP, and finish your formal education, I believe you will have learned that your opinion about answers is not the end-all and be-all. Sites have administrators, and their job is to consider more than just your small area of concern. Your mixing of topics here, about my objections to your comments about smoking, and some "violent images" highlights your lack of critical thinking and logic. If you want to continue this odd discourse, avail yourself of the "email this user" link to the left. Failure to do so will result in your removal. Have a nice day/evening/night/morning, as the case may be. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 20:49, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

I do not understand

I am trying to figure what what I did to offend you. I am guessing you are referring to the Billy Sunday article and the broken link I tried to fix. The link simply said "<ref name=tnr>" in the code and appears as an error on the page, so I thought the previous editor wanted a link to the same source as the other link referred by the same reference name "tnr" which refers to reference #9 "# ↑ "Billy Sunday," The New Republic, March 20, 1915, from The New Republic Book, p. 183", which the previous editor refers to in a previous section on the page. I was just attempting to help and thought the editor of the page would let me know if I miscalculated. I do not understand the anger, I was simply trying to help. BMcP 20:54, 19 June 2009

  • I don't understand you reading all that motivation into my pretty matter-of-fact message, BMcP. I sincerely hope you don't do that as a matter of practice with everyone. I didn't see the 1915 date, so may well be jumping the gun about the "liberal site" business. If you were not linking directly to today's New Republic, it should be fine, so please re-insert the ref. If it is linking to today's New Republic, perhaps we can find another reference? Thanks for explaining! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:37, 19 June 2009 (EDT)
Here is the link if you interested. The book is from 1916 (the article is from 1915), the book is a reprint of the first 100 issues of New Republic magazine. I will re-insert the link then, if it's good with you.
As for the modern New Republic, is the magazine not considered an acceptable source? I honestly never heard of it until the other day. --BMcP 8:08, 20 June 2009
Thanks for showing me, BMcP. Please go ahead and re-insert the reference + link. I apologize for not taking the time to peruse it more carefully in the first place! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 08:20, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

Harry Potter

Why have you reverted my improvements without so much as reading them? LarsJ 14:41, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

  • You have guts, I'll give you that, coming to my page and telling me what I have read, lol. Collaborative efforts are just that. Read the dictionary definition for the word. It is a fact of life that trust is earned. Making wholesale changes, dismissing the additions of senior administrators as "fluff" is pretty insulting and cold, don't you think? In order to have a collaboration, one would need to see who added what, and perhaps (as our editor's guides say) gather some input on proposed changes. While I know this somewhat stifles the ability to just make needed changes, without doing so also creates problems for the collaboration as a whole, don't you think? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:49, 21 June 2009 (EDT) (part time fireman)

Permission error?

Hello. In trying to leave a message to another user (User talk:JessicaT), I was shown a "Permission error" page (http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:JessicaT&action=edit), and a link to your User page. Is there a problem with my account preventing me from editing certain pages? Carillonneur 01:22, 22 June 2009 (EDT)

The person you are trying to email through this wiki is no longer an Administrator here, and has been blocked. When I click that link, it says exactly that, so it is odd you also needed to ask me. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:32, 22 June 2009 (EDT)
It says, "This page has been locked to prevent editing. If you would like to edit this article, discuss your proposals on the article's talk page or consult the protecting administrator.

This title has been protected from creation by TK. The reason given is "'". " Sorry if I misunderstood. And I was trying to leave a Talk Page message, not send an email. Carillonneur


Spelling Error?

Landmark Baptist are most often refered to as "Landmarker" rather than "Landmarkean". Don't take my word as a 20 year Landmark Baptist Pastor, but do a search on the other word and then use my word. May God Bless. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JTBaptist (talk)-- 12:13, 23 June 2009

  • Don't worry, I won't. :D I also thought as you did, but decided I would take the word of the PhD in American Studies from Yale, my fellow Administrator, RJJensen. You might want to take it up with him. And by the way, Pastor, you might want to use the button above the edit screen, that looks like handwriting (next to the "W" in a circle) to sign your posts. It inserts what needs to be inserted, after you finish typing your posts. Thanks! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 15:21, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

retired user

Is there a reason we need to keep the userpages of blocked users around instead of deleting them along with the talk pages? AddisonDM 21:38, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Oh, I am pretty sure there is, Addison. However, we don't discuss policy or security issues on wiki. Remember? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 07:26, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

WilliamSmith

Could you block WilliamSmith, he is creating parody articles --OscarJ 11:01, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

My user page

You just accidentally deleted my user and talk page as being that of a "blocked vandal". As I'm not blocked, and am not a vandal, I presume this was an error. Just wanted to confirm that so I can recreate both pages. Many thanks, and sorry to trouble you. Leo Samuels 13:42, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

Sorry! I have restored the pages, Leo....still early here for a Sunday.... --ṬK/Admin/Talk 13:45, 28 June 2009 (EDT)
Not to worry, and thank you. :D Leo Samuels 13:46, 28 June 2009 (EDT)


Future user boxes

I have a few user boxes I am working on, but the question is, "will Conservapedia allow it due to being conservative?"

The "in development" boxes are currently located here. Let me know with a comment either here, or on the corresponding talk page. Thanks JonGI am a beautiful trap 16:11, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

Yes, I will be certain to "let you know" in no uncertain terms, and will also try to avoid your "beautiful trap" as well. Thanks for getting back to me. Godspeed to you! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 17:21, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

Blanket block

Hi TK, my username's underscoreb .I was caught in one of your blanket blocks on 01 April and despite multiple emails to cpwebmaster it's been three months without a reply. If you look at my contribs you'll see I'm not a vandal and I'm well in line with the 90/10 rule. I've posted this to Andy's userpage to make sure the message gets through. Cheers! Scoresby 20:59, 29 June 2009 (EDT)

Cheers to you as well! Posting here and on the owner's page, without following instructions and contacting the blocking Administrator shows your bad faith. I cannot find the block effecting you, simply because you did not copy and paste the block message as instructed. My contact information is at the very top of my user page, rather well highlighted, and if you were sincere, you would have availed yourself of it, rather than make a trolling complaint using a sock and proxy. Of course your own user page states that you are both a liberal and an atheist, so I wasn't expecting better of you. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 22:50, 29 June 2009 (EDT)


Bizzare Behavior

Please talk about this on the Mark Sanford talk page —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BigM (talk) -- 21:34, 1 July 2009

  • I responded there, and please always sign your posts with the nice button above the edit screen. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 00:54, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Sorry, sometimes in such a rush to save the page I forget to sign. that should be the worst mistake I ever make. Please respond--BigM 01:02, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Can we please continue to discuss changes to the Mark Sanford article on the talk page? I'm going to (for now) revert the article back to RJjeanson's last edit with Bizarre Behavior as the header of the section in question. RJ added very good material that should still be in the article. I will see you on the talk page. --BigM 17:03, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Have you seen this story?

No wonder newspapers are headed for bankruptcy! And, of course, there's no bias shown when a newspaper is throwing massively-overpriced parties for Obama administration officials... --Benp 09:02, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Ben, you forgot the link! :p --ṬK/Admin/Talk 09:04, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

Argh! My fault, sorry; it's early here and I'm still about half asleep. [6] As it turns out, it's even worse than I thought at first glance: they were openly trying to sell ACCESS to their reporters and administration officials, suggesting that "An evening with the right people can alter the debate." Wow. Is it just me, or does that sound AWFULLY like an offer to spin the news for a price? --Benp 09:05, 3 July 2009 (EDT)
Retrieved from "http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:TK"
Personal tools