User:Ed Poor/archive 02
Contacting me
I'll give out my phone number to just about anyone who emails me. Please use the "E-mail this user" link in the 'toolbox' on the left side of the page.
- Note that my cell phone died a few days ago, and I haven't replaced it yet.
I usually answer email within one day, but I don't guarantee this.
When I'm editing at Conservapedia, I usually answer messages on my talk pages within a few minutes.
Sometimes I hang out at #conservapedia on IRC, and I can use Yahoo and AIM for private chat on request.
Quick links
- Special:Imagelist - table of recently uploaded images
- Special:Ipblocklist - Use this to unblock a user.
- Special:Shortpages
- Conservapedia:Commonly misspelled words
- /to do list - anyone is free to edit this: add, delete, or prioritize as you see fit
Contents
About me
Hi, my name is Ed Poor and I'm a former developer, admin & bureaucrat from Wikipedia.
I know quite a bit about the internal workings of Wikipedia: the database structure, formatting, templates, dispute procedures, content and style guidelines; and, oh, yes, all the politics and gossip of the first few years.
Dpbsmith asked me to come over, so here I am. I'm finding the environment much more congenial.
My chief aim here is to facilitate the highest standards of encyclopedia development.
I was one of the earliest members of the Wikipedia project (UserID #188). I helped institute the following practices or software features there:
- Marking edits as 'patrolled' (co-conceived with Maveric who in one marathon period personally checked every Wikipedia edit for vandalism!)
- Ability of blocked users to edit their own user talk page
- Community ban - i.e., increased authority for sysops to block a disruptive user
- The practice of bureaucrats "running" for office (I was the first one elected, when as a developer I could simply have granted myself the rights)
Pages I'm proud of there:
Favorite contributors
This is a partial list. Don't get all bent out of shape because I haven't placed your name here (yet). :-) And it's not in any particular order.
- TK (talk • contribs • count) - straight to the point
- MountainDew (talk • contribs • count) - refreshing, like a can of soda!
- RSchlafly (talk • contribs • count) - forthright
- Aschlafly (talk • contribs • count) - erudite
- Dpbsmith (talk • contribs • count) - out of sight!
- Hojimachong (talk • contribs • count) - all right!
- Sid 3050 (talk • contribs • count) - a big help
- Jaques (talk • contribs • count) - a lot of interesting stuff
A new role
To my surprise and pleasure, I was voted in as a sysop here - reportedly it was unanimous. Thank you for your support.
I believe that users who are here to contribute should get a helping hand, and those who cannot or will not make useful contributions should be shown to the door. But since, "His mercy is forever sure", I don't like applying infinite bans; it's always possible for a person to make up his mind to take a new direction. (I'm currently chewing some tough pills supplied by User:TK, so watch out.)
I've unprotected a handful of pages and am watching them. I have hopes that eventually all content pages can be freely edited, once they reach a mature and stable state.
Welcome
Welcome, I'm Dan. I see that you have made many great article improvements in your week here. MountainDew 17:45, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
- Thanks, Dan. I try. And I've learned a lot from watching you. --Ed Poor 18:50, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
Ideas I'm looking at
- Japan and its use of women as sex objects
- prawl = prowl + trawl
- Theory of Evolution
- the central premise of evolution remains more asserted than proved
- where the first cell came from
- the answers to some questions depend on the answers to others
- /aspects of evolution - a draft about the terminological confusion
- origins debate = Creationism vs. "science" (i.e., materialism)
- Conservapedia as a think tank
- Flaws in Wikipedia
- Myk's gloomy prediction:conservapedia is doomed to fail
- Objectivity
- Science and scientists
- How much trust do they deserve?
- Chilling effect
- There is little present on this site that is in any way objective or scientific. The very fear that anything could get edited out for ideologic reasons puts a chill on what is published
- Clarity: An encyclopedia should not use made-up, unclear terms. [3]
- Popularity
- of certain articles
- of the project as a whole
- Are they just laughing at us out there? (See 'liberal bias' below)
- Standards of conduct:
- for sysops
- Not arbitrarily banning users
- for ordinary users
- for sysops
- Collaboration
- Agreeing to disagree
- NPOV
- Compromise
- Registration
- Registration is closed late at night and early morning (Eastern Time). It's open during the day and early evening. Also, you can email the webmaster or User:Aschlafly (he's at aol) for manual accounts.
- Basis for inclusion of material
- Must be well-cited
- Are alternative ideas being censored?
- Politicized Science as related to:
- Smear terms [5]
Brag list
Articles I wrote: Upper West Side, kilometer, deduction
Articles to which I've made significant contributions: germ theory of disease, microorganisms, Sun, liberal bias, global warming
Seeds I've planted: ellipse, centroid
Templates I created:
Ideas I'm looking at
- Japan and its use of women as sex objects
- prawl = prowl + trawl
- Theory of Evolution
- the central premise of evolution remains more asserted than proved
- where the first cell came from
- the answers to some questions depend on the answers to others
- /aspects of evolution - a draft about the terminological confusion
- origins debate = Creationism vs. "science" (i.e., materialism)
- Conservapedia as a think tank
- Flaws in Wikipedia
- Myk's gloomy prediction:conservapedia is doomed to fail
- Objectivity
- Science and scientists
- How much trust do they deserve?
- Chilling effect
- There is little present on this site that is in any way objective or scientific. The very fear that anything could get edited out for ideologic reasons puts a chill on what is published
- Clarity: An encyclopedia should not use made-up, unclear terms. [8]
- Popularity
- of certain articles
- of the project as a whole
- Are they just laughing at us out there? (See 'liberal bias' below)
- Standards of conduct:
- for sysops
- Not arbitrarily banning users
- for ordinary users
- for sysops
- Collaboration
- Agreeing to disagree
- NPOV
- Compromise
- Registration
- Registration is closed late at night and early morning (Eastern Time). It's open during the day and early evening. Also, you can email the webmaster or User:Aschlafly (he's at aol) for manual accounts.
- Basis for inclusion of material
- Must be well-cited
- Are alternative ideas being censored?
- Politicized Science as related to:
- Smear terms [10]