Difference between revisions of "User talk:IluvAviation"

Revision as of 21:56, March 3, 2017

Hi, I am user:IluvAviation, but you can call me Gwen. If you have any questions about any edits just leave a message here. Please be polite. :)

Welcome

Useful links

Welcome!

Hello, IluvAviation, and welcome to Conservapedia!

We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.

At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!

Thanks for reading, IluvAviation!

If you need anything, feel free to ask! --David B ^(TALK) 17:22, 1 March 2017 (EST)

Advice

Hello IluvAviation, thank you for your edits here. I would like to remind you of some editing guidelines on this site. Conservapedia allows editors who do not share our viewpoint, but as long as they do not disrupt CP or challenge its viewpoint in their mainspace edits. Some of your edits, particularly this, are problematic in this respect. Also, when creating articles, please add categories at the bottom of each article, as I did in your article International Air Transport Association airport code. This allows viewers to find articles easier. Most of your edits so far seem very good, however. Thank you for contributing here. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:38, 1 March 2017 (EST)

I made that one edit because a huge component of Shinto religion is loyalty to emperor who is literally divine. (According to Shinto mythology, Emperor was descendant of the Sun God. Atheists don't believe in Sun Gods, so Shintos in WW2 Japan were not atheists.) Sorry about forgetting to add category to IATA article, silly of me since I spend hours categorizing Wikipedia. Oops. As for the Bangaldesh bloggers, they gave their lives peacefully protesting for a tribunal on war crimes of the Jamaat-e-Islami party, rebranded Hefazat-e-Islam)

No problem. I would recommend posting either on the article's talk page or the main talk page if you think that info should go. Even if you end up being correct that the article is better without the info, it still is a lot of info. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:54, 1 March 2017 (EST)

Agreed. It's okay if something should be removed, but in general, it's better to ask about it on the article's talk page first and see if anyone has anything to say. That way, you encourage collaboration and don't risk starting an edit war, or making people suspect you as a vandal. Cheers! --David B ^(TALK) 18:15, 1 March 2017 (EST)

Thanks for the help! :) Aviation articles coming soon.--User:IluvAviation(talk) 1 March 2017

Advice of your own

Hi, Gwen - I'm fairly new to this kind of editing. According to the recent changes page, you seem to be a fairly prominent content editor Do you have any tips for editing for long periods of time and large amounts of articles? - Nathan --Abcqwe (talk) 17:22, 2 March 2017 (EST)

Actually, I just joined yesterday. Wish I could give you advice, but I couldn't in good faith do so.--IluvAviation (talk) 17:27, 2 March 2017 (EST)

Okay, thanks anyways.--Abcqwe (talk) 11:21, 3 March 2017 (EST)

More advice

Please check your article Madarasz's tiger parrot. We do not have a Template:IUCN. Also, please review my edits to your articles in order to hopefully get some practical tips on how to improve articles. Thank you for your edits. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:32, 2 March 2017 (EST)

Even more advice

Gwen: I fully appreciate that the writing you see here on the subject of atheism makes you very angry. But you need to refrain from trying to edit most of the articles related to "atheism and ..." or "homosexuality and ..." or "evolution and ...". The articles to stay away from can be identified by looking at their edit history and noting enormous numbers of edits by "Conservative", often to the exclusion of anyone else. These articles are his/her pet projects. (Actually, he's male, but he likes to play the "man/woman of mystery" game.) Just don't try to edit those articles or their talk pages. I realize that staying away from them will be extremely frustrating to you.

If you can find satisfactory ways to express your views on theism/atheism, or other subjects (science and math are what do it for me), I congratulate you.

Don't get me wrong; user:Conservative ("Cons" for short) is a fun person to interact with, once you and he get to know each other. It took a while for me to develop a rapport with him, and it's been fun ever since. Especially when he does things like tell me that liberal Christians (or, in your case, atheists) must be very upset over the presence of sex with horses (I'm not kidding!) in our respective communities. It's much more fun than dealing with the anklebiters that I sometimes deal with, as in my present revert war over relativity with someone who obviously didn't get the memo.

Hang in there. SamHB (talk) 14:04, 3 March 2017 (EST) @SamHB::There is no reasonable doubt the majority of soldiers in the Nanking massacre were Shinto, (there were a few Buddhists and Confucans. Despite the popular misconception Buddhists aren't perfectly peacefull, just look at history a couple hundred years ago) I'm not going to start an article on The Lords Resistance Army of Uganda as that would stir up a lot of anger and strong feelings here (despite the fact that small moderate churches in Uganda have done the most to help victims like Night commuter children) or anything else like that. I'll just stick with aviation for the most part (some religious parents block Wikipedia but allow Conservapedia, so at a minimum I'll edit the aviation articles) In terms of feelings, I try to separate myself from my emotions but when verbal atheists like Ananta Bijoy Das and Ahmed Rajib Haider are murdered you're right I get angry. I won't edit articles related to "atheism and ..." or "homosexuality and ..." or "evolution and ... much, it is just very well documented that a vast majority of the Japanese military were practicing Shintos.--IluvAviation (talk) 16:56, 3 March 2017 (EST)

And, right on cue ....

Cons steps in. Look at the recent changes log for the last couple of hours. Cons, you are so much fun! SamHB (talk) 15:20, 3 March 2017 (EST)

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 Hang in there.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 14:04, 3 March 2017 (EST)
+@[[User:SamHB|SamHB]]::There is no reasonable doubt the majority of soldiers in the Nanking massacre were Shinto, (there were a few Buddhists and Confucans.  Despite the popular misconception Buddhists aren't perfectly peacefull, just look at history a couple hundred years ago)  I'm not going to start an article on ''The Lords Resistance Army of Uganda'' as that would stir up a lot of anger and strong feelings here (despite the fact that small moderate churches in Uganda have done the most to help victims like Night commuter children) or anything else like that.  I'll just stick with aviation for the most part (some religious parents block Wikipedia but allow Conservapedia, so at a minimum I'll edit the aviation articles)  In terms of feelings, I try to separate myself from my emotions but when verbal atheists like Ananta Bijoy Das and Ahmed Rajib Haider are murdered you're right I get angry.  I won't edit articles related to "atheism and ..." or "homosexuality and ..." or "evolution and ... much, it is just very well documented that a vast majority of the Japanese military were practicing Shintos.--[[User:IluvAviation|IluvAviation]] ([[User talk:IluvAviation|talk]]) 16:56, 3 March 2017 (EST)
 === And, right on cue .... ===
 Cons steps in.  Look at the recent changes log for the last couple of hours.  Cons, you are so much fun!  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 15:20, 3 March 2017 (EST)