Difference between revisions of "User talk:DanH"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by SeaLion (Talk); changed back to last version by Aschlafly)
Line 148: Line 148:
  
 
:That doesn't give you the right to be mean spirited or violate the Conservapedia Commandments. And don't be condescending enough to say that I think that Reagan is a saint. I have major problems with his deficit spending policies. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 16:02, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
 
:That doesn't give you the right to be mean spirited or violate the Conservapedia Commandments. And don't be condescending enough to say that I think that Reagan is a saint. I have major problems with his deficit spending policies. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 16:02, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
−
 
−
==Humble apologies==
 
−
 
−
Um, hi. This is [[User:Jellyfish|Jellyfish]]. I really hate to break the guidelines like this, but I’ve created this account in order to make my case because none of the other methods (email) worked. The fact is, we’ve hit a sort of misunderstanding here. You’ve blocked me with quite a serious charge, so I guess I’d better explain myself a little. Obviously I know that keeping vandals and so on out of the wiki is very important, so I’ll deal with each of the things you stated in the block logs seperately.
 
−
 
−
1) OK. Firstly, yes, I’ve used several IPs to edit Conservapedia. I was worried that the information on my IP address would be open to viewing by various higher editors of the site, and I wanted to retain the level of anonymity that internet users are usually entitled to. I can assure you that my use of those things doesn’t signify any disloyalty towards the site of anything like that. I was just being a little paranoid, and if you look at my edits I think you’ll see I've only ever contributed to the site in a constructive way.
 
−
 
−
2) Secondly, I’m not Senex, whoever that might be. There doesn’t look to be any record of that user in the wiki, apart from a single (admittedly inappropriate) edit, quite recently, so I can’t really tell what similarities you saw between us. Once again, I know I’ve only been constructive here, apart from the occassional frivolous talk post.
 
−
 
−
3) You also blocked Freeze and Tolerance for being my socks. I think Freeze was inactive to start with(?), but I feel really guity that someone as polite and generally positive as Tolerance was punished for my mistakes. If nothing else, I really think he should be allowed to appeal against his block.
 
−
 
−
So, er, in conclusion I’d quite like to be unblocked, if it’s not too much trouble. I wasn't planning to blow the site up or anything, and I can use my own IP in future, obviously. And, also, I’m sorry to have to waste your time with this kind of unnecessary rubbish. I know you have an important job at Conservapedia.
 
−
 
−
Thanks. --Jellyfish. ([[User:SeaLion|SeaLion]] 08:15, 22 April 2008 (EDT))
 

Revision as of 12:19, April 22, 2008

Archives:

User talk:MountainDew

User talk:DanHarchive1

User talk:DanHarchive2

User talk:DanHarchive3

User talk:DanHarchive4

IRC

Does Conservapedia have an official or unofficial IRC channel? - Hak

I'm not sure. DanH 20:54, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Leptospirosis

Just saw that an article named Leptospirosis was deleted. wonder why? can I re-create it?

thanks--JBuscombe 15:49, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Martin

Why? There is nothing wrong with those links. On the contrary, It can give us more traffic. Do you have a proof that Google would not like it? --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 22:05, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I talked with Andy about it awhile back. Also, I've discussed search engines with User:Conservative. Google does not like it when links are placed at random without a clear correlation. DanH 22:06, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
Ok. Let them be until Andy say the last word. They are not without correlation. They are actors all of them. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 22:10, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
He is already in the Actors category, which links to all other actors anyway. DanH 22:11, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
For us it is better to have more traffic and that is a better way than in the Category place. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 22:13, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Animals A etc.

Can you move Animals A to Animal Terms A

Animals C to Animal Terms C

Animals G to Animal Terms G

Animals P to Animal Terms P

Animals V to Animal Terms V

Animals W to Animal Terms W

Animals Y to Animal Terms Y

Animals Z to Animal Terms Z

? --Qweki2 22:22, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Possible Bans?

What is the highest possible block time? (besides infinite). Also, can you make a ban of User:Liberal9188 and User:HHSFake.. so I'm not tempted to use either of those accounts again.

I have one final request.. could you ban me for 3 years, 1 month, and 4 days? Or 5 years if you don't want to type all that in. The reason can be: "request by user". Thanks. -^_^- Fuzzy 09:44, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
I once copped a fourteen year stretch. I think the sysop must have been bored. HarryWharton 10:43, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

For banning, can you do something like "3 days, 1 day, 4 days, etc." o_0 Fuzzy|AFD 21:37, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

So, what's the policy

The reason JM unfairly banned me was because I was removing the nonsensical see-also links on various pages. My reason for doing so was because it isn't encyclopedic. I began doing it en masse when I saw what you wrote to JM that it wasn't our policy. His response: It'll boost our google rankings. (VERY encyclopedic).

So, what's the policy now? I don't want another ban. ד.לערנער 22:43, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Tread lightly when working with Sysops showing them the respect they are due. If you are going to be making changes to their work, then talk with them first and make sure there is a common understanding. This should be followed for all people, but of course Sysops can also ban you for it. Unless there is a specific written policy saying all 'See Also' sections should be removed, then it is unwise to attempt to remove them en masse on your own. Talk page discussions between sysops, especially before a specific resolution has been reached, do not count. Learn together 15:59, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

Thanks

Thank you. Feuerstein 00:14, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Why not copy from Wikipedia?

I wrote those articles on Wikipedia , Asteroid.--Asteroid 01:15, 22 March 2008 (EDT) CLtFn--Asteroid 01:19, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

Blessings to you on Easter -

Dear Dan H, You have been doing wonderful work here. :) Wishing you every blessing and joy this Easter - Taj 00:57, 23 March 2008 (EDT)

Happy Easter and......

Happy Easter! I am sending you a private email in about 2 minutes. Conservative 21:10, 23 March 2008 (EDT)

Thanks

While I appreciate the action, now might be a time to save oneself. Thankyou, though. --wikinterpreter Modspeed!

Thank you! --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 17:37, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

Great example

Great example of opportunity costs, Dan!--Aschlafly 19:52, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Thanks! Opportunity cost is maybe the most useful thing I've learned about in college so far. DanH 19:55, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Request

Dear Dan, I am currently trying to get night edit rights so that I can better contribute to Conservapedia. As a sysop who has had experience working with me, I would like to ask for your support. If you feel that I deserve edit rights, please say so here. If you do not think I deserve them, I fully understand and I thank you anyway. Sincerely, HelpJazz 01:19, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Name-calling

Could there be any more damning evidence of the bankruptcy of liberal thought then the incessant campaign of name-calling by liberals against conservatives? If they had a rebuttal to conservative thought, they could simply present it in the Marketplace of ideas. Calling people liars isn't going to help their cause much. --Ed Poor Talk 13:14, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Deborah

Yes, She seems to have expertice in several areas. User:BertSchlossberg also and she deleted several sentences from his work failing the discussion both had about that subject.

I'll have to look at that. DanH 22:50, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
See [1] First strike she did. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 22:52, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
Thanks for the link. DanH 22:57, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Liberal Tools

Mr. Schlafly created it, I have not heard of him doing any strange vandalism. ;) Geoff PlourdeComplain! 03:15, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Haha... oops. DanH 03:26, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Christianity templates

Dan, you just protected a bunch of almost identical templates (user, Protestant, Baptist etc.) which could be better written as a single template with a parameter. I was about to rewrite them when I saw that you had locked them. I won't do it now as it's late in my time zone, but would appreciate access to modify them at some point. BrianCo 18:59, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Unprotected. DanH 19:09, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Satan

Do you think you could unprotect Satan? (On this site) I think we could handle any vandals. Learn together 12:31, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

ChrisGomez

Really good block there Dan, hearty congratulations. Never mind he's been working his fingers to the bone making improvements to CP, he's a sock so he's got to go.... Clever guy. Peason 14:38, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

How would you know? You don't have access to checkuser. DanH 14:52, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
So what's the scoop? I'm interested as well. He added a lot of thick, meaty content with nary a peep. Are these the people you don't want here? Donaldson
It's a user making a whole lot of socks, some of which engaged in poor conduct besides Gomez, and it's all been done by one individual. If this user wants to come back, then it's only going to be one name, one account, no proxies. Karajou 16:20, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
I see. Are the posts which are considered "poor conduct" by the other user(s) being made at the same time as ChrisGomez? What I'm saying is all it takes is a spiteful lib co-worker, using the same proxy from work, to walk behind is desk and see that he's editing CP. Any liberal would be sneaky enough to create his own username and password and start trolling.
When I was banned from Wikipedia (long, wondeful story), it stopped about 1200 people from changing anything.Donaldson 16:50, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

Cracking the filter

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Francis_%46ukuyama&action=edit&section=1

Hooray Kansas

Congrats, but you do of course know that had Bucknell made it to the tournament this year, and had we played each other, we SO would have knocked you out this year. Again. So you should be thanking us. ;-) HelpJazz 15:24, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Expelled edit

Why dod you revert the expelled change? The sentance 'making one wonder...' is really unencyclopedic AdenJ 01:09, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

It's probably not best to change the wording of the site's creator immediately after putting it there. DanH 02:19, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

A user's page is his castle, huh?

You know, just because I may have committed lese majeste against Blessed St. Ronald is no reason to go messing up the format of my userpage. Which nobody is supposed to mess with, anyway. And I do think Reagan was showing signs of Alzheimer's back in 1980. --Gulik5

That doesn't give you the right to be mean spirited or violate the Conservapedia Commandments. And don't be condescending enough to say that I think that Reagan is a saint. I have major problems with his deficit spending policies. DanH 16:02, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:DanH&oldid=436776"