Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia:Abuse"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Replacing page with 'YOU ARE HOMOS')
Line 1: Line 1:
−
<center><big>''Justice never sleeps''</big></center>
+
YOU ARE HOMOS
−
 
 
−
{|
 
−
|Quick Links<br>
 
−
[[Articles for Deletion|AFD]]<br>
 
−
[[The Conservapedia Commandments]]<br>
 
−
[[Conservapedia:Abuse|Abuse]]<br>
 
−
[[:Category:Speedy deletion candidates|Speedy delete]]<br>
 
−
|This is where you can report abuse of editing privileges. Please make notes short and concise. Crossed out notes have been dealt with.
 
−
|Archives
 
−
[[Conservapedia:Abuse/archive1|1]]
 
−
|}
 
−
 
 
−
== Reporting obscenity ==
 
−
 
 
−
User "Hal jordan" posted obscenity here.  In addition to being blocked, his full IP address and other identifying information have been reported to [http://www.rrsecurity-abuse.com/contactus.html Road Runner] with the request that it take immediate action against him for posting obscenity to a website used by minors under the age of 16.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:25, 17 March 2007 (EDT) 
 
−
 
 
−
A Soft Layer Technologies system in Dallas was the source of a different obscenity by a user.  The user has been blocked and the owner of the server has been notified at support@SoftLayer.com .--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:23, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Removing users ==
 
−
*[[User:Deus rex caelum]]--Is making parody/mocking edits/entries.
 
−
 
 
−
: I almost blocked him last night, but thought perhaps it best to give more of an opportunity to be constructive.  His edits have not been clear vandalism, though I agree at least one seems silly.  Maybe he'll get serious.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:23, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
*[[User:Scalito1776]] - has made numerous vandalizing edits --[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 01:40, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: REPLY: blocked for infinite duration, and his vandalism has been rolled back.  We also have his IP address and ISP.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:56, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
*[[User:Sisyphus]], [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Microscope&direction=next&oldid=41608 Microscope], prank/parody article: "Microscopes are ''purportedly'' instruments that enable the user to view objects smaller than the eye is capable of visualizing... Microscopes are frequently used by scientists, such as those arguing in favor of human cloning, stem cell research, and evolution... little investigation has been done into the possibility that microscopes may cause the existence of the very microbes they purport to offer us a glimpse at. It is also possible that the scientific method may itself be at fault." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:21, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: REPLY: blocked for one week for his one edit, which was inappropriate.  Good decision here by another SYSOP (Geo).  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:56, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
*[[User:Scriabin]] and [[User:Familyman]], for subtle vandalism in their creation of the original articles on [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Johann_Sebastian_Bach&oldid=33939 Johann Sebastian Bach] and [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Bach%2C_johann_sebastian&oldid=40072 Bach, johann sebastian] (now a redirect). They highlight a problem that concerns me: both of these articles, as created, are poisonous mixes of valid information with misinformation that is subtle enough to escape notice by people who don't know the subject, while ludicrous enough to arouse the derision of those who do. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Johann_Sebastian_Bach&oldid=33939 Johann Sebastian Bach] said that Bach composed "a C Minor Mass." If he did, it's obscure, whereas his '''B''' Minor Mass is celebrated; ''Mozart'' wrote a famous C Minor Mass. That could be a typo. Saying Bach composed ''The Diabelli Variations'' (which are by Beethoven) can't be. The original version of [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Bach%2C_johann_sebastian&oldid=40072 Bach, johann sebastian] goes over the top when it says "The title of his collection Bach's Great Organ Works is attributed, according to legend, to his wife Anna Magdalena Bach upon the delivery of their umpteenth child." OK, maybe not-so-subtle vandalism. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:49, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:Familyman has been blocked, and upon Dpbsmith's comments above I also blocked Scriabin.  But upon further extensive investigation I couldn't find evidence justifying a block of Scriabin, so I have unblocked him.  I have an open mind about this and welcome comments by others.  I'm particularly reluctant to disagree with Dpbsmith, who has almost always been right here and has been with us since nearly the beginning.  Thanks, Dpbsmith!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:21, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
::(You're welcome!) [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:20, 17 March 2007 (EDT) P. S.  Since it wasn't at all obvious (and still isn't) that Scriabin's edit represented abuse, and since he wasn't making rapid edits, I should have asked him about this on his Talk page instead of going here. I've now done so now. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 06:35, 18 March 2007 (EDT) Scriabin and I have exchanged mutual apologies. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 08:45, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
I am reporting [[user: Conservative]] He was involved in a dispute with AmesG and then unilaterally decided to ban him for a week, using a power he possessed and AmesG does not. That is a blatant abuse of SysOp authority - the proper course of action would have been to bring in another SysOp as a neutral third party to decide the matter. I am asking that AmesG be re-instated and Conservative be given a warning for his abuse of authority. This kind of ham-handed banning will give this site a bad reputation that will be hard to shake.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 16:43, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
*[[Eric Mukherjee]]. Suspect harmless undergraduate prankster hi-jinks. No sources provided. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 11:43, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
:'''(removed names - these people may not be involved.  Unfair to publically name and shame them if they are not)'''--[[User:AustinM|AustinM]] 12:10, 15 March 2007 (EDT) You're right, I shouldn't have done that. Thanks for removing them. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:46, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
[[user: JC]] is a suspected vandal.  Could some one revert his edits I have done some but I don't thave time right now to search through everything. ([[User:AustinM|AustinM]])
 
−
 
 
−
:What is going on?
 
−
:[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] gets granted exclusive rights to put the [[creationist]] view on the [[Theory of evolution]] article. [[User:AustinM|AustinM]] banns [[User:JC|JC]] for putting the creationist view on other articles, claiming it is vandalism. [[User:AustinM|AustinM]] then goes and vandalizes the [[Margaret Thatcher]], [[John Major]] and [[Guantanamo Bay detention camp]] articles. Are Conservatives fighting amongst each other in order to decide whose version of reality gets to be the definitive one? Can't wait for the SYSOPs banning SYSOPs melee.
 
−
:This site is an endless source of surreal entertainment. I can't really see anyone taking it seriously as an encyclopedia.
 
−
:I assume I'll get banned for pointing that out.
 
−
:[[User:WhatIsGoingOn|WhatIsGoingOn]] 15:04, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
::Handy jargon: on Wikipedia, this is known as a "wheel war." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:22, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
:::Interesting, I always idly wondered about that term means (and always forgot to look it up), so thanks for the info! --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 19:35, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
===Christianity===
 
−
The page has been blocked to prevent editing, which I would normally commend had the content been accurate, except that the existing definition of Christianity is a weak rendition of the actual Biblical revelation.  It should not be defined by a Harris poll! If you are to be any better than Wikipedia, you must want truth to be objectively stated.  For something as important as one's eternal relationship with God Himself, the information better be accurate! 
 
−
 
 
−
In Wikipedia, when Christians try to edit, say to some cult's page, the cult members merely come and erase it and edit it out.  Truth doesn't matter to the site, and they allow the false claims to continue.  That should be different here!  Truth is objective, and can be known by anyone, believer or unbeliever in Christianity.  Facts are still facts.  But we can only write articles to the level of our knowledge.  Whoever wrote, wrote what he could, but it can be improved, and should be allowed to be improved.
 
−
 
 
−
I would suggest a respected editorial Board for Christian issues.  All Christian denominations surprisingly agree on the basics such as are in the Apostle's and Nicene Creeds of the Church.  There is one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit; Jesus is fully God and flly man; He died and rose physically from the dead; He offers salvation solely on account of His grace, His works on our behalf, as our Substitute, taking the wrath of God due us.  God calls us to repent and believe, and that faith is a "gift, that no man may boast."(Eph.2:8,9). Our salvation is because of the works of Christ alone, and we have this knowledge from inspired Scripture alone, etc.
 
−
 
 
−
All three major branches of Christianity, Protestantism, Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy would agree that Mormonism or Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christian denominations, but rather non-Christian cults or religions.  But in order to show the truth of various claims, there must be accuracy in reporting the facts -- objectivity.  As it is right now, the definition of Christianity is far too limited. 
 
−
 
 
−
Who do we talk to in order to submit changes for its editing?
 
−
Thank you,
 
−
 
 
−
PD Popejoy
 
−
 
 
−
:''All three major branches of Christianity, Protestantism, Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy would agree that Mormonism or Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christian denominations, but rather non-Christian cults or religions.''
 
−
:They, on the other hand would disagree.  Are we going with [[Truth By Headcount]], now?  If so, the Christians were Wrong(tm) back when the Roman Empire was using them for lion chow.  --[[User:Scrap|Scrap]] 06:33, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: I'm not sure where this stands now, and I apologize for being late on this discussion.  But I wanted to say this:  let's avoid using the word "cult" to describe any group.  It seems overly pejorative and not encyclopedic.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:32, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
*Mr. Schlafly is correct.  Too many words are bandied about all over the Net.  Jim Jones, of Jonestown--Peoples Temple infamy, he ran a "Cult".  So think of him, and his tragedy, before applying that word. Last I checked, neither the JW's or LDS people were telling their people to drink Kool-aid laced with poison, so they could cross over and meet Jesus. 
 
−
 
 
−
Blocked [[user:JesusSaves]] for three days.  Reason for it was in repeated inclusion of a nonsensical line in the article [[Genesis]], and his decision to begin and escalate an argument about it.  When given a last warning to stop, he continued.  It's documented on the [[Genesis]] talk page.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 20:13, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
:I have to tell you, this is a mirror image of when Conservative blocked AmesG.  Karajou, you were involved in a personal dispute with the user and should probably get a fellow sysop to sign off on that.
 
−
 
 
−
:From [[Talk:Genesis]] "If you intend to continue this fight, then I'm going to boot you from the site. Last warning. Karajou 19:41, 18 March 2007 (EDT)"
 
−
 
 
−
:The fight was with you... get a neutral sysop to go with you... you probably had a case but booting him yourself removes your moral authority.  [[User:Myk|Myk]] 20:47, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: I reviewed this debate betwen Karajou and JesusSaves at length.  While blocking is always a last resort, it is appropriate when someone is repeatedly interfering with productive work.  Karajou could have locked the page, but that would have prevented others from contributing to this work-in-progress.
 
−
 
 
−
:: JesusSaves should have deferred to the person doing the most work on the entry (Karajou).  It's not right for a bystander to come along and repeatedly insist on placing a dot somewhere in the Mona Lisa as Da Vinci paints it.  Karajou warned JesusSaves repeatedly, and even then blocked him for only 3 days.
 
−
 
 
−
:: Put another way, we don't allow a heckler's veto here.  Some professional courtesy and deference is appropriate, and Karajou need not divert his efforts to track down other SYSOPs in this situation.  I hope JesusSaves will return and not insist on his same edit yet again.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:16, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:::Personaly, I did not like the thought of having him, or anyone else for that matter, removed from the site.  I think a better preference for myself at least would be to contact another sysop or Aschlafly for arbitration should another incident happen.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:16, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
------------------
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
I responded on your talk page. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 02:15, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
==Current Alerts==
 
−
*Dunno about [[Breast Exam]], initial text by [[User:NewGuy2]], image added by [[User:EditGenius2]]. Sincere article about an important and nonsexual topic, or deliberate attempt to push at the borderlines? Image appears to have been copied from http://www.iparenting.com/resources/articles/cancerpregnancy.htm by the way. Image is not obscene in context but I would have thought it was hot stuff when I was thirteen. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:38, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
*[[User:EditGenius2]] also uploaded [:Image:SelfExam.jpg] but no pages link to it. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:47, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
*Seems to be an edit war in progress over the same image at [[Self Breast Exam]]. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:52, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
::Could people at least reply on the talk page for the breast exam page for WHY they keep deleting the non offensive image?  If that's offensive, then this is going to end up being an amazingly tiny encyclopedia.  It doesn't show anything rude, as I said on the talk page, yet it's gone once again. --[[User:ALFa|ALFa]] 14:50, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
:::This is going to be a very tiny encyclopedia.  That's sort of the point, unfortunately.  --[[User:Scrap|Scrap]] 22:45, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: Folks, I deleted that stuff about breast exams.  Go look in your Encyclopedia Britannica and see if you find voyeurism like that.  You won't, and it shouldn't be here either.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:38, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
:: Due respect, Andy, but you will... you will find anatomical pictures of breasts, etc.  But then again, in an EB, you'll also not find outright censorship of material on evolution.-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 20:58, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::: The desire by so many (present company excluded) to teach about sex has really been an eye-opener for me.  There appear to be millions of people wanting to teach about sex!  Virtually none of them become doctors, or even go into health professions.  Virtually none want to become real teachers.  But it's amazing how many want to be teachers of sex-related topics!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:09, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
::::Woot!  Sign me up!--[[User:Raytrotter|Raytrotter]] 21:12, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
:::::Can't say I understood that. Sorry. But, first, breast exams are not sex. They're cancer prevention. Second, teaching about safe sex prevents unwanted pregnancy, prevents abortion.-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 21:13, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
==Long-term tasks==
 
−
I made a "short" list of redirects that still exist after the "on wheels" move vandalism. I believe they should be cleaned up... But instead of actually editing fifty redirect pages to include them in the "Speedy Delete" category, I just compiled a list at [[User:Sid 3050/Deletion List]]. I also included the Delete links AND lined them up in a nifty column so you can just click away if you like. (Yes, I've been having far too much fun with regular expression replacements there. I'm weird like that.) =P --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 23:17, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
: Did someone beat me to it?  I tried and there was nothing to delete for everything I clicked.  Thanks for your superb list!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:48, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::Yeah, whatever. MountainDew reacted to the call within minutes, so you should praise him. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 21:24, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
== Hitler article ==
 
−
The Hitler article is locked to prevent vandalism, but the most recent changes by [[User:RobS | RobS]] and [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.plrd]] are nothing short of vandalism.  --[[User:Order|Order]] 19 March, 14:00 (AEST
 
−
:I fail to see how I vandalized this page by adding information. I have unprotected it to allow work. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 01:34, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
::It looked like subtle vandalism, by inserting many red herrings and factual erros. Thanks for unprotecting it, although I am not sure where to begin first. The article bebfore the ''improvment drive'' was maybe short, and a bit simplistic, but at least fairly correct.--[[User:Order |Order]] 19 March 20:00 (AEST)
 
−
 
 
−
*I posted over there at the Hitler talk page.  Let's hope cooler heads will manage the rather simple task of informing users what Hitler was, and what it was he ordered, without getting bogged down in nitpicks and petty arguments.  When examining '''true Evil''', and trying to explain it, we simply don't have time for that kind of crap. --[[User:TK|TK]] 06:47, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
Can somebody stop [[User:RobS | RobS]] from editing the Hitler article. Every entry he adds contains at least two factual errors, and he presents legends on Hitler as facts. He doesn't do any research before an edit, and probabaly just relies on his recollections from either history class or his grandmother. Locking this page to prevent vandalism doesn't help, if there is a not-so-subtle vandal among the sysops. --[[User:Order|Order]] 20 March, 12:30 (AEST)
 
−
 
 
−
: And [[User:TK|TK]] is posted copyrighted material. As a sysop. --[[User:Order|Order]] 20 March, 12:30 (AEST)
 
−
:There is no subtle vandalism going on, it is a good faith effort to improve this article. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 02:28, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
:How do you distinguish? If they weren't sysops, they would or should have gotten a warning.  --[[User:Order|Order]] 20 March, 17:55 (AEST)
 
−
::Intent [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 02:57, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
:::They have been told a few times, especially [[User:RobS | RobS]] that the edits conatin many factual errors. That didn't keep him from introducing more. I assume he did it with intend, since I assume that he is able to google for actual information, rather relying on myths,  legends, or made up stuff. If he is not able do that, I wouldn't blame him of course. --[[User:Order|Order]] 20 March, 14:00 (AEST).
 
−
*You distingush by reading the history. :p The attribution was in one of my drafts, and in all the moving and re-arranging, wasn't there when I finished in the middle of the night. Is this place always such a tempest in a teapot? I posted material that is in the public domain, not copyrighted, and attributed. If you see something like what I did, and know the attribution, it is your duty and right to add it in. If you don't know it, rather than running like a baby to abuse, you should contact the person who edited it. My email is listed here, my IM is listed. Does that not sound fair? The page was a freakin' mess. The page is supposed to be about Hitler...they were all over the map. The focus is now back where it should have been all along. I think far too many of you isolate yourselves, rather than communicating, and the last few posts are a good example.
 
−
 
 
−
*I assumed that you had just dumped some material for further improvement. That why I said that I was looking forward to the final version. The material that you posted was  at least mostly factual. The strom in the teapot, is because the article as it was, was nothing more than a Miffy version of History. "Hitler planned a putsch in a beer hall. The army storms the room. Hitler trips and falls. Look, Hitler is unharmed. Hitler escapes." That has nothing to do with a serious entry on this guy. Thats why I was glad that you at least infused some factual material, even if it's from another site. [[User:Order|Order]] 20 March 21:10 (AEST)
 
−
 
 
−
:*Then the purpose of posting here, before you ascertained any of the facts, was what, exactly?  I am not looking to beat this horse, but I think my comments were valid, and my solution, quoting one of the foremost experts on the "Final Solution" and Adolf Hitler was better than what was going on.  Sometimes one can and should copy.  Only this wasn't even that, just my dumb mistake to leave the attribution off the final compilation, even though the quotes and link are on my Word copy of it.  The point is, it explains who and what Hitler was.  As for the rest of the page, if you all could stop sniping at one another, and hammer it all out on the talk page, it would be even better.  I almost removed all the rest of the crap there, and perhaps I should have, and only transfered over what was posted and cited on the talk page.  Do you think that would have been a better solution?  I just get a bit riled when people run around shouting "dishonest" without ever looking at the facts present, or at least having the decency to ask.  Now, why don't you get in touch, and together perhaps, since you have the interest in the topic, we can do what we can to make the page even more informative? --~ [[User:TK|Terry]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]</sup> 06:42, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
:: Didn't I say that I was actually pleased that you put the Wiesel speech into the article. I'm happy to say it again. I was glad about your material, and I was looking forward for it to be intergrated with the rest, or even replace the rest, where possible. [[User:Order|Order]] 20 March 21:10 (AEST)
 
−
 
 
−
Please feel free to make a new header on the talk page, and give me your thoughts. :-) --~ [[User:TK|Terry]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]</sup> 09:43, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
 

Revision as of 14:41, March 20, 2007

YOU ARE HOMOS

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Abuse&oldid=51316"