SkipCaptcha
12,693
edits
Changes
User talk:TheAmericanRedoubt (view source)
Revision as of 00:42, January 10, 2015
, 00:42, January 10, 2015no edit summary
Sadly, I no longer have the enthusiasm to contribute in the face of such ''''strong'''' opposition from 5 very vociferous liberal/RINO editors. It's more of an uphill battle than it was on Wikipedia, I am very disappointed to say. Godspeed in all you do.
Sadly, I no longer have the enthusiasm to contribute in the face of such ''''strong'''' opposition from 5 very vociferous liberal/RINO editors. It's more of an uphill battle than it was on Wikipedia, I am very disappointed to say. Godspeed in all you do.
===Response from Karajou and User:Conservative to Not Give Up===
:You are not giving up. If anything, the liberal smear campaign won't work, except as to advertise just who and what liberals really are, which is a bunch of hate-filled lying clowns. So, I really mean it when I tell such an individual that every time he opens his fat, lying mouth, he proves our point. In fact, sometimes I even thank them when they do that. But rest assured, they will be held accountable for their words and deeds, both now and in the hereafter. Now get rid of that retired message and have fun editing! [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 04:56, 9 January 2015 (EST)
:You are not giving up. If anything, the liberal smear campaign won't work, except as to advertise just who and what liberals really are, which is a bunch of hate-filled lying clowns. So, I really mean it when I tell such an individual that every time he opens his fat, lying mouth, he proves our point. In fact, sometimes I even thank them when they do that. But rest assured, they will be held accountable for their words and deeds, both now and in the hereafter. Now get rid of that retired message and have fun editing! [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 04:56, 9 January 2015 (EST)
::::I tried to mentor him and to explain about categories and copy and paste. I believe that [[User:Conservative]], [[User:Karajou]] and I all delivered the same advice about trying to create full articles. It is odd that every time he posted a new stub article, the edit summary said "rough draft". I don't know whether [[User:Conservative]]'s guideline of 2500 is the best number for the target length of an article, but if it is the target, one should not meet that target with a one sentence quote from another website followed by a massive "See also" section. The lesson to be learned here is that we need a better program for mentoring new editors. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 11:46, 9 January 2015 (EST)
::::I tried to mentor him and to explain about categories and copy and paste. I believe that [[User:Conservative]], [[User:Karajou]] and I all delivered the same advice about trying to create full articles. It is odd that every time he posted a new stub article, the edit summary said "rough draft". I don't know whether [[User:Conservative]]'s guideline of 2500 is the best number for the target length of an article, but if it is the target, one should not meet that target with a one sentence quote from another website followed by a massive "See also" section. The lesson to be learned here is that we need a better program for mentoring new editors. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 11:46, 9 January 2015 (EST)
== Re: your message to Karajou ==
==== From :User:Conservative Re: your message to Karajou ====
I don't think you should quit editing. Also, if SamHB acts in a rude way again, he can be blocked for awhile as a warning. If he persists, he can be blocked permanently. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:41, 9 January 2015 (EST)
I don't think you should quit editing. Also, if SamHB acts in a rude way again, he can be blocked for awhile as a warning. If he persists, he can be blocked permanently. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:41, 9 January 2015 (EST)
:Generous gun rights in countries with significant crime rates, can save reduce crime and save lives.[http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/02/21/disarming-the-myths-promoted-by-the-gun-control-lobby/][http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/01/less-guns-more-crime.html]
:Generous gun rights in countries with significant crime rates, can save reduce crime and save lives.[http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/02/21/disarming-the-myths-promoted-by-the-gun-control-lobby/][http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/01/less-guns-more-crime.html]
====User:Conservative says "Conservapedia is not going pro-gun control"====
:Conservapedia is not going pro-gun control. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:04, 9 January 2015 (EST)
:Conservapedia is not going pro-gun control. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:04, 9 January 2015 (EST)
==User:Wschact' Stubborn Hounding: 72% of his edits over a period of 24 days are about my work out of 179 edits, 129 concern my edits ==
Between December 16 and January 8, out of 179 edits made by Wschact, 129 concern either Wschact rapidly changing my edits soon after I complete them / reverting them or complaining to the Community/Admins about my contributions. That is to say, 72% of his edits over a period of 24 days are about my work. That is a good example of being tenaciously hounded by strong opposition. Source: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Wschact
I didn't really want to put this part about Wschact on CP Talk pages or Community Portal since I don't want to further alienate him from me or make him more dogged in his pursuit of editing/patrolling/trolling my contributions. But his recent remarks to my "Retirement" posting, made me decide to mention these 72% statistics and to come out of "retirement". [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 19:42, 9 January 2015 (EST)
===Inspired by Karajour and User:Conservative to Not Retire due to User:Wschact' Dogged Hounding===
Dear Admins Karajou and Conservative
My biggest concern, that finally '''temporarily''' "took the wind out of my sails" and prompted me to '''temporarily''' retire as a contributor, is Wschact, who makes my Conservapedia contributions the subject of 72% of his edits over a 24 day period, as I will show below.
My biggest concern isn't SamHB who explained himself well here:http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:SamHB#.22Troll.22_Editing_by_User:SamHB_of_Numerous_articles_I_am_Working_on_.2F_Editing_.2F_Contributing, saying that "I promised that I would revert your things only once, and I mean it."
Nor is my concern AlanE's presumptuously slanderous race baiting comment here:
I first said to AlanE: "Please better to stop the "Revert War" (unless it is by an American CP administrator) and instead make comments and suggestions on this talk page for editing the material. "Free state" is a big topic in the American Conservative, Libertarian and Christian circles. The old meaning of Antebellum south is rarely used except among historians. I would be willing to move some of it to an essay, however, the majority of it matches conservative values. Please discuss in a civil way without using words like hideous, offensive, etc like User:SamHB used for the previous revert." TheAmericanRedoubt 02:57, 17 December 2014 (EST)
Alan rudely Ad hominem responded to me:
"Excuse the following...but I am cross, and Sam is I know to be a reasonable and intelligent man - and a friend.... Obviously I can't win against someone who probably sits at his computer for hours on end with an assault rifle beside him with one eye out the window just hoping that some one who is black or jewish or liberal will put a foot onto his property so that he can shoot them. What larks!! (Pip old chap)). I won't go on because I see you are like those I occasionally met in the old days in Outback pubs who felt naked without their firearms and were usually relieved of their ammunition before the publican would serve them a beer. Cheers mate." AlanE 04:06, 17 December 2014 (EST)" Source: http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Free_state
I decided to simply ignore AlanE since that was the last I heard of him.
What finally '''temporarily''' took the remaining "wind out of my sails" is Wschact’s almost month-long dogged efforts:
I assert that between December 16 and January 8, out of 179 edits made by Wschact, 129 concern either Wschact rapidly changing my edits soon after I complete them / reverting them or complaining to the Community/Admins about my contributions. That is to say, 72% of his edits over a period of 24 days are about my work. That is a good example of being tenaciously hounded by strong opposition. Source: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Wschact
Here http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Desk/Miscellany#Interpretation_of_copyright_policy
Wschact doesn't even know the difference between 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge/ammunition and a "7.62x51mm NATO rifle" and hence wrongly insisting that the Admins move 7.62x51mm NATO to "7.62x51mm NATO rifle". And the so-called copyright issues he brings are been handled by MLA citations/references/bibliography and [[fair use]].
I made more than 1000+ small edits on CP for several months before contributing much of anything original to be sure that I got a feel for the actual format, content, categories, see also's, stubs or lack of stubs, politics, guidelines, etc. I also wanted to make sure that my edits proved to the CP admins that I am sincere and trustworthy, not a troll or parodist. Then in late November when my sabbatical began I begin much more extensive CP contributions. That was when on December 16 I can on the Wschact radar scope.
I was asked by one JoeyJ (http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:TheAmericanRedoubt&oldid=1130110#Orphaned_Pages) to deorphan pages which I then began to do. But the edits I make to de-ophan them by adding them appropriately to a See Also or a wiki link within the article were getting frequently deleted by Wschact. This happened a lot. He would keep saying I am violating the CP policy.
Over the next few months while I am taking a sabbatical from my work, I have a lot of time/energy/knowledge to contribute to CP generating new content. Alas, at the moment I am feeling too harassed by their constant rapid nit-picking and having to 10/90 Talk Page explain my every step versus doing 90/10 actual article work. I've never experienced this before in an online Wiki or forum community, I am sad to say. Even on Wikipedia, I would get at least a few days to a week to perfect a short article or a contribution to one before the liberal vultures would swoop in to eat it up (if they did even). Because CP is a much smaller community of editors, they give me no time to improve upon my work before they come in and revert/delete. It's truly demoralizing/intimidating for a new editor. I don't know what else to say. I feel CP is an amazing voice for our American conservative movement, but I didn't know it would have so many fast-moving critics/deleters/reverters against anything I contribute in the realm of firearms or survivalism/preparedness articles. Yet they were against much on complementary medicine and amateur radio as well.
It's funny, the ONLY contributions of mine that the liberal/RINO editors didn't touch were the Buddhist articles. I think that is because most liberals like Buddhism. Although Catholic, I formally studied comparative religions and CP's Buddhist and Hindu articles are very slim at the moment, so I have much to add there as well. But again, at the moment, I am becoming "gun shy" with their liberal/RINO sights all aimed at me now, especially on http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Community_Portal.
[[Persistence]] is a virtue, as Calvin Coolidge said:
Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence.
Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb.
Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.
The slogan Press On! has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.
Thank you for listening. Any advice or encouragement would be appreciated.
[[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 19:42, 9 January 2015 (EST)