Difference between revisions of "User:Ed Poor"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New Pages) |
(→New Pages: 50 since April 4th) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==New Pages== | ==New Pages== | ||
| − | + | These are the last 50 articles I started: | |
| − | # | + | #[[Right to life movement]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Saline abortion]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Comfort women]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Silent scream]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Speech codes]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Balint Vazsonyi]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Usage]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Theory and fact]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Rastafarianism]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Wiki way]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Red link]] |
| − | # | + | #[[The word]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Getting Better]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Brian Mitchell]] |
| − | # | + | #[[How to write a Conservapedia article]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Unguided evolution]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Fidelity]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Conscientious objector]] |
| − | # | + | #[[National Center for Science Education]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Infrared]] |
| − | # | + | #[[I Have a Dream]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Paul Simon]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Political spectrum]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Infinity]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Equality]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Trawl]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Orbit]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Deduction]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Sit-ins at lunch counters]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Wikipedia:Avoid personal remarks]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Diane Ravitch]] |
| − | # | + | #[[George Carlin]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Donkey]] |
| − | # | + | #[[The Manchurian Candidate]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Wolves]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Suffolk Punch]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Manure]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Riders of the Purple Sage]] |
| − | # | + | #[[The Family Man]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Brainwashing]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Frank Sinatra]] |
| − | # | + | #[[To Sir, With Love]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Strider]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Hate]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Methods of contraception]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Fornication]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Idiot]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Ellipse]] |
| − | # | + | #[[Blood type]] |
| − | # | + | #[[The Paradoxical Commandments]] |
| − | + | #[[Carbon dioxide]] | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==Who do you think you are?== | ==Who do you think you are?== | ||
Revision as of 13:02, April 10, 2007
New Pages
These are the last 50 articles I started:
- Right to life movement
- Saline abortion
- Comfort women
- Silent scream
- Speech codes
- Balint Vazsonyi
- Usage
- Theory and fact
- Rastafarianism
- Wiki way
- Red link
- The word
- Getting Better
- Brian Mitchell
- How to write a Conservapedia article
- Unguided evolution
- Fidelity
- Conscientious objector
- National Center for Science Education
- Infrared
- I Have a Dream
- Paul Simon
- Political spectrum
- Infinity
- Equality
- Trawl
- Orbit
- Deduction
- Sit-ins at lunch counters
- Wikipedia:Avoid personal remarks
- Diane Ravitch
- George Carlin
- Donkey
- The Manchurian Candidate
- Wolves
- Suffolk Punch
- Manure
- Riders of the Purple Sage
- The Family Man
- Brainwashing
- Frank Sinatra
- To Sir, With Love
- Strider
- Hate
- Methods of contraception
- Fornication
- Idiot
- Ellipse
- Blood type
- The Paradoxical Commandments
- Carbon dioxide
Who do you think you are?
Q: Is this your personal blog, or what?!
A: No, but it just so happens that nearly every word I type, link I create, article or template I start - gains instant and widespread acceptance.
Q: Isn't that a bit arrogant?
A: Okay, I guess you're right. Perhaps I should be more humble.
Explanations
There was a time when Wikipedia was a meritocracy, and I rose rapidly through the ranks then. I got Jimbo to create the Mediation and Arbitration committee's, so he wouldn't have to be the sheriff all the time. I became the first elected bureaucrat, and pioneered the system whereby admins could enforce rules without having to take everything before a committee.
But I didn't see the anti-elitism creeping up and choking the life out of the place. Larry Sanger was right.
My only worry about Conservapedia is that it might make the equal and opposite mistake; it has certainly been accused of it, hundreds of times. But senior staff have been amazingly tolerant of opposing ideas here so far and I reason to hope they will continue to do so.