User:Ed Poor

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TimS (talk | contribs) at 03:49, April 13, 2007. It may differ significantly from current revision.
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archives: 01 02

I am a SYSOP on this site.

My interests include history, religion, and science.

If you have any trouble on the site, a question about my edits/blocks/redirects/protects ect. please post on my talk page or email me and I will address them ASAP. I am open to working with everyone in regards to their work, so-long as they express a genuine will to improve the site through there work.


Earthsat.jpeg
This user lives in the northern part of the Western Hemisphere.

Ed Poor (talk • contribs • count)


Use Google to search for Ed Poor probation [1]

NPOV

Here are the most commonly violated principles of neutral editing at Wikipedia:

  • It is inappropriate to remove blocks of well-referenced information which is germane to the subject from articles on the grounds that the information advances a point of view. Wikipedia's NPOV policy contemplates inclusion of all significant points of view.
  • Wikipedia's neutral point-of-view (NPOV) policy contemplates inclusion of all significant points of view regarding any subject on which there is division of opinion.
  • Wikipedia articles should contain information regarding the subject of the article; they are not a platform for advocacy regarding one or another point of view regarding the topic. Sweeping generalizations which label the subject of an article as one thing or another are inappropriate and not a substitute for adequate research regarding details of actual positions and actions which can speak for themselves.
  • Injection of personal viewpoints regarding the subject of an article is inappropriate and not to be resolved by debate among the editors of an article, but referenced from reputable outside resources. See Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
  • Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a vehicle for propaganda advocacy or advertising.
  • A strong point of view expressed elsewhere on a subject does not necessarily mean POV-pushing editing on Wikipedia; that can only be determined by the edits to Wikipedia.
  • Unexplained deletions of portions of controversial articles are unacceptable.

New Pages

These are the last 50 articles I started:

  1. Right to life movement
  2. Saline abortion
  3. Comfort women
  4. Silent scream
  5. Speech codes
  6. Balint Vazsonyi
  7. Usage
  8. Theory and fact
  9. Rastafarianism
  10. Wiki way
  11. Red link
  12. The word
  13. Getting Better
  14. Brian Mitchell
  15. How to write a Conservapedia article
  16. Unguided evolution
  17. Fidelity
  18. Conscientious objector
  19. National Center for Science Education
  20. Infrared
  21. I Have a Dream
  22. Paul Simon
  23. Political spectrum
  24. Infinity
  25. Equality
  26. Trawl
  27. Orbit
  28. Deduction
  29. Sit-ins at lunch counters
  30. Wikipedia:Avoid personal remarks
  31. Diane Ravitch
  32. George Carlin
  33. Donkey
  34. The Manchurian Candidate
  35. Wolves
  36. Suffolk Punch
  37. Manure
  38. Riders of the Purple Sage
  39. The Family Man
  40. Brainwashing
  41. Frank Sinatra
  42. To Sir, With Love
  43. Strider
  44. Hate
  45. Methods of contraception
  46. Fornication
  47. Idiot
  48. Ellipse
  49. Blood type
  50. The Paradoxical Commandments
  51. 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.

Proposed Block Policy

There has recently been some disagreement over blocks, so I have created a proposed block policy Tell me what you think. --CPAdmin1 23:23, 12 April 2007 (EDT)