Difference between revisions of "User:Tomt"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Removing all content from page)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User Block|2}}
{{User CPA1Blk}}
{{User NoArbBlk}}
{{User en-UK}}
{{User bothered}}
{{User Bible just book}}
{{User Evo}}
{{User bigbang}}
{{User guns harm}}
{{User noracists}}
{{User Interest}}
{{User evolutionScience}}
An A level science (biology, chemistry, physics and maths) student from England, UK.  I am hoping to study veterinary medicine at the University of Cambridge, starting in October 2007.
I am atheist, but don't hold that against my contributions - I am tolerant of other's views but do not feel that opinions hold a place in a 'trustworthy encyclopedia' so will not express mine in any article and hope that others do not express theirs.
==Administrative Decisions==
Apparently, in a wiki (like Conservapedia) the deletion of entire articles without a reason is an administrative decision that is not any of my business.  Also, I asked why the Conservapedia talk page was removed and was not told.  I do not understand why there is not a page for making comments about this website - perhaps there were criticisms of the project on that page?  --[[User:Tomt|TomT]] 12:40, 18 May 2007 (EDT)
As those who look at my talk page will notice I have now been given an official warning for complaining about the rude comment made about myself by a Sysop.  However, the Sysop was not given a warning for making the rude comment in the first place.  I'll leave it at that.  --[[User:Tomt|TomT]] 07:44, 19 May 2007 (EDT)
Since complaining about the warning I have been blocked.  My appeal to Mr. Schlafly was successful and I am grateful for the apology given to me by Ed Poor.  --[[User:Tomt|TomT]] 09:17, 19 May 2007 (EDT)
The [[evolution]] article on this website is a joke.  Not only did editors consistently remove the scientific views to make the article '''unbalanced''' and '''[[bias|biased]]''' but the Panel upheld this view.  Any website that claims to be a "Trustworthy Encyclopedia" must make sure it has well written articles that can be trusted to show the views of all parties involved.
For more information see my rant on the [[Talk:Theory_of_evolution#Embarrassment|evolution discussion page]].  --[[User:Tomt|TomT]] 15:41, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
As a few people have been aware, I was recently blocked by [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.plrd]] for no apparent reason.  I owe my thanks to [[User:CPAdmin1|CPAdmin1]] for pointing out to Geo.plrd that I was actually correcting the vandalism that led to my blocking.  While I do not hold a grudge against Geo.plrd as we all make mistakes and he has made a very sincere apology, I feel that his method of blocking me without leaving any prior warning or even an explanation of the reason I was blocked is unacceptable.
Syspos should not go around blocking contributors without warning and '''must''' leave a reason on the user's page once they have been blocked.  My trust in the Conservapedia administration has been further dented by this very rude event.
This website is, unfortunately, becoming more and more biased towards conservative Christianity.  This should be stopped as soon as possible as I would not currently use many of the articles in a piece of research due to this bias.  --[[User:Tomt|TomT]] 12:46, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
:Please offer specific suggestions. I'm as pro-Christian as they come, but I have 5 years experience with neutral encyclopedia editing. How can I help? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 18:43, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 16:02, August 15, 2007