Last modified on August 27, 2012, at 16:00

User talk:Baobab

This is the current revision of User talk:Baobab as edited by Ed Poor (Talk | contribs) at 16:00, August 27, 2012. This URL is a permanent link to this version of this page.

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Return to "Baobab" page.

Advisory Warning

Hello, Baobab,

We're glad you are here to learn and possibly edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you do.

Your chosen user name and/or initial edits don't inspire a great deal of confidence, however.
If you are here to argue, show us why we are wrong, introduce a liberal POV into articles, engage in time wasting talk, talk, talk, you have indeed come to the wrong place. We value conciseness, civility and productivity here.
Please consider opening your mind...the truth will set you free!

At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page.

Thanks for reading, Baobab!

--James Wilson 14:17, 24 February 2012 (EST)

Please don't remove content, especially content added by Administrators.--James Wilson 14:17, 24 February 2012 (EST)

Hi James Wilson. If Conservapedia really aspires to be a trustworthy encyclopedia, then all manifestly biased content has to be removed, not only by me, but also by you. And it shouldn't matter who added the content, whether an Administrator or a 'normal' contributor. So please stop undermining Conservapedia's credibility. Bear with me, I'm not calling you a vandal, but your actions and attitude do nothing to improve this highly interesting project. Regards, Baobab 14:29, 24 February 2012 (EST)
Hello, Baobab. However, I must warn you that it is generally against Conservapedia policy to revert additions made by Administrators; both of the edits you reverted were originally added by Administrators.--James Wilson 14:33, 24 February 2012 (EST)
Okay, I didn't know Conservapedia is apparently some sort of caste system. But anyway, how do I know who is an Administrator and who is not and how do I know if a particular word or sentence was added by an Administrator? Baobab 14:55, 24 February 2012 (EST)

Article changes

If there are entries to articles that appear to be personal in nature rather than encyclopedic and neutral, feel free to change them. If you're unable to do it at the outset, i.e. admin page restrictions, make a proposed entry on the talk page and go from there. If an admin says no, accept it and move on to another topic. Karajou 14:45, 24 February 2012 (EST)

Hi Karajou, thanks for the suggestion. However, changing text that appeared to be personal in nature ("SNL became less funny in the past decade") rather than neutral was exactly what I did and what was reverted by James Wilson. Baobab 14:55, 24 February 2012 (EST)
That particular edit was originally added in by User:Aschlafly, who is the founder of this site. That is why I reverted it.--James Wilson 15:03, 24 February 2012 (EST)
So if I delete edits done by Aschlafly that clearly violate his own Conservapedia rules, that are (as Karajou puts it) personal in nature rather than encyclopedic and neutral and undermine Conservapedia's credibility, you as Aschlafly's zealous servant will still revert my action? Peculiar behavior... What you should do of course is judge every single entry by its encyclopedic merits, regardless of who made the entry. Baobab 02:57, 25 February 2012 (EST)
My apologies if I was being rude to you. If you are having insights on this page, feel free to discuss. It's more productive than the SNL thing (and more important) I suppose :). Good day, --James Wilson 11:17, 27 March 2012 (EDT)


Pretending you didn't know we have a hierarchy of editors is disingenuous, at best. Promoting open rebellion against the rules is intolerable. --Ed Poor Talk 12:00, 27 August 2012 (EDT)