User talk:81.149.36.207

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Re BBC playing games? at Talk:To the Manor Born

I can assure you that no-one is playing games here. UpDown can sometimes be a little brash with their enforcement of the Wikipedia principles of no original research, however they still have a point. The edits you are trying to make to the article have no references, and make claims that, if they are to stay, need to be referenced. The whole idea of Wikipedia is indeed to make changes, however in doing so to make sure those changes are valid and truthful, otherwise they will indeed be removed fairly quickly. After all, what is the point of an encyclopedia if that encyclopedia can't prove that it's information is factual? -- Roleplayer (talk) 11:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you please *not*, that's *not* post on this talk page. I hope that is crystal clear.

Every thing you say above is complete and utter rubbish.

*conceptually* Wiki is what everyone makes it. You happen to think it's what YOU want to make it. You are behaving exactly as the typical, tragic "Wiki Boor" -- which is exactly what gives WIki it's bad name. OF COURSE you have to strike a balance between adding references to every single word, and obvious descrptive passages.

Obviously ANYTHING, WHATSOEVER that is added to Wiki can be erased by a "no-lifer" with the comment "oh, you have to add references to that, not enough references" It is a meaningless, non-comment.

IN the SPECIFIC example what you are saying is garbage. The notion that the thing is a QUOTE FROM SHAKESPEARE (in the Name of God) does not need to be extensively referenced, other than a quick link to a play you have likely heard of called Hamlet.

"however in doing so to make sure those changes are valid and truthful" .. OF COURSE the modest change made was valid and truthful. As a self-appointed Administrator YOU MUST REALISE that you occasionally - frequently - get sad people who OBSESSIVELY EDIT AND 'UNDO' one or two particular articles, so that they stay exactly as they want the articles to be. ie, "no life Wiki users". You are actually just ENABLING the social problems of no-lifer article-obsessives by encouraging them to "lock up" an article.

I have almost zero interest in Wikipedia, I was "just passing" and I have vast inside knowledge of the topic there, so, for a laugh I added the notes. The fact that someone erased it with a "not enough references for my taste, where's your link to which edition of Hamlet" comment, and is supposrted by Keen Wiki Administrators, is plain sad, and again PRECISELY what gives Wiki the bad name.

Nobody takes anything on Wiki seriously, precisely because obsessed "Trekkie" types, as it were, who are amazed to see their words in print, and a naive self-appointed "admin" mob, enforce their own consensus on pages and anyone with a life can't be bothered.

I don't particularly know why I bothered wasting my time typing all this but I hope it helps. Good luck.

---

This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users. Registering also hides your IP address. [WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • Traceroute • Geolocate • Tor check • Rangeblock finder] · [RIRs: America · Europe · Africa · Asia-Pacific · Latin America/Caribbean]