User:Isonomia: Difference between revisions
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
* [[User:Sperxios|Sperxios]] 12:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC): Well done for your excellent collection of quotes about [[democracy]] clarifying the misconception about its nature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democracy_%28varieties%29#Very_disappointed |
* [[User:Sperxios|Sperxios]] 12:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC): Well done for your excellent collection of quotes about [[democracy]] clarifying the misconception about its nature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democracy_%28varieties%29#Very_disappointed |
||
==Current Status== |
|||
I used to edit Wikipedia, I used to believe wikipedia was a fantastic idea. Then I had the singular misfortune to try to put a link from the article on [[Global warming]] to one on [[peak oil]] because as someone with a great deal of knowledge on renewables, I thought many people who were interested in (renewable) energy would also be interested in peak oil - I totally regret ever attempting to edit global warming now - ignorance is bliss! |
|||
I am not at all surprised at the revelations of [[climategate]]: The way people who should be neutral scientists have turned out to be environmental campaigners - for anyone with a neutral point of view (less so now admitted but it was pro-warming to start) trying to edit the climate articles, it has been obvious that the same thing has been going on in Wikipedia for years: "hide the decline" - look for any mention of the 21st century cooling! Subvert the peer review proces = use wikilaw to prevent NPOV insertions. Prevent delegates who might "cause trouble" from attending climate conference = ban editors who might cause trouble. Run science as a propoganda tool = run every single climate article as a propoganda tool. |
|||
So, I don't edit wikipedia much these days - certainly not when signed on - because sooner or later, and it needn't be on a climate article at all, I'll give these professional lobbyists just enough technical ammunition to hang me with and I'll get banned as happened to all the other editors I saw trying to stop the POV push. |
|||
So, I accept it is going to happen and so as it is more and more likely that the days of my editorship draw near, I would like to take the opportinity before I become another NPOV martry to thank all those people who worked so hard to make wikipedia my first port of call on most subjects (except obviously climate). Don't let the lobbyists ruin it for the rest! And have fun! [[User:Isonomia|Isonomia]] ([[User talk:Isonomia|talk]]) 12:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==My Links== |
==My Links== |
||
*[[User:Isonomia/template]] |
*[[User:Isonomia/template]] |
||
*[http://www.lenzie.org.uk Lenzie Community Web site] |
|||
*[[Wikipedia:Template messages]] |
|||
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Proposed_deletion Category:Proposed_deletion] |
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Proposed_deletion Category:Proposed_deletion] |
||
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AfD AfD] |
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AfD AfD] |
||
Revision as of 13:00, 14 December 2009
To email click here
Awards
 |
The All Seeing Eye | |
| A monumental work such as Wikipedia can only be constructed under "The All Seeing Eye." The Eye symbolizes all editors who watch for & defend; Neutrality, Truth and Fairness. Your struggle, against many attacks, to create a Wikipedia, free of bias & censorship makes you the worthy recipient of the "All Seeing Eye" ~ Rameses 22:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC) |
- Sperxios 12:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC): Well done for your excellent collection of quotes about democracy clarifying the misconception about its nature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democracy_%28varieties%29#Very_disappointed
Current Status
I used to edit Wikipedia, I used to believe wikipedia was a fantastic idea. Then I had the singular misfortune to try to put a link from the article on Global warming to one on peak oil because as someone with a great deal of knowledge on renewables, I thought many people who were interested in (renewable) energy would also be interested in peak oil - I totally regret ever attempting to edit global warming now - ignorance is bliss!
I am not at all surprised at the revelations of climategate: The way people who should be neutral scientists have turned out to be environmental campaigners - for anyone with a neutral point of view (less so now admitted but it was pro-warming to start) trying to edit the climate articles, it has been obvious that the same thing has been going on in Wikipedia for years: "hide the decline" - look for any mention of the 21st century cooling! Subvert the peer review proces = use wikilaw to prevent NPOV insertions. Prevent delegates who might "cause trouble" from attending climate conference = ban editors who might cause trouble. Run science as a propoganda tool = run every single climate article as a propoganda tool.
So, I don't edit wikipedia much these days - certainly not when signed on - because sooner or later, and it needn't be on a climate article at all, I'll give these professional lobbyists just enough technical ammunition to hang me with and I'll get banned as happened to all the other editors I saw trying to stop the POV push.
So, I accept it is going to happen and so as it is more and more likely that the days of my editorship draw near, I would like to take the opportinity before I become another NPOV martry to thank all those people who worked so hard to make wikipedia my first port of call on most subjects (except obviously climate). Don't let the lobbyists ruin it for the rest! And have fun! Isonomia (talk) 12:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC)