User talk:Anxietydisorder

From TinWiki.org

Hi Anxietydisorder,

I just wanted to tell you a quick tip for when you are signing a talk page. Just type four tildes instead of signing you input manually, like this: ~~~~. This also creates an automatic link to your discussion page.

William One Sac 08:11, 16 July 2008 (CDT)

Contents

[edit]

Hi (the psi ball article)

Anxietydisorder,

Hi. First I want to say that you are doing lots of great work. tinWiki is definitely benefitting very much from your efforts. I have one small "objection", though, about the psi balls article. I noticed you put back the instruction on how to create a psi ball.

Here's what I think: an encyclopedic article should only describe the topic of the title. For example, an article about guns would describe what they are, how they work, the history of their use, different types, who first created them, that sort of thing. However, an encyclopedic article about guns shouldn't, in my opinion, include an instruction on how to fire a gun, like a "crash course". Which I would say would be a kind of equivalent to a course on how to create a psi ball. That type of content belongs in totally different contexts than in an encyclopedia. As I see it, a link in the external links section is more appropriate. I have removed the instruction section again. Please let me know how my thoughts here seem to you, though.

On a side note, the "perspective" in the language of an encyclopedic article should not be that from First Person to Second Person, but should instead talk from a neutral perspective like that, independent of point of view. The reader shouldn't be addressed by the writer, which in practice means the word "you" should be avoided. Example: instead of "I think you will agree that tinWiki is an interesting encyclopedia", a sentence should say "Some people consider tinWiki to be an interesting encyclopedia".

Anyway, keep up the great work. Optimist 05:27, 22 July 2008 (CDT)

[edit]

A simple way to revert spam edits

Anxietydisorder,

Hi. I noticed in the recent changes list that you notified of some spam edits. So I want to describe a simple way that you can use for reverting spam edits.

First, in the 'tabs' above the article, click where it says 'history'. Now you will see a version history list for that article. If the spam is still the most recent edit, it is safe to revert without losing anyone's (legitimate) work. Click on the list item that is below the spam edit. You will now be viewing a previous version, specifically the article version that came right before the spam edit. Now, if you click on 'Edit', as if to edit the article, and then click on 'Save', you will restore the article. 'Voila!' You have now reverted the spam edit. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions about this, or about something else here. Keep up the good work. Optimist 10:26, 4 September 2008 (CDT)

[edit]

antarctica

hey thanks for posting that images and putting in the link

Peace Justice

[edit]

Protected Articles

I protected those articles today, because as soon as a spam hit was reverted and an IP banned, the article was hit again with a new IP and the same spam. This weekend, the Apostolic United Brethren article was hit repeatedly (25+ times....as soon as it was deleted, it was hit), and both WOS and I protected it. It is like the person/persons pick one article, and they hit it every 10 minutes with the same spam. Happened today with the Arecibo article.

Just wanted to let you know why those two articles were protected against any and all updates.

--Skeptic1 21:33, 24 November 2008 (CST)


I understand the problem with spammed articles, but I'd like to find a solution to this that doesn't involve blocking legitimate contributors from making edits. Perhaps a system that allows proven people with the best interest of the Wiki to make edit but blocks others from destroying the page.

I try to contribute where I can, but numerous times I've run into edit problems because some ass has decided to repeatedly spam an entry and it gets protected.

Any ideas on how we can fix this ?

Anxietydisorder 21:47, 24 November 2008 (CST)

  • I will "unprotect" those two articles and see what happens. I don't mind reverting spam edits, but when it is the same article every 15 minutes, then I know it is the same person, with no life and too much time on their hands, with an agenda. I will "unprotect" them now, and you can add some legitimate data to them. As far as stopping it in the future, I would prefer just having legitimate contributors add to tinWiki, but it has been discussed in the past and decided against. If you want to bring it up in the ATS tinWiki working forum again, I will add my thoughts and see if we can't reach some "happy medium"...and see what WOS and Optimist have to say about it. --Skeptic1 21:53, 24 November 2008 (CST)


  • Thanks...

I'm working on one article now that you unprotected, and I'll put some additional data in my CETI article in a bit.

I realize the necessity to protect an established article from continual spam edits. You folks must go through Hell patrolling this place.

I'll point out this discussion to WOS in a u2u and put a thread in the tinWiki forum.

Anxietydisorder 00:22, 25 November 2008 (CST)

Retrieved from "http://www.tinwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Anxietydisorder"