User:Delsource

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi, I'm Del,

I've been editing Wikipedia pages for a year from numerous anonymous IPs (I previously travelled a lot with my job), but I have only just got round to opening an account.

---

MY USERBOXES en This user is a native speaker of English. This user supports the English English language man- kind Regarding gender, this user will use the vernacular, not what is "politically correct". O'Wikipedia This user does not believe that everyone in the Anglosphere who has ever achieved anything is Irish, Irish-American, or has Irish ancestry - including Eddie Murphy. Uh?! This user would like Wikipedia to provide guidance on how to construct userboxes which is written in Plain English and does not require a programming degree to understand. Jobism This user opposes revisionism in the history of technology and consumer electronics. This user is a bibliophile. This user plays the guitar. This user is interested in Evolution. This user is interested in politics. This user reads The International Herald Tribune. E This user reads The Economist. This user reads Private Eye. BBC This user supports the BBC. C2H6O-0 This user is a non-drinker. This user does not smoke. This user is The Stig.

First and foremost, although I enjoy contributing to this resource after a year of anonymous editing I just have to say what I dislike about Wikipedia...

• Editors who quickly dish out an uncivil attitude and rule-bending to walk over anon IPs then jump to report the slightest infractions by said anons.

I was once called a "useless twat" and a "prick" by an account holder, and when in my defence I called him a rude, condescending and arrogant individual he reported me for personal abuse and tried to get me blocked. Go figure...

• Editors who selectively edit their talk pages - usually using the "troll" accusation for anything less than sycophancy - leaving just praise.

A few months back I edited a page to clear up some vandalism and an editor reverted it all and accused me of mucking up the article. He then posted a warning on my talk page about vandalism and how I was "...playing with something I did not understand" and said that if I touched it again he would block me. When I posted on his talk page that I had cleaned up the article and he had reverted back to vandalism - and linked to the page's history to prove his mistake - he immediately deleted my entry from his talk page. When I posted another entry to say that I found his behaviour out of order and unfair given the circumstances he accused me of being a "troll" and deleted me again. Then he posted on my IP talk page in not exactly polite terms, calling me a liar and, again, a troll...

• Editors who "compromise" then come back two days later when they think no-one is looking to "rv" back to their pre-compromise position.

Happened to me a hundred times. Dishonest and underhand.

• Editors who "rv" and refuse to explain why, particularly when the disputed material is a subjective statement where there is no "correct" answer. Also editors who use "rvv" constantly against anon IPs even when clearly there is no vandalism.

You know who you are. STOP, and read Wikipedia:vandalism.

• Editors who want to claim everyone who has ever achieved anything as "Irish" or "Irish-American" - including Eddie Murphy.

According to some Wikipedians 87% of the English-speaking world is Irish. Including, apparently, Eddie Murphy....it's his name, you see. Also seems to apply to anyone who is Catholic or has green eyes or red hair (or better, both).