User talk:MagnummSerpentinee

Welcome![edit]

Hello, MagnummSerpentinee!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Doug Weller talk 17:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:Cataclysmic pole shift hypothesis are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. I reverted your edit about the CIA book as it had no sources - our opinions or what we believe may be correct but not useful here as these aren't chat pages. New users often misunderstand talk pages. Doug Weller talk 11:03, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This talk page post is more of a problem[edit]

What about..............?[edit]

So I was going to ask a question about an individual who investigates missing persons. For some "strange' reason I was not allowed to post the question. I think you all know who I am talking about. MagnummSerpentinee (talk) 17:18, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This makes no sense at all. Can you please explain it? As an aside, do you know that Sanger promotes a number of conspiracy theories? Additionally, his view on what Wikipedia should have been were contrary to our WP:NPOV policy. Doug Weller talk 11:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure who Sanger is. I just know Wikipedia is unfairly attacking Paulides despite the fact he offers no causes to the numerous disappearances he investigates. Many families say after Paulides has highlighted their loved ones disappearance suddenly the authorities are very interested in helping. I say if what Paulides does in his investigations gets Law Enforcement up off their rear ends & causes them to actually investigate the case then thats good enough for me.

However, I feel the harsh attacks against Wikipedia are justified. Before Notability became a factor in Wikipedia, there existed hundreds of well written articles on small towns in America written by average everyday citisens and writers. When Wikipedia began stronger enforcement of so-called Notability, these articles suddenly vanished almost over night. Wikipedia, in my view, uses Notability to discriminate against articles not written by their own staff. Its totally shameful! Remember Wikipedia use to advert that it was the encyclopedia that everyone can write an article for. MagnummSerpentinee (talk) 15:07, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also......

As to me not being able to post to the Paulides Wikipedia talk page, After I posted the statement above, I don't think I went back to try again. More than likely it was a glitch and I was overreacting. However one can never tell. MagnummSerpentinee (talk) 15:11, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is still the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. But that doesn't mean that they don't have to follow our policies and guidelines. You really wouldn't want an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, it would be so useless no one would read it. You haven't seen the nonsense, literal gibberish (presumably intentional vandalism) etc that I have. Nor should every individual in the world be entitled to their own article. And what in the world do you mean by "staff"? Also who were you pointing to as the possible person who stopped you from editing? Doug Weller talk 15:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rule Ambiguity, Institutional Clashes, and Population Loss: How Wikipedia Became the Last Good Place on the Internet[edit]

[1] is a good read. Doug Weller talk 16:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]