User talk:Dragonfly02

Hello Dragonfly02, and welcome to Wikipedia! The first thing you should know is that we encourage you to be bold. Feel free to edit and improve articles, by clicking any 'edit' link.

If you'd like to test what Wikipedia can do, check out the sandbox - just type and save the page and your text will appear. That's the beauty of a Wiki.

For more information check out our tutorial - it's designed with newcomers in mind, as is the help section. If you'd like to get involved with current projects, have a look at the Community Portal. There are always tasks for users to do, ranging from copyediting to expanding stubs.

I hope you'll enjoy your time here, but be warned, it can become addictive! Feel free to message me, I'm more than happy to help. As an added tip, sign any message you post so users know that you've said it. To do so is delightfully simple, just use the wikicode ~~~~.

Once again, welcome! James Kendall [talk] 12:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First and only edit was links that a certain user adds[edit]

Any reason? Those are the same links User:Jason Gastrich has added. They contribute nothing to the article. Arbusto 05:15, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You sure about that? Why do you think so? I disagree. --Dragonfly02 23:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I respect your opinion. However, the reason the links were removed is that it has been discussed repeatedly ... and each time, the community consensus has been that they don't contribute to the article, because they don't deal with Till in a relevant fashion. User:Jason Gastrich has repeatedly ignored that community consensus, which is why those links are removed without further discussion. Justin Eiler 23:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They don't deal with Till in a relevant fashion? Come on, now.

First, we have Till's very own Topica email list link. He runs the list, decides who posts and who doesn't, and posts on it about every day. Now, for what good reason should that list link be absent from his entry?

The other link is his debate with Hovind. Many people think he killed Hovind. To many, Till came across smelling like roses in the debate. If nothing else, it gives people exposure to a free, Till debate. Why shouldn't it be in the entry? --Dragonfly02 23:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dragonfly, as you will note, I did not offer my opinion on whether or not the debates were actually pertient: my only claim was that community consensus has deemed these debate links as non-notable. As I said, I respect your opinion that they are notable information ... will you extend that same respect to others who hold the opposing opinion?

That doesn't mean that you have to "dummy up and soldier," certainly, but it does mean that--in the interest of courtesy and cooperation--such changes should be discussed on the talk page and agreed to by community consensus before they are made on the actual page. To do otherwise (my opinion only, based on my Christian beliefs) is to fail to submit to the lawful authorities. Justin Eiler 02:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"They contribute nothing to the article" was posted a week ago right above. Arbusto 01:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockastrich[edit]

So if you are not a sock of Jason Gastrich, how come the only article edit you've made has been is the same edit all this other ones make? Arbusto 01:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]