User talk:Vanished user 54564fd56f45f4dsa5f4sf5/sandbox
| Nice things from people | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Awards - overdue and richly deservedI've been around Wikipedia for a while, but I've never before seen your rare combination of perspicacity and civility. I wanted to give recognition to your remarkable contributions to the ongoing struggle to make the Dissociative Identity Disorder article more correct and useful. When I entered into this struggle, I didn't expect to encounter someone with my level of passion and persistence for this subject. Surprise!!! I am continually amazed, delighted, and gratified by your contributions. It is a remarkable gift to the community, both small (Wikipedian - rather large, actually) and large (the rest of the blessed world!). I am well beyond grateful for what you do. I therefore have no choice but to award you TWO barnstars simultaneously (I've never seen this done before); to do less would be to perpetrate a misrepresentation of your value to us:
Awwwww.....! Thank you! I am blushing from head to toes! :) I got barn stars! I am so excited! ~ty (talk) 04:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
GOT IT! Milk cow barn, north of Everson, Washington [(c) Tom Cloyd]. (It was a bitterly cold day - Christmas eve, 2008.) Am deeding this to you. It needs more barnstars, though. Get back to work! Tom Cloyd (talk) 08:51, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Home barn of the wild Tylas Ha ha... you are too funny. -laughing- ~ty (talk) 15:57, 31 January 2012 (UTC) A kitten for you! thank you for all your hard work on wikipedia. your awesome. Unitybicycle (talk) 21:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Awwwww!! You are a sweetheart! Thank you! ~ty (talk) 21:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC) A barnstar for you!
Thank You! That is kind of you! I keep trying to edit the DID page and run into an obstacle. Maybe some day it will be more new editor friendly.~ty (talk) 03:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC) You Are a Superhero!
If they had an actual "Superhero" award, I would have given you that instead! Thank you so much! Daniel Santos (talk) 08:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC) Awwwww! You have made my morning. Each day I wake wondering if a "silencer" will be here to attack and instead I am greeting with a friend. :) ~ty (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC) Smiles for you! TheGeneralUser (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:User:Cowman109/Smile2}} or {{subst:User:Cowman109/Smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing! Just came around to say Hi :). Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 21:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC) Awwww... this made my day! I never come to WP expecting anything good, but this is awesome! Are you the same Generaluser that has worked on the DID page before? If so, this is probably a sympathy smile. ;) ~ty (talk) 04:47, 6 August 2012 (UTC) A barnstar for you!
Oh! You are a sweetheart! Thank you so much! I am trying really hard to make a little corner of WP an accurate place for people to get their information. Tanya~talk page 15:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC) A Rose for you! :)
|
.jpg?lang=en)
| Content expert banned |
|---|
content expert bannedTylas, I'm sorry to see you go, though I definitely understand if that is your choice. If you feel you can, it may be worth dropping by the administrators' noticeboard one last time to register a formal "Oppose" vote. All the best. —danhash (talk) 18:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC) I will continue to monitor the admin board, of course, until this is resolved, but I realize that no one is going to be able to ever edit the DID page as long as WLU is there. I noticed your posts there and like them! You are awesome! ~ty (talk) 18:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I will pop in once in a while and see if I can edit anything. In the past 2 editors (you know who) dive in almost as soon as I post something to delete it and argue it.~ty (talk) 14:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC) |
| Adopted | ||
|---|---|---|
adoptionHi Tylas! I went ahead and created you an adoption page :) You can follow the course if you like, or you can just ask me for help on whatever you want. You can find it here. Let me know if there's anything you need. WormTT(talk) 11:25, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Tylas! I hope all's going well with you. You haven't heard from me in a little while, and there's a number of reasons for that - firstly, I'm terribly busy in real life, so am cutting down a lot of on-wiki stuff at the moment. Secondly, because I've been trying to get my head around the DID article and the arguments on both sides. I should mention that MathewTownsend has also previously run through my mentorship program, he's a good guy, but like you he strongly believes in whatever stance he takes. Unfortunately, since you've noticed the subject of this section... I've failed. Quite simply, I don't have the attention span or the interest in DID to make a reasonable judgement. My knowledge doesn't extend far enough that I could know a reliable source from an unreliable one, let alone a leading expert from a fringe scientist. What I will say, is that I am willing to vouch for Mathew here. He's not a "hard-core believer in fringe theories". I've watched his editing for a long time, and whilst he can be a bit pig-headed, he reads sources and does a good job of summarizing them. At the moment, the only evidence that I've seen that the sociocognitive model of view is fringe, and the "top scientists" all believe something else is your testimony. I'm not doubting you, I just can't take one person's word for it. I'm sure you'd be able to find a dozen sources confirming your point of view, but the level of detail I'd need to go into to find out if they were reliable... it's just not something I'm able or willing to do. Now, I can help you by point out methods of dispute resolution (I'll rearrange the lessons, to progress that one if you like). I can help with conduct issues, and hypothetical situations, but I'm just not the right person to answer in depth questions on medical content. I'm very sorry. WormTT(talk) 19:27, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
|
| User page and misc. |
|---|
General UserI feel like I have a guardian angel watching over me. You make me feel at ease in, what so far as I have experienced, is a hostile environment in WP. I cannot thank you enough for your kindness. On another note, I hope you come and work on the DID page, like you mentioned once on my user page, if you have the time and interest of course. Right now we are just waiting for our peer reviewer to return from vacation. I have put up an argument that cannot be refuted (currently on the talk page), but these 2 guys keep pulling up fringe stuff to try and also try and cover up this main debate with all kinds of nonsense. Here I am venting at you. Sorry, but if you need a project we could sure use someone there that is unbiased and understands what expert consensus is vs fringe ideas. Right now I am getting attacked right and left by 2 men there, and without some help there is little hope of ever getting an accurate page on DID. They just delete and revert all I do. Tanya~talk page 17:07, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Tanya :). Hope you're doing good! I recently came around this article Bagatayam Waterfall and i think it currently does not meet the basic minimum requirements for a Wikipedia:Stub. The article only has a external link to flicker website of a picture and a external map link. There are no other reliable sources and references. If possible can you have a look at it and see what can be eventually done ? I believe your help will be invaluable
|
| Child protection on WP |
|---|
Child protection policy on WPChild Protection Hello Tanya. I am a member of the Arbitration Committee for the English Wikipedia. Among other tasks, Arbcom has a role in handling allegations related to child protection issues. I see that you have had some recent edits deleted by an admin. I also see that you were informed back in February that it was inappropriate to make allegations of this kind on wiki, and that there was a procedure to follow if you had concerns. If you did not intend those comments to sound the way they did, please be more careful in future. If it occurs again, it is likely that you will be blocked. If you have genuine concerns about individual editors, please follow the procedure in Wikipedia:Child protection contains details of the appropriate way to report potential child protection issues. If you have any queries, please feel free to email me or talk to your mentor. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 16:24, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
|
| Randy from Boise |
|---|
Randy from BoiseRandy from BoiseYes, topic banning TomCloyd was unfortunate. He knows a great deal about the subject, but got caught out by how to handle opposition to his edits. There is an amusing essay Randy in Boise about the dark side of Wikipedia's attitude to expert editors, which you may feel has some relevance here.Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:41, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” - Isaac Asimov apologySorry! I was wrong for calling your editing vandalism. Please accept my apology! Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 15:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
|
Awards - overdue and richly deserved
I've been around Wikipedia for a while, but I've never before seen your rare combination of perspicacity and civility. I wanted to give recognition to your remarkable contributions to the ongoing struggle to make the Dissociative Identity Disorder article more correct and useful. When I entered into this struggle, I didn't expect to encounter someone with my level of passion and persistence for this subject. Surprise!!!
I am continually amazed, delighted, and gratified by your contributions. It is a remarkable gift to the community, both small (Wikipedian - rather large, actually) and large (the rest of the blessed world!). I am well beyond grateful for what you do. I therefore have no choice but to award you TWO barnstars simultaneously (I've never seen this done before); to do less would be to perpetrate a misrepresentation of your value to us:
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
| Awarded to Tylas for her untiring responsiveness in the torrent of hostile chatter that has characterized the Talk:Dissociative_identity_disorder page in recent weeks, as well as her multiple valuable contributions to the article itself. Your knowledge of the literature is manifestly broad and deep, and your many ways of sharing this knowledge is an educational experience for all us who are capable of learning (and a missed wakeup call for all others!) Tom Cloyd (talk) 00:01, 31 January 2012 (UTC) |
|
Civility Award | |
| Awarded to Tylas for her unfailing politeness and good humor, in the face of a broad range of uncouth and completely uncalled-for responses and behavior, while working on the Wikipedia DID article. I've never before in my entire life seen such an impressive display of the power of "nice". Awesome, thought-provoking, and effective. Tom Cloyd (talk) 00:01, 31 January 2012 (UTC) |
Awwwww.....! Thank you! I am blushing from head to toes! :) I got barn stars! I am so excited! ~ty (talk) 04:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
- OK, now we gotta find you a barn. That'll take a little time. I just know I have one around here somewhere...Tom Cloyd (talk) 05:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
GOT IT! Milk cow barn, north of Everson, Washington [(c) Tom Cloyd]. (It was a bitterly cold day - Christmas eve, 2008.) Am deeding this to you. It needs more barnstars, though. Get back to work! Tom Cloyd (talk) 08:51, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Home barn of the wild Tylas
Ha ha... you are too funny. -laughing- ~ty (talk) 15:57, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
thank you for all your hard work on wikipedia. your awesome.
Unitybicycle (talk) 21:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Awwwww!! You are a sweetheart! Thank you! ~ty (talk) 21:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Special Barnstar |
| Hi Tylas! Although you may not have a big number of edits, but you have been on Wikipedia for a long time and i feel that you can surely contribute your best here more often in many articles and other areas too! A nice editor with great potential and a good friend :). Hope to see you around more soon :) Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 19:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC) |
Thank You! That is kind of you! I keep trying to edit the DID page and run into an obstacle. Maybe some day it will be more new editor friendly.~ty (talk) 03:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
You Are a Superhero!
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
| Awarded to Tylas for her valiant assault against the fradulant use of Wikipedia to silence survivors of severe child abuse through gross misrepresentation of its symptoms (i.e., Dissociative Identity Disorder). Thank you! Daniel Santos (talk) 08:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC) |
If they had an actual "Superhero" award, I would have given you that instead! Thank you so much! Daniel Santos (talk) 08:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Awwwww! You have made my morning. Each day I wake wondering if a "silencer" will be here to attack and instead I am greeting with a friend. :) ~ty (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Smiles for you!
TheGeneralUser (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:User:Cowman109/Smile2}} or {{subst:User:Cowman109/Smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!
Just came around to say Hi :). Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 21:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Awwww... this made my day! I never come to WP expecting anything good, but this is awesome! Are you the same Generaluser that has worked on the DID page before? If so, this is probably a sympathy smile. ;) ~ty (talk) 04:47, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
Heya Tylas! I am greatly happy and thankful to have received your sweet smile  . You are one of those Wikipedians who always try to defuse conflicts, consistently lighten the mood and always make Wikipedia an Awesome place to be  ! Keep up the great work by editing and improving Wikipedia like you always do as you have a great future ahead. I am confident that we both will strive and work together to make Wikipedia the best! Regards and Happy Editing!! TheGeneralUser (talk) 11:42, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
|
Oh! You are a sweetheart! Thank you so much! I am trying really hard to make a little corner of WP an accurate place for people to get their information. Tanya~talk page 15:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
A Rose for you! :)
Awwww..... Thank you so much General User! I see you are editing the DID page too! I so welcome some unbiased help there! Thank you so much! Tanya ✫ ♥♫ 16:11, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
content expert banned
Tylas, I'm sorry to see you go, though I definitely understand if that is your choice. If you feel you can, it may be worth dropping by the administrators' noticeboard one last time to register a formal "Oppose" vote. All the best. —danhash (talk) 18:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
I will continue to monitor the admin board, of course, until this is resolved, but I realize that no one is going to be able to ever edit the DID page as long as WLU is there. I noticed your posts there and like them! You are awesome! ~ty (talk) 18:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
- I hope you will reconsider leaving. Maybe take a couple days off and see how that treats you? GL either way Forgotten Faces (talk) 18:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I will pop in once in a while and see if I can edit anything. In the past 2 editors (you know who) dive in almost as soon as I post something to delete it and argue it.~ty (talk) 14:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
adoption
Hi Tylas! I went ahead and created you an adoption page :) You can follow the course if you like, or you can just ask me for help on whatever you want. You can find it here. Let me know if there's anything you need. WormTT(talk) 11:25, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oh it's so hard as a female to talk to a worm, so I will call you Dave. Dave is a nice name. Thank you! I will fill out this paper and I have so many things to ask! I desperately need help with WP ins and outs. ~ty (talk) 14:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 | This user has been adopted by Worm That Turned. |
Hi Tylas! I hope all's going well with you. You haven't heard from me in a little while, and there's a number of reasons for that - firstly, I'm terribly busy in real life, so am cutting down a lot of on-wiki stuff at the moment. Secondly, because I've been trying to get my head around the DID article and the arguments on both sides. I should mention that MathewTownsend has also previously run through my mentorship program, he's a good guy, but like you he strongly believes in whatever stance he takes.
Unfortunately, since you've noticed the subject of this section... I've failed. Quite simply, I don't have the attention span or the interest in DID to make a reasonable judgement. My knowledge doesn't extend far enough that I could know a reliable source from an unreliable one, let alone a leading expert from a fringe scientist.
What I will say, is that I am willing to vouch for Mathew here. He's not a "hard-core believer in fringe theories". I've watched his editing for a long time, and whilst he can be a bit pig-headed, he reads sources and does a good job of summarizing them. At the moment, the only evidence that I've seen that the sociocognitive model of view is fringe, and the "top scientists" all believe something else is your testimony. I'm not doubting you, I just can't take one person's word for it. I'm sure you'd be able to find a dozen sources confirming your point of view, but the level of detail I'd need to go into to find out if they were reliable... it's just not something I'm able or willing to do.
Now, I can help you by point out methods of dispute resolution (I'll rearrange the lessons, to progress that one if you like). I can help with conduct issues, and hypothetical situations, but I'm just not the right person to answer in depth questions on medical content. I'm very sorry. WormTT(talk) 19:27, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Dave! Yep, I understand all that and I do believe in Mathew, it's just this is one little corner of WP where Mathew has some preconceived ideas that affect him. Other than that, I think he is a top notch editor - as you can see from the awards I have given him. You may not know this, but it is Mathew that suggested I come to you for training. I think his heart is in the right place. The real problem on the DID page is the other editor WLU - and somehow Mathew is getting the blame. You talk about arbitration, but from my experience on WP those that face WLU among his friends at arbitration, end up like this.
- It does not take anyone with a medical background to answer the question of what should be presented on the DID page since that question has already been answered by an expert consensus of those who are considered the top in the field of DID. The problem is simply getting WP to present the expert consensus instead of pop culture ideas - which means WLU needs to let go of the sociocognitive method (it is not a model) at least on the DID medical page, but he can publish that nonsense all he wants on the pop culture pages about DID.
General User
I feel like I have a guardian angel watching over me. You make me feel at ease in, what so far as I have experienced, is a hostile environment in WP. I cannot thank you enough for your kindness. On another note, I hope you come and work on the DID page, like you mentioned once on my user page, if you have the time and interest of course. Right now we are just waiting for our peer reviewer to return from vacation. I have put up an argument that cannot be refuted (currently on the talk page), but these 2 guys keep pulling up fringe stuff to try and also try and cover up this main debate with all kinds of nonsense. Here I am venting at you. Sorry, but if you need a project we could sure use someone there that is unbiased and understands what expert consensus is vs fringe ideas. Right now I am getting attacked right and left by 2 men there, and without some help there is little hope of ever getting an accurate page on DID. They just delete and revert all I do. Tanya~talk page 17:07, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- I understand this deep situation very well Tylas. However right now i haven't read the full dispute which is going on the DID page, as i come to Wikipedia at random hours of the day and focus mainly on maintenance and administration of the project and sometimes write article content to random articles whenever i get the chance. I see a peer review has been started on the talk page and will continue for some time. If you do not get the desired result and you wish to seek input to form a more greater and neutral consensus, then i suggest you go for Wikipedia:Request for comment which is a part of Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. It is an easy method which will invite other editors with the interest to express and give their comment of the article's talk page to form an actual consensus. I am really sorry that i cannot help you out fully, as i am not a subject expert like you on the topic, but i will fully cooperate with you and help you out as much as i can. And as Worm That Turned has also said below that he is also ready to help you out in some way or the other. Again my deepest apologies if i couldn't help you directly. I wish everything will turn out better and good for everyone once the required consensus has been formed :). And thanks a lot for the trust and faith you have in me which i am confident i will always hold it true and keep it up :-). Regards. TheGeneralUser (talk) 07:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- I smile when I see a message from you. You brighten my day. I summarize the "dispute" below. Anywhere but WP it would not even be a problem, but the politics here makes it a problem, when it should not be. The peer reviewer seems to be wonderful so far but his vacation began almost as soon as the peer review began - I have great hope for that process and patiently await his return home. By the way, to work on the DID article, I don't think an editor needs to be an expert in DID, but they do need to come without a preconceived idea of what DID is - one formed from the media, past psychology education that is now obsolete or a desire to cover up child abuse. They need to come and report the expert consensus view of DID. Thanks for replying! Tanya~talk page 23:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Tanya :). Hope you're doing good! I recently came around this article Bagatayam Waterfall and i think it currently does not meet the basic minimum requirements for a Wikipedia:Stub. The article only has a external link to flicker website of a picture and a external map link. There are no other reliable sources and references. If possible can you have a look at it and see what can be eventually done ? I believe your help will be invaluable 
. Regards. TheGeneralUser (talk) 20:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi General User! I tried editing various articles that interested me but I have a shadow following me around trying to find anything wrong with my posts - and I just don't need the attacks. For the time being I am going to stick with the DID article and am patiently awaiting the return of the review editor. I write about the outdoors almost every day, so WP is a break from that. If this is something that you need help with though, I will work on it! Tanya ✫ ♥♫ 21:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Child Protection
Hello Tanya. I am a member of the Arbitration Committee for the English Wikipedia. Among other tasks, Arbcom has a role in handling allegations related to child protection issues. I see that you have had some recent edits deleted by an admin. I also see that you were informed back in February that it was inappropriate to make allegations of this kind on wiki, and that there was a procedure to follow if you had concerns. If you did not intend those comments to sound the way they did, please be more careful in future. If it occurs again, it is likely that you will be blocked. If you have genuine concerns about individual editors, please follow the procedure in Wikipedia:Child protection contains details of the appropriate way to report potential child protection issues. If you have any queries, please feel free to email me or talk to your mentor. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 16:24, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi! Yes! Oh! I am so glad to hear from you! I scratched the comments out and then someone was kind enough to delete them, but before I could get the link to find you! I forgot about the February post. Thank you for reminding me. It's hard when something is so important, yet is not allowed discussion here, but I would love to talk to you about this in private and I am so glad to know the correct path to take. I am still wary however and not sure who to trust. Tanya ✫ ♥♫ 16:33, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- You're welcome to email me - you can pick my email up from my userpage. What you need to be careful of is accusing individual editors of being paedophiles in public posts, as it always creates a drama, and is very difficult for everyone if you're wrong. That's why the policy insists on off wiki reporting. If you believe that of someone, you should submit the evidence via email as described in the policy. If what you mean is that the argument unwittingly supports child abuse, then you need to word any comments really carefully. Discussing whether academics who do not support a child abuse element for DID are (deliberately or not) providing support for child abuse can be done if supported by sources - ie if it is being discussed at a professional level. Even then, read WP:BLP and be careful if referring to people working in the area. Elen of the Roads (talk) 17:35, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you so much Elen, but it takes me a while to trust someone and so far WP has not been a friendly place. I really do appreciate this information and will try my hardest not to break WP rules. Also, thank you so much for the link to where TomCloyd was banned for being too "passionate about DID". That is really helpful. I know DID well, but I don't know my way around WP yet. I seem to be getting a fast track introduction to it with the topic I have chosen to work on. Tanya ✫ ♥♫ 19:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- You're welcome to email me - you can pick my email up from my userpage. What you need to be careful of is accusing individual editors of being paedophiles in public posts, as it always creates a drama, and is very difficult for everyone if you're wrong. That's why the policy insists on off wiki reporting. If you believe that of someone, you should submit the evidence via email as described in the policy. If what you mean is that the argument unwittingly supports child abuse, then you need to word any comments really carefully. Discussing whether academics who do not support a child abuse element for DID are (deliberately or not) providing support for child abuse can be done if supported by sources - ie if it is being discussed at a professional level. Even then, read WP:BLP and be careful if referring to people working in the area. Elen of the Roads (talk) 17:35, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Randy from Boise
Yes, topic banning TomCloyd was unfortunate. He knows a great deal about the subject, but got caught out by how to handle opposition to his edits. There is an amusing essay Randy in Boise about the dark side of Wikipedia's attitude to expert editors, which you may feel has some relevance here.Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:41, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- What I learned about the banning of TomCloyd is that what matters (not in the case of every vote) is how many friends you have on WP that show up to vote. I would rather see one fair judge decide than those who oppose the edits of a user vote. He seemed to live for WP before that incident. He was an ambassador, he traveled to support WP and then was banned. I don't think too many confront the editor he did and come out unscathed. I read the Randy in Boise article, it was linked (at least at one time) from an editors user page. You seem kind, but I am afraid to trust many people. Tanya ✫ ♥♫ 22:52, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- It's a hard opposition to handle. If I remember right, all his edits were reverted by WLU. This incident was in February and you know the only edits I have been allowed to keep pertain to 2 images. All else was reverted, mostly by WLU. It gets frustrating. I don't know many people who could handle that sort of thing and keep cool. Cloyd and I are not the only ones, Hash, Santos, Philosophicaldancer all had all their edits reverted as well. Tanya ✫ ♥♫ 23:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- I read what about Randy in Boise again, and I read what WLU has on his user page, (it maintained a good portion of my thoughts throughout the night) and it could not make more sense! You are brilliant! Thank you for this perspective! :) Tanya ✫ ♥♫ 14:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- It's a hard opposition to handle. If I remember right, all his edits were reverted by WLU. This incident was in February and you know the only edits I have been allowed to keep pertain to 2 images. All else was reverted, mostly by WLU. It gets frustrating. I don't know many people who could handle that sort of thing and keep cool. Cloyd and I are not the only ones, Hash, Santos, Philosophicaldancer all had all their edits reverted as well. Tanya ✫ ♥♫ 23:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” - Isaac Asimov
apology
Sorry! I was wrong for calling your editing vandalism. Please accept my apology! Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 15:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- And I am sorry if you feel that I am picking on you in any way. You appear quite emotionally invested at the moment and I don't understand why. Nothing I am doing on WP is anything against anyone personally and I still do believe you are a good editor. Tanya ✫♫♥ 15:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)