User talk:ZimZalaBim
 Archives |
|---|
What do you mean by inapropriate?
Why did you call my update to Google criticism inapropriate? It's true, and it's old news in Israel.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Traaa (talk • contribs)
- This is original research, not properly sourced, and seems to be a personal rant. If it is, indeed, "old news in Israel," then provide a proper citation. --ZimZalaBim talk 21:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Your message
Concerning your message[1] on my talk page:I'm simply asking you all to stop criticizing me. I have not done what any warning on my talk page claims. Concerning this message [2] against looking for help in getting the warnings to stop, what do you think I should do? Just ask you directly? Ok, although the article on dispute resolution says to seek other opinions. The fact is all the warnings left on my talk page seem to me to be claiming I did something I was trying not to do. What is the purpose of that? I'm not sure if you all are trying to teach something or if it's you're idea of bold. I think by bold the writer of the policy means to "go ahead and edit articles". If I did not get a concensus for the Introduction edit, then why not explain how to get a concensus instead of criticizing me for editing, as it said I should? You wouldn't yell at someone for not knowing how to play basketball. The same thing should be true here. I'm trying to learn Wikipedia the best I can. I have good intentions, and I'm reading the directions even though I can't think of anything to write and don't know how to do research. Are there any articles on the subject? --Chuck Marean 10:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please read your archives as this is clearly not the first time you have violated policy, been warned about POV edits, or non-consensus changes to policy. Links to all the appropriate policies have always been provided, along with helpful suggestions and constructive criticism. If you can't follow them, perhaps this isn't the place for you. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
hi
Can a cool admin help a guy out? I want to add one sentence to the world of Wikipedia. But I can't. The sentence is factual, provable, reliable (I chose the New York Times version.)
Circumcision may decrease a man's risk of getting HIV but it may also INCREASE a man's risk of getting herpes and chlamydia. (and some doctors even say other STD's too but I won't get into that and I wouldn't put caps on INCREASE.)
The article on circumcision mentions the term HIV probably 100 times (I'm not joking) and mentions "herpes" or "chlamydia" not Once. Click on the article. You tell me if it's an article on the procedure or a pro-circumcision propaganda pamphlet.
Can a cool admin stop two guys named Avraham and Jakew (the site's dictators) from deleting my one sentence I want to add? Or possibly get new Admins to take over this article, which has fallen way below Wikipedia standards. And if people's edits are automatically deleted, people won't want to get a user name and contribute in the future.
here's the New York Times piece... http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C07E4D91F3AF931A35757C0A961958260&fta=y
I used to love Wikipedia until I went to add a sentence, you know? Well, thanks. 70.114.38.167 (talk) 07:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)