User talk:DerekE/Archive 1

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Jim Cramer

Great work on Jim Cramer! You seem to really know your stuff and I'm glad to have you on board. Side note: we ask all editors have their names formatted as first name, last initial, or some variant of that. You can have your name changed by posting what it should be changed to on User talk:Aschlafly. JacobB 18:35, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

Wow, it's not just Jim Cramer, it's a number of articles you're doing fantastic work on! JacobB 18:36, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
Conservapedia rocks! I have been slowly sifting through several articles and making appropriate edits to each of them, and I'll continue to do so for many other articles to come. This site is awesome and I'm definitely glad to help out in any way that I can. As for my name change, I'll be sure and get that done ASAP. I've got a few more minor adjustments to make on the Jim Cramer page, but once I'm done there I'll get to changing my own name. Thanks for the help! Tycoon24 18:55, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
Request a change to your real first name if you want to continue editing here, and don't copy from Wikipedia.--Andy Schlafly 18:57, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
I didn't realize you were copying from Wikipedia. Unless you yourself wrote it, that isn't allowed here. JacobB 19:09, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
The funny thing is, the section that I assume was being charged as "copied," it is in fact my work, but most or all of which got reverted or deleted in Wikipedia long ago. I had it saved in a text file and simply updated a few items to assure it's quality. In either case, I just made some more changes to the section that I assume was referred to as the copied section. I'm still working on it though, so I'll go back and check wikipedia to make sure it's not the same. On a similar note, I'm assuming quotes and what-not are not considered as "copied" if the relevant citation is given. I don't think Wikipedia owns the quotes from individuals on their site, it's only a reference tool. Tycoon24 19:46, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

We don't prevent copying from Wikipedia for legal reasons, we do it to prevent the bias that permeates Wikipedia from entering our articles. What username did you use on Wikipedia? JacobB 21:07, 10 October 2009 (EDT)


That makes sense, and I promise that I'm here with good inentions. I'm a bit confused and taken back by my account getting blocked though, especially after I tried to explain that the edits are my own work. You even went as far to revert my changes on the Tax Day Tea Party article? Take a look at wikipedia's article on it. Nothing I added is copying Wikipedia. :-( ...that's what sucks the most about my getting blocked. I guess at this point I have to wonder what constitutes "copying?" Innevitably, some information may discuss very similar facts here as they do on wikipedia, especially when using quotes or sources that are the same, but as long as I'm not copy/pasting anything I can't imagine how my edits are considered to be copying Wikipedia. Besides, wikipedia is bias! I'm being very careful about my edits and have put a lot of time into them. So this is a bit frustrating, to say the least. Sigh. :-( Tycoon24 21:44, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
As you can see from the block log, you were blocked for a total of 1 minute before I undid it.
For the record, your additions to the tea part article, starting under "History - Founding", began "On January 27, radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh criticized the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, commenting, "This 'porkulus' bill...". Compare this to content from Wikipedia, second paragraph in this article, which says, "On January 27, 2009 radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh criticized the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, commenting, "This 'porkulus' bill...".
There's nothing wrong with taking content from Wikipedia so long as you wrote it yourself, and to show this, it would be great if you could post here the screen name you use to edit Wikipedia. JacobB 21:50, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
I did notice that my username was only blocked for 1 minute, but my Internet IP location is still blocked. I'm using my iPhone right now. :-)
My apologies for not mentioning this earlier, my Wikipedia Username is the same: Tycoon24
As for using Wikipedia to help, I've only used my work and previous edits as a helping guide for edits made on Conservapedia. I used to use wikipedia a lot in the past but became way too frustrated with the site and it's clear bias. Tycoon24 22:33, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
Tycoon24, six months ago I would have said "fine", please proceed as you say. But the reality is that we don't want to be like Wikipedia, and now we're way past the point you describe. We use real first or last names here for first-time editors and we don't want material from Wikipedia at this stage, even if you wrote most of it, because if Wikipedia has allowed it to be posted then it probably has a liberal bias to it.
So please ask to change your name to something real and please contribute without bias here. Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 00:28, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
All of your concerns make complete sense, I totally understand the need to keep as much Wikipedia out of this site as possible, especially since most of everything on Wikipedia is bias. I will note, with respect to my edits on this site thus far, the citations and/or information used was for the most part all my work; however, awhile ago when I added it to wikipedia it would always get deleted or reverted for what I assume was due to it's use of factual, unbias tone as well conservative leaning sources. So I saved my work in txt files and ultimately stopped using wikipedia for the previously mentioned reasons. But as an avid reader and conservative, after I noticed the addition of I got all excited about the prospect of being able to edit the site using the sources and previous work that I spent so much time researching in the past. So there's a chance I got a bit carried away here, for that I apologize. I understand this is not my personal website and must obey by it's rules.
So, with that being said, later today when my IP address block expires I will be sure and get my name changed. May I ask what the easiest way to do this is?
As for using previous wikipedia work for future edits here, I'll refrain from that as much as possible from now on. To be honest, since it's been awhile since using the wiki-style platform, it did help a little for me to get back into the groove for how this works by going over what I did when editing wikipedia awhile ago. All I can ask for is a little patience until I get a better feel for how the tone, content, and audience read/write in conservapedia. I'll get the hang of it. :-) Thanks for the advice and I hope to be able to help out more appropriately in the future with you all! Tycoon24 15:48, 11 October 2009 (EDT)

Name Change

Tycoon24, we welcome your contributions and I have may have overstated our position. If you wrote something, then you can post it here, regardless of where else it may be posted. As to a name change, simply post your requested new name (a real first or last name, or first name and last initial), and I'll make the change. Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 16:09, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
Cool! New name request: DerekE Tycoon24 11:18, 12 October 2009 (EDT)
Done as requested!--Andy Schlafly 11:23, 12 October 2009 (EDT)
Awesome! Thank you! DerekE 13:01, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

Welcome banner

I moved it to New Welcome Banner proposal, with the reason posted on the main talk page. I think it's a good idea. Karajou 00:57, 29 October 2009 (EDT)

Perfect! Good move. Thanks for the heads up. DerekE 01:00, 29 October 2009 (EDT)

DerekE saboteur

DerekE suddenly made a massive sabotage of a major article Obama Administration, for which he was blocked immediately. This is far more than vandalism--it took a lot of work, and throws into disgrace all his previous work here. RJJensen 20:50, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Issue resolved. Unless RJJensen has anything to add, I plan on deleting this section soon so that I don't have to keep looking at the "nasty vandalism" on my talk page. :-) DerekE 01:21, 6 November 2009 (EST)
I think we can keep the sabotage comment, which is true. And I thank TK for deleting DerekE's personal attack on me on his home page. DerekE remains on probation with warnings from at least three different administrators in recent days. RJJensen 01:35, 8 November 2009 (EST)
RJJensen, if you take a look at Professor style, I argue that that your judgment could be affected by it. Based strictly on your astoundingly bitter dispute with me and your erratic behavior, described as, "[A] tactic that might have been appropriate for the great Soviet Encyclopedia ... [not] suitable for an America conservative project," evidence of your actions suggest to me that you were acting in accordance with the Mental Ossification Curve. Both Professor style and the Mental Ossification Curve are at issue here. Based on these assertions, which are in no way a personal attack against you but merely my argument, you acted in line with that of individual under the influence of Conservaphobia. Contrary to Conservapedia's Law, you not only discouraged an open-minded search for the truth, but rejected what I offered in my edit as simply "nasty vandalism." And then you took it to the extreme, rather than simply delete my entry, you banned me indefinitely and then proceeded to erase my existence from Conservapedia.
I'm not rejecting your credibility on the site, nor am I personally insulting you with my argument; however, because I'm still unsure of the specifics in my edit that were, as you claim to be, "the nastiest of vandalism" that you've ever seen, I have no reason to believe my arguments are not justified. Maybe you can be more specific about what I added in my edit that is, in your mind, purely "imagination?"
In the meantime, and forever (until moved to archives), I will leave this section here. I believe in the freedom of speech and in ones personal right to defend themselves against slander - which you appear to be doing by attempting to injure my reputation in this community. DerekE 00:42, 9 November 2009 (EST)
Freedom of speech does not equal sabotage, especially on this encyclopedia. You invented and inserted a whole string of falsehoods that if any CP reader saw them and trusted them would make our reader looks like a total idiot. The question remains: how much other sabotage have you inserted that we have not noticed? The notion that deliberate deception of our readers is "an open-minded search for the truth" is a disruptive attack on the concept of a trustworthy encyclopeda. One more outburst and you get permanently banned as disruptive. RJJensen 01:06, 9 November 2009 (EST)
I understand your logic for deleting my entries based on the notion that, if I had vandalized, than I may have quite possibly done the same with my other edits. But without even reading my edits or the articles that you were deleting, you just zapped them from existence. In all reasonableness, you could have just as easily deleted my edit and I would have taken the hint, gone back and thought through what I added with a more critical discourse. But you didn't do that. Regardless, that problem was solved and is in the past, so now I'd really like to know what part of my edit in the Obama administration article (what caused you to ban me) that was wrong? Was it adding more czars to the list? If that's the case, you're wrong. We all know there are more czars than what is currently in the article. So what part of my edit was vandalism--what is it that you referred to as purely "imagination?" DerekE 01:25, 9 November 2009 (EST)
Derek wants examples of what he did wrong. OK, here are some of the edits he added to the Obama Administration article on Nov. 3; he apparentlyu cut and pasted from an anonymous email message with no effort to verify even the most basic facts:
Afghanistan Czar Richard Holbrooke Ultra liberal anti-gun former Gov. of New Mexico. Pro Abortion and legal drug use. false and malicious statements about a real diplomat who was never a governor.
California Water Czar David J. Hayes Sr. Fellow of radical environmentalist group, "Progress Policy." No training or experience in water management. False statement about a prominent expert on water policy; there is no "Progress Policy" group.
Drug Czar: Gil Kerlikowske; devoted lobbyist for every restrictive gun law proposal, Former Chief of Police in Liberal Seattle. Believes no American should own a firearm. Supports legalization of drugs false nonsense. (he actually said, any drug 'legalization' would be "waving the white flag", "legalization is off the the charts when it comes to discussion, from my viewpoint" and that "legalization vocabulary doesn't exist for me and it was made clear that it doesn't exist in President Obama's vocabulary." Specifically about marijuana, he said, "It's a dangerous drug")
Homeland Security Czar John Brennan Anti CIA activist. No training in diplomatic or government affairs. Believes Open Borders to Mexico and a dialog with terrorists and has suggested Obama disband US military. Unbelievable. Let's quote our own CP entry: "He served in the administration of George W. Bush, where Brennan has generally used strong means to ensure the safety of Americans, and was an architect of the interrogation techniques criticized by many liberals." (from John Brennan)
Faith Based Czar Joshua DuBois Political Black activist (Degree in Black Nationalism), seeks a separate black nation. Anti-gun ownership lobbyist. all nonsense. he's the one who brought Obama on Rick Warren's Presidential Forum. The list of DerekE's additions goes on and on. All with no regard to the truth or the damage it will do to CP. That's worse than incompetence, it's sabotage. RJJensen 02:24, 9 November 2009 (EST)

Vernon Davis

I have restored. Thanks for the vote of confidence. RJ is a good man, try avoiding contacting him. You da man! --Jpatt 15:02, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Thanks! I promise to avoid him at all costs. I realize his intentions are in the best interest of Conservapedia, and nothing personal against me. I'll also keep in mind that he is and has much more authority than I do, and he is in fact a very renowned user within Conservapedia. For that I do respect him and his wisdom as a positive, influential member of the community. DerekE 15:52, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Great work on the Czars

Glad to see someone's finally putting some real work into those articles. Those were some of the first articles I added here, and they've been sorely in need of attention! --MarkGall 22:49, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Thanks for the nod of approval! There's so... many... czars... sometimes I felt like the list keeps growing as I edit one after the other. As some of the first articles you added to Conservapedia, I'm glad you appreciate my edits! DerekE 22:56, 10 November 2009 (EST)


As a former game player, I like the tack your taking. Isn't there a tribe that comes out when the game is about to end? Geoff PlourdeComplain! 17:17, 11 November 2009 (EST)

Oh yeah! Forgot to add info about the end game. Thanks for the reminder. When I get another chance, I'll be sure and make the updates. But if you're up for it, feel free to do so if you have time.
As for gamer tactics (I'm assuming ref bonuses); while it's best to keep those links out of the encyclopedia page directly, long ago I ended up writing a blog about the game, at the time I figured an informative article with ref links would be a much more fun, productive way to refer people. And when I was still playing (I no longer play), the article referred hundreds of people. So, since it seems to be helpful I figure why not keep it out there to help spread the love about Travian. At this point, it's strictly working as an indirect medium for Travian to inform potential gamers about the game. I'm sure the makers of the game appreciate it in one way or another. DerekE 19:18, 11 November 2009 (EST)
I haven't played in years, and can't really remember much of the details of the game. Geoff PlourdeComplain! 19:21, 11 November 2009 (EST)
No worries, I'll update it as soon as I get the chance to do so. DerekE 19:23, 11 November 2009 (EST)
I just noticed the link in the 'see also' section that you were likely referring to rather than the citations. Fixed! Almost got past me. DerekE 11:58, 12 November 2009 (EST)
updage: As a minor FYI, I've decided not to add details of the 'end game' to the Travian article because, from what I understand, it is designed to be more of a surprise for gamers as the server ages and it reaches that point in the game. That being said, I won't stop anyone from adding details about it to further the article. And I'm one to change my mind occasionally, so who knows, I may go back and add more to it in the future. DerekE 14:27, 25 November 2009 (EST)

NavBox 4 ClimateGate

Where, exactly, is this? The links on the NavBox are all bogus. Please provide me a link. --ṬK

/Admin/Talk 13:48, 1 December 2009 (EST)

Really? Hmm... They're suppose to be Internal Links pointing to other articles related to Climategate (ie. climate change, global warming, etc.). Can I ask what links you are referring to? My apologies for the foul-up in advance... still learning the how-to's for writing code in Conservapedia. DerekE 13:59, 1 December 2009 (EST)
Never mind, I found it, and am perplexed as to why the links to it, on the NavBox, are bogus...please explain. Go to any page you placed the box on, and click the links on the top border that supposedly go to the template to edit or view it. Also our rules prohibit the placement of templates without approval, and I posted about that on the template's talk page. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:01, 1 December 2009 (EST)
Oh! Now I see what you mean. Can you please unlock the navbox so that I can fix it? I understand (now) that I violated a CP policy by not getting approval first, for that I apologize. But I have found the problem on the Template:Climategate scandal page. To save time, I typically save my work in txt files on my computer, so at times I'll go back and use an already created navbox which was originally developed for another article. However, I accidentally missed some minor changes to the navbox currently in question. I promise it's a simple fix! Unless you want me to delete it. But I do think it will benefit readers, in my humble opinion. DerekE 14:08, 1 December 2009 (EST)

I reparied it. Although how you linked the template to the submission page, is beyond me. At least you know now I am pretty much always watching, just in case anything hits the fan. ;-) Consider the template approved. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:16, 1 December 2009 (EST)

Thank you! It's good to know others are watching; it helps to know that my work (and anyone's for that matter) is reviewed in the case of accidental mistakes. It's best for Conservapedia and helps to uphold the integrity of all articles. So I do appreciate it! Thanks again for helping to fix the template page and getting it squared away (green is a much better color too!). Regarding my linking the template to the submission page, all I can say is that I have an odd way of going about coding (on occasion). I'm learning as I go. :-)
All the best, --DerekE 14:27, 1 December 2009 (EST)


For fixing all that vandalism just now...--DuncanChannel 16 18:09, 13 December 2009 (EST)

You're welcome. DerekE 18:11, 13 December 2009 (EST)