Difference between revisions of "User:Ed Poor"

Revision as of 19:17, March 29, 2007

Archives: 01

Hi, my name is Ed Poor and I'm a former developer, admin & bureaucrat from Wikipedia.

I know quite a bit about the internal workings of Wikipedia: the database structure, formatting, templates, dispute procedures, content and style guidelines; and, oh, yes, all the politics and gossip of the first few years.

Wikipedia

I was one of the earliest members of the Wikipedia project (UserID #188). I helped institute the following practices or software features there:

Marking edits as 'patrolled' (co-conceived with Maveric who in one marathon period personally checked every Wikipedia edit for vandalism!)
Ability of blocked users to edit their own user talk page
Community ban - i.e., increased authority for sysops to block a disruptive user
The practice of bureaucrats "running" for office (I was the first one elected, when as a developer I could simply have granted myself the rights)

Pages I'm proud of there:

Wikipedia:Avoid personal remarks

Dpbsmith asked me to come over, so here I am. I'm finding the environment much more congenial.

My chief aim here is to facilitate the highest standards of encyclopedia development.

Favorite contributors

This is a partial list. Don't get all bent out of shape because I haven't placed your name here (yet). :-) And it's not in any particular order.

TK (talk • contribs • count) - straight to the point
MountainDew (talk • contribs • count) - refreshing, like a can of soda!
RSchlafly (talk • contribs • count) - forthright
Aschlafly (talk • contribs • count) - erudite
Dpbsmith (talk • contribs • count) - out of sight!
Hojimachong (talk • contribs • count) - all right!
Sid 3050 (talk • contribs • count) - a big help
Jaques (talk • contribs • count) - a lot of interesting stuff

Troublemakers

Bob2 (talk • contribs • count) - 2 large unexplained deletions, right after signing up
Huey gunna getcha (talk • contribs • count)
ilikebigbibles (talk • contribs • count) - was on "Conservapedia:probation" - an experiment which did not work

A new role

To my surprise and pleasure, I was voted in as a sysop here - reportedly it was unanimous. Thank you for your support.

I believe that users who are here to contribute should get a helping hand, and those who cannot or will not make useful contributions should be shown to the door. But since, "His mercy is forever sure", I don't like applying infinite bans; it's always possible for a person to make up his mind to take a new direction.

I've unprotected a handful of pages and am watching them. I have hopes that eventually all content pages can be freely edited, once they reach a mature and stable state.

Welcome

Welcome, I'm Dan. I see that you have made many great article improvements in your week here. MountainDew 17:45, 26 March 2007 (EDT)

Thanks, Dan. I try. And I've learned a lot from watching you. --Ed Poor 18:50, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

PF Fox

Why would the use of a single standard NOT help in the writing of an article? Do you consider double standards desirable? --PF Fox 14:32, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 Why would the use of a single standard NOT help in the writing of an article? Do you consider double standards desirable?
 --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 14:32, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
-==Alphabet==
-Excuse me, what was wrong with beginning stubs on the letters in the alphabet? And why did you block me for it? Not very fair in my opinion. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 14:58, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
-Mr. Schlafly has asked for more substantive articles. We need better articles on history, literature, science, economics, religion, etc. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 14:58, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
-::That seems very short-sighted. Is this supposed to be comprehensive or not? [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 15:00, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
-blocked "Flippin (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 minute (too many new articles)
-*That was to get your attention. In your case, please go for substantive over comprehensive. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 15:11, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
-We don't need to be so comprehensive as to state the obvious. I think anybody who's on this site knows that A is the first letter of the alphabet. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 15:14, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
-::Substantive over comprehensive? In my case? With all due respect, who put you in charge of this project? I thought this was supposed to be a like-minded community of interested individuals who wanted to make something great--even greater than Wikipedia. You have dissuaded me of that perception. And, dare I say, in ''your'' case, I would rather you didn't try to intimidate new users, such as myself, in order to get the wiki you want---not the wiki they can create. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 15:16, 29 March 2007 (EDT)