User:DissidentAggressor: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 21:32, 16 October 2022

This is an alternative account of Toddst1.

This is a Wikipedia user page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DissidentAggressor.

About me

I am here to build an encyclopedia.

About the handle

A nod to the heavy metal band Judas Priest whose song Dissident Aggressor was released on Sin After Sin in 1977. The song later won the 2010 Grammy Award for Best Metal Performance after being released again on A Touch of Evil: Live.^[1]

On English usage

Viva the past tense

Please don't use a present participle to describe something that occurred in the past. It is incorrect. You should use the eponymous past tense.

Declarative - just say it

Many editors seem to have difficulty making a declarative statement. If you're tempted to use the word "actually" you're probably looking at it. In 99% of the cases, that word adds no meaning. Please don't use it.

Example

Many editors actually seem to have difficulty actually making a declarative statement. If you're actually tempted to use the word "actually" you're actually probably looking at it. Actually, in 99% of the cases, that word actually adds no meaning. Please don't actually use it.

Others

Other adverbs similarly abused are:

definitely
totally
really
really, really
super

In general, please don't abuse adverbs.

Paid Editors: The greatest threat to this project

Paid editors on Wikipedia are IMHO the biggest threat to Wikipedia. These are professionals who are paid to "spin" Wikipedia articles.

A person accepting financial compensation from a third party is placing himself in the following conundrum:

If they are not willing and able to present the totality of properly encyclopedic material about their client, warts and all, with a truly fair-minded ability to give proper weight to material which may be inimical to their client's interests, or support the inclusion of such material when appropriate, then they should not be editing Wikipedia.
And if they are, their client should fire them.
And in either case, they are acting unethically.

As of the writing of this section, there are 4,600 folks who self-identify as Category:Connected contributors. Not all of them are paid, but the ones who are, IMHO have no place on this project. Unfortunately, current policy hasn't (yet) dealt effectively with this problem.

They're professionals making their living on the backs of the volunteers on this project, manipulating how their clients are perceived on Wikipedia and they're professionals at manipulating wiki-politics and gaming the system.

Please be on the lookout for articles that this these editors have polluted and join me in attempting to keep Wikipedia articles honest.

See also

User page references

^ "Judas Priest Grammy Nomination for Dissident Aggressor". Judaspriest.com. 4 December 2009. Retrieved 7 November 2010.

This user is a member of the Integrity Project

Category:Wikipedia nobodys

[1] "Judas Priest Grammy Nomination for Dissident Aggressor". Judaspriest.com. 4 December 2009. Retrieved 7 November 2010.

[1]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+ {{User alternative account | Toddst1}}
 {{user page|logo=yes|noindex=yes}}
+==About me==
+I am [[Wikipedia:Here to build an encyclopedia|here to build an encyclopedia.]]
-==About the handle==
+===About the handle===
 A nod to the [[heavy metal]] band [[Judas Priest]] whose song ''[[Dissident Aggressor]]'' was released on ''[[Sin After Sin]]'' in 1977.  The song later won the 2010 [[Grammy Award for Best Metal Performance]] after being released again on ''[[A Touch of Evil: Live]]''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://judaspriest.com/news/fullstory.asp?id=1A7722C1-AC84-4388-9BB9-D73085FE0401 |title=Judas Priest Grammy Nomination for Dissident Aggressor |publisher=Judaspriest.com |date=4 December 2009 |accessdate=7 November 2010}}</ref>
 ==On English usage==
 === Viva the past tense ===
-Please don't use the present tense to describe something in the past. It is incorrect.   You should use the eponymous past tense.
+Please don't use a present participle to describe something that occurred in the past. It is incorrect.   You should use the eponymous past tense.
 === Declarative - just say it ===
 Many editors seem to have difficulty making a declarative statement.  If you're tempted to use the word "actually" you're probably looking at it.  In 99% of the cases, that word adds no meaning. Please don't use it.
 ;Example:
 {{quotation|Many editors actually seem to have difficulty actually making a declarative statement.  If you're actually tempted to use the word "actually" you're actually probably looking at it.  Actually, in 99% of the cases, that word actually adds no meaning. Please don't actually use it.}}
+;Others
+Other adverbs similarly abused are:
+*definitely
+*totally
+*really
+*really, really
+*super
+In general, please don't abuse adverbs.
 ==Paid Editors: The greatest threat to this project==
-Paid editors on Wikipedia are IMHO the biggest threat to Wikipedia.  These are professionals who are paid to "spin" Wikipedia articles.  Some will say they're just here to present the facts but their inherent conflict of interest will prevent them from being neutral.  As of the writing of this section, there are 4,600 folks who self-identify as [[:Category:Connected contributors]].  Not all of them are paid, but the ones who are, IMHO have no place on this project.  Unfortunately, current policy hasn't (yet) dealt effectively with this problem.
+Paid editors on Wikipedia are IMHO the biggest threat to Wikipedia.  These are professionals who are paid to "spin" Wikipedia articles.
+A person accepting financial compensation from a third party is placing himself in the following conundrum:
+*If they are not willing and able to present the totality of properly encyclopedic material about their client, warts and all, with a truly fair-minded ability to give proper weight to material which may be inimical to their client's interests, or support the inclusion of such material when appropriate, then they should not be editing Wikipedia.
+*And if they are, their client should fire them.
+*And in ''either'' case, they are acting unethically.
+As of the writing of this section, there are 4,600 folks who self-identify as [[:Category:Connected contributors]].  Not all of them are paid, but the ones who are, IMHO have no place on this project.  Unfortunately, current policy hasn't (yet) dealt effectively with this problem.
 They're professionals making their living on the backs of the volunteers on this project, manipulating how their clients are perceived on Wikipedia and they're professionals at manipulating wiki-politics and [[WP:Game|gaming the system]].
-Please be on the lookout for articles that this these editors have polluted and join me in attempting to keep the honest.
+Please be on the lookout for articles that this these editors have polluted and join me in attempting to keep Wikipedia articles honest.
 ;See also
 *[[Wikipedia:Paid editing (essay)]]
@@ Line 24: / Line 41: @@
 {{reflist}}
 {{User:UBX/INTEGRITY}}
+[[:Category:Wikipedia nobodys]]