User talk:Neververyvery: Difference between revisions

Welcome!

Hello, Neververyvery, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --M1ss1ontomars2k4 19:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Media Defender

You seem pretty adamant on editing/arguing against having certain information on the Media Defender entry. Why the interest in that article only? Just curious... Noah 20:59, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I just happened to read and follow the initial story and one thing that sticks out a mile is that the mails don't confirm the honeypot theory, so I commented. I don't know for a fact whether the site was a honeypot or not (and I honestly don't care, running a honeypot site is amongst the least of these assholes shady practices) but it's obvious to me that the emails don't confirm it's a honeypot. Don't you think it's important that the most used encyclopedia on the internet doesn't perpetuate a myth that's not supported by the (current) evidence? If people can just come along and write stuff on Wikipedia and claim it's a fact when there's no evidence it is a fact (and there's also evidence that it's not a fact) and you don't challenge them on it then a) they won't learn how to think critically and b) it'll just become a crap encyclopedia Neververyvery 21:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

But you have to admit, it does look kind of suspicious that the only topic you are up in arms about is this one. But if there's one thing I've learned in life... is that things blow over. They always do. Next week, there will be a new hot story on Digg/Slashdot/NYT, and people will forget all about Media Defender and MiiVi. Cheers. Noah 17:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it looks particularly suspicious (what exactly is the suspicion, you didn't say) but even if it is, so what? Neververyvery 03:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Have you read this article yet? Your thoughts? [1] Noah 14:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)