Content deleted Content added
→Reply to your long-winded and unwelcome rant cluttering my talkpage: unacceptable, name calling, disrespectful, critical about a productive edit and comment i left on his precious talk page; wow! |
|||
Line 17:
'''My recent observations:''' I sit down to go online with a big smile and no ill motive, go to article X and make a good edit with a source and feel good about my progress. Then someone comes along and rejects it. I try again - not wanted. So I'm "shuffled" to the next article, not smiling as much but still hopeful. I look back briefly wondering why my good intentions weren't appreciated but maintain a positive attitude and move ahead, shoulders back and chin up. So I go to article Y. I see something that could be expanded, improved and corrected/sourced, etc. Therefore, in good faith, I make my edit. Not so I can get recognition or my way, just so the article speaks truth and neutrality and balance. After I submit it, I think, that's great! Now, what's next? But wait, before I move on, my edit is rejected again. Someone prefers it not be there. Not really cus of a "rule" but cus of there prejudice and preference. I "fight" it, for the principle, but I'm not wanted. I'm pushed away again. So I shuffle on to Article Z. By this time my shoulders are curved, neck drooped, and head hanging low. I started out with such positive input, yet it's being challenged so much. No consistancy, no true reasons, just because. So my work "suffers" on the last edit. I'm like, what's the use? But still, I make a small dent in it, just a small mention of something that's not hurting anyone and can be left, yet it's rejected again. I'm confused. Why are the same types of edits all over other articles, but this one wasn't accepted? Oh, it's sourced. It's fact. But still, I'm told "no room for your kind, go away!" Hmm, I now see why editors become vandals. Doesn't seem right. Doesn't seem fair. I think many editors with or without a created account feel this very same way. And I now see why people become "homeless" (online or offline). If you're not one of them, you're nothing. Even if you have great things to offer, if it's "different", get lost! Sad but true. Not just via this IP, but many others in the past. Even created accounts. Something I know that the creator of this website did not want to happen, but does. If they ever need an Undercover Boss, they need it here. So is human nature. Egos conflict, personalities stubborn and control monopolized. Makes me think back to a man that spoke up for what's right, but He didn't fit into the present social scene, so He was put to death. Sad. Everyone dies a little inside when their hard work and good efforts are rejected, even though they know it's ok. Even though the editor who denied it knows it's ok too, but he likes to be in charge and has no concern for the feelings of others. Not like the edits are vandalism. Little do those editors know, they may have their work undone and blocked, that they're being watched on here and the person of the edit they removed could undo their work and block them to "prove a point"? Never know. We should just always be consistant. I gave them opportunities to make it right, to no avail. God forgive us all, and certainly, Wiki have mercy on those that did wrong. P.S. There is a level of sabatoge, supression and conspiracy... the "good 'ol boy / band wagon" routine. And they get angry at the truth. [[Special:Contributions/63.131.4.149|63.131.4.149]] ([[User talk:63.131.4.149#top|talk]]) 12:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
==A discussion about you==
| |||