User talk:Kyk

From Wikipedia:Sandbox:

Testing cool new name, coined from observing current practice by contributors Jesus Blows Goats 06:04, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Please review our no inflammatory usernames policy. Names created for the purpose of offending a large portion of the community are not acceptable. -- Tim Starling 07:11, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)

I don't understand; I saw this cool name Jesus_Saves!, and decided that sounds fun, to have names with Jesus and actions, so I picked one I liked... Jesus Blows Goats 07:15, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

If you have something against User:Jesus Saves! then by all means say something. After all, we forced User:Jesus is Lord! to change his/her name, and most of the arguments applied in favour of that action could also be applied for "Jesus Saves!". -- Tim Starling 07:28, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)

No, I think this is cool, using crazy names. Why censor names? I suspect that (censorship of names) is a messy slippery slope which quickly loses any NPOV.

But I guess more to the point would be, what may I use instead? May I use "Jesus_loves_goats"? May I use "Jesus_saves_goats"? I'm not at all clear what the lines are--in fact, I hadn't realized there were lines, but I read that article you pointed to, and it says inflammatory names are disallowed, so I just need to know which ones are inflammatory.

Well, a list of precedent cases is at Wikipedia:Changing username. "Jesus is Lord!" was judged to be inappropriate. It's pretty likely, as you're hinting, that names which make fun of peoples' religions are more offensive than names which affirm peoples' religions. However, the precedent suggests that even an affirming name is unacceptable. -- Tim Starling 07:44, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)

I fear that there is no answer, and I am shooting in the dark; eg, I might try "Jesus_is_not_my_friend" as a lot more sanitized/goodspeak, or "Jesus_is_tricky_business", or "Jesus_is_not_my_savior", or "Jesus_is_controversial", or even "Minority_that_dislikes_Jesus", or "Afraid_of_christians", but how do I know when it is sufficiently sanitized/reasonable/inoffensive/goodspeak/whatever? Shall I just experiment?

You're quite right, there's no fine line between acceptable and unacceptable. Experimenting is pretty much impossible, because the way we usually determine what is acceptable is by lengthy debate followed by a vote. You just have to use your discretion. May I suggest using your real name? -- Tim Starling 08:05, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)

Certainly you may suggest it, but I may not follow this suggestion :) I have just requested on the name change page a change to something the probably very inoffensive "pagan". Hopefully that will work out, or something similar.

No problem, it's done. You should be able to log in with the same password. -- Tim Starling 11:21, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)

Of course I'll soon get bored and be gone, in trollish fashion, although I have not actually striven for trollity.

Fair enough. Nice talking to you. -- Tim Starling 08:05, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)

---

Instead of this, why not actually work on the articles you find incorrect? Several good suggestions appear to have been made in Votes for deletion as to how articles by "Jesus_Saves!" could be merged, edited, or deleted. - Puffy jacket

Honestly, too much exposure to christian myth makes me physically ill, and trying to sort through all that christian myth to decide what could be kept would probably be unwise of myself. Plus, I'm really a newbie, and probably not suited to working in such potentially controversial waters.

• • • Fair enough. Best of luck to you. - Puffy jacket 08:08, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

Your name has been changed to kyk, as requested. -- Tim Starling 13:28, Jan 1, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for the help, again. Now is there an easy way to change all the occurrences of my name in previous comments, or do I ignore them, or ought I change them all manually? Kyk 06:44, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

You can find them using [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/User:Jesus_Blows_Goats) and [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/User:Pagan) and change them manually, if you wish. -- Tim Starling 03:22, Jan 11, 2004 (UTC)

---

Re Missouri: thanks! I was quite interested at some of the people I found... Salsa Shark 05:57, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

---

I don't know a whole lot about negative feedback; I attempted to address the issue you noted; but, you can probably do it better than I. Lirath Q. Pynnor

Words that are nouns or adjectives when the accent is on the first syllable and verbs when on the second is obviously not merely a list. Accordingly, I have altered the title, deleting "list of". One should hope that the page will evolve so that most of the space is not taken up by the list, but will be scholarly scientific and historical discussion of the phenomenon. Michael Hardy 21:47, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Its not merely a list? It looks like a list to me (whether or not its title contains the actual word "list"), just as "List of counties in Wisconsin" looks like a list to me; however, the latter contains something famous, or at least noteworthy, so it is an obvious exception. So, clearly I don't understand the intent of the "wikipedia is not a list repository", insomuch as apparently I don't understand what "just a list" means. If you find time to clarify further, that would be great. Kyk 21:51, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Rabbit-Proof Fence

January the 3rd of this year you asked about The Rabbit-Proof Fence. (on the Australia talk page)
The article we have in Wikipedia is about the movie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit-Proof_Fence_(movie).
Yes, there was one in real life.
You might be interested in reading more about Aboriginal Australia and the Stolen Generation, which the girls in the movie are contemparenous with.
Thank you,
EuropracBHIT 05:16, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)