User:Copysan

Wikipedia:Userboxes
This user repairs links to disambiguation pages.
This user subscribes to The Signpost.
This user is a member of Wikipedians against censorship.
This user is interested in politics.

Yo. (That's my normal greeting to most people, but I'm no rapper.)

I really need to improve this thing, but, real work calls.

Apparently, I am a "Wikignome". Scroll down to the part where he quotes "revert removal of recall mention, its pretty notable, also removing POV language like "successful", LOTS of fact tags., this still reads like an ad." Why.... that's my edit summary!

I don't really write a ton of articles. I mainly go around and do RC patrol (not often since I'm slower than most of the other RCers out there, with my dialup and all). I also do redirecting disambig links. Most of the time, though, I hit Random Article until I find something that needs fixing or categorizing.

To-Do List

• Wikipedia:Proposed deletion One of the best things I have ever seen to hit Wikipedia.
• WP:SUBST
• WP:MOS
  • WP:MOSDATE one of the most violated suggestions of the MoS
• Citations
  • WP:FN <ref> tags
  • WP:CITET citations
  • Fair use image example [1]
• Convert template: Template:Convert {{convert|2599|m|0|abbr=on|lk=on}}

== Summary ==
{{Information TV series screenshot
|Series=
|Episode= (name)
|EpNumber= (prod num)
|Time=
|Description=
|Source=[[User:Copysan]]
|Copyright_date=
|Screenshot_date={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTDAY2}}, {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}
|Author=
}}

== Licensing ==
{{Non-free television screenshot}}

=== Fair use for {{PAGENAME}} ===
This image, {{PAGENAME}}, is being linked here; though the picture is subject to copyright I (~~~~) feel it is covered by the U.S. fair use laws because:
# it is a low resolution still of a television program;
# it does not limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the television program in any way;
# copies could not be used to make illegal copies of the television program;
# the photo is only being used for informational purposes.
# Its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because it shows the subject of this article

from Template_talk:Information_TV_series_screenshot

• WP:Copyvio one of my favorite jobs!
• Wikipedia:WARN

==Warnings==
{{subst:s/wnote}}

==={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}===
# {{subst:uw-test1}} ~~~~

• User:Copysan/Pink Taco

• Mrs. Xu's Page. Hope ya find it funny in years to come Xu 老师!

What Wikipedia policy said Jimbo was policy maker for Wikipedia? I say that anything he proposes or suggests or thinks through his emails should be disregarded or made into a proposed policy for the community to comment on. However, since he is part of the Foundation, he can always create his own policy page and decree it to be so. This does address Wikitruth's little tiff about the "God King" Wales. It also makes his depotism much more blatant. I dislike people citing his emails as actual policy. His "we shoulds" (paraphrase) or whatever are ambiguous at best. Policy and critera for deletion or other such decrees need to be concrete, so arguments can be much easily solved. As it stands now, Jimbo's words are like the Bible -- open to interpretation. Either that, or we need a policy that says "Jimbo is always right".

Personally, I think people should calm down about deleting some of the more controversial ones. Frankly, some of them are funny (I liked the "Bush's Edits to the Constitution needed to be reverted" one). While I don't think WP should be just about being funny, I think it needs to retain a tad of the "funness" factor that surrounds the Internet. It is the same whimsy that Google has tapped into with its cartoony renditions of Google's logo on special days and it's do no evil policy and it's corporate office filled with exercise balls, friday hockey, free food, Page and Brin's emphasis on fun, etc. And look how successful Google is. That is what I think WP needs. That Internet whimsy is what sets us apart from those Ivory Tower publications like Britannica.

I support the move of userboxes to User space since they directly relate to users. Maybe we should create a new space for them, called the "User Template space?"

As for the disputed userboxes that don't show up down there, I'll delete them and rearrange when the situation dies down and everything is calm once again. Then I can be assured that the ones I like will be able to stay, if they are allowed to stay.

If you click on "Random article" long enough, you eventually realize the prevalence of the word "notable" or some other variant of it in articles. (According to Google, there are 10,100,000 pages in en.wikipedia.org that contain "notable".) It seems that with the advent of WP:N as an AFD criteria, editors like to justify their subjects notability in subtly overt ways. Just take a look at Wally (Dilbert character), where the editor wrote, "He also has a notable lack of hygiene." What does "notable lack of hygiene" mean? If he has bad hygiene, just say it. In the WP world, "notable" has become a buzz word. It does have some uses, but often, it is meaningless.

Yay?

I like to keep track of who hates me. Fun eh?

• Pastebin
• Study Guides
  • Slashdoc
  • MonkeyNotes
  • BookRags
  • Booknotes
  • SparkNotes
  • Homework Online
  • TranslateLatin