Deminizer

9/11 stuff

I hope you don't mind me addressing you out of the blue like this. I just want to share some advice with you which I hope you will find useful:

Normally in wikipedia new editors try a few edits, get some things wrong, get helped out by other editors and have a pleasant learning experience. Unfortunately, when it comes to "conspiracy theory" related articles, this is not the case. Basically, if you don't know what you are walking into, you will get creamed. The way to protect yourself is to make sure you learn wikipedia policies and guidelines forwards and backwards. The best policies to learn first are the ones that are being used to beat you round the head at that particular moment. Surprisingly often you will find that the policy in question says nothing resembling what it is being made out to mean, and it may even say something that works directly to your advantage. Another couple of policies/guidelines you will find thrown at you over and over again will be WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF. These mean that you need to be circumspect, but they do not mean that you have to accept every indignity that comes your way without saying anything. The important thing is to keep your head. That way you won't be provoked into saying something that can be used as a pretext to get you banned, which would be a bummer.

I offer this advice as a fellow sufferer. Please remember that you can always choose to edit more enjoyable areas of wikipedia for a while if you feel at risk of burning out. Pace yourself. Don't forget that there are other editors such as me going through the same kind of stuff, that you are not alone. ireneshusband (talk) 13:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

request your input in a consensus survey re 9/11

Dear Deminizer,

At Talk:9/11#defining consensus I started a survey to get a better picture on how editor's opinions are varying with respect to the following statement:

"The current form of the 9/11 article is at odds with the WP:NPOV policy, and the proposed inclusion of the fact that Michael Meacher alleges the US government of willfully not preventing the attacks, would make the article better, in stead of worse.

I would appreciate it when you could take a look.  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 17:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)