User:Paradoctor

{{User:Paradoctor/custom DISPLAYTITLE}}

{{DISPLAYTITLE:User:paradoctor|noerror}}

In many of the more relaxed civilizations, the Wikipedia has already supplanted the great Encyclopedia Britannica as the standard repository of all knowledge and wisdom, for though it has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least wildly inaccurate, it scores over the older, more pedestrian work in two important respects. First, it is free; and secondly, it has the words Come as You Are inscribed in large friendly letters on its cover. — with apologies to the D. A.

{{Userboxtop|1=}}

{{Labutnum III Userbox}}

{{BabelBoxCommons|en_card}}

{{User Fifteen Year Society|alticon=true|year=2007|month=4|day=20}}

{{User:RadicalOne/UBX Design/Clarke}}

{{Userboxbottom}}

{{Babel|de|en-4}}

{{YesAutosign}}

Welcome to the Land of Confusion

{{quote|1=A Paradox May Be Paradoctored.|4= the 4th By-Law of Time from Robert Anson Heinlein, "—All You Zombies—", 1958}}

The Literature

Fashioning articles is the goal. But this tends to overlook the fundamental value added by an encyclopedia through its encyclopedic research (ER (is) not OR). Collecting bibliographic information, and reviewing the quality of the sources establishes the factual basis from which articles derive their utility. The use or non-use of statements in the article is determined by the result of encyclopedic research. Consensus (other than that on WP:V) is secondary to that. NPOV is determined from the literature, anything else is madness. Notability is an arbitrary cutoff for pragmatical reasons. Many, if not most notability discussions are moot when viewed from WP:V.

What is the first step in writing an article about X? Finding the literature on X. This means that every article needs a comprehensive commented bibliography. The rest of the article should follow mechanically.

Random wikiquotes

= Yeah, why free for workers? =

{{quotation|

Why free for workers?

I don't accept the Wikimedia/Wikipedia project as the educator's starvation. It has to be discussed, before anything. The knowledge free for everyone, ok. But must the price be no-pay teachers, professors, writers, educators, experts? Yesterday was the Worker day, and the Wikimedia gift for workers in EDUCATION should be payment. If not, the rising "knowledge society" or "information society" will promote a "Wealth of Educations", but also the "misery for educators".

The Wikifoundation has million and million dollars for too several things, but for users? Users support the Wikimedia, it's deeply reasonable to pay who MAKES the Wikifoundation projects, like Wikipedia.

This subject is also about License, that means also Copyrights. PAY AUTHORS NOW!!!|2=[http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Camillo_Cavalcanti&action=edit&redlink=1 Camillo Cavalcanti] 23:29, 2 May 2009 (UTC)|3=found [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Licensing_update/Questions_and_Answers/Oppositional_arguments&oldid=1476591#Why_free_for_workers.3F on Meta]}}

= ''The World and Wikipedia'' by Andrew Dalby =

{{quotation|With encyclopedic modesty Pliny has named his sources; but; with the insouciance of a second-rate Wikipedian, he provides no inline citations.|Andrew Dalby, The World and Wikipedia, chapter 2 "Where it came from", page 20}}

== Wikilulz ==

image:Thomas Hobbes (portrait).jpg

{{Commons cat|Education}}

  • (found on :Category:Education) isn't that a teensy bit tautological?{{clear}}
  • We had a virgin, now the other half speaks: {{cite book|isbn=1580083501|author=Sean Joseph O'Reilly.|authorlink=|year=2001|publisher=Auriga Pub. Group|location=Maryland|url=http://www.dickmanagement.com/|title=How to Manage Your DICK: Redirect Sexual Energy and Discover Your More Spiritually Enlightened, Evolved Self}} (spotted this while researching a claimed RS)
  • Fell nearly out of my chair when I noticed this link on the page on hotel toilet-paper folding.
  • leakage, indeed :-))
  • can't argue with that
  • Goya and Wikipedia: finally someone has courage to tell the real story.
  • Gargamel's musings
  • "The forces throng in this one."
  • Templates that I sorely miss
  • Adler's laws
  • Nothing to laugh about. Seriously, they will come for you if you do.
  • Spotted at Wikisource. Unremarkable? Sure, as long as you don't speak both English and German. It might be interpreted as "making love to a consanguine relative". ^_^
  • Always, always [http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Scriptorium&curid=16060&diff=1732249&oldid=1732197 put spaces after your commas]!
  • [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philosophy_of_space_and_time&curid=655002&diff=336636709&oldid=334958055 Ssymmety is important]
  • No [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Contents&oldid=338305051 uncited material], please!
  • [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AWiktionary%2Flogo%2Frefresh%2Fvoting&action=historysubmit&diff=1817224&oldid=1816591 Britannica vindicated] (refers to alleged copyvios of Macmillan Dictionary for Children and Scrabble)
  • I think this explains everything about Microsoft.
  • Overdue [http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:WikiProject_Popular_Science_Monthly/Archaic_spellings&curid=558462&diff=1801743&oldid=1801738 spelling reform], or just a case of clairvoyance?
  • So [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ontological_paradox&curid=766395&diff=347383079&oldid=345964403 that]'s how they financed the pyramids!
  • I understand [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grandfather_paradox&curid=45990&diff=349468519&oldid=349402360 his enthusiasm].
  • Everyone was a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sanity&oldid=34201311 newbie] once (first messages). ^_^
  • [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28miscellaneous%29&curid=1015853&diff=349880929&oldid=349767476 But it's notable!]
  • The mad translator has [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Paradoctor&diff=prev&oldid=351473220 struck again!]. Though I'm not sure why. ^_^ International cooperation, I love it.
  • Wikipedia is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brian_Scalabrine&action=historysubmit&diff=355132116&oldid=333075410 making progress]. (noticed via [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVillage_pump_%28miscellaneous%29&action=historysubmit&diff=355405572&oldid=355380125 this edit])
  • An [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics&curid=183089&diff=357031230&oldid=356800659 inquiring mind]
  • [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Twin_paradox&curid=31602&diff=358811550&oldid=358811518 DVDm is taking his own advice ;)]
  • I think [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_paradoxes&curid=3575201&diff=365588232&oldid=365527497 that] explains it.
  • Some Mathematicians enjoy dirty jokes so much that they write an entire paper just to make [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cox%E2%80%93Zucker_machine&diff=381840617&oldid=344235834 a horrible pun]. ^_^
  • [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilet_paper_orientation Over!]
  • [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_illusion&curid=53497&diff=574094176&oldid=572646572 that's] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_illusion&curid=53497&diff=574094196&oldid=574094176 right]
  • [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paradox&diff=prev&oldid=319481602 understandable complaint]
  • [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ross%E2%80%93Littlewood_paradox&curid=7823769&diff=591217997&oldid=585201986 Par(adox) for the course.]
  • [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=591979849&oldid=591979371 The long version] of TL;DR.
  • Edit summary: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_banned_films&curid=200884&diff=620805839&oldid=620666685 true story].
  • Didn't see [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_time_travel_science_fiction&curid=9767324&diff=621555812&oldid=620773844 that one] coming. :D
  • That is how you add verifiable content.

Another fine mess

{{quote|In arguments opposed to this, a primary one was of "code reuse". Our longstanding principle of not using templates for article content stands in stark contrast to this. We, as a wiki, have chosen to sacrifice the benefits of consistency and elimination of redundancy in exchange for ease of editing and the idea that hitting "edit" on an article actually allows you to edit the article, not just the meta-structure of the article. This is also somewhat a failing of our current editor UI, which doesn't have IDE type functionality that would be required if our articles were written more like computer source code.|source=Template talk:Cite doi/Archive 1#RfC: Should Template:cite doi cease creating a separate subpage for each DOI?}}

Dinosaur droppings

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABresenham%27s_line_algorithm&diff=prev&oldid=4836242 The oldest edit] I have reverted, so far. Timestamped 2002-07-25, almost 23 years ago.

Director's dashboard