Search the Kids Internet
Encyclopedia > User:Alex Kennedy
Article Content
User:Alex Kennedy
Graduate Student in Cryobiology at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
well, Alex, to be honest I have more than enough to do with the NON-esoteric history of the West, but I'll see.
Hey Alex, see you ran into BF in New Age. Don't take it personally. She seems to think she *owns* the article, and it has only been by persistent corrections from a half dozen others that the article avoided becoming a complete screed. --Dmerrill
Just dropped by with a welcome message. I'm sure you'll find that some peopleare a little touchy about certain articles. ;-) Don't let it scare you off; any article is fair game if you think you have something to contribute. --Stephen Gilbert
Thanks, both of you, for your advice and welcome. Actually, I find in life that most people are very kind and reasonable if you give them the chance, and I've found this particularly so of the people here at wikipedia.
You're almost correct DMerrill. I "think" I own the article because I wrote it! Larry Sanger showed me that all articles belong to wikipedia. When you realize the difference between original content, meaning writing, and copyediting or removing non NPOV material, you may come to the very astute realization that removing content is not writing at all! Rephrasing, spelling errors,and grammar correction is wonderful and those who do this consistently have their role here, but never assume they contribute new content. So why do I think the article is mine ? Because I am the only person who wrote it. This whole revision process on New_Age compares to the current New Testament of today versus the original content, which included the later banned Gnostic Gospels. Original unedited content refined into a watered down version including outright mistruths to bolter the developing Roman Catholic Church's stranglehold on salvation. Thanks. And Alex, hope you don't mind me taking up your homepage space. The freemasonry part done by Michael was included because he appears to have a general macro-view on New Age rather than my micro-view, under assault here, obviously. any help is welcome, since no-one has created anything new for my article that Larry is lucky to own despite blatant persecution of a work in progress. When you see you're the only one writing the lines, and sadly watch smug little champions of "proper content philosophy" erase your work, at best you develop an apathy. I am building a house, alone. Larry owns the land. All the rest burn the site to the ground or destroy any walls before I can( all by myself ) move my tools and scaffolds around slowly painfully, and work twice as hard restoring what the vandals ruined. ~BF
And thus have writers ever cursed their editors, since time immemorial....--Paul Drye
A contemporary, peer, and admirer of user:Bryan Derksen.
I have contributed in what I believe to be a significant way to:
well, Alex, to be honest I have more than enough to do with the NON-esoteric history of the West, but I'll see.
Hey Alex, see you ran into BF in New Age. Don't take it personally. She seems to think she *owns* the article, and it has only been by persistent corrections from a half dozen others that the article avoided becoming a complete screed. --Dmerrill
Just dropped by with a welcome message. I'm sure you'll find that some peopleare a little touchy about certain articles. ;-) Don't let it scare you off; any article is fair game if you think you have something to contribute. --Stephen Gilbert
Thanks, both of you, for your advice and welcome. Actually, I find in life that most people are very kind and reasonable if you give them the chance, and I've found this particularly so of the people here at wikipedia.
You're almost correct DMerrill. I "think" I own the article because I wrote it! Larry Sanger showed me that all articles belong to wikipedia. When you realize the difference between original content, meaning writing, and copyediting or removing non NPOV material, you may come to the very astute realization that removing content is not writing at all! Rephrasing, spelling errors,and grammar correction is wonderful and those who do this consistently have their role here, but never assume they contribute new content. So why do I think the article is mine ? Because I am the only person who wrote it. This whole revision process on New_Age compares to the current New Testament of today versus the original content, which included the later banned Gnostic Gospels. Original unedited content refined into a watered down version including outright mistruths to bolter the developing Roman Catholic Church's stranglehold on salvation. Thanks. And Alex, hope you don't mind me taking up your homepage space. The freemasonry part done by Michael was included because he appears to have a general macro-view on New Age rather than my micro-view, under assault here, obviously. any help is welcome, since no-one has created anything new for my article that Larry is lucky to own despite blatant persecution of a work in progress. When you see you're the only one writing the lines, and sadly watch smug little champions of "proper content philosophy" erase your work, at best you develop an apathy. I am building a house, alone. Larry owns the land. All the rest burn the site to the ground or destroy any walls before I can( all by myself ) move my tools and scaffolds around slowly painfully, and work twice as hard restoring what the vandals ruined. ~BF
And thus have writers ever cursed their editors, since time immemorial....--Paul Drye
All Wikipedia text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License
|
Search Encyclopedia
|
Featured Article
|