User talk:Scramblecase

Hello, Scramblecase! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. We're so glad you're here! If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills, the sandbox is for you. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply] Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

writing style

My real style in WP is to use simple words in very short posts. Alas, the way the WP system operates in on listing "diffs" and a short comment on each when dealing with noticeboards. This is sort of a social problem here, to be sure. For encyclopedia articles, my view is that we should use no more than a sixth grade vocabulary level as recommended im various places. When called upon, I can be as sesquipedalian as anyone. Magazine articles can use the nomenclature common to the field involved - "perce en scie" is not something one finds in everyday use, as an example. In any case, senior admins, such as Lar, know who I am, and I assure you that they are unlikely to think we are one! By my calculations, I have now written several million words online, and read four billion words or more online. Collect (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, Collect - as I said, no offense meant. When I'm writing casually or quickly, I don't get quite so, as my niece and nephew would say, "high-falutin'" either. Perhaps Lar could weigh in on the WQA to clear this up once and for all, as Ratel's continued accusations - and, naturally, avoidance of any actual topics - is growing tiresome. Scramblecase (talk) 03:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I mean this kindly

But I'll be straight. Wikipedia didn't fail you. Other editors didn't fail you. The establishment didn't circle the wagons to protect the idiot son gone amok on the slutty SPAs who don't matter. The laments on your user page and elsewhere about the unfairness/wrongness/stupidness of Wikipedia policy or etiquette do not make you noble or somehow above it all. Your qualifications and professional life don't matter. Your past edits don't matter. Your intents don't matter. What does matter is that everyone can edit Wikipedia. Get what that really means, and you will get Wikipedia. Your choice, though; it's not for everyone. Flowanda | Talk 03:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]