User talk:Heimstern/Problem

comments so far

Interesting beginning. Looks like it could be a nice complement to wp:civ. I've been involved in a couple of contentious articles (or rather, a couple of groups of them), so I know what you're talking about... --victor falk 16:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reading and commenting! Heimstern Läufer (talk) 07:26, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with Victor. This has real potential for something like Wikipedia:Community (which is currently a redirect to Wikipedia:Wikipedians). Not only could it include CIV, but also WIKILOVE and a few others. Heimstern, I think you are on to something here, and I encourage you to pursue it. —Viriditas | Talk 11:16, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't really know where to pursue it except to write it here. Unfortunately, my writing it here does not solve the problem. Heck, I struggle with the problem myself! I continue to think about it, though. I don't think this would be much of a policy, it's more just an essay on my thoughts. How to make those thoughts a reality... there's the rub. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: Thank you, too, reading and commenting!

Comment by me

Has any situation on Wikipedia ever come up to which these ideas are more applicable than to this one? Heimstern Läufer (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

RE:The real problem with Wikipedia

I was just surfing around Wiki and reading up articles which came across your page. I have to say, you are dead on with the statement. It’s all about people’s egos. I believe most of the people read the articles to gain knowledge or just to “beef up” for “trivial pursuits.” But when you are interested in a topic, you tend to want to know more about it. Everyone’s experience with one topic is different and therefore, resulting different POVs on issues. It’s human nature that we all have different POVs and that’s why we have different backgrounds, habits, cultures, languages and even religions. However, as you pointed out, people’s ego now gets in the way. Some people believe that their vision is the correct and ideal format so that others should view this issue the same way, resulting POV Pushing. The world is not black & white, the world is grey and I hope Wikipeida can stay this way – neutral, to allow both sides to see the issue, explain their statements and let the others to take in. Thank you for the good read. TheAsianGURU (talk) 19:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

And thank you for reading and commenting. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 01:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Heimstern -- Jerome K linked this a moment ago, and I wanted to mention that this is a superb little writeup. Spot on. Indeed, if someone is sufficiently obnoxious and insulting, an editor is more likely to hold on to ideas that are wrong -- even after he realizes they are wrong -- just to defend the ego from hurt. I've done it myself. I don't know if you've ever seen this page which I began writing about five years ago; see number 35 where I tried to get at some of the same thing. I think you nailed it though. Antandrus (talk) 23:28, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

See also

I wouldn't edit a userspace essay, but I as near as dammit did. I wanted to create a "See also" section and put in a link to our article on a very enjoyable and deeply uncomfortable book I'm just reading, Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me). So this is a request. :-) Bishonen | talk 00:37, 27 November 2011 (UTC).