Wikipedia

User:Alinnisawest/User Page

< User:Alinnisawest

Real User Page

Behold! A real userpage at last! You are standing in the midst of a R341 T41K 94G3!!!11!1!* It has many interesting little facts about the user whose talk page this is. You also see a large number of userboxes here; it would appear this user is a bit of a userbox kleptomaniac. As of this time, she has not sought professional help for this condition.
*"real talk page", for those who don't speak n00b... I mean 1337, of course...

> x userboxes

Well, they're rather scattered throughout the page, although if you prefer to see them all nicely laid out in one place, you could try User:Alinnisawest/Userboxes.

> x facts

Hang on, hang on, we're getting to that!

Some Little-Known Facts About Me

edit
  • I am, in fact, human.
  • I edit Wikipedia regularly and can be considered a Wikipedian.
  • I can read and write English fluently, something I'm sure you could never tell by looking at this page.
  • I am also fluent in sarcasm... something else I'm sure you could never tell by looking at this page...
  • Oh, and I also have a secret page. So secret, in fact, it may not exist. Please remember that both the cake and the cabal are lies. Thank you.

Me

edit

Note: The following is a work in progress. Do not quote any of it, as it is A) probably false and B) likely to change five minutes after you quote it. Thank you, have a pleasant day, and please remember that both the cake and the cabal are lies.

Hmm, what to say about myself...

My Characteristics

edit

I can be very argumentive, particularly about things I'm passionate about (which are few and far between; see My Passions below) and often argue simply for the sake of arguing. As few others enjoy this, I'm trying to cut back. I also either have a hearing problem or a listening problem, as the most common word out of my mouth is "What?" It's not my fault; everyone else just mumbles or has their music turned up too loud. (excuses, excuses) The true reason likely lies more in that I spend the majority of my time daydreaming, daydreams being far more entertaining than the real world. I often say "meh", a direct result of being too much of a Zorbak fan. I am also inexcusably lazy and easily distrac- *wanders off*

*comes back* Excuse me, I thought I saw a bunny. Where was I? Ah yes, my characteristics. If I am passionate about something, I can do it with great vigor, but I'm just too lazy to finish most thi-

On Being Nice

edit

Everyone should be nice. Nice-ness makes the world go 'round. Vandals and sock puppets just complicate matters and makes Wikipedia less credible.

Of course, you can go the other way, too, and stick so strictly by the rules that you forget the Number One Policy of Wikipedia: Ignore all rules. This doesn't mean to devolve into anarchy. What it means is that if a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it. If an edit would make Wikipedia better, even if it's not strictly in line with all our petty little rules, then make it and forget about the dumb rule. See this essay for more on what Ignore All Rules means and why we should follow it.

Yeah, I'm getting a little off-topic. This was supposed to be about being nice, wasn't it... well, I suppose it's about being nice on Wikipedia. Some other stuff I think all editors should keep in mind:

  • Be nice to the noobs. You were one once, too.
  • Do not respond in like kind to trolls. It's their favorite food, and by doing so, you are merely feeding the trolls.
  • Remember that while discussion may be the way we do things on Wikipedia, arguing is not.
  • Remember that while civil debate may be commonplace, personal attacks on others' beliefs should never be.
  • And remember that while consensus may be the best way we have to solve disagreements, majority rule is not always right. Take gravity. For thousands of years, the entire population of Earth thought it didn't exist. Guess what? It does.
  • We are all just strings of letters, characters, and numbers in Wikipedia. But never forget that behind every username is a real, live person in a real, live place. You do not know who they are. You do not know if they are black, white, Native American, Asian, male, female, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, blind, deaf, paralyzed, sick with cancer, discriminated against on a regular basis, an orphan, a mother, a teenager, a detective, a housewife, a scientist, a hobo with a surprisingly good internet connection, and the list goes on for pages. Quite frankly, you don't know who I am, and I don't know who you are. All we know about one another is what we say, which could be lies, and what we do, which can tell you about a person's character, but not the person themselves. So before you make comments about one thing or another, remember that you don't know who's going to read it, and you don't know how it will make them feel. Be nice, be reasonable, and remember that I'm a real person, too.

I guess in conclusion I should say: be nice. Be sensible. If someone is being ridiculous, sure, go ahead and reprimand them. But do it politely and gently. If, on the other hand, after a great deal of effort by you to extend friendship/mentoring/kindness to the jerk they simply attack you or continue on their downward path (I'm getting poetic here), OK, now's the time to slap them with a warning and report them to someone with higher authority. Being nice doesn't mean being weak. It means being fair, and when the fair thing to do is to discipline someone, you are being nice by doing it. Allowing others to continue to hurt people (or Wikipedia, for that matter!) because "Oh, I don't want to hurt them" or "Punishment is EEEVILLL! It only begets EEEVILLL!" is not being nice. It's being stupid and detrimental to the far greater good.

Oh, and the ends rarely justify the means. To think that killing a hundred people to find a new medicine is justified is ridiculous. If the means take human life or cause suffering, then the ends are never worth it.

What I Like

edit

I'm interested in a very strange collection of things. In reading, I enjoy mostly fantasy, particularly Lord of the Rings and Chronicles of Narnia, but I also read some thrillers- primarily those by Ted Dekker. Lately, I read his Circle Trilogy, which I found to be excellent. I also enjoy the Pendragon series by D. J. MacHale. If webcomics count as reading, then I greatly enjoy The Adventures of Dr. McNinja and Darths & Droids, as well as Concerned (which is no longer running, :sadface:)

I watch very few TV shows. A friend of mine got me interested in two of my favorites: Avatar and Doctor Who (more on that below...). Recently, I've also gotten into Firefly and Heroes. In web series, I am a huge fan of both Red vs. Blue and Zero Punctuation.

The same friend that got me hooked on Doctor Who also introduced me to the wonders of manga and anime. I've watched a little anime (mostly Full Metal Panic!), but I'd rather read manga. My current favorite is Deathnote.

In music, my tastes are just as eclectic as my reading and watching likes. I willingly listen to (and enjoy) everything from hymns to rock. I categorically refuse to listen to rap, which I maintain is not real music, and don't really like country, although I will listen to it. If forced. At gunpoint.

I spend a great deal of my time online. On the Internet (which I no longer must browse with dial-up!! Ahh, the wonders of high-speed Internet!), I play some RPGs (with DragonFable and MechQuest being my favorites), edit Wikipedia (duh), and amuse myself by playing silly little games on Facebook. I am also a admin on a fanfiction site for the Inheritance Cycle fandom. Shurtugal Fan Fiction, or SFF, is connected to Shurtugal.Com, which is one of the largest fansites for Eragon. Bypass Shurty and go straight to SFF, though- we're nicer. That was such a shameless plug! For SFF, I write a few fanfictions, and I enjoy writing outside of fanfiction, as well.

My Passions

edit

Although there's quite a few things that could conceivably fit under the above category, only a few truly classify as obsessions- err, passions, I mean. They are:

Lord of the Rings: Yes, I am obsessed. It is such a marvelous book (it's not three books! It's one novel, split into six books, often published in three volumes! Sheesh!) that how could I not love it?! I don't understand people who don't like Tolkien. Is there something wrong with their heads? Sheesh.

Christianity: Not sure if this really classifies as a passion, but... I'm a fundamentalist young-earth Christian, meaning I believe the Bible (all of it), I believe the Earth is not billions of years old but just thousands, and I can defend my position. I will do so below, in fact! See My Beliefs. I'm quite open to a friendly debate over on my talk page, so feel free to pop over there and start it up, if you'd like. I consider myself quite open-minded; the reason I believe in creation is because it makes the most sense with the facts we have. If you can prove otherwise, then I'll be quite happy to take that side! Remember, however, that I'm open to friendly debate... if you aren't going to be civil and can't accept a light-hearted attitude to debate, then I don't want to discuss it with you.

Being Lazy: Yes, I have a passion with being lazy, and I'm very good at it, too.

Text Adventures: These are so much of a passion with my that I can't even list them under "What I Like" because that barely even begins to cover it! It all started with a little game on the official site for the Inheritance Cycle. It was really cool, because it was all in text and you just typed the commands! I wanted to play more, but didn't know what kind of game it was, so I couldn't. Finally, my unwitting cousin showed me this awesome game called Zork. After looking it up here on Wikipedia (which I use for all my encyclopedia needs, of course), I discovered that it was a text adventure! From there, it was only a matter of time until I found the IF Archive and began learning TADS, which I'm now... well, if not exactly fluent, I'm good in.

Computers and the Internet: Definately a passion, which would explain why I'm on 'em 24/7. I'm very interested in majoring in computer science. More specifically, computer programming. Presently, I know BASIC and TADS quite well, but I'm working on some other languages, including HTML, as I'm taking a basic web design class this fall. I would love to work with game design, but I'm not sure if that dream will ever become a reality.

Doctor Who: Amazing, time-and-space-travelling alien with great hair... how could I not love this show? It's also the inspiration for my current signature and tendency to say "EXTERMINATE!"

Firefly: My latest obsession. There are very few things I get instantly hooked on, but I was hooked 30 seconds into the first episode of Firefly! River Tam is awesome.

Wikipedia

edit

For my views on Wikipedia and how we should act while here, see On Being Nice above.

For what it's worth, I began my Wikipedia career as an IP user, way back in the olden days. (read: about four years ago) Eventually, I signed up for an account (the same one I'm using today and the same one you're reading this user page on!), primarily because I kept wanting to fix typos or reply to something on a talk page. You see, my school had wisely been blocked from editing, due to the general idiocy of many of my peers. My early edits were few and far between, but I slowly started to edit more and more.

Finally, in early 2008, I began my obsession with Artix Entertainment games. While reading the articles on them, I discovered quite a few things I could help with, due to my knowledge of the games. (My inner grammar/spelling/punctuation policewoman helped, too!) That's when I got involved in the Artix Entertainment Wikiproject. From there, I've branched out into patrolling recent changes (well, mostly new pages) and later began using both Twinkle and Friendly to help me in that task. I'm also a member of the Welcoming Committee, but I'm afraid I don't accomplish much there.

I'm pretty well addicted to Wikipedia now, as my 'holic test result attests to, as well as my overabundance of userboxes. What can I say? Those little things are quite addicting! I haven't started an article in ages, and firmly believe this essay. It's true; established users do stuff like reverting vandalism or minor cleanup. It's the new or anonymous users that do the big stuff. C'mon everyone, forget about the recent pages or your watchlist for a while, and pick a stub and expand it by a lot. Write a whole new article. If it gets deleted, so be it. But remember that those edits matter a whole lot more than the edit I'm making right now to say this. One big edit is worth more than a dozen small ones. Quite frankly, we need to bring the WikiDragons back. Copyediting isn't worth much when you haven't got articles to copyedit.

My Signature

edit

Yeah, yeah, who cares, but this:
--Alinnisawest,Dalek Empress (extermination requests here)
is my current signature (minus the date stamp). I got tired of plain old "Alinnisawest (talk)", so I mixed it up a bit. Plus, it now references Doctor Who! Awesome! Of course, I'll undoubtedly get tired of it, oh, tomorrow, but for now I like it.

My Views

edit

Disclaimer: The following pieces of writing are entirely my own, and are probably not supported by Wikipedia or many leading scientists, mostly because they refuse to consider the evidence. If you have a problem with personal views on a personal userpage, take it up with me on my talkpage. It's the little tab at the top of your screen labeled "Talk".

On Evolution

edit

I, as an intelligent member of the human race, have deducted by way of logic that evolution is a faulty theory based on wishful thinking and misinterpretations of data. There are many pieces of evidence I could put forth in support of this, but I'll focus on three main points:

The Second Law of Thermodynamics

edit

The second law of thermodynamics states that order tends towards entropy. In laymen's terms, things tend toward chaos. Over time, organisms decay, rocks wear away, and errors build up in DNA. An orderly system will slowly become disorderly.

Strangely, evolutionists believe that out of the chaos of the primitive Earth they believe existed 4.5 billion years ago came the supreme order we see in the world today. Over time, they say, mutations built up in genes, bringing us to to the highly complex organisms we see today, like humans, crocodiles, and penguins.

Mutations are almost always harmful. This has been directly observed by scientists and is in accord with the second law of thermodynamics- indeed, over time, these mutations disrupt the normal order of life. However, evolutionists seem to believe that the very small percentage of non-harmful mutations, over billions of years, somehow created order. This is clearly not possible, if the law of thermodynamics is to be believed. If it is correct, then, we must logically conclude that evolution by means of random mutations is incorrect. As the second law of thermodynamics has been proved to such an extent that it is considered a law of science, we have to believe it over the theory of evolution. (and before someone tries to explain to me the difference between a theory and a hypothesis, yes, I know that a "theory" is a well-supported hypothesis that fits data, blah blah blah. The fact still remains that a theory is not 100% proven, and thus a law of science (which has been 100% proven) outranks it.)

Cell Theory

edit

The cell theory has nine parts, accepted by virtually every scientist. Among other things, they state that cells are the basic unit of structure and function in living organisms and that all cells come from pre-existing cells. Again, the theory of evolution is contrary to this. It tries to say that the original cell did not come from a pre-existing cell. However, all of the evidence points towards the impossibility of having a cell without a pre-existing one, and so we must decide whether to believe cell theory or evolution. If cell theory is incorrect, all of modern biology and medicine is fundamentally wrong. I choose to believe cell theory, as it has never been proven wrong, and has often been proven right.

Microevolution vs. Macroevolution

edit

Before I get into this topic, I should probably define the two words I will be using a lot: microevolution and macroevolution. I will be using "microevolution" to refer to small changes within a genus or species, such as the small genetic changes that changed wolves to the hundreds of dog breeds there are today. I will use "macroevolution" to refer to the large-scale changes that, according to evolution, changed reptiles to birds and so on.

Microevolution is accepted without question by almost every scientist and pseudo-scientist in the world today. It is easily observed in both nature and the laboratory. A wonderful example of this is Darwin's finches. An ancestral species, probably blown in from the mainland in a storm, slowly adapted to the different environments on different islands. Eventually, several species of finches lived there, all with slightly different shaped beaks and slightly different behavior.

This microevolution is often used as evidence for the overall theory of evolution. However, microevolution (small changes within a species) is very different from macroevolution (large-scale changes from one organism to an entirely different organism). Macroevolution has never been observed in nature or the laboratory. It is not observable from the so-called fossil record, due to the embarrassing lack of transitional fossils. In reality, there is no evidence for macroevolution at all, except that we humans want an excuse to deny the existence of God.

In Conclusion

edit

In conclusion, I have to say that after examining the evidence, I cannot believe the theory of evolution. It is directly opposed to the second law of thermodynamics because it states that chaos turned to order. It rejects cell theory because it requires us to believe cells can come into existence without a pre-existing cell. Finally, it is not observable in nature and has no fossil evidence. The only evidence for it is found in microevolution, which really is very different from macroevolution. Thus, I do not believe in Darwin's theory of evolution. It is only a faulty theory based on man's denial of God's existance and willful misinterpretation of laws of science.

edit

A few links to pages needed only by me, pretty much.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Alinnisawest/User_Page&oldid=1143356707"