Markhenick

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Markhenick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Triplestop x3 15:24, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Committing to not using commit

I think rational argument is not going to win out as there seems to be a flood of (religious?) philosophically inspired opinion being voiced with little regard to the references given or Wikipedia policy. Keep up the good work anyway. Djapa Owen (talk) 14:10, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

The RFC at Talk:Suicide has been closed

It is important that you know that continuing to escalate the matter up the various paths for it is an action not to be taken lightly. Wikipedia is not a democracy, it is ruled by consensus. Its rules are created by and changed by consensus. Those rules are, broadly, geared towards the creation of an encyclopaedia, not towards deciding on the shape of a table for summit talks between cold war powers.

You may disagree with or agree with the closure. It is not important that you do either. What is important is that you honour the consensus formed.

You have every right to escalate the matter. To do this you need to be or to become aware of the processes and procedures that allow you to do so. If you are unsure, use either {{Helpme}} of {{Adminhelpme}} depending upon the help you perceive that you need. Be aware, though that things do not always go as one wishes at the higher forums. If one is perceived as being engaged in (say) forum shopping, something I am sure you would not ever do, one may receive short shrift.

So my message to you is to proceed with wisdom, with clarity, and with rather less rhetoric than you have used in the discussion. It may be that you have a perceived urgent or important need to act now. It may be that you choose to wait and see what will take place. Please do either of these well. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 21:27, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

You speak, elsewhere, of their consensus as though this is an abstract concept that you are not part of, owned by others. It is not. Consensus is formed by the participation of those who discus the topic. In this case it was discussed at length and a consensus, one in which you took part, emerged, and was formalised. You may not agree with the outcome, but you are inescapably bound to the consensus that was formed. The people who insist upon consensus being adhered to do not bully, they implement policies and processes created here by consensus. Those who find consensus runs against them can often be vocal in upholding that consensus, and that is not a paradox.

If you want to win hearts and minds please take the approach of seeking to win them and accepting when that does not succeed. But do not, please, accuse unnamed people of bullying (you?) to enforce their consensus. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I bet the next time you read or hear the term "commit suicide," this discussion will come to mind. Markhenick (talk) 14:08, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah yes, the comparison between the pointlessness of the act of suicide and the pointlessness of the continued, dragged out, prolonged discussion when a consensus has been reached. Actually, no. I very much doubt it will. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Bias revealed. Markhenick (talk) 14:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I do have a bias, yes. My bias is to accept the consensus here having sought to influence it. I also have a bias in favour of easily intelligible articles. So yes, I have revealed a bias, one I am happy to advertise. I suppose your comment was intended to score a swift point of some sort of cleverness, but I think you will determine, on careful reflection, that it has failed. Or you may not determine that, and may continue to believe what you wish. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:35, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Relax, bro. Markhenick (talk) 14:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Suicide terminology, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Jamesx12345 (talk) 17:23, 29 May 2013 (UTC)