Topic on User talk:NormAtredies

Supposition and flat-out falsehoods have no place on All The Tropes.

Opinions have a place, but that place is the YMMV subpage, not the main article.

I am willing to accept that you made an honest mistake when you posted this content. However, I have to warn you that repeatedly making the same honest mistake is frowned upon here, to the point of it being grounds for a temporary block of editing rights.

I do not care what your religions beliefs, if any, might be. I do care whether you're sufficiently mature to be able to leave your beliefs at the door when editing here. All The Tropes exists to discuss stories, not faiths.

@NormAtredies @Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

My mistake, it was not my intention to do push any agenda. I merely sought to elaborate a bit on how atheists get stereotyped in fiction. I will be more careful in the future.

Likewise, your edit to "Acceptable Religious Targets" has been rolled back. If you want to remove the word "arguably", you'd better have evidence to back up your claim.

I removed the word "arguably" because when it comes to the list for each religion on that page, the list for Christianity is much longer than the lists for other beliefs. Still, I'll concede the point because you are right and I think there's many examples missing for all beliefs from that page, which could be added to the lists for each belief.

@Robkelk: We may want to also review his changes to Belief Makes You Stupid‎, which has been expanded to such a degree that it may count as unilaterally redefining the trope.

It wasn't my intention to re-define the trope LooneyToons. I'll re-examine and roll it back a bit.

That was unnecessary. I didn't revert your changes when I last edited the page because I thought there were good points and expansions -- there was just a lot of them. I brought it up out of simple caution, as the last time someone swept in and dumped a huge amount of text into the main text of a trope (actually several tropes, and it was just a few weeks ago), they were engaged in rewriting the trope(s) to fit their personal sensibilities, and I just wanted a second opinion about your changes from another mod.

I've finally had a chance to look. The edits appear good to me, although I'll add a short phrase saying that they aren't all required to be present for the trope to apply.

Norm, I gotta be honest, and I say this as a devout Christian who is nonetheless a moderator here, and honesty is something both positions force me to value highly, so consider this said with my mod hat on.

Whatever your biases, they have no place here. I have no more right to turn what should be a place for objective fact (save YMMV pages, where opinion can be expressed according to appropriate restraints) into a shrine for my religious views than an atheist is welcome to bash religion here.

Frankly, and I'm not going to spare your feelings, you have some strong opinions, and consciously or unconsciously, you appear to be pursuing some pointed agendas on certain topics. Off this site, you are more than welcome to feel whatever you like, but here, your opinion is of EQUAL value to all others, whether you like it or not. As for fact, it is NOT be given any bias towards anything other than fact alone.

You are treading on thin ice that has already severely cracked. If you keep going, I will personally hand you your walking papers, for whatever period we at ATT deem fit, because it is starting to become rather clear certain topics will be the start of pointed attempts to allow a minority view to trump objective fact and where YMMV is in play, communal consensus, and we are not a battleground, nor will we become one.

That issue on the Hollywood Atheist page was a misunderstanding, and apart from our shared religious beliefs, you misunderstand me. From Robkelk's comment prior to yours, that was resolved months ago, why bring that up now? Also, why post this THEN hand me a six month ban for a first strike?

Just because we're both Christian doesn't mean we don't wrong each other and doesn't mean we don't make mistakes; we all have our sin and only God is all-knowing. I didn't turn to you because you're a fellow Christian - I didn't know your beliefs until now - I turned to you because, in my opinion, you seemed and still seem to be the least biased and most level-headed among the moderators that I've interacted with in my time on this site.

Well, now that you've laid that on the table, first, let me thank you for being so forthright.

That said, here's a case in point why you got your knuckles rapped, let's use your edits from the Acceptable Religious Targets page as an example:

https://allthetropes.org/w/index.php?title=Acceptable_Religious_Targets&type=revision&diff=1869542&oldid=1768707

On the whole, the edits do add some new content, but a lot of it pro-Christian editorializing and apologist in nature. The page is supposed to be objective fact, but it was obvious you just had to insert a pro-Christian bias into a page that is supposed to be written in a neutral tone.

Other pages with similar content, like the one the above comment addresses you took umbrage to (and this very page as well),. have you pulling similar stunts. Just because we at ATT were a bit late realize your subtle whitewash campaign doesn't mean you don't deserve a callout for editing propaganda where we expect objective fact.

I leave my religious beliefs at the door of this site and I edit all items on this site without letting my religious convictions color my bias because this is not a pro-Christian apologism wiki, this is a wiki about all types of media, the tropes they use, and how they are used, and we represent them as they are, not how our personal opinions depict them as, and if said tropes or media do not reflect well on the Christian faith, then we represent that faithfully without trying to whitewash the facts.

To do otherwise is deceitful, and that is both against our shared religious beliefs and the policy all who edit this wiki are expected to abide by.

I admit I did do some editorializing and added loaded language, I also contend that the points I presented about those works are facts, not whitewashing. Whitewashing is covering things up, where and how was I doing that?

For example, on the edit history you linked, where I elaborated on Stephen King's book "Carrie"; "(in fact, Margaret's backstory involved her trying to join other Christian Fundamentalist groups but being rejected due to being too extreme, even for them). The story also shows that Margaret's beliefs and behavior actually have more to do with her abusive husband than any particular denomination's teachings." this is in the novel itself. Or when I added those points relating to the TV show Bones about their jab at creationists (look up the episode "The Archaeologist in the Cocoon"); while I editorialized, that's exactly what happens in the episode.

However, since I checked the definition of propaganda and realized propaganda can contain objective facts, I see where this all came from and take the "L".

How can I convince the mods I've learned to be objective in edits when I can't edit anything for six months?

It's terrible that you've just suddenly learned to behave right at the very moment you've been punished for behaving wrong. What a horrible, terrible coincidence, that.

You'll just have to wait six months and then demonstrate your epiphany.

While I was reconsidering my conduct before then, the punishment made me also take a look at my track record - which helped me understand your position and the situation better - and openly confess where I went wrong.