User talk:Equinox

Hello, Equinox, and welcome to the Simple English Wiktionary!

We hope you will be happy editing here. Some helpful pages to begin with are Wiktionary:Community Portal, Wiktionary:Useful, Help:Contents, Wiktionary:Rules, Wiktionary:How to change a page, and Help:Creating a new entry.

If you want to talk with other members or ask a question, you can visit Wiktionary:Simple talk. Administrators can also help you with more difficult problems. You can also ask me for help. The best way to do that is to leave a message on my talk page. Just remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing "~~~~" (four tildes) at the end of your words.

Good luck and happy editing! Griffinofwales (talk) 22:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Criminal

I know I had a tendency in the past to start aimless arguing, and I'm not doing that now, and I'm not going to revert you, but I'm just going to make a quick point. Words can have different meanings depending on the context. It is possible for the courts to mistakenly convict an innocent man of a crime, and in the sense of being convicted, I think he could be called a "convicted criminal" even though he's completely innocent in reality. Again, I defer to your judgement and will not revert you or debate you further on this, I'm just explaining that there can be a difference between who is guilty in fact and who is convicted in court, just like on the flip side guilty people are sometimes acquitted.PaulBustion87 (talk) 05:18, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I think you're trying to say that "convicted" is an alienans? e.g. a "so-called genius" is not a genius. Equinox (talk) 13:34, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Not really. I looked the word up, it looks like that is just when people mistakenly call someone a thing he is not, like Peter Myers the Australian right-wing/anti-Jewish journalist thinks Einstein and Freud have inflated reputations and he would regard the word genius in their case as an alienans. Here's an example, if a man was a convicted robber, and he applied for a job and the job application asked, "have you ever been convicted of a crime", if he chose to answer which in the USA he would not be required to, but if he chose to answer, he would need to give the correct answer that he had been convicted even if he was in fact innocent of the crime, whereas if a man murdered another person but was never caught thus never prosecuted/convicted and was asked the same question, he could legally say no and even if he was later caught and prosecuted/convicted since his answer at the time was truthful he could not get in trouble for that answer. I'm not saying it's right that a guilty person can be convicted of a crime, but it does happen sometimes. Calling an innocent convicted person a criminal has a valid sense for the word, so I would not call it an alienans. PaulBustion87 (talk) 14:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I reread the definition just now, yes it is an alienans in that sense. "Convicted criminal" the convicted adjective would be intended as an alienans to cast doubt on the validity of the conviction. I suppose you're right. Sorry, I just woke up.PaulBustion87 (talk) 14:19, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

My editing

I think my editing is better here than it was on English Wiktionary. My main problem on English Wiktionary was creating to much talk page debate, and not enough article content. Here, 89.6% of my contributions have been article content. I have not debated, and I have deferred to consensus. I've adopted the consensus I should have adopted on English Wiktionary in the Mormonism article, the pedophilia article, the rape article, etc.

I wrote the sample sentence here,[1],"A person who commits the crime of rape can be either male or female", to show I've moderated my position in the rape article, I accept a female can be a rapist, although I still say its less likely than a male being one. In the pedophilia entry, I accept the colloquial use is the proper one for a dictionary and not the medical use,[2], although I would still say the medical one is proper for an encyclopedia, you were right that it did not belong in the dictionary.I defined Mormonism as Christian from the beginning here,[3], because it is Christian in the broadest sense of the word. I also reduced the amount of definitions Jesus of Nazareth has from two to one,[4], in contrast to English Wiktionary where I played games and tried to give Jesus of Nazareth different definitions for the Mormon and Christian versions. So I think my editing here has improved.PaulBustion87 (talk) 14:29, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm calling on you because I've noticed that you've recently changed visibility of some revisions in en.wiktionary and I'd like to report a few more revisions by blocked vandals that should be hidden: [5] [6] [7] (some others of the the socks' vandalisms have already been hidden: [8]); they also used improperly some of their user talk pages some of the which have already been partially deleted but there's still a pair: [9] [10]. I hope my report was useful, thank you in advance if you'll decide to take care of these vandalisms. 185.15.208.26 (talk) 21:01, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hiding edits isn't generally necessary unless it's doxxing or possibly linkspam. "Silly" edits can remain in the edit history: it's better for transparency. Equinox (talk) 02:42, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok 185.15.208.26 (talk) 12:59, 10 March 2019 (UTC)