Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:45, 8 April 2007

Archives
Archive to end 1st August 2005 17th August 2005 11 September 2005 02:53 (UTC) 26 September 2005 22 October 2005 19 November 2005 5 December 2005 3 January 2006 20 January 2006 5 February 2006 4 March 2006 23 March 2006 3 April 2006 29 May 2006 1 August 2006 18 September 2006 16 November 2006

How did you do it

A blank talk page.... seriously, how..... it looks so nice -- Tawker 00:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

:) Not been editing much lately, so everything was old and I could just bundle it all away at once. Oh, and I like keeping the histories with the archives, so being able to do a full-blown 'move' is more-or-less a pre-requisite for me archiving. Splash - tk 00:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Category:German-American mobsters

Splash,

I hope I'm not distubing you, however Category:German-American mobsters has recently been nominated for deletion. I'm not sure if you remember, however it was originally deleted on December 30th for too few entries and was eventualy undeleted when the problem was resolved. As you've edited the category in the past regarding this issue, I was wondering if you might have some insight on the matter ? MadMax 07:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Input needed on Template:Sprotected

We have yet another brouhaha going on at Template:Sprotected. We once again have users who want to make the sprotected template so unobtrusive that it doesn't even states what sprotected means or why a page has been sprotected. Anyway. Input would be appreciated. --Woohookitty 11:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Scottish national identity

I've opened a Request for Comment on Scottish national identity. As an editor with previous involvement in this article, you may wish to add a statement or comment. Best wishes, --YFB ¿ 18:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

List of songs that have been considered among the greatest ever

I've nominated it for deletion again. As a previous participant in the debate I thought you'd be interested. Duggy 1138 08:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Page protection

Somewhat crossposted from Template talk:Spam4im

There are a long list of templates that are protected forever now, lots of them "just in case."

• Neither Protection policy nor Semi-protection policy say this is acceptable.
• The High-risk templates guideline clearly doesn't apply to templates that should always use {{subst:}}. (Although the indef protection list clashes almost 100% with this.)

If you're feeling brave you could clean all this up in one hit...
152.91.9.144 05:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Image

Your trademark image has been updated, by the way. - 152.91.9.144 05:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:UobArms.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:UobArms.gif. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Misplaced Pages because of copyright law (see Misplaced Pages's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Misplaced Pages are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Durin 18:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Change to Common.css

Per recent discussions, the way in which Persondata is viewed by Misplaced Pages editors has changed. In order to continue viewing Persondata in Misplaced Pages articles, please edit your user CSS file to display table.persondata rather than table.metadata. More specific instructions can be found on the Persondata page. --ShakingSpirit on behalf of Kaldari 01:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Request for my own comments on deleted user talk page

Hey Splash, long time no hear--so long I can't remember how I know you, but I have a general good feeling about you, long after the reasons why I know you have faded. (Funny how our mind works that way, huh?)

RE: Category:Misplaced Pages administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles

Can you provide my last comments to User:XP when I called members of encyclopediadamatica lepers? You can email me the comments if you wish. Thanks in advance. Best wishes, Travb (talk) 21:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Just checking in

You haven't edited in a while, just thought I'd pop in and say hi and hope everything was okay. Take it easy, Steve block Talk 20:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Couple of AfDs that might interest you

Hi Splash. A persistent vandal who often uses IPs as sockpuppets decided on a new strategy and set up a couple of articles that really need to go. If you have a moment, I was wondering if you could look at Aga Khani and Islamic cults and comment on their AfD pages. Much appreciated -- Aylahs 04:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Have a cow

I never saw a Purple Cow;

I never hope to See One;

But I can Tell you, Anyhow,

I'd rather See than Be One

Gelett Burgess. Don't be a stranger. Steve block Talk 00:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Steve, good to hear from you. I've lately not had time to give to Misplaced Pages, between finishing my PhD (you can call me Dr. Splash) and working. That, and I'm not sure I was mollifying the inevitable conflicts properly, and the direction from the Foundation was/is becoming too control-freakish. In compensation, work is taking me into an area on which Misplaced Pages has an almost total absence of articles. In time, I may opt to overlook the "old articles bad, new articles worse" edicts from the Foundation, and write them. You know, making this one edit feels odd after a relatively long time away. It's odder because I've made a few typo-corrections while I've been using Misplaced Pages to learn about the lead-in to the new stuff for work and I've done those logged out, and it's strangely uncomfortable being logged in again. Anyway. Good work you've been doing on Superman (don't forget to unprotect it!). Hope the Wikimeet was fun! -Splash - tk 17:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Nice. It's good to see your name scroll by my watchlist again. Titoxd 19:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Doctor Splash, congratulations! Glad life is treating you well, and I'm sorry for dragging you back. The Wikimeet was interesting, let's say that. Yes, Superman is going okay, apart from the draconian FA rules. Apparently all cites have to be formatted the same and you can fail if you have too many blue years, whatever that means. But I'm griping, and you're well out of it. Look after yourself. Steve block Talk 00:12, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

For Hijiri zaka

Tsuki no Misaki will become an article with enormous quantity. Therefore, I seek readers each of contents to refer to the end of the link. Could you please understand it.Tokyo Watcher 22:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

EffK and the ArbCom

Hi, Splash. Out of courtesy, I just want to let you know of this. There is a clear difference of opinion about whether or not someone may post on his talk page when banned, but most administrators seem to feel they may. At the time that EffK was banned, Sam Korn, who was then on the Committeee, said that if he continued to post that stuff on his talk page, his talk page could be protected. He never even hinted that the block should be extended. Even if there is a policy forbidding banned editors to post on their talk pages, an editor should not be penalized because an administrator gave him wrong information. EffK certainly believed he was allowed to post there. He knew that a consequence of continuing to post his "Str1977-is-a-Vatican-agent" theories could be that his page would be protected again; he did not know that his ban could be reset.

If he is allowed back, there are two possibilities:

1. He behaves himself, and stops posting his strange theories. (That's most unlikely, but I'm sure we agree that it would be an ideal solution.)
2. He continues the behaviour that got him blocked in the first place, and gets blocked again. That, I think, would be a better solution than the current extension of the ban, because it would not be unjust. He didn't know he was violating anything in his talk page posts. There are, however, remedies in place to prevent him from disrupting pages when he returns. He is aware of those remedies (indeed, I'd remind him again), and would therefore have nothing to complain about if he violated a ruling and got blocked.

I admit his talk page posts are not pleasant, but I've seen worse behaviour from people who didn't get blocked. He doens't engage in foul language or threats. And I am quite sure he did not create any sockpuppets during his ban. Musical Linguist 12:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

request for help explaining the difference between a redirect and a deletion

Good evening, Splash. I am having a terrible time explaining to a user that turning a page into a redirect is not the same as a deletion, that redirects to not require AFD decisions and that AFD decisions do not preclude the possibility of turning a page into a redirect in the future. I'm casting this request out to a couple of experienced admins to see if someone can explain it better than I have been doing. I can't seem to get the point across clearly. Could I impose on you to consider commenting at Talk:Bee's knees? Thanks. Rossami (talk) 01:55, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Rossami. I've been away, and so have rather missed the boat on your request, I fear. Still, things look pretty quiet over there now, so I guess I'll let sleeping dogs lie. Though I will probably have nightmares about that tag it's got on it. I'm pretty sure it is self-contradictory on that particular article! Anyway, hope you're well. Splash - tk 14:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

Glad you're back. While you were gone we basically lost the semi-protection fight. Hundreds of pages are now semi-protected semi-permanently and semi-invisibly. Haukur 15:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Now that is unfortunate. I see, though, that we now have expiring (semi-)protection, which should at least lower the future rate of forgotten protections. Also encouragingly, we have a log somewhere that tells us what's protected at the moment. I wonder to myself whether my writing the original sprotection policy has been a net good or a net harm, though.

I wonder if we might look at some sort of rational, apolitical, but firm method for scrutinising the surviving protections as a matter of course rather than coincidence. I wonder what scope, and support, there is for some sort of WikiProject Protection to seek some body of people who'll offer to look at a few every day when they can, and maybe set 24 hour expiries on those they think should be released or something. Or perhaps that would just result in 24 hour trials-by-fire. Splash - tk 17:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Quite true, the expiring feature is a positive step. I hope we can foster a culture where (semi)-protections with indefinite expiration are the exception and not the rule. And changing an indefinite protection to a time-limited one is a nice soft way of getting rid of protection with less risk of offending the admin who applied it. I hadn't thought of that. Haukur 21:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Irony

Hello Doctor :),

The day after I finally surrender, and mournfully add your name to WP:MW, you return! :) If I had known cosmic forces would so operate, I would have added you months ago! :) Admiringly, Xoloz 15:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Sorry about that, coincidence it is indeed. For double irony, I opted to edit today having recently lost my home internet connection for some not yet determined period! Glad to see you're around. Splash - tk 17:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh. Glad to see a familiar face around. You've missed quite a bit... Titoxd 04:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Very well spoken

Your User_talk:Durin entry that referenced 28 Days Later (faster way to let you know which one I meant than finding the diff.. grin) was very profound and well spoken. It ought to be incorporated into one of the many essays on what it means to be an admin if you ask me... Thanks for sharing. ++Lar: t/c 16:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Lar, I'm glad you liked it. I think an alternative reaction is to view at as a little anti-egalitarian (can't non-admins do nearly all that stuff too?), but I think that, to admins, it probably has at least a grain of truth in it. If you think it useful as a thought, then you are probably better placed to find a home for it; I'm likely rather behind on my reading! Splash - tk 17:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

For now: till I find a better home, so it's not lost. ++Lar: t/c 01:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Your question

I have replied to your question on my RFA. Cheers, – Chacor 13:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Linkimage

Template:Linkimage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Watchlist stuff

Sorry for the delay, I've been a bit busy in RL. I don't know about that page in your watchlist; as far as I know, PovWatch is not enabled or anything like that. It could be the server barfing as well, as there have been a few issues with data corruption lately. As for page creations; yes, they are now available to users on their watchlists. You can go delete some pages at CAT:CSD, and when you click on the delete tab, you'll see there's a "watch this page" link under the delete reason. That's relatively new. Titoxd 03:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Multiple-input multiple-output communications

Hi there. Could you maybe take a look at this article and fix it up? It appears to have been rewritten completely and then vandalized. I know next to nothing about the subject and can't figure out which version is better, or which parts from the versions should be merged together to fix this article. Note that the external link appears to have been lost in the whole process. Thanks! Lupo 12:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh wow. Looks like I will finally have to do something about this... thanks for pointing it out. Splash - tk 16:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion Review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Suicide_City. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tornfalk 04:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

St. mary school massillon ohio

You removed the speedy delete tag saying that db-group doesn't apply to schools- well, db-school has gone; can we not speedy delete schools any more? I am pretty certain it does apply. In any case, your reason for a prod, "ultra-sparse info" is far, far worse than my tagging- being a stub is NOT a criteria for deletion. J Milburn 22:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I suspect there is basically no more information than is already in the article. If you disagree with the deletion under PROD, then you can remove the tag. Speedy deletion does not apply to schools, as the deletion of the tag you mention makes clear. It's basically impossible to delete a school article that is even half-way to being on the road towards locating viability. For more information, there's useful discussion at Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 December 9#Template:Db-school, where the closure statement is particularly informative. Splash - tk 22:21, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

And please don't replace the tag again. Splash - tk 22:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I have consulted with other editors (User:Snowolf and User:ScorpO) and they both agree with me that a school could fall under a7. Think about it- it is a group, and this group does not assert notability. I find it rather ironic that you are nitpicking with my choice of tags, when you insist that your prod reason is grounds for deletion. I am not going to retag as a speedy, but I request that you stick to decent reasoning for the prod, as is on it now. J Milburn 22:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that both are wrong. Schools have been added and removed from the criterion at least once, and their specialised template deleted. Many things are explicitly listed in the criterion; schools are not among them. I don't care what reasoning the prod tag uses. Splash - tk 22:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

The Wiire

I am the one that tagged the article for CSD. I was more doing on the basis of web notability and I put it in during the middle of the edit war (bad timing I guess). From what I can gather, this edit war largely began because the parties all have some interest in the article topic, thewiire.com, and disagree on the representations presented in the article. In general, I think it doesn't qualify for web-notability at all and there seems to be a general feeling of just wanting to delete the article altogether amongst the warring parties, see the recent messages on the talk page. Just my two cents on the subject. Thanks for stepping in though, it was getting messy. Good luck with dealing with it. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 22:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

As I said in , I broadly agree with you. Splash - tk 22:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Shumil

It's not the correct use of the {{db-histmerge}} tag, but basically the article was deleted as an uncontested prod, and recreated. Basically, I'm asking for the old history to be restored, and I can't really find another appropriate tag for that. --Sigma 7 22:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the update; history undeletion done. Splash - tk 22:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Unforgivable Trilogy

As far as I know the last delete was a speedy, so it's probably good to do the AfD this time around like you said. I just tend to do {{db-repost}} instead of AfDs on the second creations of deleted articles...possibly because I think the AfD nomination is lengthy and annoying:-P. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 23:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Aluminij

A tag has been placed on Aluminij, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jdchamp31 17:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Misplaced Pages, you will be blocked from editing.