Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:18, 12 April 2005

Suggestion box

Improvement

• Galashiels Academy
• Kent School
• Haberdashers' Aske's School for Girls
• Hamden Middle School

could use some TLC. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:13, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Stephen Tyng Mather High School Dpbsmith (talk) 13:24, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Role models

Is Dr. Michael M. Krop High School an example of a good article? Subject line says all. Dpbsmith (talk) 20:59, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Requested move

• GRider, if this is to be a wikiproject you must allow other people to give their opinions on it. You cannot use it to unilaterally push your opinion. Therefore, this does belong in main namespace. Radiant_* 08:19, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • Respectfully, I must reject your entire argument on the grounds that it is illogical and has no merit. Schoolwatch was constructed for the sole purpose of improving school-related articles. There is no opinion-pushing. In fact, the page itself is rather spartan; there is a question, a referenced answer, and a one-line disclaimer, followed by a list of school articles which need improvement or expansion. Nothing more, nothing less. --GRider\ 18:06, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• This is supposed to be a public project so it should not reside on a private user's page - particularly if the user is controversial, and the project is generally accepted. Radiant_* 11:27, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • Of course, GRider may still keep a copy of this page in his user space, but note that, by ArbCom ruling, GRider is currently prohibited from editing deletion-related pages. This page could be construed as deletion-related since one of its aims is to prevent deletion of school pages. So if this page is to be widely used and updated, it is best kept in Mainspace. Radiant_* 12:19, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

Radiant! — Let me try to understand this. So you believe that this page on GRider's own namespace deletion related. Therefore, by your definition, he cannot edit something in his namespace nor try to defend keeping it. Doesn't sound very fair to me. I also find it ironic that you're trying to drum up support this move by leaving messages to people on their user talk pages (User_talk:Rdsmith4#Schoolwatch here, for example). There's nothing wrong with this, in my opinion, but it was GRider's attempt to do the very same this about school-related articles that caused him to start this page when he was repremanded for it by the school-deletionists.

Cheers.--BaronLarf 13:55, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

• I'm not drumming up support. I only spoke to RDSmith about it.
  1. Do you contest that this page is deletion-related? And if so, why?
  2. Do you contest that GRider is currently prohibited from editing deletion-related pages (by ArbCom)? And if so, why?
  3. Do you believe that I am the cause of either of those? And if so, why?
  4. And if not, how am I unfair here? Cheers, Radiant_* 15:02, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

Is the moving of an article deletion-related? I don't believe so, but I haven't reviewed all Misplaced Pages protocol on the issue. I don't contest GRider's current prohibition on editing deletion-related pages, and I really am not familiar with the case either, so I'm not defending him there.

I'm just trying to say that it seems kind of crummy to have a debate about whether or not to move something out of a user's namespace and prohibit him from participating. Seems like the kind of thing that would just drive a dedicated user to become a Misplaced Pages alumni. --BaronLarf 15:15, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

• I'm not forbidding him from participating. I would welcome his opinion, or discussion on his or my talk page. My point is that it seems that he may not currently work on schoolwatch, so it shouldn't be in his user page. But of course he can join in this talk discussion. Radiant_* 15:22, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

• Support the requested move. --Angr/_(comhrá) 11:32, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, pages should not be moved out of user space against their will. Does "requested moves" even have authority to do so? Kappa 11:40, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, it does have the authortiy to do so. Radiant_* 12:19, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • I'd say that requested moves has the authority to move any page that has community support for the move. If we all wanted to move the Main Page to List of schools that GRider has voted to keep then it should be moved (although this is extremely unlikely and there may be technical restrictions on moving the main page, but you get the point). Thryduulf 11:49, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Support, if this is to be anything other than POV pushing it needs to be in a public namspace. Thryduulf 11:49, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose plus, I believe there are no grounds to allow anyone to move this out of GRider's name space. Even if the ayes have it in this case, I don't think it should be allowed. --BaronLarf 12:04, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • Of course, GRider may still keep a copy of this page in his userspace, but we should create a publical and neutral page in main space. ]Radiant_* 12:19, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. If someone else wants to save the schools, there is nothing stopping them from creating their own Schoolwatch-like spinoff. But to unilaterally move a page first, and then have a discussion about it later in order to prevent someone from freely expressing their own opinion within their own userspace after recently failing to have the same page deleted less than a week ago comes off as a bad faith attempt at page hijacking, IMHO. —RaD Man (talk) 14:35, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, I'm afraid it does come over as bad faith. However, let me assure you that it isn't. Please do not polarize. The way I see it, there are two possible approaches to the school issue: we can keep doing what we do now (which is getting into shouting matches and mass copy/pasted votes in VfD) OR we can do something constructive, like improving the relevant articles, and providing neutral ground for discussion. All I'm asking is that this page be neutral, as it claims to be a wikiproject. I do value GRider's opinion, and I would like his input on this matter, but this page can never be neutral as long as he unilaterally decides what's on here.
  • Please note that on the main schoolwatch page, I asked that it be used for improving school articles, rather than for copy/paste voting. Don't you agree that that is best for all? Radiant_* 15:02, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
• Put me down for a strong "Who cares?" The page serves the same functions whatever namespace it is in. I would much rather have good articles about non-notable schools than bad articles about non-notable schools. I continue to be skeptical that there are really enough people willing to do the Misplaced Pages-quality work on them but if GRider can organize such a cadre, more power to him. And on the other hand, if we are not willing to assume good faith, well, organized bloc voting is not new—see m:AIW for examplea—and probably can't be affected much by "parliamentary" maneuvering such as flipping pages into different namespaces. Dpbsmith (talk) 15:05, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: Radiant -- at what point has GRider crossed the line in his namesspace? Because he mentions specific articles? What makes his page necessary to move, while your have your own page devoted to your opinion on school articles in your namesspace (User talk:Radiant!/Schools)] which you have only invited selected people to edit (example)? Thanks much. --BaronLarf 12:32, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
  • The problem is that if it is in GRider's userspace, then ultimately it is his decision what goes on there, which makes it a good vehicle for POV-pushing. If someone from the opposing viewpoint wants to make a comment then GRider can erase it - after all, it's in his userspace. But then it's patently obvious that this page is being used to manipulate policy and by-pass the normal process of VfD. Thus, it should not be somewhere where someone can claim to have justification in pushing their own opinion on it. Support a move out of userspace. Chris 23:24, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Decision

Template:Notmoved Something in a persons user area should only be moved if they ask it to be. I alternatively suggest using and expanding Misplaced Pages:Watch/schoolwatch. violet/riga (t) 10:41, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Rock on !!

Keep up the good fight

Klonimus 11:03, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Watch

For all your information Misplaced Pages:Watch has been set up and currently includes a Misplaced Pages:Watch/schoolwatch entry. violet/riga (t) 23:55, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• The problem of Misplaced Pages:Watch/schoolwatch, is that it is inherently NPOV. This project is inherently POV, it's inclusionist, thats the whole point. Schoolwatch is about countering the rampant deletionism of schools on the VfD page. Ancilliary to that it's about improving and making articles about schools encyclopedic.

This page exists to proclaim and defend the notion that all schools are created notable, that they are endowed by their Authors with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Inclusion, Tender Love, and Organic Growth. Klonimus 04:31, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• • No, it exists to subvert the processes that Misplaced Pages has laid down to aid in ensuring quality and relevance. Your paraphrase is factually inaccurate, too. Such a project should not be about countering "rampant deletionism", because the very notion is a fantasy - there is no such thing. What it actually turned into was a witch hunt, which resulted in vote-stuffing in VfD discussions, as well as disruption and interference with due application of policy. What you fail to understand is that discrimination of this manner is ultimately harmful to Misplaced Pages. Chris talk back 21:21, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Reverts

I'm not trying to "legitimize" anything but.... Chriscf, isn't that four reverts in under 24 hours? (Misplaced Pages:Three-revert rule --BaronLarf 22:08, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. Might well be. I slept between the first two, thought it was longer. I'll leave it for a day or so, and hope someone else makes sure the new project gets priority. Chris talk back 22:18, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)