Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:15, 1 November 2007

Sock puppet

You look very much like a sock-puppet to me. Behaviour of this kind is just what some people want to see, since it enables them to make accusations against, and block, the people holding the opinions you claim to espouse. Please stop it immediately. The Battle of Jenin article will eventually be written in an encyclopedic fashion - but behaviour like yours is a serious obstruction, not a help. PalestineRemembered 10:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Since I'm NOT a 'sock-puppet', I'm having difficulty responding to this insult politely. Please stop harassing me. Dlabtot 17:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

User Contributions like this make it a bit of a give-away. PalestineRemembered 17:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I've posted an alert about your personal attacks against me on WP:WQA. Please stop. Dlabtot 17:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Saying you "look like a sock puppet" is not the same as saying "you are a sock puppet." Glad to clear that up for you. You are not following proper procedure. This is what is causing all the trouble. You not them. Clean up your act and follow procedure. William (Bill) Bean 00:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I humbly bow and scrape before your superior level of experience. Thank you for helping to make the Misplaced Pages experience so pleasant and rewarding. Dlabtot 00:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. I didn't vandalize anything. I'm in the middle of moving content within, and adding content to, that page. Dlabtot 17:20, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry man, I was a bit heavy-handed with the vandalism notices. I just thought you were a vandal deleting content in wikipedia. I'm really sorry. I deleted the wrongly-put notices. Next time, add an Edit summary so that I don't jump to conclusions. Again, I'm sorry. Dabomb87 17:20, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Now you've denied it (and explained yourself) I have no difficulty atall accepting what you say. Puzzled you've acted in the way you've done, but it'll all come out in the wash.

Would you mind me putting a single dot in your UserPage, which will stop your name showing up in red at the end of your postings? If you were some kind of returning character, blasted from the project for something unspeakable, then you'd not need me to suggest it, you'd know the trick already! PalestineRemembered 20:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I neglected to thank you for the two edits you made to Battle of Jenin, being this and this. They were both significant improvements to the article, congratulations. The last thing on my mind was to scare off someone doing such good work. However, the trickery that has occured on this article is huge - see here for the latest attempt to ignore policy. Notice how it's become difficult even to read my section-starter, comments have been inserted into the middle of it and the indent pattern has been broken. Under these circumstances (and the jeering that accompanies any possible link between critics of Israel and sock-puppets), you can understand my alarm at seeing what I took to be a suspicious person. I fear that your impressions of editing honestly on this topic have been permanently damaged by this affair, and I deeply regret it. My only consolation is that you'd almost certainly have been driven off, as happened to these two editors just in the same article and . Best Regards PalestineRemembered 11:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Fallon's comments about Petraeus

Keep this in the discussion about the article, not my personal talk page. A.S. Williams 01:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion nominations

Hello. You've recently nominated Yuri Landman and Moonlander for deletion but given no explanation at their respective "articles for deletion" discussion pages: and . This makes the nominations, shall we say, incomplete. Could you please add that information? Thanks. Doctormatt 05:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't realize I had to do anything besides nominate it for deletion and give the reason why. They seem to be relatively blatant self promotion. Well, it's pretty late here. Tomorrow I'll research whatever steps I missed and make the nominations more complete. Dlabtot 06:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

When nominating articles for deletion one should state a clear reason for that nomination. Merely tagging an article is not sufficient. William (Bill) Bean 13:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I apologize. I had no idea it was such a difficult and exacting process. I have stated clear reasons why I nominated those articles for deletion. If you don't agree with my reasons, fine. Dlabtot 15:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Did you wish to nominate Moodswinger as well, which is related to these two articles? If so you should nominate it. If not, you may wish to explain why in the deletion discussions. Rigadoun (talk) 19:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't realize there was a Moodswinger article. I'm sorry, I don't have time to make another nomination. I already messed these two up by skipping some steps apparently. I wouldn't have done it if I'd known how much followup work would be involved. I don't think they warrant inclusion but I also don't care about it so much that I want to spend multiple hours of my day on the issue. I won't be nominating any more articles for deletion. Dlabtot 20:03, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Let's shake hands, I've made 2 General Announcements on the nomination-list to close my discussion. Hopefully this will end in a good direction for everyone. Best, YuriLandman 21:23, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, this is in no way a personal issue between you and I. I'm always willing to shake hands though. Cheers. Dlabtot 21:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Plea for calm

I am asking you to please to refrain from your aggressive posts towards me. I officially apologize for any mistakes I may have made while editing Misplaced Pages and ask that you forgive my transgressions. I refer you to WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL, and especially this page. Dlabtot 00:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Dlabtot: You did not follow proper procedure when flagging the article. This is not the first time you've done this. Since you have done this at least three times that I can see your "plea for calm" rings false. Follow procedure and I'll have nothing to complain about. That is my only beef. William (Bill) Bean 00:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I have apologized and asked you to assume good faith on my part. And your response is to come hear and tell me that my words 'ring false'. I'm asking you one last time to stop attacking me. If you persist in your attacks I will have to move towards a more formal process to get you to stop. (I'll crosspost this on your talk page) Dlabtot 00:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Stating fact is not an attack. You have tagged articles without showing cause at least three times. That's not an attack; that's a fact. If you feel a need to formalize this please feel free; however, I have more than enough evidence to assert that you are not acting in good faith. Your call. William (Bill) Bean 01:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I've placed an alert on WP:WQA. Hopefully this will mark the beginning of the end of acrimony.

Three questions

It's notable because he was supposed to have only one question, then insisted, very assertively, that he was going to then ask two more. He himself quantified the number of questions and it's there in the video evidence, and transcripts. Badagnani 20:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Please discuss articles on their respective talk pages so that all the editors involved can be a part of the discussion. Dlabtot 20:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your work

thanks for your comments and work on: Scentura Best of wishes, Calendar 22:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

ANI Tagging

You're right -- I apparently was overly optimistic of the chances of getting a short resolution (based on his admission of error over at WQA). I've removed the resolved tag and responded on ANI. Honestly, this might need to go to an RfC/U. --Bfigura 17:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Petraeus Page

Thanks for your work on the Petraeus page. You're doing a good job at helping fight the POV. Bbrown8370 17:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, thanks, although actually, I've pretty much given up on that. A certain user has worn me down through the sheer volume of his contributions. Maybe once Petraeus is no longer the current poster boy the article will be able to be improved. I don't think there is much chance of that in the short term. Dlabtot 17:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm also about to give up on it for the short term. I just wanted to say thanks for trying. Bbrown8370 18:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

There is talk about removing the neutrality flag from Petraeus' page. A lot of work has been doen to clean up the POV. If you get a chance, please take a look and voice any concerns that you have. Thanks. Bbrown8370 17:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I gave up on that page awhile ago. Dlabtot 17:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to ] for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.Template:Do not delete Please refer to Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Nrcprm2026 (3rd) for evidence. John J. Bulten 21:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I have no clue what you are talking about. Nor do I particularly care. My name is James Lang and I post from 12.32.36.103 and from 12.32.36.57 I made a few edits anonymously from one or both of those IPs before I registered my login, under which all of my edits have been made since. Good bye. Dlabtot 23:51, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Depleted Uranium

What prompted your interest about Depleted Uranium? Starkrm 19:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't actually have any particular interest in DU. Someone made an edit to a page on my watchlist, and DU was one of the articles they had previously edited. I started editing the article because it looked like it needed help - and it still does. But frankly, I don't actually feel any need to explain or justify to you why I choose to edit one page or another. I respectfully request that you leave me alone and refrain from asking me irrelevant and pointless questions. Let the admins do their job. If you want to discuss how to make the DU article better, its talk page would be the appropriate place to do so. Dlabtot 20:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)