Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:39, 16 November 2007

User talk:East718/PLEASE DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE

EpicFlame

Hey man, thanks for declining that guy's unblock, but it might have been a little hasty on my part. He created some pretty nasty userboxes, including re-creating one after it was deleted at MFD, but other than that, he seemed to be a good-faith editor for the most part. I think some other admins are looking into it, but I wanted to tell you that I appreciate you backing me up. GlassCobra 02:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. His unblock request was rather uncivil. Well, thanks all the same. GlassCobra 02:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, he's not handling the situation well. It also looks like he's made a sock, User:PartyVan. GlassCobra 03:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Is it really? I had no idea; well, it looks like the sock's been banned. Even EpicFlame's adopter, User:Mschel, acknowledges that his behavior has been pretty disappointing. GlassCobra 03:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:GuruAskew

Moments after you rejected his block appeal, he left this post in which he promises that he will continue to edit war when he returns and be a disruptive user. -- Scorpion 02:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hiey can you please not use CSD#G6 when an article has been deleted via AfD please link to summary as it makes it easier for people to understand. Point of not I almost recreated an started another AfD it was only because Hesperian had put "AfD notice" in an edit summary of the article I didnt. Gnangarra 04:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry didnt realise your new to this for afd and edit summary like -- deleted as per Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Route 1A Curse makes it easy for others to see why, especially when you close discussions where the article gets recreated. Trawling through AfD logs to find the right discussion can be difficult, when multiple article are deleted in the one discussion. Gnangarra 04:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

My (Remember the dot)'s RfA

I never thanked you for participating in my RfA a couple of weeks ago. Thank you for your support, though unfortunately the request was closed as "no consensus". I plan to run again at a later time, and I hope you will support me again then.

Thanks again! —Remember the dot 06:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

List of current world boxing champions

Hey, east718! As I just saw on fightnews, they wrote that the WBC have added Manny Pacquiao as emeritus champion in superfeatherweight. But they write that there are also Klitschko, Mayweather, Morales, and 2 or 3 more others. Therefore, I would recommend only to add those to our list that appear on the official WBC website under "Champions", just like Mayweather. Anyway, with six or seven more emeritus champions, you have to admit that then, it would be better to let them out... Cheers! claudevsq 16:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

HAYE LAID DOWN HIS BELTS!!!

It has just been confirmed that David Haye isn't champion any longer. He stated in an interview yesterday evening that he would definitely move up to heavyweight, having been offered a good ranking by the WBA, and that he would lay down his belts... claudevsq 19:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Emeritus champs

I reverted it in fact because I think we should mention them only when the official WBC website mentions them too. It's getting too much otherwise... or put a question on the discussion page to see who is pro/contra. Cheers, claudevsq 19:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Haye

You're right about the Ring mag's title for Haye. My fault! ;-) claudevsq 19:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Link

Here's the link, by the way (read beyond the photo):

http://www.laprovence.fr/articles/2007/11/11/153534-FRANCE-Foudroyant-David-Haye.php claudevsq 19:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

DRVNote Jim Jagielski

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jim Jagielski. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ⇔ ChristTrekker 23:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Administrivia

Heya, I just closed off that DRV on Jim Jagelski (whatever!). Wanted to let you know that for that kind of ancillary, 'paperwork' request, it's fine for you to close it off yourself once you've dealt with it. There's no conflicts of interest in such a simple thing, and you're not actually making any decision you didn't already make. I've done it anyway, but just for future reference. Splash - tk 23:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thankspam

...for your participation, criticism, and support in my recent RfA, which succeeded with a final count of 90/1/1. I appreciate all of your kind words, criticism, and suggestions. I extend a special thanks to Acalamari for his nomination, and Dihydrogen Monoxide and Husond for their coaching and nominations. If you need help in any administrative matters, please contact me.

Re: Image:MUSHAGamecover.jpg

Sorry, didnt release the edit was by an admin until after.

Only did it because your Edit summary "bot is sick" wasn't really relevent to what you were doing. Salavat 06:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

sorry, just wondering what "I1s" is abbreviated from? Salavat 06:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I see now, thanks. Salavat 06:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello - goodbye

I'm quitting Misplaced Pages. Please delete all my subpages http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special%3APrefixindex&from=Vintei&namespace=2 and drop down the semi-protection. Thank you. Goodbye.-- Vintei  talk  21:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

David Haye

I se he's in the list again as WBA/WBC champion. I think meanwhile that it was maybe indeed a little too early to take him out, even though he said that he would relinquish his belts, he may not yet have done so. I'll change the talk on the discussion page from "Haye vacates belts" to "Haye will relinquish titles to move up"... Cheers! claudevsq 05:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

As for the emeritus champions, the WBC published their report yesterday about rankings and mandatories, as you may have seen. It seems uncertain that Pacman stays at superfeatherweight or if he will move up. Let's just wait 2 or 3 more days for the smoke to clear up, 'cause until then, the WBC website will be done updating their rankings 'til October included, and we'll add Pac and Hopkins if they appear in the WBC website's champions list. You know I've never been too much of a friend to emeritus champions, espeially now that there are that much, I simply cannot see why B-Hop is Ring's champ at LHW and emeritus champ at MW, and he doesn't even have a belt and fights maybe once per year, who wants to see him fight anymore anyway? But if they list him, we're gonna list him too. I saw you had him as eme-champ in MW... is that because of his former accomplishments in MW, or why since he's at LHW now, it seems? Too much questions, I know... Let me just handle this, OK? You've got enough other work... ;-))) CHEERS! claudevsq 05:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of how the average Misplaced Pages reader is currently moving

Just curious how this discussion (Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of how the average Misplaced Pages reader is currently moving) ended in deletion since clearly no "consensus" was reached with a large minority of users calling for clean/merge/rename/userfy with a lot more even split after numerous sources were added? I truly am just curious how this process works. Thanks. Ojh and one more thing, just curious if I could get a copy of the article code especially from the "cells" section as I had some unique sources already worked out for inclusion in either a user page or existing articles which lacked sources for those. I have most of the code saved on my computer but not that section. Thanks for your time. Earthdirt 21:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• I tend to disagree that most of the votes for keeping where "intersting" though many people did comment on the interestingness of the article. I am planning on merging most of the information to Orders of magnitude (speed) which is definitely a very similar, though unsourced article. I would consider hosting the "essay", but I'm not sure that it's worth the time or effort to post an essay on user space, as who would read it? Do you know of any notable user essays which get any meaningful traffic? Also, could I get a copy of the article code for the "cells" section as I had some unique sources already worked out for inclusion in either a user page and/or existing articles which lacked sources for those. I have most of the code saved on my computer but not that section. Thanks for your time. Earthdirt 22:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
• Usually, when dismissing a significant number of keep arguments (even if they are just "interesting" or "useful" ones) there should be some clear policy-based reason for deletion. Did you believe the discussion established that the article was original research, not notable, or what? Also, even though he isn't clearly requesting it, I think it would be best to userfy the article in Earthdirt's user space, since he is requesting parts of it anyway. Finally, since many people argued that the content might be appropriate in some form or another (though with a clear consensus that the title was awful), is there anything that you believe could be done to make the article, or some derivative of it, more suitable for inclusion in the mainspace? DHowell 22:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: User talk:DHowell#Re: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of how the average Misplaced Pages reader is currently moving

Let me just say that I completely disagree with your interpretation of the synthesis policy, especially as it specifically says "serving to advance a position" and you specifically admitted that the article "didn't really advance any position". If we had to delete articles which simply collect information in novel ways even if they don't advance a position, we'd have to get rid of a huge amount of Misplaced Pages content. "Unencyclopedic" is not usually a valid reason to delete unless one can show a clear violation of What Misplaced Pages is not, and duplication of content is not usually a good reason to delete (though it could be a valid reason to merge or redirect). Since you also admitted there were valid reasons to keep, I think these alone should be reason enough to reverse your deletion. As far as finding sources which do collect information in this way, there is mostly educational material such as this and this, and I'm sure published printed versions of this type could be found, though these don't include the internal motions of the body. (Of course, there's also that song from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life!). Trying to find stuff which presents both the cosmological motion and internal body and microscopic motion led me to more new-age-ish type sites, such as this and this. There is at least a prima facie case to be made for this, and given more time and more thorough research more appropriate sources could probably be found, though again I don't think the synthesis policy really requires it when no position is being advanced. DHowell 23:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 01:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Privatemusings (talk · contribs)

Can you point to the consensus to unblock PM? He's had his unblock request rejected, and it's also been rejected on the unblock mailing list. Also I see rather strong support for the block on AN/I. I strongly suggest you reapply the block. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

A lot of people on AN/I want PM blocked from all accounts and there's a fairly strong consensus for an indef block all round. This has got to the point of being more than sockpuppetry. I'm not sure I saw David Gerrerd support the unblock and he was the blocking admin. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The unblock of Privatemusing is inexplicable. He's making serious trouble wherever he goes. He continuously fails to take the interests of the project into account and engages in aggressive behavior that promises to damage us. We simply don't have the millions of dollars for litigation which his actions may result in. Please see Talk:Giovanni di Stefano, especially the deleted versions. Fred Bauder 02:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Miletich

East.718,

I am asking you to please remove the litigation note at the bottom of miletich fighting systems and lock the page indefinately. I have been being harrassed for almost a year by a man who has filed lawsuits against many in the sport of mma.

He keeps trying to copyright and trademark logo's for my clothing, and with the use of my name. He was denied on a trademark application already. please help me to control this man's abuse of my name.

Please contact me thru my website at mfselite.com and I can give you all of my attorneys info so they can fill you in.

Thank you, Pat Miletich —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pj miletich (talk • contribs) 02:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)