Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:29, 20 November 2007

PLEASE BE FAIR

Please read my post at bcn0209 regarding Digital Reality, Inc. I also notice that you have been involved in speedy delete disputes multiple times and the speedy delete is an aggravating means to accomplish an admittedly important job but please be conscientious, objectionable and interpret Wiki rules more carefully. For example, Wiki does not state in the rules that posting information about companies is necessarily grounds for deletion. In fact the rule on this is quite clear.

Thanks

Thanks for the comments in support of the CDC travel links. Craigoliver 14:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Kudos to you

I know I was originally kinda crabby on the Humanzee page, and I apologize. You've worked very hard in the past few days to try and fix some of the deeper problems with the article and I know it hasn't been easy. Even though I'm part of the paranormal Project, I am an Anthropologist and Folklorist. Topics such as the Oliver, Humanzee and the fascination people continue to have with Ape-human hybrids speak to some very deep issues of personhood, where we all come from, where we are going etc etc. Please know that I support your efforts to keep these articles NPOV, grounded in fact and well sourced. We could use an editor such as yourself over in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Paranormal! ;-) Lisapollison 00:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Humanzee

You seem to misunderstand the purpose of the "See also" section. It is to include additional links for further reading. Yes, the word hybrid is important, but it is already used many times in the article and wikilinked in it. You don't list the words chimp or human in "See also", do you? `'mikka 20:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

OK I see you are a relatively new user. I suggest you to invest some time in reading wikipedia:Manual of style, to avoid future similar misunderstandings. `'mikka 20:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Holloway

Thanks for offering. I think what we do is keep reverting her nonsense, making sure we don't each violate the 3RR, and in a couple of days, ask for semi protection again, setting out that HollysMom was a new user, that she was warned (as it seems) by an admin but was cut a break because she is new and ask for semi protection or a block.--Wehwalt 19:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Is there any point in me getting into this discussion? I think not, but I will if needed.--Wehwalt 04:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

FYI, they were so outraged at my edits that they posted my name, my photo, and said I "looked like a perv" at Scared Monkeys bulletin board (run a search for wehwalt on the discussion boards there if you are interested). Also proposed complaining to the Bar because I posted "libel". Nice people.--Wehwalt 13:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

http://127.0.0.1 . Please erase this link once you've looked at it.--Wehwalt 21:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Pagey and his solos

Hi Kww. Yes, you are quite right to challenge me on this. I made a very quick edit to the STH page andf afterwards thought I may be asked for a ref (following). The reason I chopped the edit was it was preposterous to claim that Page always made three recordings and chose the best one in all his songs.

I can only find two refs atm - moved house so it's a bit disorganised - and can't find the bit about agonising but I think it is in one of the Zep biographies I have. Hope this satisfies the three takes on the solo though. (These articles are already refed in the article.)

Quote:

Back at Basing Street, Richard Digby Smith reckons he saw Jimmy Page get over his lead guitar-break trauma and finish the track: "He did three takes. He didn't use headphones, he monitored the backing tracks through speakers which was how the classical soloists who used that studio did it."

"Bustle in the Hedgerow" by Phil Sutcliffe p64, MOJO, April 2000.

Quote:

GW: You had the guitar solo demoed and ready I presume

PAGE: No, no, not at all. I winged it.

GW: You winged the solo?

PAGE: Yeah every time

GW: Even the call and refrain sections? The overdubs?

PAGE: Oh you mean the slide buts? That's orchestration. You want to know if I prepared the overall structure of the guitar parts?

GW: Yes

PAGE: Yes. But not the actual notes, though. But when I came to record the solo, I warmed up and did three of them. They were all quite different from each other.

GW: You mean there are different solos on the master tape that no one's even heard?

PAGE: Oh yeah! But the one we used was the best solo, I can tell you that ...

"Light and Shade" by Brad Tolinski with Greg Di Benedetto. Guitar World, Collector's Issue Jan 1988.

Cheers! Candy 06:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Bonaire Image Order

I don't understand your change. I wound up moving that diver image to the top because every time it wasn't the top image, people would come in and delete the ones that came before it so that it would be on top. By just moving it there and retaining the others, I kept the edit cycles down. Why do you feel that it needs to be lower? Kww 15:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I changed it because the image caused the article to have a large ugly-looking white space. This is because the text will only begin again when the picture can be shown on the right side of the article, and that is when the table ends. You probably don't see this because you use a low resolution (800x600 for example), but with a resolution of 1152×864 it looks very ugly. Cure to this phenomenon is to group together images and tables, or to place them lower in the text. Maartenvdbent 15:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm happy now :). Cheers! Maartenvdbent 15:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Re. Rename request for Sint Maarten

Sure. St. Maarten should be allowed to have its recognizable, official name left alone and not transformed into some new, odd, made-for-wikipedia name space entity. But about the song: it was written in English by Father Kemps, a Dutch priest active on the French side and I believe he wrote Saint Martin, you know. At least that's what they put on the plaque in Marigot in 2005. They use Sint Maarten here: Volkslied van Sint Maarten (and the French sing "Saint Martin, Saint Martin, si jolie en tous ses coins!"). But I believe Saint Martin is also the correct form in Kemp's original version because it's a song meant to inspire pan-island unity and includes the French side. Notice that the wikilink doesn't work as it is. Cheers, Afv2006 08:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Curaçao

Hey, thanks for correcting my IPA on Curaçao. I've heard it pronounced rhyming either with "Warsaw" or "Palau" but assumed the former was the prevalent form. Good to have someone living in the Carribean, I'm currently trying to add IPA labels on all possible locations in that region, I'll ask you for advice when in doubt, if that's OK with you. --Targeman 00:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi,it's me again with a pronunciation issue. Namely, what is the usual pronunciation of Saint Lucia? Loo-SEE-ya? LOO-sha? Do people in the Carribean pronounce the "Saint" as "saint" or "sn't" like the British do? Thanks for help. --Targeman 21:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! That was fast :-) I'll insert that in a sec. If you want to learn more about IPA, you can read IPA_chart_for_English, although transcriptions I see around here are far from consistent. I'll raise the issue of standardizing them on Misplaced Pages when I find out whom to address :-) --Targeman 21:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Please understand the dispute at the article 'The Rocky Horror Picture Show" is not personal. It is completely a matter of what should be included.

We actualy have a great deal in common and would probably be good friends otherwise. I extend an Olive branch to you. I want to follow Wiki guidlines. I will stick to the outcome of the dispute should it go against my opinion.

I was born at Tachakawa AFB in Japan in may of 1963 and have worked in some great hotels. I wish I could own one myself. Sorry if this situation has caused you frustration. --Amadscientist 21:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Power Ballads (UK album)

Hi there - although I'm not the original author of the Power Ballads (UK album) page, I couldn't help noticing that you'd flagged it, and other pages from the same chain of albums, as being spam. I'd be interested to know why you think the articles are spam - to my mind there's little difference between the contents of Power Ballads (UK album) and the contents of, say, Garage_Inc., an album by Metallica. What particular wording makes you think that the Power Ballads (UK album) article is spam, rather than an entry listing the contents of the CD concerned? Giles Bennett 13:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message - I don't think there's any particular name for those sorts of albums over on this side of the pond, but we definitely have them (a series called "The Greatest XXX album in the world, ever", where XXX is replaced by folk, rock, driving, air guitar, etc., springs to mind). Whilst they're not exactly high art, I don't necessarily agree that they were spam - I appreciate that you only flagged them, and that an administrator agreed - as the criteria for db-spam says, having the product as its subject doesn't necessarily qualify the article for deletion, only inappropriate content. I think we'll have to agree to differ on this one! Giles Bennett 13:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Tamika and the Beast

I've added some more context in the article, but tagged it with the notability tag. Pants 02:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

SANGREAL SODALITY

Hey Kevin -- I've made changes which I thought you would love based on our discussion and somehow that seemed to trigger this Eagle guy who is frankly not one I have found reasonable to talk with

Eagle is labeling it a COI and not stating reasons..but he didn't last time he wanted to delete it either. Especially with the changes the article is now more scholarly and less advertisement than most occult and magical and fraternal organization listings! Yes it links to the Sangreal website..er..so does every other group link to their main website. I'd really appreciate

1. Your opinion and possibly you could join the talk page (PLEASE) 2. Your help and advice on what to do if some editor seems hell bent on getting rid of an entry like this and won't even talk. Plus he probably hates my guts because after his failure to talk I did say that he is being inappropriate to him(or her) And frankly I'm now pretty angry. I spend time making changes based on our discussion and another editor deletes and tags it COI.

If the source of the problem is outside Misplaced Pages I should know that and what claims are being made. There is one person who might have problems with the description --.. I and some other contributors have avoided embarrassing the guy to death by actually sharing certain letters from the groups founder written over the past years and shared with his official biographer and the current Warden.

Hey I know wiki articles can be changed deleted etc..But I do think I deserve more than a TAG and some conversation for all my work on it

Thanks

Renee

Speedy

Please do not try to use speedy to solve an editing dispute. If there is any possible controversial element to the deletion of an article, and the article talk page for London Action Resource Centre makes it clear that there will be, the method to use is AfD, DGG (talk) 16:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Bleep OR straw poll

There is a straw poll being conducted on the Bleep OR issue. Your input is welcome. Dreadstar † 16:55, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Due to continued confusion around the scope of the Bleep OR straw poll, I’ve added a clarification note to say that the poll is primarily meant to see if everyone agrees that a majority of that content identified as unsourced or improperly sourced OR in the Bleep sandbox, is indeed OR. Please feel free to change your vote if necessary. Please post a message on my talk page if any of this is unclear. Thanks for your patience! Dreadstar † 17:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Watch the A7 criterion

I hate to say this because you are doing great work with catching these new non-notable articles... but be careful with the A7 criterion. It is not for all non-notable articles, it is specifically only for non-notable "people, groups, companies and web content." The vast majority of your CSD noms seem to be right on the money, but I found at least a couple where you technically misapplied the criteria because it did not apply to one of those four things. In one case I left the db tag in place anyway as per WP:SNOWBALL, but PUNISHher really should not have been CSD'd.

Cheers, and happy new page patrolling! --Jaysweet 21:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, don't worry, I'd never heard of that rapper either. ;D I'm a little iffy on the validity of Misplaced Pages articles about upcoming albums, etc. anyway (if you wanna see a train-wreck, check out Drake & Josh In New York!, particularly this frikkin' hilarious edit) --Jaysweet 15:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

OneCleveland

Well my advice is to bring it up on the WP:OH messege board because I really have no clue...Im not going to get into that because it was not my idea and I was just helping my WikiProject out...MarkDonna 22:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Spiritual QP

LOL! , You're right! I wasn't paying enough attention! Thanks for reverting my blunder! Funny! – Dreadstar † 23:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

2the Max

Please undelete the 2the Max article. You should at least notifying the author and relative projects before submiting any deletion request. It is ridiculous to not letting other to improve before any furthur actions. — HenryLi (Talk) 03:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I really wonder you and admin completely ignore the notability guideline. In the guideline, it has clearly written that:

If an article fails to cite sufficient sources to demonstrate the notability of its subject, look for sources yourself,6 or:

Ask the article's creator for advice on where to look for sources. Put the {{notability}} tag on the article to alert other editors. To place a dated tag, put a {{subst:dated|notability}} tag.

If the article is about a specialized field, use the {{expert-subject}} tag with a specific WikiProject to attract editors knowledgeable about that field, who may have access to reliable sources not available online.

Have your look for sources yourself?

Have you ask the article's creator?

Have you put the notability tag or expert-subject tag?

I cannot see you follow the procedure stated in the guideline.

I am really disappointed that even an administrator agrees with you so carelessly. I also hope you can follow the consensus and the guideline.

— HenryLi (Talk) 15:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

In the guideline (Misplaced Pages:Criteria for speedy deletion)

Non-notable subjects with their importance asserted: Articles that have obviously non-notable subjects are still not eligible for speedy deletion unless the article "does not assert the importance or significance of its subject". If the article gives a claim that might be construed as making the subject notable, it should be taken to a wider forum. However, articles with only a statement like "This guy was like so friggin' notable!" can be deleted for lacking context, because it gives no context about the subject.

When you said it because of notability, please follow the procedure in WP:NOT. The article has asserted that the product is sold to multiple nation and important product. I think you never carefully read the given link and even do a web search on the subject. I know I can recreate the article in a minute, but I hope you can follow the notability guide before putting any tag. — HenryLi (Talk) 16:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Let me make this perfectly clear

kww, sorry for making you feel comfortable, but, it is necessary. I appreciate your effort to read 2000 articles a day. On the other hand, I noticed that you have involved in several disputes on speedy delete recently. You should not be amazed that more contributors would take this kind of matter seriously if you continue to ignore the consensus made, namely guideline. You have joined Misplaced Pages for 7 months and you might be eager to do some administrative works, maybe later run for administratorship. My recommendation is, before you do administrative works, read relevant guideline. Deletion and notability are two of most controversial matters in Misplaced Pages. To read and applying the guidelines carefully do help you to avoid unnecessary disputes. User:HenryLi 05:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll try one more time. There is nothing wrong with speedy deletion, and yet speedy deletion is essential. But it require to follow the deletion and notability guideline. People usually get disputed when they do not like to admit they are too lazy to follow the guidelines. — HenryLi (Talk) 15:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

RHPS

"He didn't just cut the nerves to the frontal lobes of Eddie's brain"

Show-off. :P Atropos 01:22, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

RHPS cast

Amadscientist has disagreed with the inclusion of the cast. If you could voice your opinion I'd appreciate it. Atropos 01:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Just a note that, though you added the cast section back, you didn't remove it from the infobox (that is, replace it with the short one with only four cast members). I think everyone involved can agree that having both include the complete cast is redundant, no? Atropos 02:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

MotivAction, LLC

The criteria and guidelines for proving the notability of an article are vague. The references included in the current iteration of this article are reputable and factual and have been provided in good faith. If they do not qualify, then please provide more specific guidance so that I can be sure to include appropriate references in the article. Thank you kindly. Robert Burmaster 21:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, they aren't all that murky. wp:notability provides an overall guideline. The problem you had the last time was simple: it doesn't count as a reference if the person mentioning you is being paid to mention the subject. If you work for MotivAction, one question to ask yourself is "Why hasn't somebody else written an article about my company?" If the answer is "because no one outside the company thinks it's interesting", then you haven't achieved notability. Kww 21:45, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

(Copied from Talk:MotivAction, LLC DES 16:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC))

DaFont Article

Hey Kww,

I noticed you tagged the DaFont article as a candidate for deletion. Please read my response here. If you're satisfied with it, then we can settle the issue quickly and painlessly. :)

xDanielx 08:48, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Just a gentle reminder

In response to your 3RR complaint, I blocked User:Bloggerhead several days ago for his reverting on Spam Prevention Early Warning System. Since then he has resorted to meatpuppetry and had the block extended to a month.

So he may well not be troubling you for a while. However, I noticed this diff] and thought it only fair to remind you that, as exasperating as dealing with him may have been, you are still obliged to be civil. OK? That's all. Daniel Case 00:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Scrooge

Did you see the to-do list for the article and the question any information on which characters he might be based on? I want to improve that article. By putting the statement there I can attract attention. If I have to find the info my myself this search is doomed. I'm a moderate Scrooge fan. I read the Carl Barks library, I have Thomas Andreae recent book but that's it. What can you contribute?

Pardon me

You misspelled "vandalizing". If you insist on wasting my time further, I suggest you first learn to spell.

List of lists that list lists of list lists

I noticed on a few AFD discussions that you seem to feel the same way about massive lists that I do. I just stumbled across this mindnumbing category: http://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Lists_of_schools_by_country which contains links to 72 lists that just have no reason to exist. Somehow, I don't think submitting 72 independent AFDs is the right procedure. Any advice as to how to proceed? Kww 16:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Damn... You're right, there's to much of this around to eradicate it all with AfDs. Besides, some kid will eventually come back and re-list his or her school again. I honestly don't know what action to take here. I'm still a relative newb and I don't know whom to address to propose a radical change in policy that listcruft warrants IMO. I thought maybe an automatic listing of recently created articles beginning with "List of" on a separate, heavily patrolled page would make it easier to shoot them at sight. (Preferably together with another pet peeve of mine, "...in popular culture" articles). The overwhelming majority of ordinary schools is patently not notable - articles about them, and lists of them, would be a speedy delete offense if I had my way. I reckon a very hefty proportion of all time-consuming AfDs are this type of articles. However, I can't really throw my weight around to get things done because I don't have any. A lot of things still bother me on Misplaced Pages and even make me regularly consider quitting, but as a newb I'm unlikely to be taken seriously. --Targeman 18:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I can't think of an action to take either. A massive AfD would be far too time consuming. Ten Pound Hammer • 19:28, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems that all of you do not seem to understand that the reason for the existence of lists like this is to aid (together with the Category mechanism) in creating another way to find information by creating a lateral and/or hierarchical browsing mechanism, supplementing the normal hyperlink mechanism. Mahjongg 00:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for typo fixes in my essay.--Alexia Death the Grey 12:19, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I was told to put the image back =

For the Ashley Tisdale Image, in my last message i got, i was told to put it back, so i will do as instructed.SuperWiki5 13:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Mark Tinley

Because I've communicated with him, I have reason to believe he will do better with communication and patience, and I intend to watch what he does closely. If he misbehaves, I can and will take care of it myself. — Catherine\ 17:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: FredAbbey

Re your message: I blocked that particular editor for spamming as you can see in their block log. -- Gogo Dodo 18:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Lawrence Mujari

I was in the middle of editing the article when I saw the template. What gives?--SGCommand (talk • contribs) 16:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I am busy getting it in the style of the other characters so please bear with me.--SGCommand (talk • contribs) 16:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Eurominuteman 3RR

Thanks! I was thinking of making that change, but since I didn't make the initial report, thought I'd leave it as is. Perhaps I'll suggest that to the editor who made the report. Thanks for the notice! Dreadstar † 23:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I took your advice and changed the versions to diffs myself...thanks for the nudge in the right direction...! Dreadstar † 00:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey, it worked too..finally got the block! Dreadstar † 17:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Yung_D. No clue, it's a protected article transcluded into the Main page. What's the problem with it? Dreadstar † 00:40, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, yeah..I see...I thought it was just a weird name they had. I'll check. Dreadstar † 01:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I figured it out. It was a redirect. Interesting puzzle..! Got any more? Dreadstar † 01:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Yung D.

Template:Yung D. 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. — Mbisanz 19:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

AFD

I think your understanding of AFD may be a little skewed. Just because an article may be filled with OR, doesn't mean that it can't be fixed. Saying that the present content of an article is original research isn't really a valid reason to delete the article. - Ta bu shi da yu 09:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Edits/reverts

Misplaced Pages is about editing. Some edits go unchanged some are reverted. That is simply the name of the game here. Neither one of us likes the other but I am not immature enough to liable you with remarks like you have left on my page. I do not revert everyone else's edits. Request for me to stop editing Misplaced Pages....denied. Amadscientist —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 20:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

=="mistakenly" is not the same as "accidentally"==

The thesaurus disagrees with you. See: http://encarta.msn.com/thesaurus_561567881/by_mistake.html Please, in the future, before you edit relevant, cited information, look into the basis behind your reasoning. Oh, by the way, I reworded the paragraph to give a more accurate idea of what happened and DID use mistaken since that is the word that is used in the ref. Though they are synonyms so either would be acceptable. Thanks for the thought, though. - Jarn 05:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

A7

The idea of a ten day delay in speedy deletes fills me with horror - it's a terrible terrible idea. --Fredrick day 14:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

How to

to nominate at AFD: follow the directions at WP:AFD. After you save after adding the {{subst:afd1}} template to the top. Edit again and add " (2nd nomination)" after "cupcaking" to read "Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/cupcaking (2nd nomination)", save. Follow the link to create the debate at that name, and add that name to the daily log (all set out at the template that appears on the cupcaking page. Try it first and if you have trouble I'll do it for you, but it's always a better learning experience to try it yourself - you really can't do any damage by accident, so don't worry, be WP:BOLD. Carlossuarez46 00:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Kosovo massacres

How was my move unjustified? There isn´t anything substantial on that article besides the list.Paulcicero 12:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Chicag ball

That's why I added WP:SNOW as another ground for closing the AFD. After four speedy deletions of the predecessor (and identical) article Chicago Ball by four different administrators, I feel pretty confident about this one. Thanks, NawlinWiki 23:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Follow the rules

And establish the notability of the section instead of blindly inserting pov into the article. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia and not a gossip rag. Turtlescrubber 23:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD on Human chemistry

Hi there, the article has been changed substantially since your vote so you might want to have another look at the new version. All the best Tim Vickers 16:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The Rocky Horror Picture Show

In view of this AfD and this DRV, please consider adding references to the songs listed at the AfD. -- Jreferee t/c 19:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Sadi Carnot

Hey there. I just started an ANI thread on our mutual acquaintance. Since you also expressed reservations at his contributions, you might want to chime in. — Coren  03:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm somewhat concerned about your message on my talk page. You seem to imply that we should revert all 8567 edits that Sadi Carnot has made to wikipedia. This is ludicrous, and shows that you have not consulted this user's contributions (first one was on 2005-12-27). If you attempt to do this, you will be blocked for disruption, and that certainly wouldn't be impetuous. Physchim62 (talk) 17:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Kww has suggested no such thing, Physchim62. There's no reason for you to threaten him with a block. I know you're upset, but you still need to assume good faith. Please, relax and we'll figure out how to resolve this situation at WP:ANI. - Jehochman 18:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Dammit, Janet!

I just tagged the article, and left my arguments on the talk page. Look it over and see if I missed something, or add your two cents. --293.xx.xxx.xx 09:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I have corrected my statement at the Deletion review. You are right that i got mixed up about who said what in the many exchanges DGG (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration

You have been named in a request for arbitration titled Sadi Carnot. Please visit Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration and consider making a statement per the instructions there. Thank you. - Jehochman 00:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sadi Carnot

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sadi Carnot. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sadi Carnot/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sadi Carnot/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, David Mestel 19:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC) David Mestel 19:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Possible Sadi Carnot sock/meatpuppet

Replied on my talk page. Carcharoth 14:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I noticed the arbcom checkuser section. Do you think you could leave a note for User:linshukun about this? I'm not 100% sure about the etiquette in difficult cases like this, but it would seem like the right thing to do. Carcharoth 17:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Humanzee

Come up with some sources. Corvus cornix 17:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

For the pop culture section which should be deleted. Corvus cornix 17:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

For movies, novels, etc., a reliable source would have to have commented that a humanzee or similar appears in the novel, movie, etc. Corvus cornix 18:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

It might be best to spin it off into its own article, and then wait for somebody to nominate it for deletion.  :) Corvus cornix 18:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

There is a purpose for the "trivia" tag. It is used all over the place. I'd rather not have it removed. If you want to go ahead and remove it, I won't edit war, but I don't think it's right to remove it. Corvus cornix 18:51, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Sadi Carnot arbitration case

Do you think you and Physchim62 could cool it a little bit at the arbitration case? You should both concentrate on Sadi Carnot's behaviour and not so much on the behaviour of you two. Although the arbitrators will look at that if it is warranted, at the moment it is a bit unsightly to see you two throwing proposals at each other on the workshop page. Cross-posted to User talk:Physchim62, and clerk notified. Carcharoth 19:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Hopefully you can both broker a truce yourself. You are right that Physchim62's unblock is part of the arbitration case, but please don't bring his subsequent behaviour towards you into the case. It would be best to limit things to what happened at the time. If you are unhappy with Physchim62's actions towards you, please try and raise that separately with Physchim62. Carcharoth 22:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The best approach here is to focus entirely on Sadi and ignore any comments directed at you personally. The arbitrators are not going to be paying the slightest attention to these retaliatory measures and making any response to them will only lower your credibility. This isn't a particularly pleasant aspect of Misplaced Pages, you have my sympathies in being plunged into it so quickly after joining! Tim Vickers 16:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Sometimes fighting isn't the best way of winning, as on Misplaced Pages your audience is frequently more important than your opponent. If you stay calm, stay focused and remain scrupulously polite, even under much more serious attacks than in this case, people will look at your situation in a very supportive manner. Tim Vickers 17:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Ashley Tisdale image

Regarding Image:Ashley Tisdale 01.jpg: how do you know this to be a free image? Is the person who uploaded the image to flickr the photographer who took the image? —C.Fred (talk) 02:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Damnit, Kww.....erm, Janet!

Okay, said my peace like you asked. Even provided a arguement from another Wikiproject. If this gets nastier, i'm gonna throw it to Wikiproject Songs and let them in on the debate.--293.xx.xxx.xx 11:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Ask for the articles in question, no rebuttal. Ask even for any mentions of rocky Horror, nothing. Win? --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 04:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

John254 and the talk page reversions

I've removed the report from WP:AIV that you made, since no warnings had been given to User:John254 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) on his talk page. Additionally, there is an open incident at WP:AN/I, opened by John254 about talk page spamming by another user: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Massive, disruptive canvassing. That is probably the better place to report/discuss this user's behaviour, not on AIV. —C.Fred (talk) 03:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The Game Song

I think you misread this one. The claim the song is to be released as a single is a rumor. The song itself already exists and is in no way crystal-ballery. You might want to adjust or withdraw the nomination. - Mgm| 22:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sadi Carnot

This arbitration case has now closed and the decision may be found at the link above. Sadi Carnot is banned for one year, and the remaining parties are encouraged to "move forward from this unfortunate incident with a spirit of mutual understanding and forgiveness". For the arbitration committee, David Mestel 12:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Bleep

Take it to the talk page please, no further reverts. It is clear from all the writing on this movie that there are documentary style inteviews (non-fiction) that go along with a fictional narrative. Dreadstar † 20:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

3RR

Your recent editing history at What the Bleep Do We Know shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dreadstar † 22:55, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

You have made three reverts to the article per WP:3RR, . One more and you will be blocked. I find this edit to be a personal attack. It's unjustified and unwarranted. I recommend you retract it. Dreadstar † 23:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

You said "I have not been reverting the same material or to the same version at any time", let me refer you to WP:3RR which states:

'An editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, on a single page within a 24-hour period. A revert means undoing the actions of another editor, whether involving the same or different material each time."

You violated 3RR, if I weren't involved in the dispute, I'd have blocked you myself. As it is , I've reported you. Dreadstar † 23:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Kww (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

First off, I did not revert four times. I reverted three. Look at the 3RR report. Note that the third and fouth reverts listed in my 3RR report are identical. You can't count the same revert twice to make four. Second, Dreadstar's report is quite hypocritical. Dreadstar has reverted on the page at 05:47, 15:43, and 16:47. All three of those reverts were to prevent new material from being added to the article, and not only mine: his first revert was of User:Eleland.

Decline reason:

Please see Misplaced Pages:Edit war. You edit warred, period. — Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.