Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:29, 18 April 2008

User:Doc glasgow/BLP watch

Smert' spamionem! This user is a member of WikiProject Spam.

I check in most mornings and most evenings, and occasionally some days during the day. I am on UK time (I can see Greenwich Royal Observatory from my new office). If you post a reply at 8pm EST and get no reply by 10pm, it's likely because I'm asleep. My wiki interests at the moment are limited. I still handle some OTRS tickets.

I am under considerable personal stress at the moment; my father died and I have a lot of other stuff going on in RL including a new job as senior engineer for enterprise storage and virtual infrastructure in a Fortune 500 company. Great job, lots of shiny expensive toys, big responsibility. But Misplaced Pages is still one of my top hobbies, and I come here to do what I can. I respond much better to polite requests than to demands. People who taunt me with "I dare you to block me" may have cause to regret it, as may I. Don't even think of trying to drag me into one of the many cesspits this project offers, I will likely choose only those disputes where I don't actually care too much. Not coming to your party? It's because I've decided it will make me unhappy. Sorry about that.

Above all, please do not try to provoke me to anger, it's not difficult to do, so it's not in the least bit clever, and experience indicates that some at least who deliberately make my life more miserable than it needs to be, have been banned and stayed that way. Make an effort to assume good faith and let's see if we can't get along. Guy (Help!) 22:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

• Please see User:JzG/Harassment links.

Were this admin to act in a foolish, trollish, or dickish way, he is open to being slapped with a large trout.

teh internets is populated by eggshells armed with hammers

• Bored? Looking for something to do? Try User:Eagle 101/problem BLPs.
• See my winter cycling tips - feel free to suggest more!
• My take on the Durova incident.

Note to self

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Istria&diff=192329190&oldid=189359747

Kinder, gentler approaches

Regarding this, calling people "spiteful shit-stirring weasels" may not be the most effective approach, regardless of what you may think of them. It just plays into their hands, doesn't it? Hope that's helpful advice. ++Lar: t/c 23:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

• You'll notice that I removed it immediately. I got trolled again, of course. It happens. Guy (Help!) 06:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • My bad, I didn't notice. Fair 'nuff. People latch on to these diffs no matter how briefly they stand, though... Cheers. ++Lar: t/c 13:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Guy, we may not be friends (I have no ill will), and you may think the same of me as you think of Cla68 for all I know, but in my view you should apologize. Misplaced Pages has a policy of civility to allow editors who may not like each other still to work together. You don't have to like anyone on Misplaced Pages, but your comment was probably the greatest breach of that policy I have seen, while all deleting it really does is prevent Cla68 (or others) from responding. You should at least apologize for breaching the policy in my view, and assure that you will not do this again. I didn't say this yesterday because I was hoping you would have time to consider it. Mackan79 (talk) 14:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I will apologise to Cla68 when he apologises to Jimmy Wales, Durova, David Gerard and others for calling them liars by going to the press with a story that flatly contradicted everything they had told him about that situation. I have that pencilled in as expected on the 11th of Never. Guy (Help!) 14:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you have both suggested a lack of candor from the other in ways that are generally considered acceptable. Your comment yesterday goes well beyond that. People should be able to disagree with each other and argue with each other without being attacked in that way. Mackan79 (talk) 15:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

My comment yesterday was an ill-tempered response to gratuitous trolling a sanctimonious pest, and I removed it almost immediately (actually as soon as the database was unlocked). I will not pretend that my opinions have changed, though. Guy (Help!) 15:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Would "sanctimonious pest" be more civil? Raymond Arritt (talk) 15:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Le mot juste, thank you. Guy (Help!) 16:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Neil Clark

Sorry Guy, I am "tired of silly drama on Misplaced Pages" too. Your complaint about my most recent edits to the Neil Clark page took you two weeks to make despite your regular work on WP. Not quite in line with the issues supposed seriousness is it? Philip Cross (talk) 14:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• No, it just took him two weeks to complain about it by email to the Foundation. Again. Guy (Help!) 14:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Apart from adding one intemperate phrase to the edit history of the Clark article over a year ago, I do not see what I am doing to bring WP in to disrepute by editing his WP article. Unless Clark is of such importance that his e-mail missives must be obeyed. Philip Cross (talk) 13:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Tony Sandel

Hi, he persists in using personal attacks--calling me a vandal==in spite of repeated warnings from Mysteryquest. What should I do about this? Thanks for any help or advice,-PetraSchelm (talk) 14:55, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_works_for_the_theatre_portraying_sexual_attraction_to_children_or_adolescents&diff=prev&oldid=205541455

http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Tony_Sandel#List_of_works_for_the_theatre_portraying_sexual_attraction_to_children_or_adolescents

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_books_portraying_sexual_attraction_to_children_or_adolescents&diff=206005438&oldid=205760810

Can you explain this edit?

Hello, can you explain this edit? Thanks! JBFrenchhorn (talk) 18:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, and can you explain what moel of horn you play and whether you are a member of the International Horn Society and why is Giovanni Punto not up to FA standard yet, I want to know? Guy (Help!) 19:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Specifically, I am wondering why that particular site is blacklisted, what "linksearch" is, where the list of blacklisted sites is, and why they should not have links that go to them. I'm just wondering, as I don't really care whether it has a link in it or not. I play a Conn 11Dr. I don't know why the Punto article isn't a FA yet. I don't think I've done any editing at that article yet. Most of my edits are on topics other than music. Thanks.JBFrenchhorn (talk) 00:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

A website tends to get blacklisted when it has no particular value to the encyclopedia but gets repeatedly placed on article pages. An external link needs to be reliable and informative, and to contribute something of encyclopedic value which the article itself doesn't already have. See WP:EL for the policy, and WP:SPAM and WP:WPSPAM to get a handle on what a problem external links are.

There is an en:wiki spam blacklist and a meta blacklist. Linksearch means this page where you can see what sites are linked from within the wiki. Hope this helps! Franamax (talk) 06:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks. JBFrenchhorn (talk) 23:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Question again

So, may I ask why metallian is a bad site or spam? I don't use it myself, so I wouldn't know, but I checked it out briefly and it seemed fine. Just curious. Blizzard Beast 21:09, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Same for me. Is there any reason besides that some IPs throw the link through various articles? --Gripweed-de (talk) 21:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

As noted, see m:User:SpamReportBot/cw/metallian.com. It's not usable as a source (despite being cited several times as a ref) and there's no evidence it's valuable enough as a "me-too" link to justify the spamming. I have received expressions of relief from spam handlers on other projects that this has now been stopped. Guy (Help!) 21:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Any site that his a disclaimer saying "Metallian provides all contained information only for entertainment purposes. We make no guarantees regarding the information provided" is all you need to know about linking to it, regardless of spamming. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Move log

Its great this now appears in our watchlists. And good one. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

And this is how you sidestep a block

Recently, you blocked 75.57.196.81 (talk · contribs), an anon with an IP banner for being a "Disruptive and disputatious editor)". That anon subsequently adopted a new anon IP address (quie likely simply restarted his modem and received a new dynamic IP address) and began editing under as 75.58.39.201 (talk · contribs). As there was also a prior caveat to keep the IP banner identifying the IP range as well as an apparent avoidance of the block you placed, I filed an AN/I complaint in regards to the matter. With apologies, I meant to notify you immediately, but was sidetracked. - Arcayne () 23:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Err, were you planning on commenting on the block you placed on the anon user who then sidestepped it by rebooting their modem and start editing from a new one? - Arcayne () 20:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the attention. - Arcayne () 02:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

OTRS

Guy, I have seen that you have stated you work OTRS issues, but you're not listed at m:OTRS/personnel...is that page out of date? Also, would you please consider adding yourself to Category:Misplaced Pages OTRS volunteers to make it easier for people needing contact with en Misplaced Pages OTRS volunteers to find you? Kelly 00:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

• Listing at m:OTRS/personnel is and always has been voluntary - some people choose not to shout about it. Guy (Help!) 08:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking for the former content of List of books portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors

You seem to have protected this entry (probably a good thing). I'm looking for the full list that used to be there, but all I can find on the Talk page is titles between A and E: Talk:List_of_books_portraying_paedophilia_or_sexual_abuse_of_minors#refs

My interest is simple: now that the title has been changed again to " . . . paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors" I would like to remove from the provisional list various works that portray neither.

That has always been my interest in the page: that works were being put on the list that did not belong there unless an extraordinarily broad definition of paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors is in play -- one completely inappropriate to the categorization of fiction (especially utopion fiction and science fiction). Current editors of the page think there is no problem with definition. Fine, I guess. But I feel I need to remove works that will be badly misrepresented by the restored title, before the list is restored to the main page.

I can't do that if I can't find the list! Can you help?SocJan (talk) 05:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

• It's only protected against moves, the content should still be there in the history, but I'll have a look. Guy (Help!) 07:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks!. SocJan (talk) 19:23, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
    • P.S.: Read the lovely tribute to your father on your page. I'm typing through tears. Thanks for sharing his life with us, and for your efforts to bury him in the fashion that he wanted. SocJan (talk) 19:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

What/where is blacklist?

In Lew Rockwell talk you removed part of link with edit summary mentioning black list but wp:blacklist only mentioned spam. helpful for new and even older editors who haven't learned everything about[REDACTED] to explain or at least give appropriate link to this black list. thanks. Carol Moore 13:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}

• Mediawiki talk:Spam-blacklist and m:talk:Spam blacklist. Guy (Help!) 13:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleted article in userspace

Why did you delete the article Leftist-Islamist Alliance from my own userspace? You have no right to do that, so please restore. /Slarre (talk) 15:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

• You created the article, moved it to mainspace, and it was promptly deleted by acclamation. Feel free to try Conservapedia, where I believe that kind of content does not violate site policies. Guy (Help!) 15:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I did not "move it to movespace". It was created in mainspace before I moved it to my userpage. I moved it to my userpage to have a copy of it, so I could work on it to become a decent article under a new title or integrated into an existing article. What policies are you referring to that says you can't keep copies of old articles on your userpage? /Slarre (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I must say, I can't quite understand why you deleted that page; when an article is AfD'd, I was under the impression that it was acceptable for an editor to userfy the content in order to work on it and add references, with the aim of eventually moving an improved version of the article back into mainspace. (I've seen this done before, at any rate.) I agree that the article, as was, did not meet notability guidelines for neologisms, but User:Slarre seemed to be making a good-faith attempt to improve it. Apologies, of course, if I've misunderstood the situation. Walton 18:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

It very much depends ont he reason for deletion: poorly written articles on borderline or good subjects are certainly game for user space rework, but as you'll see from Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Leftist-Islamist Alliance this was just a piece of political advocacy sourced from Free Republic and the like. Guy (Help!) 18:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

That's just your opinion. As you can see from the discussion, several users seem to think that the content is encyclopedic enough and worth expanding/improving under a new title or merged into another article, that's why I moved it to my userpage to try to improve it. It should also be noted that the article was previously nominated for deletion and was then voted to be kept. You have also not pointed to the guidelines/policies you seem to be relying on that says admins have the right to delete non-inflammatory content from other users' pages without even notifying or asking the user before. I ask you kindly once again to restore the article, otherwise I'll have to take this to another level. /Slarre (talk) 19:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Several? Oh, you mean three. And it's only your opinion that it's non-inflammatory. Actually, if that genuinely is your oipinion then I foresee trouble. Guy (Help!) 19:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

So what's 'inflammatory' in the article then? /Slarre (talk) 19:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Ask a passing Muslim, I'm sure they'll help you out with that. Guy (Help!) 19:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I was asking you, since it was you who made the assumption. /Slarre (talk) 14:10, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

(To Guy) I agree (looking both at the AfD and at the deleted text of the article in Slarre's userspace) that the article did not meet WP:NEO, and obviously Free Republic is not a reliable source; thus I completely agree with the consensus on that AfD. However, I also think it's worth noting that the version in Slarre's userspace did cite two published sources; that isn't enough on its own to meet the notability threshold, of course, but it does suggest that the term is actually in use, and therefore that there's a possibility of writing a decent article at some point if enough acceptable sources can be found. Even if this won't be possible, it might also be possible to merge some of the content into another article (as a representation of a particular viewpoint). I agree 100% that the article, as was, doesn't belong in mainspace, but wouldn't it be acceptable to let him store it temporarily in his userspace to let him work on it? Walton 19:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Copyvio?

I noticed you removed the archive links of three references on three Degrassi: The Next Generation articles yesterday, which pointed to pages at freerepublic.com. In the summary, you put unlink copyvio per WP:C; I read the page but see no explicit mention of the site or why any like it cannot be used. What then, is the problem with the website?

Also, when you removed the link, you messed up the formatting of the entire reference by not removing the archive date:

"McKay, John (2004-07-19). "American teen channel delays abortion-themed Degrassi episode". National Post. Retrieved 2007-09-10. {{cite web}}: |archive-date= requires |archive-url= (help)"

Please be aware of this in the future. Regards, -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 21:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

• WikiProject Spam members
• Misplaced Pages OTRS volunteers
• Misplaced Pages administrators open to trout slapping