Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:33, 23 November 2008

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97

Windows NT#Designation

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Windows_NT&diff=244396881&oldid=244396535

This reads like the VMS story could be true, just uncited. Also, Lucovsky is called "Another of the original OS/2 3.0 developers", but he's the first person mentioned in the section. 98.223.106.192 (talk) 01:28, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, both of those need fixed. Do you mind suggesting fixes (or doing it yourself)? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I already had. Sorry for not making that clear. 98.223.106.192 (talk) 03:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Template

Template:Backwardscopyvio. Lovely. :) I've added some clear instructions to the documentation (for the benefit of those like me who will stare at it, wondering "What am I supposed to put here?") and included it in Misplaced Pages:Copyright problems/Advice for admins. I expect it will come in very handy! --Moonriddengirl 14:04, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. :) Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Editing headers on talk pages

Thumperwad: When users post to a talk page on a given topic, the guidelines state they should give that section a header. Once they create that header, the header becomes communal property. It is not part of their comment. See Misplaced Pages:Talk_page_guidelines#Editing_comments. It is recommended to change header titles when the topic shifts, which it has in this case. My change, which you reverted, followed these guidelines perfectly. Your reversion violated editorial guidelines. In the future, please allow those engaged in the discussion determine whether changes in header titles is warranted; SoundBlast was welcome to speak up if he felt that I was changing his intent by modifying the header title, and would have been justified in making an edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesoxlost (talk • contribs) 16:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the compromise edit. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Giant Space Hamsters

I see your point. I've merged the article into Spelljammer. -Drilnoth (talk) 20:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. Much appreciated. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: protected request

Request has been taken care of, however, the link you added does not seem to go to any specific section. Check the target page and see if another section should be linked to and let me know. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 23:45, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Done, thanks. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 00:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Larsson

It looks much better. After I got your message, I recalled seeing a new proposed footballer infobox template over the weekend, which I'm sure that's what you'd put into the article. Jiminy Christmas, I'm not having a good month with editing. *sits in corner*  :) sixtynine 21:08, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey, don't worry about it. If it's any consolation, I stuck up for you over your edits to Klaas-Jan Huntelaar. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I know, and I am most grateful. Muchas smooches. sixtynine 22:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Andy Martin

How 'bout explaining why this isn't an "attack piece" while "Barack Obama birthplace controversy" is. The arbitrary nature of Misplaced Pages edits appears to be motivated more by the desire to censor a particular POV than provide a reliable source of information. --DaleEastman (talk) 16:33, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Given that the article you're talking about no longer exists, I'm not sure exactly how I'm meant to compare the two. What I can say is that the Martin article is backed up by multiple reliable sources and doesn't actually appear to be in dispute, other than your desire to have it deleted (presumably due to the negative light it places on the fringe theories espoused by its subject). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:40, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps I can shed some light on this. The article DaleEastman referred to was a coatrack for an attack on Barack Obama sourced primarily to "www.obamacrimes.com." The fringe nature of the site's claims, combined with the fact that there is no controversy about Barack Obama's place of birth -- there is his verifiable birthplace and there is a nutball who has filed a frivolous lawsuit -- made the article into little more than a poorly sourced attack page. As an apparent subscriber to the notion that the lawsuit has merit, and won't be tossed out of court, DaleEastman is upset that the article was deleted. I'm sorry if this comment comes off as snide, but I've grown quite frustrated with the constant push to incorporate OMGOBAMAISAFOREIGNBORNMUSLIMLOLWTFBBQ into Misplaced Pages. You'd think that now the election's over, this stuff would die down, but no... --GoodDamon 19:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the backstory wasn't hard to find after a look at the user contributions. 2016 can't come fast enough, although to be honest the next Democratic candidate could be Whitey McOldGuy and exactly the same thing would happen. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Radar

Hi,

I would like to know why you took out references about the meaning of radar in the intro of the article. These have been put there because some user had contested the meaning of the acronym and it was necessary to it backup with solid references. I will put them back. Pierre cb (talk) 04:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

The lede is intended to be a summary of the article - any facts within it should be fully explained in the article body. Those refs belong further down. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

"Markets" section of console articles

I wasn't referring to the Mega Drive item in that comment... that was my mistake and I've corrected it. The comment was in regard to the subtitles and the breakdowns. I can't find the specific page now where the talk was it was on one of the other video game related pages. There was some comments I made on the LaserActive talk page that I found. I'll see if I can find the other talk on this. This break out is related to this odd cross over class of systems from the mid nineties that didn't specifically fall under one market category or another (eg, LaserActive, 3DO and CD-i) which need qualifiers to explain how they fit into the market. BcRIPster (talk) 07:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know they need qualifiers, but there are much better ways of doing so than presenting a largely context-free set of wikilinks and I didn't even change the presentation - just reduced the evident overlinking and removed the ugly parentheses from the headers. If you find the discussion please let me know. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

New proposition regarding D&D article notability

Hi! I know that you have recently been active in some Dungeons & Dragons articles, so I thought that I'd point out a new proposition that I made regarding their notability at WT:D&D#A new proposition. Any input on the idea would be much appreciated. Thank you. -Drilnoth (talk) 14:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Australian Racing Driver

It's only orphaned because it has been removed from relevant articles and been replaced with a completely inappropriate template which looks similar at the technical level but creates a completely inaccurate result. Absolutely oppose. --Falcadore (talk) 21:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

It is surely a far better idea to edit an existing template so that it covers the subject in question than to create an entirely new template which differs only subtly from existing ones for a rather niche use case. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:52, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure, if it does, and the V8 Supercar driver template does not. You've just stated that Leanne Tander has won 4 V8 Supercar races. Like to know when she did that precisely. --Falcadore (talk) 22:01, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

So pick a different one. Part of the reason one can never find the right infobox to assign to people is because there are so many of them, which differ in trivial ways. The correct solution is not to continually invent new infobox templates. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I created this one specifically so it could be picked for a multitude of purposes as the V8 Supercar driver template is category specific. You're attempting to delete the more generic template in favour of a template which can't be used for the purpose you prescribe. None of the other templates in Category:Racecar driver infobox templates is useable. --Falcadore (talk) 22:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

What exactly makes {{infobox racing driver}} unsuitable? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello Thumperward

Just to mention I noticed your contribution on gNewSense right after mine. I am ok with your edit. --Grandscribe (talk) 23:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)