Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:19, 6 March 2009

I am on extended wikibreak, and so my response to talk page messages may be delayed. If you wish to contact me, emails are welcome, and will probably result in quicker communication.

Archives

Archive 2 (first archive)

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Bulldozers

Hi Malcolm, at Rachel Corrie, I see that there's a dispute as to whether to include the model number of the bulldozer in the lead of the article. I personally have no preference either way, but based on the (limited) discussions on the talkpage, it would appear that the forming consensus is that it's okay to include the information in the lead. So it's probably not a good idea to be edit-warring to remove the information. You are of course welcome to continue discussing things at the talkpage, and if you feel very strongly about this, you may wish to file an RfC. But please don't make any other reverts, unless the talkpage consensus changes. Thanks, --Elonka 19:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Did I violate an armistice? Malcolm Schosha (talk) 19:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, not to my knowledge, but I'm checking the I-P articles and looking for edit-wars, to try and push people away from reverting, and back to the talkpage. That's all.  :) --Elonka 19:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I would be hard put to explain why I get involved in these arguments. Even when it is an article that gets no traffic (like Israel Shahak, or Self-hating Jew), every little change turns into a fight to the death as though it was as something as important as the Battle of Thermopylae.

Time for me to stop. I appreciate that you maintained your humor and composure in our discussions. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 20:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding, and for the kind words.  :) BTW, if you'd like something non-controversial to work on, have you ever looked into something like Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Israel/Assessment? There are over one thousand articles in the queue, awaiting someone to come along and review them and decide if they should be tagged as stub, start, B-class, etc. Some people very much enjoy article-reviewing, and while looking over the articles, you may see other places you'd like to help, that are outside of the normal battlegrounds. --Elonka 20:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I have no difficulty finding stuff to edit. I had plans to rework Stoicism, a subject I have studied extensively. That article is in terrible shape. There are also some articles that I created that are in stub form and need further development.

The unfair editing situation in some other articles bothers, yet I know if I get drawn further into those arguments that it will end by my getting bounced out of WP. One way or another, I seem out of wiki-rope; and I will either stop, or I will get stopped. That is my sense of the situation. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 20:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey Mr Malcolm

Good to see you back and I am glad to see your return. Hey have you seen these series of articles I started? On underground cities in Asia Minor? -Derinkuyu and the Derinkuyu Underground City. Hey no better place to be a troglodyte! LoveMonkey (talk) 13:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

You know Mr Malcolm Özkonak Underground City really reminds me of allot of the work of Antoni Gaudí. Like his Casa Milà and his most beautiful and beloved Sagrada Família. A working man can appreciate good architecture.

LoveMonkey (talk) 13:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi LoveMonkey. Thanks for the interesting links. Your mention of architecture reminded me of the Russian Orthodox church in Florence, Italy. I had not thought about that in a long time. The church is quite small, but I always considered it was one of the most beautiful churches in Florence....which is saying quite a lot. I do not know if there is a WP article, but there are images in Wikimedia Commons . I found a little information about it here . When I was living in Florence, I would sometimes walk a number of blocks out of my way just to see it. This is a pretty good photo of it , although none of the photos I have looked at do it justice. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 19:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Wonderful. Yes, beauty is something supernatural. It plays on our hearts and draws us to it. If I can help with anything Malcolm let me know. P.S. your story (I don't know why) made me think of St Sophia in China

LoveMonkey (talk) 19:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Ayn Sof

Accuracy of transliteration is not spam. I transliterated the Hebrew to English for the Ayn Sof Kabbalah Community website to accurately reflect the closest approximation in English to the Hebrew. Adding the Ayn Sof site to a rare few sites listed is not spam: it is diversity. You will most likely have more time on your hands to change the spelling, if you believe that makes the most sense. However, it is a less accurate mistake that should be corrected rather than called spam.

All the best, Rabbi Alyjah (talk) 14:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Ein Sof is very widely used, as on the Kabbalak Online site .Malcolm Schosha (talk) 14:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Widespread use of something does not make it the most accurate or best choice. Shabbat Shalom Rabbi Alyjah (talk) 14:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

thx

Malcolm, your comments at the ANI page concerning so-called disruptive editing by me and Ohconfucius were much appreciated. You may be interested in User:Tony1/AdminReview, which I will attempt to move forward to elections and operation in late March or early April, when my work deadline passes. Tony (talk) 15:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Afroghost

As I said at the time, if he posts an unblock request (or asks someone to post at my talk page) with a genuine request that he won't do again what he was blocked for, I'd be perfectly happy to unblock him. I'd rather not set an expiry date though, given the circumstances. Black Kite 19:26, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Your WQA Comments of Late

Malcolm, please do not take what I am about to say as an WP:NPA issue, because it surely is not meant in that way. Your recent comment at WQA was made after the discussion thread had been closed, and was highly reactive and inflammatory in nature. It pained me to have to adjust the "archivebottom" tag to encompass it, simply because the thread did not need any more drama than already was present.

I noted from your userpage that you are 65. That places you at 25 years my senior. Honestly, I tend to look up to people that are physically older than I for guidance and inspiration. When I see things like this, it confounds me a bit. Come on, Malcolm, it's only Misplaced Pages for goodness sakes! Being my senior, you know better than I that there is way more to life than this little corner of cyberspace, and it's not worth being so reactive and hot-headed about.

Again, this is not meant as a personal attack, nor to be patronizing either. It's my honest observation. Edit Centric (talk) 22:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

If you look up to me, or down on me, is your own affair. It is not something that is in my power. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 23:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

If you are pained by any external thing, it is not this thing that disturbs you, but your own judgment about it. And it is in thy power to wipe out this judgment now. But if anything in your own disposition gives you pain, who hinders you from correcting your opinion? Marcus Aurelius VIII. 47, trans. George Long

Edit Centric (talk) 23:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget, you still owe Hrafn and Hip apologies - Hip for your incivility, Hrafn for perpetuating a smear by digging up and repeating old smears, without bothering to look into the details. I trust that you will do the right thing and apologise to both of them. Guettarda (talk) 20:41, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't make me laugh. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 20:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

No, I'm serious. Apologise, stop trying to stir up trouble, and focus on being a constructive member of our community. Guettarda (talk) 20:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Umm this is very disturbing. I realise that you are still a relatively new member of our community, but let me remind you that trying to stir up trouble like that is never acceptable. Trying to stir up trouble, trying to drag an editor back into a fight that they have walked away from - that sort of drama-mongering is unacceptable in Misplaced Pages. Do not do something like that again. Consider this a formal warning. Guettarda (talk) 20:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

If there is a complaint about a user, such as was on WP:Wikiquette, there is nothing unusual about pointing out that that the user has a history...if there is a history. In fact, I drew no conclusions from that user's history beyond the one point that the user was not perfect. I just gave a link, with a very brief statement.

On the other hand, you and several others continued, from that point, to make ad hominem attacks on me, and continued until the thread was closed. But you, apparently, see nothing wrong with that, even though such attacks are WP:NPA. And, in fact, instead of apologizing to me, you have made more such attacks on me here on my own user page; and then, to top it off, you have the chutzpah to ask me to apologize for something that is a figment of your own imagination? Amazing.

Go way and stop bothering me. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 22:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

3rr

Your recent editing history 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.

untwirl(talk) 15:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)