Misplaced Pages

Always remember - first assume good faith...

sometimes pigs do fly...

and...Jimbo is watching you!

The hows-and-whys of this talk page

Because this is my own user talk page, I have certain rules and standards as to how I like to maintain it.

(1) Comments made by me are non-italicized

(2) Comments made by others are italicized

(3) If there is a Misplaced Pages issue I am currently involved in, I prefer to keep tabs on the situation by including information surrounding the issue as content on this page for future and present reference (as necessary). This may mean the inclusion of Misplaced Pages exchanges between others involved in the issue at hand. After the issue is resolved, I will archive the information.

(4) IT IS NOT THE RIGHT OF ANOTHER WIKIPEDIAN TO TAKE IT UPON THEMSELVES TO REMOVE CONTENT FROM, OR CHANGE CONTENT ON, MY TALK PAGE (not to mention it's against Misplaced Pages policy). If you have a problem with something I have placed on my talk page regarding the issue I (or we) may be involved in, please assume good faith first and then discuss the matter with me before jumping to conclusions and making erroneous and/or bad faith assumptions.

(5) While I may remove content placed on this page that originates from exchanges elsewhere, I will never edit what someone what written in order to change the tone of what was written or to make someone look bad. Again, if you have an issue with what I have included here (or have not included), please assume good faith first and then discuss the matter with me before jumping to conclusions and making erroneous and/or bad faith assumptions.

(6) It is my intent to keep my talk page organized, orderly and in compliance with Misplaced Pages standards regarding user talk pages. This means that I reserve the right to include what I choose - so long as it complies with Misplaced Pages standards - and will, in the same vein, remove what I choose.

(7) Anything added to this talk page by another editor that is not in regard to an article being edited or is outside the guildelines for user talk pages will be seen as disruptive editing and the appropriate steps will be taken within Misplaced Pages guidelines - including issuing warnings as appropriate and in line with Misplaced Pages standards.

(8) Last, but not least, don't even think of vandalizing this page. Any vandalism will be reverted immediately and get you reported to the Vandalism Crew. Additionally, doing so will jeopardize your Misplaced Pages account and may get you banned from posting - so don't even try, okay?

Thanks for your understanding - may your Misplaced Pages edits be correct, well-referenced and relevant and may you have a great Misplaced Pages day!

Barnstar

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		For Concrete, Washington. - Omarcheeseboro (talk) 18:09, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow - a Photographer's Barnstar! (what's a "Photographer's Barnstar"? ;-) Just kidding - thanks, Omar! SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 18:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.. I checked out the page after seeing the film of the Tobias Wolff book This Boy's Life. I guess I drove right by there too, since I went from Seattle through the N Cascades last year (via Marblemount). I'm glad to see you like the style of my userpage too :) Anyway, great photos! --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 12:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Userboxes

As a double finally, in answer to your question on my talk page, I didn't create the user boxes in my sandbox, rather, I put those there as reference in case I later decided to use them, and so I could reference their text should I decide to make a new user box.

The best way to make your own user box is to find one you like and edit it. This is what I did to make the KGO and Mac boxes on my page.

Regarding images, they're uploaded to Misplaced Pages and referenced via the Image tag. If you go to the Mac box, for example, and edit the page, you'll see how the image is included within the user box. There's also a helpful article on how to make user boxes at WP:UB. -FeralDruid (talk) 05:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. If I have any more questions, can I impose upon you again? SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 15:14, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Mantle décor

		The Press Barnstar
		SkagitRiverQueen – for diligently correcting press accounts, not to mention Misplaced Pages's "biography of a living person" for Glenn Beck, with concern to the place of Mr. Beck's birth, which WP edit was mentioned (link's here!) by Julie Muhlstein of The (Everett, Washington) Herald on October second, two thousand nine (and for splendid editing all around on the article otherwise, too!) — Justmeherenow 14:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, JustMeHereNow for The Press Barnstar. Personally, I've found editing the GB article somewhat amusing in light of all the discussion - as well as frustrating in light of some of the arguing (and comments by a couple of the editors ;-) You, however, I have found to be a calm in the storm; a lonely beacon of restraint in a squall of self-appointed wordsmiths! You, sir, are a gentleman and stellar Wikipedian! I am honored, and frankly, you made my day! SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 15:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

As you did mine, SkagitRiverQueen, with your graciousness. ;^) Thanks! ↜Just M E here , now 15:34, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Random comment

Gotta say, I'm impressed by your userboxes -- there are a few in there I wouldn't have expected to see on the same page. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and I get that a lot. ;-) SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 04:50, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Message

Messaged the user regarding his harassment. I've also reported the incident to be reviewed by other editors. Happy editing! Netalarmtalk 06:17, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

PS: You might want to archive your talk page. Netalarmtalk 06:17, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 06:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Washington

Thanks for your post. I wholeheartedly agree that Washington is one of the most beautiful places on earth. There are some pretty nice parts of the East, like the White Mountains in New Hampshire, but they don't compare. I've been to Israel, too, and that's another one of my favorites :). When I was in Washington I took a whale watching trip that specifically went to the places the Orcas like to go. They are amazing animals. I take it that you also like watching birds. I wish I knew more about birds than I do, given that Central Park and other parks in New York are major stops along the bird migration routes and we get some very interesting ones. And BTW, I think you were right about "incensed" and "posited." Take care, AFriedman (talk) 22:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Monday! --AFriedman (talk) 18:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC) has extended an olive branch of peace.

Route description on WA 20

Please read WP:USRD/STDS; a substantial route description is expected in a road article. See California State Route 78 for an example. I do agree that some of the details were unnecessary, and the formatting was a bit off, but it should have been revised, not blindly reverted. --Rschen7754 (T C) 06:37, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

AFriedman (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for your note and holiday greetings. And BTW, I don't know if you saw the earlier message I posted on my Talk page, but I apologize for offending you. Here is a little "present" for you. --AFriedman (talk) 19:13, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

The link is to A Christmas Carol. In my opinion, Dickens' argument is even potent enough to soften the hardened heart of a Jew like myself. You may want to look at the link about pikuach nefesh, which is an essential principle of Judaism and very similar to the point Dickens was trying to make about Christmas. I've commented on that article on its Talk page as well, because I think there are other views (including mine) which are not represented in the article. --AFriedman (talk) 19:24, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Dinos

I don't think he's heard of 3rr or other WP policies before. I put a welcome template on his talk page. We'll see how it goes. Best, Amerique 21:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

To our newest Rollbacker

I have just granted you rollback rights because I believe you to be trustworthy, and because you have a history of reverting vandalism and have given in the past or are trusted in the future to give appropriate warnings. Please have a read over WP:ROLLBACK and remember that rollback is only for use against obvious vandalism. Please use it that way (it can be taken away by any admin at a moment's notice). You may want to consider adding {{Rollback}} and {{User rollback}} to your userpage. Any questions, please drop me a line. Best of luck and thanks for volunteering! ❄ upstateNYer ❄ 07:13, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Good luck with the new tool! ❄ upstateNYer ❄ 14:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congrats on becoming a Rollbacker! Here is this.

		The Special Barnstar
		Happy New Year! --AFriedman (talk) 19:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, AFriedman!

AfD nomination of International House of Prayer

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/International House of Prayer. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:WQA

Hello, SkagitRiverQueen. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

MisterSoup

Hi. That edit to your page was completely unacceptable and I have put him on a final warning for personal attacks/harassment. I'll keep an eye on him but please let me know immediately if he trolls you again. All best, Nancy 10:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Archives

My talk page archives are located here.

WP:3RR

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. LaVidaLoca (talk) 19:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

January 2010

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

Request reason:

I am pretty sure I did not violate 3RR as the edit I made this morning to Charles Manson was not a revert. I edited the portion that was contested by two other editors yesterday and provided a compromise with both statements re: the info contained in the Certificate of Live Birth (which was already listed as a reference before I edited the section) and the existing statement re: the info about whether or not Manson was ever referred to as "No Name". Although I did replace the section which was edited yesterday by me - IMO, it never should have been reverted to begin with as it was not incorrect and actually improved the improper order of events, the bad grammar and poor syntax that existed before my edits. The only portion that was actually contested by one other editor (the birth certificate information) was not replaced by me today in the same verbiage as existed yesterday - as I stated above, it was corrected to contain a clearer picture regarding the COLB - but it was an edited version. Ergo, there was no revert, just editing and resubmitting in a better, more compromising form. Believe me, I never would have made the edit at all today if I thought it would be seen as a revert putting me in violation of 3RR. Finally, the admin who blocked me stated this was my second offense. As I understood it at the time, when I was blocked previously it was not considered an actual block. It lasted for a very short period of time as the block was reconsidered. Additionally, I had not been blocked correctly to begin with - there was no template and there was no provision to contest a block. It was not a reasonable block, it was not an exercised block, and it was not a proper block. IOW - it was never really a block to begin with. Ergo, this is not my "second offense", but actually my first actual block. I hope the preceding is clear - if not, please feel free to ask any questions.

Decline reason:

You were not blocked for 3RR, you were blocked for edit warring. The rest of your argument is just wikilawyering; see WP:GAB for a better path to unblocking. --jpgordon 00:21, 9 January 2010 (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.

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

Request reason:

Well, color me confused. Although the above *does* state "edit warring" (and it was my error for not really seeing that previously), the warning I received from LaVidaLoca was for 3RR (that was the header on my talk page), not edit warring. So...if I didn't violate 3RR, why did I get a warning for 3RR and why are other editors gossipping that I was blocked for 3RR? But, I digress... It was never my intention to edit war with my edit at the Charles Manson article this morning, rather, it was just about editing the article and working out what was a problem in the article for the other editor and what was a problem for me content-wise. Now, I understand that by writing another request for unblock that I need to somehow convince you that I now understand why I was blocked (which I do) and to state that I will not repeat the action that got me blocked (which I won't), however... That's kind of a problem since I don't believe I was actually edit warring to begin with. As I stated above, my intent was never to edit war, but to work out a compromise with my edits. The fact remains that the editor who originally reverted my entire edit (and we're talking a lot of editing in an entire section in a very long article) should never have reverted the *entire* edit. He didn't like just one thing I changed, and rather than removing that, he reverted the entire section I edited. From what I could see, that defied common-sense and was essentially a knee-jerk reaction in a throw-out-the-baby-with-the-bathwater kind of fashion. I didn't understand it, I tried to reason with him on the article's talk page. His response was "I'm not working against you — and if you'll permit me to say, I'm not interested in working with you." Okay - so I knew where he stood. He wasn't interested in allowing me to edit the article and would then revert everything I edited. So, I ask you - how can one then go on trying to honestly and productively edit an article if you know that an editor who hangs out at that article is going to revert pretty much everything you do? Does on continue to just edit anyway? Or does one cower and shrink into a corner and stop editing that article? It didn't seem right to me to just stop editing the article, so this morning, I wasn't intent on edit warring, I just wanted to edit the article in a useful, positive fashion. But again, my perfectly good edits were reverted in total without a good explanation. You see, I guess I just don't get why allowing another editor to revert my edits wholesale because he isn't interested in working with me is the best course for Misplaced Pages. I also don't get why leaving that editor to do as he pleases and for me to completely stop editing out of fear is the best course for Misplaced Pages. And I guess I also don't get why I should promise to allow someone treat the article that way in order to be unblocked. Can you tell me why it's okay for that editor (and the other two who also reverted my edits for no real reason) to refuse to work with me and be allowed to revert edits across-the-board and *I'm* the one who's being blocked (and essentially punished) when I wasn't edit-warring to begin with (but they were)? I wasn't the one creating the war-like environment, after all. So...after all I've said here, I imagine I haven't convinced you in the fashion I'm supposed to. Please understand that I'm not doing it just because I'm being stubborn, or trying to be oppositional-defiant. It's because I won't lie and say I won't do something that I know I really didn't do in the first place. Of course I'd like to be able to edit again sooner than 48 hours. Of course I am not going to edit war again if I am unblocked before the 48 hours are up. I can say that because I'm an honest person with the best of intentions always, everywhere I go in my life. But I can't and won't say that I know I was edit-warring and that I think this block is just because (a) I know I wasn't edit warring, I was just plain editing, and (b) I won't compromise my integrity by saying I did something I know I didn't do. I really wish you would look into the other editor(s) involved here by reading talk page of the Charles Manson article - beginning with how the events unfolded starting with the section titled "The horror" and then to the section titled "Faulty revisions" where I tried, in good faith, to not only explain my good faith edits but to reason and reach a working compromise with editor JohnBonaccorsi so that this very kind of scenario would not occur. Thank you for taking the time to read all of this and considering my request for unblock. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 02:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Any time an admin sees a very long unblock request, like this one, it's a clue that it's not likely to contain a valid argument. Your statement suggests that you don't grasp our policy on WP:Edit warring. Please carefully read WP:GAB, WP:NOTTHEM, and WP:EW, then come back and make a *short* request that says how you agree to behave differently in the future. If you would formally commit to a 1RR (no more than one revert per article per day) for some period of time, that would be quite persuasive. EdJohnston (talk) 06:36, 9 January 2010 (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.