Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:28, 7 June 2010

New messages will appear at the bottom of this page.

Vandals, trolls, and other fiendly visitors, please note:

"Misplaced Pages is a community,
not a crazy den of pigs!"

Social experimenters, please note:

"We're an encyclopedia,
not a bunch of lab rats in a cage."

If I leave a message for you: Please respond on your talk page. I will add it to my watchlist, so you don't need to notify me, unless I don't respond when a response is expected (normally within 24 hours, unless the issue is urgent). This helps keep discussions in one place and makes them easier to read and follow. If you leave a message for me: I will generally respond here. Either add this page to your watchlist or ask me to notify you of a response on your talk page. If you are discussing an article: I would prefer to use that article's talk page, unless you'd rather not to use that page for some reason, such as commenting on a particular user's edits in semi-privacy. I generally do not bother to leave messages on IP talk pages, since many IPs are dynamic, and there's no way to know the difference on the first edits. The user will more than likely never even know they received a message, so it's just a waste of time better spent on actual editing. (This is one example of how not having mandatory registration does a great disservice to IP editors. Because of this, IP editors really ARE second-class users, made so by Jim Wales' own non-negotiable (thus dictatorial) policies.) The main exception is vandalism warnings, which are required before most admins will block or ban for vandalism. Please limit this page to discussions not related to any particular article, those covering a wide range of articles/topics, or personal comments. Note: I reserve the right to decline or withdraw from a situation that is escalating or uncomfortable, without giving a reason, or to take further action through permissable means. (See this policy.) This may include removing your messages from my talk page. If I've done so, please DO NOT re-add the same meassage, or follow-up with another - They will be removed again, mostly likely with a edit summary about your obnoxiousness in continually hounding me. If you then follow this up wth an ANI report, you're proving that you are a real jerk, and I won't respond there either, per WP:DENY. I may, however, file my own ANI report against your harassment. Further notes: Due to the misbehavior of a few IPs, IPs are sometimes prevented from editing this page. If you need to discuss an article, see the previous note. If you need to discuss something else with me, register, and come back in four days. If it's urgent, use the e-mail feature; it won't work if it's been abused lately. If you chose to whine on an admin complaint board somewhere, I'll probably hear about it. And ignore you. ;) PS. if you posted the type of comments on my page that you would post on an admin alert board, they would have been ignored and removed anyway! Also, talk to me like a normal person, and don't just quote Wiki guidelines to me - I'm NOT a newbie (Read WP:DTTR!). I consider it rude, and will likely just delete your comments, and ignore the point, as guidelines can be ignored. If you do it anyway, and turn out to be wrong, an apology would be the considerate thing to make, though you probably won't since it's not policy to apologize for your mistakes. (If Jimbo Wales wanted people to apologize for their mistakes, he'd have made it a policy, right?!) If you want me to take your opinions and edits seriously, you ought to Register!. Otherwise one never knows who really made the edits, especially in the case of dynamic IP addresses. If I mistakenly called your edits as vandalism when I reverted them, it was probably because you did not leave an edit summary. Please realize that, in many cases, unexplained edits are indistinguishable from vandalism! This also applies to Rollbacks. I reserve the right to clean up this page in any manner I chose, including the use of Rollbacks for non-vandalism, and especially if you made more than one edit. Please do NOT re-post what I've removed, unless you are an admin issuing a formal warning, though I'll probably still remove it! If you wish to keep a matter confidential,such as discussing personal and/or confidential information, you may use the "E-mail" feature (usually activated!). I will respond in kind unless otherwise requested. This is not for discussing routine matters regarding editing on pages - use the article talk pages for that.

Dave1185 is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

It is 10:18:47 on January 15, 2025, according to the server's time and date.

This user has read and understood the BIG HUGE FREAKING PURPLE BOX. Have you?

This user is a WikiDragon. ...one of the last of a dying breed...

This user has been on Misplaced Pages for 16 years, 10 months and 19 days.

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

This editor is a Veteran Editor II and is entitled to display this Bronze Editor Star.

This editor is a Grand Tutnum and is entitled to display this Book of Knowledge with Coffee Cup Stain.

This user is part of the Welcoming Committee.

Archive 1: Dave1185 MMVIII
Archive 2: Dave1185 MMIX
Archive 3: Dave1185 MMX (NB:Donkey years ago, I fried two 166mhz Pentium MMX in my many attempts of overclocking them first to 180mhz, then to 200mhz. It works~! When I found the Celeron 300A, the rest became history. Ahhh... good times~!)

Welcome! (* Usage: {{subst:welcomeg}} )

Hello, Dave1185! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Midorihana 07:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Using rollbacks on one's own talk page

Dave, I think we were involved in a discussion recently regarding using rollbacks on one's own talk page to perform cleanups. Do you remember where the guideline that allows this is? I've got an admin accusing me of misusing rollbacks by reverting a warning I issued to myself! I'd like to use the guideline in taking action against the admin, if it's necessary. Thanks.- BilCat (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

• Hang on a sec and wait for my reply, I'm on it now. --Dave 18:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! - BilCat (talk) 18:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

• Bill, try looking at Misplaced Pages:Rollback feature & Misplaced Pages:User pages, it think it does allow you to do that but why is that Admin harping on you for? (Bill, I'd suggest that you just ignore him (per messed-up sense of priorities!), because AFAIK you are entitled to use the Rollback feature even if it is on your own user page.) --Dave 18:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I think I was involved in a edit war with on of his/her friends or something, on the James Garner page. Quite stange! Anyway, I remember an ANI or something a couple of months back in which an editor (I thought it was you) was being harassed for using rollbacks to remove comments from their own talk page. It took a while, but someone did find a guideline that allowed it. - BilCat (talk) 19:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Found it! See this diff at WQA, and it was you being harassed there. The guideline is at "When to use rollback":

"Rollback should be used only for reverts that are self-explanatory – such as removing obvious vandalism; to revert content in your own user space ; or to revert edits by banned users who are not allowed to edit." - BilCat (talk) 19:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Request for input

Dave - many thanks for your comments and advice. I was just wondering whether you had had the time to see my response to your comment (see this post in response to your comment) on the 'Massimo' talk page. If you could take a look I would be most grateful. I would very much appreciate your help in keeping this discussion constructive and 'on the talk' page as I am hoping it will remain. If you could post something to that effect I think it would be really helpful in preventing the resumption of any sort of edit warring - i.e. any editing or reversal of edits on the article itself before we reach a consensus on the talk page. Many thanks and kind regards, Historybuff1930 (talk)

• Not necessary for me to add in my 2 cents now on "Massimo" as I think that Fab is currently reading through what I had provided him on his talk page. Per WP:IRS and WP:VERIFY, I am behind you in view of the sources provided by you but there is a chance that Fab might offer a better source to counter that, since he lives in Rome and he is nearer to the actual source should he be able to find it to back his claims. Which is why I kept my silence... I'd rather that you two gentlemen work things out amongst yourself. That said, I will still intervene if either of you escalates, which is highly unlikely given the current atmosphere. In short, relax... I got your back. Cheers and regards~! --Dave 16:22, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• Understood. Many thanks for your help. Historybuff1930 (talk) 16:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• You are welcome! Don't be afraid to ask another editor for a third party opinion when an edit here irks you, we are humans after all and are not spared from feeling indifferently towards the action/edit/statement of others at times. Cheers and regards~! --Dave 06:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks Dave. Appreciate the advice. I have posted a long, non personal and detailed piece of research on the 'Massimo' talk page (see this post), which took me a while to put together. No success as yet with asking for 3rd party opinion, although I think there is plenty enough material on the talk page now for someone to opine on, particularly on (1) the main source I have used (the original 'Almanach de Gotha', which anyone with any familiarity with heraldry will recognise as the top reference source on the subject and very accurate) and (2) the verifiability of sources point that I keep raising (which is a generic point applicable to all Wiki articles). Thanks again, Historybuff1930 (talk) 22:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Aw shucks! I was hoping you'd do it! I may be able to get to it later today, and that may give him enough time to use the extra rope! - BilCat (talk) 17:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• Aye~! Even as we speak, the noose is not slacking one bit. --Dave 17:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Salve Dave!

Please excuse me for not having responded earlier. I've been terribly busy and out of town for some days. Now I'm back. I just posted a response to Historybuff's arguments which I think and hope it will settle the issue. Thank you for all the advices. DGAF and agree-dis-agree were pertaining!

Please note I didn't revert the page although incorrect. I asked HB to remove one source (Theroff's Gotha ) which was already declared to be unreliable . I'm pretty sure I proved that the sources I was referencing are correct and authoritative. Let's see how this will evolve. Ciao. Fabrizio - Fabritius (talk) 09:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, you asked...

Plip!

But no worries, that was a really borderline user. {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 05:28, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• Ah... minnow, yummy when nicely baked with some butter, garlic and onion added... lightly seasoned with some salt and pepper to taste. *grin* Having a late lunch over here now! --Dave 05:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

You made me hungry... :( (well, good thing too, because my brother just called me for dinner... :P) {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 06:46, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• And if only that Rock boy had openly apologise to you for his stupidity, I might not have reacted that way. Anyway, we'll let it pass and be back to our merry way, right? Bon appetit~! --Dave 06:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Those who play with fire

You once said to me that Those who play with fire will get burn by it eventually, sadly no, that isn't the case, they get away with it.. Regards, Justin talk 16:31, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

• Justin, let it all go because obviously you are not applying what you think you had learned of WP:DGAF... read → Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages is not about winning ←. --Dave 16:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Mmm, who said it was about winning? Those that do think that way, well they think they've won in that they're getting what they wanted. I would imagine the Champagne is on ice as we speak. In a supposedly collaborative project how can there be winners? And as they're probably following me here as well, they're getting away with stalking as well. Seems the way to "win" is to hound people into leaving and arbcom will do fuck all about it. No, strike that, arbcom can be manipulated into backing them. I'm learning not to give a fuck but only because I've lost any respect for wikipedia, its institutions or have any pleasure in editing anymore. I would hope that isn't what you meant. Adieu. Justin talk 18:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Massimo

@ Dave1185. I hope all is well with you. I have posted another extensive piece of research on the 'Massimo' talk page (see my latest post), and have made a polite request to Fabritius to engage with me in the same way as I am engaging with him. One of the key things I wanted to get across was that each time I post, I am presenting fully-sourced, verifiable, detailed, non-personal arguments, which take a considerable amount of time to put together. Yet given the amount of time I have invested, I am beginning to feel as if, no matter how clearly I lay out my arguments, and no matter how exhaustive my explanations, I am not getting anything like the same in return. Fabritus is replying with phases such as "Regarding the Massimo article I disagree with all you wrote" or "I proved what I said with references but you didn't prove anything" - I really don't know what to say to statements like that given the constructive and thorough way I have approached this. These, amongst others, are very sweeping statements which even an impartial observer can see are not correct. All I ask is that I get the same sort of detailed, non-personal response back. My point about verifiable sources is just being ignored and it just feels one sided in terms of effort. Please see this for what it is - a polite appeal to Fabritius and an attempt to quell any 'heat' on his side. I honestly want to have a proper debate and a civilised discussion, which is something I genuinely look forward to. Your help, as ever, is much appreciated. Kind regards, Historybuff1930 (talk) 21:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:13, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Indonesian Aerospace

Ugh! Hopefull we can find someone to translate Indonesian Aerospace into standard English, and remove the adverts. - BilCat (talk) 13:54, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

• Agreed, though my understanding of Bahasa isn't that good... I'm not sure if I'm up to mark to this but I'll rope in a few Indonesia "experts" to help out. Also, I've tagged the article page, seems that a lot of issue are abound. Cheers~! --Dave 15:58, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Ciao again Dave

Hi Dave, maybe this time you should insert the calm tag in Edwards321 answer in the Massimo discussion page. Honestly, by looking at his replies, I don't think he's an unbiased editor. He's too much aggressive to have a neutral point of view. The discussion is really poor, with no arguments pertaining to the issue. His only intention seems trying to catch me red-handed. Could you please have a peek at the discussion? Ciao. Fabrizio.--Fabritius (talk) 15:13, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

• FYI, I've sub-sectioned all the responses so that it is easier for all of us to follow the discussion(s). Fab, try to work calmly with us, I know this is something of a family honour for you hence I would really appreciate if you could work with a Neutral point of view attitude when editing, regardless of what other people might say. If you have done your utmost, then I don't see any need for me or any Admin to intervene. Agreed? --Dave 15:28, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

• Fabritius - it seems that unless an editor agrees with what you say (but repeatedly do not provide proof for), then they are 'biased' - now it is Edward321's turn to suffer these personal attacks, as I already have. Why on earth would two totally independent editors both be 'biased'? I urge you, politely, to please refrain from this type of behaviour as it is unhelpful. Thanks in advance and kind regards, Historybuff1930 (talk) 00:00, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

• Dave, it's not about family honour, it's about truth. I'm getting bored by useless discussions about COI, calm tags, conjectures and so on by people which are clearly ignoring the only official sources for italian titles:

1. The heraldic laws (by Royal decrees - verifiable and referenced).

2. The italian College of Arms, Consulta Araldica (by Royal decree - verifiable and referenced).

3. The official directory: Libro d'Oro (by Royal decree - verifiable and referenced).

When Historybuff1930 or Edward321 ignore these original sources arguing with third parties opinions (which are not verifiable and might be incorrect), with false statistics as he did, I think I can use appropriately the term bias without meaning to offend them.

The heraldic law was regulating titles and these have never been abolished like they falsely pretend. Libro d'oro is still used nowadays when someone listed therein wants to add the predicate to his surname (verifiable and referenced).

By their logic we should discard all wikipedia's articles (many also in italian) I referenced. There was no word of comment about these articles.

Cheers, --Fabritius (talk) 09:48, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Baiting? No!

User talk:Atama#Can I beg a favour, please? I asked for a block as a favour as I'm having problems with nightmares again right now. Have you seen what someone has added to it? Floating over my request is text in white, ROFLMAO!. Can you see how it was done? Justin talk 16:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

• Just, get out of the house and go swim a bit, catch a movie or do something fun (or something you've been wanting to do!) under the sun, methinks you've been thinking too much! That hidden text was added long before you had left a message there (see the page's edit history if you don't believe me!), hence I don't see any baiting involved with you. Cheers~! --Dave 17:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Taking a break mate, not in the best frame of mind right now but it is nothing to do with wikipedia at all. Trying to sort myself out but it ain't easy. Justin talk 17:13, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I've saw that ROFLMAO! before, its part of a template User:Hi878/Right_Secret_Page.pmt7ar 18:24, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Bored?

See Talk:Royal Canadian Navy#Canada's Navy! - BilCat (talk) 21:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

• Wow~! At the rate things are going, they'll definitely need a Royal stapler to staple the nonsensical discussion shut. ;) --Dave 21:59, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Please help with moderating the "Singapore English", "Singapore" and "culture of Singapore" wiki

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi Dave, I would appreciate if you can help moderate the following Wikis.

1. User "Node_ue" on the "Singapore English" wiki seems to assert that Yoong did not write that " Pro Singlish Singaporeans feel that Singlish can help establish a national identity" (see dicussion). I have responded to him before on the discussion page and don't see any need to respond to him again. He obviously has a problem with simple comprehension and I don't see a need dwell on that further.

He also asserts that the section on "Notable Singaporeans" should not be there, citing that there are no Notable Koreans in the "Korean Language" wiki as an example. However, a wiki on "Korean language" vis a vis "Singapore English" is obviously different. One is about a language (korean) worldwide, another is about English in Singapore. Hence, writing about notable Singaporeans related to the English language field would not be out of place in that wiki.

2. On the "Culture of Singapore article", user "Jpatokal" has been trolling. Hence, I deleted his comments on the discussion as they were pretty useless and I did not want too give the troll any attention. There were spelling and grammatical errors in the wiki, he was right about that. It was a work in progress, I edited it while it was rather late hence I was quite sleepy but I had intended to go back to finish it some time later. However, "Jpatokal" has gone on to insult and troll.

And "Node_ue" left a message on my talk page saying I insulted "Jpatokal", when it was the opposite. I have a feeling they are friends.

3. On the "Singapore" wiki, "Jpatokal" once again deleted the pictures of "Fish and chips" and "Chicken cutlet" from the list of pictures of everyday Singaporean food without discussion. His reason was "those pictures are not taken in Singapore", which is rediculously funny.

Even if a picture is not taken in Singapore, surely it can be placed there? The satay, hainanese chicken rice and durian pictures are also not taken in Singapore. But they all serve the purpose of providing reasonable representation of everyday Singaporean food and the diversity of Singaporean cuisine.

PS: What is even more hilarious is that neither "Node_ue" or "Jpatokal" are Singaporeans yet somehow "Node_ue" (whom I suspect has never set foot in Singapore) feels qualified to write about Singlish (from what he read from books) and "Jpatokal" feels qualified to write about the culture of Singapore. Ironically, as both of them commented about poor spelling, grammar in the "Culture of Singapore" article, they themselves where typing in broken Englishes. The article was not 100% error free (quite sleepy while editing it) but it was far from readable by any standards. It was a work in progress and that is what edits are for.

I am not going to respond to either of them as they are obviously out elicit a response from me, doing so would play into their hands. Please help sort this out if you are free. I will be quite busy for a while these days. Thanks and sorry for the rough start we got off to.

Cenwin88lee (talk) 15:22, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Dave1185,

Cenwin88lee has been engaged in destructive editing at several articles. Please see the following diffs:

Also, he has engaged in repeated personal attacks at Talk:Culture of Singapore, where he is calling User:Jpatokal a troll, and then repeatedly blanking the talkpage:

• (notice the edit summary - "removing irrelevant comments by troll")

Also, he continues to remove the {{fact}} tags I have added at Singapore English for no apparent reason except that he believes it is "his" article, although I have repeatedly referred him to WP:OWN.

In addition, he seems to be a fan of deleting large sections of well-sourced content from articles. On the other hand, he also seems to have a penchant for adding large sections of poorly-spelled, completely unsourced material that appears to be OR and often POV, although I have tried several times to educate him about Misplaced Pages policies. --ಠ_ಠ node.ue ಠ_ಠ (talk) 17:05, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

In conclusions

TBH, I would rather the lot of you go talk it out at the article page than to carry on with such petty argument on another person's discussion page when he goes on vacation. And now that I'm back, I trust that you lot would have cool down somewhat and be back on each merry way(s)? Over and out~! --Dave 13:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Welcome back!

Dave, I hope you had a good holiday. If you're ready to jump in with both feet, take a look at the later discussions as Talk:Lockheed U-2‎! - BilCat (talk) 15:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

• Nah... I'll pass on the offer for now since I'm still very much in a merry mood coming back from Shanghai 3 days ago. :) --Dave 16:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)

The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:59, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

No, seriously. You hand out way too many trouts. It pisses people off. Oh, and note how I am aiding my trout with words. A little side dish. --67.180.161.183_{04:28, 7 June 2010 (UTC)}

• Wikipedians in Singapore