Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:35, 12 December 2010

I am currently taking a break from Misplaced Pages. I still pop in briefly just about every day, but if you're looking for assistance you may want to seek it elsewhere.

Archives

Archive 1 (2006) Archive 2 (2007) Archive 3 (Jan-Mar 2008) Archive 4 (Apr-Jun 2008) Archive 5 (Jul-Sep 2008) Archive 6 (Oct-Dec 2008) Archive 7 (Jan-Mar 2009) Archive 8 (Apr-Jun 2009) Archive 9 (Jul-Sep 2009) Archive 10 (Oct-Dec 2009) Archive 11 (Jan-Mar 2010) Archive 12 (Apr-Jun 2010) Archive 13 (Jul-Sep 2010) Archive 14 (Oct-Dec 2010)

Neuilly sa mère ! DYK

Hey Gato, I found a new source so I think I've addressed your request at the DYK nom. Thanks, by the way, for the push! Otherwise I probably would not have done any extra work on the lede. rʨanaɢ (talk) 13:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The Teacher's Bookshop

On 2 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Teacher's Bookshop, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Gaza Baptist Church

On 2 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gaza Baptist Church, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK

I'm troubled by your statement here. Not the comment about the interpretation of Bowman's episcopal career -- I feel it's still somewhat ambiguous, and I've asked for a comment from the user who created the article -- but with your comment about my behavior.

Typically, when I've removed hooks, it is because of questions of appropriateness -- largely because of the question of fiction, which is a point that I've already conceded. This, however, was a question of factual accuracy. I do not think you mean to imply that factual errors (or potential factual errors; the phrasing has been addressed and you have stated that you don't feel it's misleading or inaccurate, so okay) should be left on display for procedural reasons or because they were not addressed soon enough. DS (talk) 15:33, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

You are mistaken. I might have initially supported less restrictive measures in regards to your hook removals, but your repeated failure to address concerns raised by multiple users about those removals has changed my mind. Until you clearly indicate that you understand what is being asked of you, I will support my colleagues in their call for a full ban for you from DYK queues and the current DYK update. But even if you were to indicate fully that you get it now, I think a temporary ban at least would still be desirable at this point in order to let the dust settle. Gatoclass (talk) 15:50, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, let's see. As I've already stated, there's the issue of "appropriate", which is a point I've already conceded multiple times. There's the issue of my sidestepping procedure, which is inherently linked to the issue of "appropriate"; however, given that I've already conceded that point, this issue would only come up in instances where there's a serious problem in another aspect such as factual accuracy (about which I had a genuine concern, which has since been assuaged) or BLP violations. Plus there's tweaks to sentence structure, punctuation, wording, etc. Aside from this, there's the issue of people who become upset when articles which they had hoped to list on DYK do not in fact appear there. And there's the issue of the extent that I'm arguing about this, when it would be so much simpler if I just admitted error (which I've already done, repeatedly) and took my punishment (which I strongly reject). Is there anything else? DS (talk) 16:32, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Look, I haven't done an in-depth analysis of your edits at T:DYK or T:DYK/Q. My impression is that you've made some worthwhile contributions in those areas, in regards to say, grammar, syntax, rephrasing and so on. The issue is your unilateral pulling of hooks from those pages without prior discussion. If you look through WT:DYK, you will see numerous concerns such as those you have raised about various hooks discussed there. You are simply being asked to follow the same procedure, rather than just pull the hooks, because there is a questionmark over your judgement in that regard. Unnecessary hook pulling just pisses people off because it makes for more work.

So the first thing you would need to do is demonstrate that you actually fully understand what is being asked of you. Until you've done that, obviously no-one is going to trust that you will do the right thing. But even if you do that now, people are still going to be disinclined to trust you because of the difficulty in communicating the problem to you in the first place. So I have my doubts the ban could be prevented at this point. Perhaps in a week or two, when feelings have settled down, you might successfully apply for a review, but I would doubt your chances at this point. Gatoclass (talk) 17:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Given that you haven't actually done an "in-depth analysis", could I politely ask on what grounds you feel qualified to voice an opinion (especially given that I've already conceded the point)? DS (talk) 17:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I have voiced an opinion in regards to your hook removals, which are transparently problematic, not your copyediting, which as far as I can tell has been sound. Gatoclass (talk) 17:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification; aside from the issues of fiction (which is a point I have already conceded), and aside from the fact that I should have restored any such items to T:TDYK (oops), are there any incidents of hook removal with which you find fault? If so, which ones? May I explain them? DS (talk) 18:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Gatoclass, sorry about that, totally okay regarding , did not realize it was an edit conflict. No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 19:44, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem :) Gatoclass (talk) 19:45, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Healthy DYK hook nom count

Thought you'd be especially interested in Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Healthy_DYK_hook_nom_count — Rlevse • Talk • 23:57, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

User page

I've always wondered why you don't have a photo of a Gato-class submarine on your page. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:59, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Input

Your thoughts invited here: Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Thoughts_on_DYK_noms.2C_including_the_declining_rate. And you still need a photo of a submarine on your user page ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 17:05, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I know it looks as if my nic refers to the submarine, but that was never my intention and quite honestly I'm a bit embarrassed about it and would probably change it if not for the inconvenience. "Gato" is, I believe, Spanish for "cat", so my nic is really supposed to mean "classy cat", but few people seem to read it that way :/ Gatoclass (talk) 23:03, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for giving me a good laugh! :) Shubinator (talk) 23:13, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Having been to sea on three submarines, it's the first thing I think of when I see "gato". The second is a type of fish. Since I don't speak Spanish, I'd never think of "classy cat". — Rlevse • Talk • 23:07, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Just for the record: USS Gato (SS-212) was the namesake of the Gato-class of WWII subs. There was an Thresher-class sub named Gato too, see USS Gato. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:10, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

PS Chauncey Vibbard

Hi Gatoclass. You are off to such a great start on the article PS Chauncey Vibbard that it may qualify to appear on Misplaced Pages's Main Page under the Did you know... section. The Main Page gets about 4,000,000 hits per day and appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Also, don't forget to keep checking back at Did you know suggestions for comments regarding your nomination. Again, great job on the article. -- Ms. Citizen (talk) 19:50, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Submarine working group

Dear editor:
Would you like a chance to collaborate with other editors on a working group dedicated to submarines? Based on your contributions to submarine-related articles, we have determined that you probably have a interest in submarines. If you would like to join our working group, visit WP:ONAU. MessageDeliveryBot (talk) 07:02, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of ONAU at 07:02, 21 October 2010 (UTC).

Good work

This diff is a splendid extension of the policy that I had proposed re: hooks on active political candidates. Misplaced Pages is based on the concept of building on each other's work, after all.

In all honesty, I rather doubt that any such all-candidates hook would also satisfy all the other criteria for hooks, but I'm willing to be surprised. DS (talk) 14:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure

You are invited to participate in the Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure which is expected to close in a little over a week. If you have received this message, it is because it appears that you participated in the 2009 AC RfC, and your contributions indicate that you are currently active on Misplaced Pages. Ncmvocalist (talk) 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

• News and notes: Foundation's finances, geodata milestone, interim counsel, museum conference

• In the news: Airplane construction with Misplaced Pages, lessons from the strategy project, logic over rhetoric

• WikiProject report: Scoring with WikiProject Ice Hockey

• Features and admins: Good-lookin' slugs and snails

• Arbitration report: Arb resignation during plagiarism discussion; election RfC closing in 2 days

• Technology report: Foundation office switches to closed source, secure browsing, brief news

Thank you

Thank you, for your matter-of-fact tone and logical and rational approach at WT:DYK. Your admirable demeanor there has helped to focus dialog in a constructive and productive manner. Most appreciated. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, thankyou, but I wouldn't be too hasty in your congratulations. This debate is obviously still at a very early stage and I really have no idea where it's going to end up at this point :) Gatoclass (talk) 16:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow, what a mess. It hurts to read the comments. There's more drama than a soap opera and you know that I like to avoid drama. Some people sure are hell bent to get rid of the whole process by making broad statements about everyone at DYK. I'm somewhat glad that I don't have as much discretionary time for Misplaced Pages. Royalbroil 05:04, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't really see it that way. I think it's healthy to have a philosophical discussion about broad directions from time to time. This one has been brewing for a long time and I think it had to happen sooner or later. There may be no immediate results from this, but down the track there may be some worthwhile ideas we can revisit when the time is right. Gatoclass (talk) 06:06, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow, you sure are level-headed and calm in the midst of a huge storm! I object to some of those broad statements which sure are condescending at the entire group of DYK people, calling everyone a bunch of plagiarists or at least close paraphrasers. I have a FAC almost ready, was just about ready to list it, but I'm nervous about what objects will be thrown at me. I wish I was oblivious and naive. Royalbroil 02:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Your DYK suggestion

I don't think we promote enough articles to GA to fill an entire queue. However, if we threw B-class articles into that category I would strongly support your proposal. Marcus Qwertyus 21:16, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for USS General Taylor

On 9 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article USS General Taylor, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 1844, USS General Taylor conveyed abolitionist Jonathan Walker to Pensacola, where he was infamously branded "S.S." for "Slave Stealer"? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 06:08, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

• Fundraiser: November 15 launch, emphasis on banner optimization and community involvement

• News and notes: Second Wikipedian in Residence, {{citation needed}} for sanity

• In the news: WP prose praised, Public Policy update, education debate, WP documentary

• WikiProject report: WikiProject California

• Features and admins: No, not science fiction—real science

• Election report: The countdown begins

• Arbitration report: No cases this week; Date delinking sanctions reduced for one party; History ban extended

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

DKY talk: collapsed box adds everything new within it

Can you fix, please? Tony (talk) 10:52, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. Fixed. Gatoclass (talk) 12:23, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: DYK nom for James C. Kent

I don't think so, but since he ruled on an important case he is of some notability. Regards, —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 10:15am • 23:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

• News and notes: Fundraisers start for Misplaced Pages and Citizendium; controversial content and leadership

• In the news: How big can Misplaced Pages pictures get?; fundraising season

• WikiProject report: Sizzling: WikiProject Bacon

• Features and admins: Of lakes and mountains

• Dispatches: A guide to the Good Article Review Process

• Arbitration report: No cases this week; Amendments filed on Climate Change and Date Delinking; Motion passed on EEML

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Problem with subst:NewDYKnomination

Hi I have always used subst:NewDYKnomination but can't work out why the image on my nomination of Outline of canoeing and kayaking on the 13th hasn't worked properly. Please will you have a look when you have a moment and let me know what's wromg? Thank you Thruxton (talk) 06:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't know why it didn't work either but I've fixed it now. Basically, the filename itself was missing. Gatoclass (talk) 06:48, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Thruxton (talk) 12:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Information

I permit myself to bring your attention about the edits of user:Marokwitz (16 november) who is removing the name 1948 Palestine war from all the articles of wikipedia. What can be done ? Noisetier (talk) 20:48, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

At some time there are up to 6 modifications per minute. He used a bot to perform this. Is this permitted on wikipedia ? Noisetier (talk) 21:10, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I wonder why you are slandering me across many user pages without contacting me first. I am not removing the name. This war consisted of two stages, the 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine which lasted until May 14 1948, and the 1948 Arab–Israeli War after May 15, 1948. I'm just using the name of more specific campaign where applicable, instead of the broader name, in accordance to the sources. This is a simple matter of providing specific and accurate information. And if you have any problems with my edits, why not contact me? Marokwitz (talk) 06:04, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

The revert of 500 internal links to the article 1948 Palestine war that you made last night is a pov-pushing. The way you justify you and the way you proceeded are not appropriate. I would add that in Hamas and the Taliban analogy, you collaborated a lot to the development of an Orignal Research. By essence, this is an exemple of pov-pushing.

You focus too much on the "letter of the right" to cover you. Misplaced Pages is also based on the 4th pillar (be civil) and such rules as WP:AGF that you just referred to. The is the "letter of the rule" and the "spirit of the rule".

In importing on[REDACTED] the israeli-palestinian conflict, you harm the image of Israel and the one of your community. I would advice you to read and think about Misplaced Pages:Writing for the opponent. That would help you to improve the quality of your collaboration at the project in using simultaneously all our 5 pillars but more above all, that would increase your empathy for all sides of the I-P conflict.

Is there no article that you could *study* and *develop* on focusing both on reliable sources the content of which you don't like and on reliable sources you have sympathy for ?

Think about this. Noisetier (talk) 07:19, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

(see Marokwitz talk page for the follow up)

DYK reviewing guide

I know you're taking a bit of a break; have you started on this? If so, where is it, as I'd like to help, and if not, I'm going to start on it. Thanks, cmadler (talk) 14:48, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

No, I haven't started it yet, I don't seem to have the energy to do much writing at the moment. I do have some ideas about the general shape of the guide though. If you want to make a start, by all means go ahead - just post me a link if you wouldn't mind as I will probably want to have some input into the shape of it. Gatoclass (talk) 14:58, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm starting it in my sandbox at User:Cmadler/sandbox/DYKreviewguide. Feel free to jump in. cmadler (talk) 15:11, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep an eye on it :) Gatoclass (talk) 15:14, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Finally dawned on me

Hey. I read through this reply a few times with the feeling that something wasn't clicking and what it was finally dawned on me. I think everybody agrees that if editorA submits a 2-article hook, he can then review 2 one-article hooks or 1 two-article hook. But say there's a 15-article hook sitting there. Can editorA review 2 of the 15 articles? I'm sure there are a million arguments to be made on both sides, but it might be a point worth clearing up. I'm hesitant to stir things there up any more than they are — a !vote on whether the sun rises in the morning would surely turn into a 50%-50% screamathon morass. Cheers. Haus 07:37, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

No, as I said you can't just review some articles in a multi. I think most people will tacitly understand this without being told, so I don't see it as a problem. But in the unlikely event that someone actually tries that, it will probably be better dealt with at the time rather than spelled out in the rules. Gatoclass (talk) 10:57, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

• News and notes: No further Bundesarchiv image donations; Dutch and German awards; anniversary preparations

• In the news: Jimbo Wales interviewed and parodied; Misplaced Pages in politics

• Book review: The Myth of the Britannica, by Harvey Einbinder

• WikiProject report: WikiProject College Football

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Election report: Candidates still stepping forward

• Arbitration report: Brews ohare site-banned; climate change topic-ban broadened

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Please remove outing

--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Posts revealing my location, nationality, ethnicity at shukis talkpage and SPI. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:24, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Gatoclass, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Gatoclass/SB/Mao's Great Famine. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

• News and notes: Backlog drive; youth and confidence among Wikipedians, brief news

• In the news: Fundraising banners continue to provoke; plagiarism charges against congressional climate change report

• Interview: Interview with Johanna Niesyto and Nathaniel Tkacz from "Critical Point of View"

• WikiProject report: Celebrate WikiProject Holidays

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Election report: Voting in full swing

• Arbitration report: New case: Longevity; Biophys topic ban likely to stay in place

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Will Beback's comment in Little Olive AE case

May I respectfully request, if you are allowed to do that, that you move Will Beback's comment out of the non involved admin section of Olive AE case. Edith Sirius Lee (talk) 14:53, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Oops, just noticed that you are taking a Wiki break. Since Will's comment was just after one of your comment, I thought it was natural to ask you. Edith Sirius Lee (talk) 14:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm well aware that Will Beback is an involved user. I don't think his comment is doing any harm there right now - he's just asking for a little time to prepare his case. We can move it when he's done that. Gatoclass (talk) 15:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Saying that he can make a case is saying a lot. I thought it was exactly what the guideline says that he should not do. I must be missing something. Edith Sirius Lee (talk) 16:11, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're referring to. When you open a thread at AE you are starting a case. Will has simply stated that he would like some more time to prepare his case. It's not unusual for users to ask for a little time to do so, and no reason why it shouldn't be granted. Gatoclass (talk) 16:23, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

In any case, I have now moved his comment as you requested. Gatoclass (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I saw nothing wrong in Will's comment. On the contrary, I was saying that it was an important comment "saying a lot" and, therefore, the guideline must apply even more. Upsetting you is the last thing I wanted to do. When I wrote "I must be missing something", I absolutely meant it literally - it was not a way to argue - only a way to say that I am not insisting. I had given up on this request. Edith Sirius Lee (talk) 21:14, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Clarification please

Of all the comments posted on the recent AE, I found yours to be the most bewildering. I was expecting vitriol from others but not from you. We’ve crossed paths in the past and though our disagreements were sharp, we were always courteous and always managed to resolve our differences amicably, generally incorporating a fusion of both viewpoints. I therefore found your comments puzzling. Best,--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 16:49, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I think you have misread my comments. I wasn't trying to get you more harshly sanctioned, I was simply trying to prevent Nableezy from being more harshly sanctioned than I thought he deserved. In doing so, I did point out that some of your edits ought to be considered more objectionable than the ones that got N. into trouble, but I only did so as a means of trying to persuade the uninvolved admins that N. deserved no worse a ban than yourself.

In fact, I thought both of you got much worse sanctions than you warranted - indeed, I endorsed the views of the admin who said the offenses should be overlooked entirely, and said I thought a one month ban for either would be more than enough. Unfortunately, AE is currently in one of its sterner phases. That is the problem with AE - the sanctions that get handed out from one month to the next can vary greatly, depending entirely on the personal dynamics of those involved. I have tried to argue for a graded system of sanctions, but it's never had much support. I guess it wouldn't be that easy to achieve in any case. Gatoclass (talk) 17:10, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay thanks for the clarification. I was considering editing other articles that were not within the topic area such as the Vietnam War, Korean War and more obscure conflicts like the war in Biafra and the Chad/Lybian conflict but I think I'm going to step back for the three or (possibly) two months of my ban. I'm overdue for a break. Best,--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 18:02, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

• News and notes: ArbCom tally pending; Pediapress renderer; fundraiser update; unreferenced BLP drive

• In the news: Amazon "shopping-enabling" Misplaced Pages; Al Jazeera interview; be like Misplaced Pages

• GLAM-WIKI London: British Museum hosts two days of talks between Wikimedia and the cultural sector

• WikiLeaks: Repercussions of the WikiLeaks cable leak

• WikiProject report: Talking copyright with WikiProject Copyright Cleanup

• Features and admins: Birds and insects

• Arbitration report: New case: World War II

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

My new article

Hi Gatoclass, I am glad you liked my new article. ☺Don't understand how could I have forgotten to ask you to copy edit it ☺? Glad you found it anyway ☺. I'd like to ask you a question please. If after your copy-editing something will be left out of the article ☺, would you mind, if I am to promote you as a creator in the DYK nomination for the article? Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer Mbz, but I really don't think I've done enough on that article to merit a DYK credit. Gatoclass (talk) 17:30, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. You know I have problems with English, and I really appreciate any copy edits performed on the articles I write. I would have gladly added you as a creator, but this is of course up to you, if you'd like to be added as a creator or you would not. If you would not, then of course nothing will prevent you from promoting it on DYK yourself ASAP (like today) I guess. ☺Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

If you done with your copy-edit could you please remove your opposition from DYK? There's no valid reason to oppose the article's promotion anymore.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:31, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Civilian casualty ratio

I have no objections to the article in its current form that exceed the usual disagreements between editors. I think it should go to DYK. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 17:35, 12 December 2010 (UTC)