Misplaced Pages

Tom Hatton

Thank you for your AfD participation at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Tom Hatton. Since you made your initial comments, the article has been substantially revised by the editor who requested that it be restored after previous PROD deletion. Please reevaluate the article and see if your !vote in that AfD reflects your assessment of the updated article. Jclemens (talk) 18:09, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages frustrations

Hi Joe, sorry to see that you've had a lot of frustrating experiences lately. It can be very difficult dealing with other editors that are attacking or criticizing you, especially since the threshold for something being considered a "personal attack" is rather high these days. Whenever I get frustrated with dealing with other editors, I try to concentrate on just writing articles and stay away from the more dramatic areas of the project (like DYK and AN/I). Or if I'm having a serious problem, I'll ask another editor I trust to intervene on my behalf. Anyway, just wanted to say that I empathize with your frustrations and offer my assistance if you need anything. Cheers. Kaldari (talk) 22:10, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement and advice. Joe Chill (talk) 22:15, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

mChip

Hi Joe Chill, I was interested to see your notice pf approval of a DYK hook which could appear on our main page here immediately below my recently posted copyright concern raised with that same editor, originating from a different current DYK submission. Have you reviewed my concerns, and extended that review to the artice you've just OK'd? I found some problems in that one too, but waiting for the intial response from the editor. Franamax (talk) 01:05, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I reviewed the sources a second time while expanding an article. Is there any actions to be taken to stop these copyright violations? Joe Chill (talk) 01:13, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Well... I just randomly started looking at what's underneath the DYK noms and tried three. One looked OK, one used print-only sources and I didn't compare to that editor's other work, and the third submission was a hit (HTV 2), massive copying. I left them a TP notice after looking at three of their articles, and flagged one up at WP:CP. I looked at a few more and I have enough concern I'm thinking about filing at WP:CCI, but I'm waiting for their response first. I'm only poking a nose into DYK but I'd really have to say that reviewers could be doing more than checking the hook. It wasn't all that hard to spot this, but maybe we could talk more about ways to check this stuff? Or put another way I guess, why didn't you catch it? :) Franamax (talk) 01:39, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

You're right that I should have caught it, but I was focused on another article as well. I guess that might answer your question about why copyvios and other errors get through onto the main page. Maybe copyvios get through because of lack of concentration. I would like to say that may be the case for the most part, but the comments from members about not trying hard enough to do good reviews and copyvios slipping through onto the main page makes me think of something far worse - laziness. Joe Chill (talk) 01:47, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Y'know, I don't doubt your or pretty much anyone else's dedication to making things better, and to keep the main page working well. Me, I'm not all that good at answering to a time clock. :) I think you hit the nail on the head though about being able to concentrate and do a through job, rather than just try to get all the jobs done. I've said for a while now that DYK should slow down the rotation - and by extension, put some additional selectivity into main page DYK appearances. (Which yes, will cause it's own problem of deciding which new articles are "best") I don't fault you at all for trying, but hey, it's Misplaced Pages, I can fault you all day for your results. ;) Copyright violators we can deal with, once they come to general attention. People taking the time to check, just like people willing to deal with DYK, much rarer commodity. We need to help each other. Franamax (talk) 02:15, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of GNU Gatekeeper

Hi Joe, I saw you proposed deletion of GNU Gatekeeper, because you think it is non-notable. I am so surprised why you made such a proposal.

GNU Gatekeeper is a very famous free / open source software in the VoIP world. It's the key component of an H.323 network. The project started 12 years ago, and still well maintained. A new version is just relesed 3 weeks ago. Over 60% of the users use it in production. Please see the survey result of 2010.

For the wikipage of GNU Gatekeeper, I created it in Feb 2009. From the history I saw at least 8 individual named editors and over 10 anonymous editors helped to improve and maintain this item. The last updated date is Jul 28 2011. The key point is I don't know any of these editors. They helped to improve the page I created just because they think the GNU Gatekeeper item is important enough to be well maintained. The fact simply proves this item is notable enough.

From your page I didn't see you have any strong background about VoIP or free / open source software. If you have any suggestion to improve this item, please kind let me know. But please don't just say it's non-notable since this is totally not true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwhuang (talk • contribs) 02:40, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Just passing by this user talk page and had a quick look at the article. It seems an eminent candidate for deletion. I don't see one single reference there to independent verifiable and reliable sources that say why this particular software is important. We need more than what's there - what have other (non-developer, non-user) people had to say about the software? If the sources are silent, then so are we. Franamax (talk) 02:49, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Joe, Franamax, do you have any background about the VoIP and H.323? If not, how could you judge the key component in this field is not important? As a reference, the H.323 page cites GnuGK as an example application. I didn't involve any editing of the H.323 item, so it is totally independent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwhuang (talk • contribs) 03:31, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Try to read and understand WP:N and WP:RS. Misplaced Pages articles can't be used as references for other articles. I am uninterested in explaining further because I know where these software notability debates end up. It is a Misplaced Pages classic - significant technical information vs Misplaced Pages notability, not having background in it vs a lot of background in it, and important vs notable. I had a three day debate with a software editor that got other editors involved and it was a big mess. Even when the debate isn't that bad, it is the same three principles that I mentioned. I am not interested in that. Joe Chill (talk) 03:38, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Good, someone already gave you a cookie :-) I agree. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:14, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

PABlade Sandbox

It's a long time ago, but I guess that I had a request from the anon, now logged in, or another editor interesting in improving the article. I usually agree to requests to sandbox deleted text if it seems reasonable, in this case it looks as if I then promptly forgot about it. Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the block

Sorry, the button I thought I was pressing was blocking one of the users that you CSD'd their page...my bad, totally sorry for the inconvenience. -- DQ (t) (e) 20:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

-- DQ (t) (e) 20:48, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Good work

With catching all these attack pages. To my mind they are the most important pages to delete quickly.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:47, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I use Misplaced Pages's advanced search function to only search user pages for words that are common in vandalism and attack pages. Joe Chill (talk) 22:49, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I am hoping that someone doesn't complain about me giving admins too much work to do. It is just that I put myself on clean-up duty in order to help in an area where not many editors work with. Joe Chill (talk) 22:51, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

That will never happen. If it did they deserve an immediate whack.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:54, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Point Zero

I added some references to Point Zero. You may want to revisit Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Point Zero. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:03, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for helping and resolving this problem, I tried my best to be a roll backer but I want to be one as soon as possible because, I watch most of the articles such as terrorism and crime and I watch those pages in order to avoid vandalism. I really want to be a rollbacker in terrorism topics. Please reply as soon as possible.--Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

CSD rationale

In my opinion, we should rarely use CSD criteria in user space. Obvious exceptions are Copyvio and attacks. While the User:Ctwomen/Connecticut Women's Hall of Fame needs some work, that's exactly what user space drafts are for.--SPhilbrickT 15:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

It is a promotion only account. Compare the username Ctwomen to Connecticut Women's Hall of Fame and read the promotional language. Joe Chill (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

It was deleted even though I didn't tag it again. Joe Chill (talk) 15:18, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

For future reference in relation to the bewildering array of rules and policies at Misplaced Pages, you should be aware that the page was deleted for copyright infringement (it was a copy of the website), not for its promotional tone. --Orlady (talk) 15:25, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I really have never understood it. I have tagged many user pages for deletion and sub pages that are obvious advertising which were deleted. In this case, it was obviously promotional, but my speedy was declined. I reported two vandalism accounts that were denied on the basis that they didn't edit in 30 minutes once an admin got to it. Also, it wasn't a copyvio because the organization created the user page so they owned the content. Joe Chill (talk) 15:28, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Uh, yes, it was a copyvio. The possible fact that the person adding the material is associated with the creator of the content doesn't change that. I support the removal of material from user space for copyvio.--SPhilbrickT 15:31, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

That still doesn't change the fact that it should have still been deletable as promotional content. This is the first time in a long while that an admin has actually denied my speedy deletion of a page like this. Joe Chill (talk) 15:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

We have policies , guidelines and informal procedures that are sometimes in conflict. For example, G11 technically applies to a user space draft, so I'm not surprised that you have tagged others and they have been deleted. My edit didn't say your tag was wrong, I just feel that a user space draft, especially when non-indexed, isn't creating any harm. We have informal rules allowing more leeway in user space drafts than in article drafts. This is a perfect example where the best course (had there not been a copyvio) would be to pitch in and help, rather than delete. A Hall of Fame has clear potential to be a viable topic, and I expect it will be. I understand why you thought the article was promotional, and in article space, I would have immediately agreed. (Although my recommended action would have been to move it to user space). Someday, I'll take on the bigger task, and make a case that the policy wording should be modified to reflect what many editors believe, but changing policy isn't a light task, and I'm not up for it at the moment. (Or perhaps I'll take it on, lose the argument and become convinced that I should be supporting removal)--SPhilbrickT 15:51, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

If you have any concerns that, say, in an RfA, someone will note this as an example of a mistaken tag, let me be perfectly clear. Your tag was not wrong. I invoked WP:IAR to achieve what I felt was a better course for the encyclopedia. I did miss the copyvio. In fact, I was fixing the flawed references, and so would have detected it a few minutes later, but it was caught by someone literally as I was editing it.--SPhilbrickT 15:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I disagree about it being the best course of action. I am against helping people with promotional usernames advertise on Misplaced Pages. I am not ever going for RFA. An autopatroller and rollbacker is good enough for me. My reasoning behind not going for RFA is that it has a large chance of putting me to shame. I try to make people happy, but then an admin says that I have a feces fetish, an admin says that I have no understanding of Misplaced Pages policies, admins tell me that f off it not a personal attack if the other editor is disruptive, and inclusionist editors have many nasty things to say to me in AfD. I do understand your reasoning so I won't have a debate about it. Joe Chill (talk) 16:03, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

thanks!

hi thanks for the welcome message. cheers. NorthFarWest (talk) 17:41, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel the way you do

Would you consider going through an adoption program with me? I would analyze some of your edits and help you learn many things which would assist you in your editing here on Misplaced Pages. Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:19, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

No thanks. I had an adopter before when I was Schuym1, but then he obviously got tired of me because he started ignoring my questions. Joe Chill (talk) 01:28, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I am also sorry you had a poor experience with the adoption program; however, I can assure you that I will stick with you through the program and assist you with any questions you have. That being said, you are under no obligation to go through the program. Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:36, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism removal

If you would like to remove vandalism in a way that is less controversial (although I haven't been aware of much of the controversy of your edits) try using Lupin's Anti-Vandal Tool in conjunction with Twinkle. You are able to screen recent edits and revert them if they are vandalism. Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:41, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Checking the history

Hi, You tagged User:Prince Banks for speedy deletion as an attack page. However, it had actually been vandalized. Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:55, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

It looked like an attack page to me and was deleted as an attack page. Joe Chill (talk) 19:01, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I did check the history including the first version. Joe Chill (talk) 19:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I undeleted the page. Look at the history; IPs had vandalized the page. I'm going to RevDel the edits after you see them. I also notified the admin about deleting without reading the history. :P Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:10, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Article I'm looking at

The article that you asked me to take a look at, I'm still working on it, I had some things come up in real life that needed taking care of and I still intend on looking at it. Sorry about the long wait, I can do it tomorrow. Thank you for your understanding in advance. :-)  JoeGazz  ♂  22:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Alright. Mike Allen classed it as a B anyway. I also nominated it for Good Article status. Joe Chill (talk) 22:49, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, well in that case, I'll see if I want to review it or let someone else handle it. I hope it passes for you :)  JoeGazz  ♂  14:30, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Note about "page blanking"

Hi, Joe. I have Gorillas (video game) on my watch list, so I noticed that you recently reverted an edit by 203.206.207.51 and left a note on that editor's talk page about their "removal of content," asking them to provide an edit summary. The thing is, that edit had an edit summary: "cull external links". The external links section of that article had become a mess—mostly a bunch of links to various people's reimplementations of the program—and the anonymous editor was cleaning it up in accordance with the guidelines at Misplaced Pages:External links and WP:LINKFARM. I've redone the anonymous editor's "culling" and left a note on the editor's talk page saying that I think everything they did was appropriate. I am assuming that your revert was just a result of a little oversight—not seeing the edit summary, perhaps. If you do believe those links are useful to the article, though, and should not have been removed, please let me know or discuss it on the article's talk page. Thanks! —Bkell (talk) 05:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I just read your user page and noticed you live in Sioux City. I lived there for three years when I was younger (third through sixth grades), in the northern part of Indian Hills, just south of North High School. It's good to run across another Siouxlander! —Bkell (talk) 05:21, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

My reasoning was that the edit summary didn't exactly describe why they were being removed. The edit summary "cull external links" isn't all that descriptive. Joe Chill (talk) 05:31, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, okay, I see. That makes sense. I agree, a more descriptive edit summary would have been nice. —Bkell (talk) 05:46, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Joe - The paragraph that I removed from the Carcosa was duplicated verbatim later in the same section of the article. It was a relic of the section's former formatting as a trivia list. 69.174.87.20 (talk) 19:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Then please use an edit summary when you remove content. Joe Chill (talk) 19:29, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Pamela Conti

I demand an explanation for removing my edit in the Pamela Conti article I updated. I didn't remove anything that isn't included in the infobox I created for the article, which I created years ago as Pakhtakorienne.

I thus ask you to undo the reversion. 84.123.86.155 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC).

Ok, master. Since you demanded me to tell you why I reverted your edit, I will. You removed a lot of content and references. You could have avoided it by signing into your account or adding an edit summary. Sorry, master, I shall not revert my edit. You can do it yourself because I need to make your bed, clean the house, and polish your shoes. Joe Chill (talk) 23:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Finally replied

Cheers. -GTBacchus 08:21, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

GoodPop

Hehe. Figures the guy with "Chill" in his name nominates a popsicle article for deletion. :D Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 22:47, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Charles Chips

I think you need to look again at the Gnews link. The first 4 pages were nothing but false positives or ads. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 04:42, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Strange Son

Hello! Your submission of Strange Son at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! cmadler (talk) 12:14, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:07, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Bomb Pop

Hello! Your submission of Bomb Pop at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Miyagawa (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Tristian (Rapper)

Hi there, The Tristian (rapper) wikipedia page is not for advertisement/promotions. Tristian is a christian rapper. *

Meuseum Pictures

Hi Joe! Sorry for not replying-- it has been a busy summer.

Anyway, there are pictures of mummies owned by museums. I'd like to use them for some articles that lack pictures of them, but the museums are in Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands. Could you give me an idea on how to do this? --GouramiWatcher 15:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Joe :-) --GouramiWatcher 16:46, 31 August 2011 (UTC)