Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:18, 31 January 2013

I've got a month left of school and then Finals. In order to get the grades I want, I really need to focus in this last month and Misplaced Pages has become too much of a distraction. I've completely cleared my watchlist to avoid the distraction that comes from lurking and won't be editing much. I'm leaving my adoptee's pages on my watchlist.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38

This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving, Ryan Vesey!
As we all sit down at the dinner table and say our thanks, I would like to give thanks to you for your wonderful contributions and wish you a very happy Thanksgiving. May your turkey, ham or beast of choice satiate you until next year! TRA! ```Buster Seven Talk

Happy Thanksgiving, and good luck!

		Cookies!
		Red Hat On Head has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Hey Ryan! Happy Thanksgiving. I had fun; it was my first one! Good luck with your Finals and I hope you ace your exams! ;) To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Welcome

Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Listed below are some brief introductions containing all the basics needed to use, comment on, and contribute to Misplaced Pages.

• Main Introduction — What is Misplaced Pages?
• The Five Pillars — What are the principles behind Misplaced Pages?
• Quick Introductions to:

• Policies and guidelines — How does Misplaced Pages actually work?
• Talk pages — How do I communicate in Misplaced Pages?
• Referencing — How do I add sources to articles?
• Uploading images — How do I add and use images?
• Navigating Misplaced Pages — How do I find my way around?

• What Misplaced Pages is not - even though everyone can edit it, Misplaced Pages is still an encyclopedia.

If you want to know more about a specific subject, Help:Help explains how to navigate the help pages.

Where next?

• If you wish to express an opinion or make a comment, Where to ask questions will point you in the correct direction.
• If you would like to edit an article, the Basic tutorial will show you how, and How to help will give you some ideas for things to edit.
• If you would like to create a new article, Starting an article will explain how to create a new page, with tips for success and a link to Misplaced Pages's Article Wizard, which can guide you through the process of submitting a new article to Misplaced Pages.
• For more support and some friendly contacts to get you started, the Editors' Welcome page should be your next stop!

Help

Its me again, I have an issue with deleting the articles that I created 3 months ago. I don't really understand why I can't delete them even though that I gave quite a good reason. You see, I wrote those Nebria aetolica subspecies articles, which are all described by the same author in the same year, and are endemic to only one location: Greece. Now, I thought that in a long run I will find more info on those subspecies, but as it turns out, nothing new popped up. Also, I was declined the reason for the second time, which is the reason why I come to you. Can you delete those articles for me? Thanks!--Mishae (talk) 03:38, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I redirected them to the species article, which is the best decision in this case. In the future, if you write an article and nobody else edits it, and redirecting is the best option, add {{db-G7}} to the top of the article. Ryan Vesey 03:45, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks.--Mishae (talk) 16:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mozio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Startup (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (geographic names). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:16, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Botik of Peter the Great

On 28 January 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Botik of Peter the Great, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Botik of Peter the Great (pictured) was considered to be the reason Peter the Great built the Russian Navy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Botik of Peter the Great. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added 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.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Nice article! Regards.--Tomcat (7) 17:18, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Have a nice day, Ryan Vesey 17:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Undue tag on Coast Guard One

I tagged it as such because it gives undue weight to an incident, namely, the one flight where the CG2 tag was used pbp 19:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Then you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the various "One" and "Two" flights. Air Force One and Marine One are used to the extent that it would be inappropriate to list all of their uses; however, Coast Guard One, Coast Guard Two, Navy One, etc. become the plane they are based on the incident of use. The article "Coast Guard One" is about incidents where "Coast Guard One" and "Coast Guard Two" could exist or existed due to the presence of the President or Vice President. Ryan Vesey 19:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Notability of Coast Guard Two vs. Notability of Chili burger

You ask, how can I argue keeping Chili burger and deleting Coast Guard Two? Well, they're completely different. It's not like Coast Guard One is Marine One covered in chili. And also, because there's more than one chili burger in the history of the world, but only one flight with that callsign. It's probably not a stretch to assume that Joe Biden has eaten more chili burgers than he has taken flights in Coast Guard Two. Also, there is considerably more content at Chili burger than at Coast Guard Two; and there are considerably more hits for "Chili burger" than for "Coast Guard Two", and that includes hits for "Coast Guard two"...years, "Coast Guard two"...days, etc pbp 00:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Your comments

I consider it poor form to anonymously accuse another user of misconduct (if that's what you're doing) in a new forum where that user is not present. If you think Manning, I, or some other user is acting abusively then you should say so, name us, and then notify us of the discussion so that we might have the opportunity to respond if we do desired. Or, you could simply have requested unprotection on the grounds it wasn't necessary (and it wasn't) without bringing passive-aggressive insinuations into the mix. Best, Mackensen (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I assume here you are referring to my comment at either 28bytes or dank's talk pages? In that case, while your actions certainly played into my comment, there is a larger concern seen in many administrators who were given the bit before the current process existed. Had I sought any individual action directed at either you or Manning, I assure you I would have informed you. Ryan Vesey 01:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually the Administrators' Noticeboard and resulting request for protection modification. Please feel free to slander me at individual talk pages as necessary ;). Mackensen (talk) 01:51, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I occasionally forget that other editors aren't omniscient and aren't aware of edits I make related to them. Also, I suppose my protection request wasn't entirely neutral. Ryan Vesey 02:00, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

It's fine, I'm not nearly as annoyed as I probably sound. Note that as an old-school administrator who got the bit in 2004 I'm definitely covered in your comment. In my defense, I know the policies quite well, and deliberately ignored the ones that prevented improving the encyclopedia. Misplaced Pages:Ignore all rules is still good law, though rarely used properly. Mackensen (talk) 02:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I believe in IAR, although I'm probably less likely than any other editor to use it. I tend to agree with rules because they exist so I find fewer reasons to ignore rules than most other editors (or people in general). Still, I don't know that invoking IAR was appropriate as that involved overruling the opinions of quite a few others. I don't think IAR should be invoked in the midst of disputes. Ryan Vesey 02:12, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

You must be a scientist!

http://xkcd.com/242/

(For executing another RM after a RM blew up in Legendary style on the same page ;-)

--Kim Bruning (talk) 02:33, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Had the unilateral action not occurred, the RM would have been better than continuing to have the wrong title. Ryan Vesey 02:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

• The previous RM procedure exploded way outside Misplaced Pages, and is now news-for-a-day. Unless you live under a rock, that's Not Good (tm)
• You then repeat the exact same procedure again.

Can you construct my consequent line of logic, if we were to take as a given that I'm a strict Empiricist? O:-)

--Kim Bruning (talk) 02:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC) Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Let's be more explicit:

• An RM previously blew up at this location and caused harm to wikipedia.

therefore:

• We will not do another RM here.

If you continue to reinstate RM, without discussion, the correct action is to get you blocked on the obvious grounds that we do not want another blow-up.

I'm willing to allow that perhaps my analysis is in error, of course. Do you have any reasoning to the contrary?

--Kim Bruning (talk) 04:18, 31 January 2013 (UTC)