Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:35, 4 May 2013

Archive 1,2,3,4, 5 /Suggestion Box

A beer for you!

Thanks for the info on Merging! Rjmail (talk) 20:01, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

cheers, good luck, IRWolfie- (talk) 22:07, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism

Stripping entries of information and citations to push your agenda is vandalism. Spoonkymonkey (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

I always find it strange when people post these sort of accusations without any diffs. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 21:16, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

He reverted another editor but marked it as vandalism: . IRWolfie- (talk) 11:41, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

If you think an editor stripped information to push an agenda, that is not vandalism that would be a POV push. Don't forget this is a BLP. Also, if you continue to accuse others of being vandals, it will boomerang against you. As I said, it's a personal attack. IRWolfie- (talk) 12:02, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Fringe claim

On Squat toilet you removed this "Proponents of squat toilets list many claimed benefits of their use. These claimed benefits often relate to the increase in the anorectal angle that occurs in the squatting position, whilst other claimed benefits appear to be based on weaker or theoretical evidence." with an edit summary explaining that this was fringe claim. I feel that the above was a mainstream view of fringe claims and was entirely appropriate for the article. I can add a reference to a mainstream textbook for anorectal angle increase in squatting position if that helps. Removing this statement invites a of of non sourced or non MEDRS content (this page has many recurring problems like this), are you going to watch this page to revert these too? Lesion (talk) 10:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

We don't need to mention fringe claims on mainstream articles unless they are very significantly connected to the topic by reliable independent sources, best example is astrology mentioned on the astronomy article due to a long history in pre-scientific eras where they were less separable. See WP:ONEWAY. IRWolfie- (talk) 11:02, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

This article has been chronically subject to users adding unsourced content or content based on non-MEDRS sources. I think in this instance, the removal of the above text invites more of these edits, so I hope you have put it on your watchlist to deal with these. Lesion (talk) 13:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Will do, IRWolfie- (talk) 23:34, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration clarification request

Hi IRWolfie, this is a courtesy notice to inform you that the clarification request you submitted regarding TimidGuy ban appeal, has been closed and archived. You can view the original discussion here or the archived copy here. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

kashmiri 16:39, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Clarification request

I have filed a request for clarification of ArbCom's decline of Will Beback's ban appeal. The clarification request is here. You are being notified as you recently participated in discussion of this ban appeal. MastCell  18:30, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Releasing tallies

Where has ArbCom released tallies of straw polls? Can you provide diffs please?  Roger Davies 00:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Isn't this a released tally ? IRWolfie- (talk) 08:56, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Nope, that's a formal vote on a motion for publication, which is not the same.  Roger Davies 09:57, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Tabulation of arbcom positions

I am working to outline arbcom positions here with difs. If you wish to add to it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 09:22, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

You've got my position wrong; it's pretty much per NewYorkBrad's BUT I didn't participate in the straw poll.  Roger Davies 09:35, 4 May 2013 (UTC)