Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:08, 2 February 2014

Thanks for stopping by!

Here in Misplaced Pages, I go by "Winkelvi". I enjoy patrolling the "Recent changes" page, looking for vandalism by IP addresses. While I try to be accurate with the reverts I make and the subsequent warnings I leave on talk pages, I am only human and will make mistakes from time to time. If you're here because of a revert I've made to one or more of your edits and you feel I've made an error, please leave me a (civil) message below by clicking "New Section" above. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓

Winkelvi likes this.

Welcome

Rollback

Hello, this is just to let you know that I've granted you Rollback rights. Just remember:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Misplaced Pages:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at Misplaced Pages:New admin school/Rollback
• You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:11, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Harry. I will mind the rules surrounding the use of rollback to the best of my ability. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 17:50, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Waking the Cadaver source/SPI stuff

Hi! Just wanted to drop a note to say a couple things.

First, good work on keeping up on all of GunmetalAngel's sockpuppet IP addresses. I've have a few run-ins with them (him), but didn't realise they were one and the same. So keep up the vigilant work!

Also, I had a look at the Waking the Cadaver article, just to get a feel for what sort of edits his various IPs have been making, and noticed one of the sources being used in the infobox to justify one of the genres is psychocydd.co.uk. Obviously a torrent site with torrents uploaded by users isn't a reliable source, so I figured I'd let you know so you can remove it. (Why didn't I just be bold? I didn't want to wade into any sort of edit war, and either be mistaken for a sockpuppet myself, or be accused of unfairly targeting another editor.) MrMoustacheMM (talk) 23:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Winkelvi likes this. Unless you start cursing at me, edit warring on metal articles and demonstrate a fixation with genre, I don't see any reason why you would be accused of being a sockpuppet. Not by me, anyway. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 00:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Sakanoue no Tamuramaro

Hello,

first of all let me apologize. It may seem as if I stubbornly ignored your request to stop editing the page Sakanoue no Tamuramaro. I assure you, I didn't mean to be a pain as I only just noticed your messages right now.

The reason I edited the aforementioned page is because I believe the sources of the quote that I removed to be rather dubious. More than one author seems to ddabble in afro-centric pseudo-history.

Last night I read a few pages of RUNOKO RASHIDI (the source for this info), and he doesn't strike me as the unbiased type. Neither does his associate Ivan Van Sertima, who is the co-author of the article used in "proving" the blackness of Sakanoue no Tamuramaro. (Or you could google WAYNE B. CHANDLER for more pseudo-science.)

I have a fairly open mind about these things, and antropology is a dynamic field, but this seems a myth only useful to academics with a political agenda. When ethnic traits are being insisted upon being advertised under the guise of anecdotal surprise, I doubt the reasons behind mentioning them.

I invite you to visit the links provided by the user ^ http://members.jcom.home.ne.jp/yosha/yr/nationalism/Reports_from_early_records.html ^ Samurai: The Story of a Warrior Tradition by Harry Cook ^ Sources of Japanese Tradition: From earliest times through the sixteenth century by Yoshiko Kurata Dykstra ^ http://p-www.iwate-pu.ac.jp/~acro-ito/Japan_pics/Japan_HRK/imageidx.html and you can see that they add no value to the discussion.

Finally, because of my open mind, and because I am a Spike Lee fan, I read some texts by Malcolm X when I was younger. Statements of the nature of "Sakanoue no Tamuramaro was black" remind me of the same kind of logic people like Malcolm X were using to state that Buddha was black - statues supposedly have an african nose...

If there is any way of adding alerts to the page with reasoned objections to a statement on a wikipage without making adjustments (deletions), I'd be happy to hear about them.

Sincerely, Bram. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.165.221.22 (talk) 01:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for coming here and explaining your removal of content at the Sakanoue no Tamuramaro article, Bram. I think the best thing to do at this point is to go to the article talk page, present there what you have presented here and include your sources. Maybe even look into the editing history and see who has edits that indicate knowledge of the subject and/or time invested in editing the article, and invite them to come to the article's talk page and comment. I know nothing of the article subject, I was only doing recent changes patrol and looking for suspicious edits where a large portion of content was removed without explanation. Edits by an IP (someone who has not created an account) and no edit summary given in combination with large blocks of content remove look suspect. I think you can understand where I was coming from. Your explanations seem reasonable to me, but as I said, I know nothing about the subject. Find those who do, take time to present your case on the article talk page, and allow a few days to go by if no one responds immediately. There is no deadline in Misplaced Pages, so the content being there for a few more days will cause no harm. Thanks for your communication and your interest in editing the encyclopedia! -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 01:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Groton School

Dear W,

I saw that you undid my edit on the Groton pg. The particular "notable alumni" that you edited out has been discussed before. Another Wiki editor, like yourself - DMacks - allowed, in fact, is the one that posted the piece you just cut. Someone, maybe you - IP from Westborough, MA (next to the school) cut his piece. I reinserted it. You edited out my reinsertion.

As to the content/person. All referenced articles: NY Times, Hollywood Reporter, 20/20 ABC news, Boston Globe on C. Ezekiel Hawkins are from my perspective, as respectable as you get. That he has not set up a Wiki page for himself seems to me irrelevant. That appears to be the only difference in why some alumni are listed, with arguably, lesser achievements.

Perhaps, I don't really understand the subtleties of Misplaced Pages. The aftermath of the Zeke Hawkins' suit against the Groton School changed State laws in MA, NJ, and across the country. In fact, his case had a bearing on a Supreme Court case, which won Dan Golden a Pulitzer Prize.

Let me know your thoughts. It's important.

Sincerely, PeterEpeabody 22:42, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

EpeabodyEpeabody 22:42, 21 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Epeabody (talk • contribs)

Response to User:Epeabody

Thank you for taking the time to inquire about my revert(s) at Groton School. According to Misplaced Pages policy regarding living persons who are victims of crime, being a victim of a crime is not enough to make a person notable. Misplaced Pages's definition for notable people is as follows (taken from the section "Basic criteria" at the Misplaced Pages article on Notability):

A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,and independent of the subject.

What's more, a person's possible notability that comes from being the victim of sexual assault makes for touchy ground. If I were a victim of sexual assault, I would surely not want my name listed at the schools I attended because I had become "notable" in terms of news and legal concerns as a result of the crime.

Bottom line: In accordance with Misplaced Pages guidelines for living person notability, Mr. Hawkins does not make the cut. Please see the following (taken from the section "Crime victims and perpetrators" at the Misplaced Pages article on Notability):

Crime victims and perpetrators

A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Misplaced Pages article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person.

Where there is such an existing article, it may be appropriate to create a sub-article, but only if this is necessitated by considerations of article size.

Where there are no appropriate existing articles, the criminal or victim in question should be the subject of a Misplaced Pages article only if one of the following applies:

For victims, and those wrongly convicted of crime

The victim or person wrongly convicted, consistent with WP:BLP1E had a large role within a well-documented historic event. The historic significance is indicated by persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role.

For these reasons, I cannot and will not allow Mr. Hawkins to be included in the "Notable alumni" list at the Groton School article. You are welcome to bring this up at the article's talk page for further discussion with other editors. Just know that I cannot and will not support the inclusion of Mr. Hawkins in the Notable Alumni section of the article and will state my reasons as stated above if this is brought up for discussion there. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 23:14, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

The only action of mine I can find with respect to this disputed content/individual is from Early October 2010, for example . His claim of notability was as an award-winner for some film work. I'm not sure that rises to the level of "notability" in the Misplaced Pages sense sufficient to include him in the alumni list. He didn't and doesn't have a bluelink for a bio, which is essentially the level required (notable enough to have one, even if nobody's written it yet). But it was not clearly not unworthy and it was not a disputed fact and it did not seem damaging per WP:BLP, so I left it in. As you can see at my link, that film award was the only statement about this individual at that time--nothing to do with being a victim of a crime. DMacks (talk) 05:53, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Read and noted. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 05:58, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Would you mind

If I stole the color style you have for you signature? Lol I think it's really neat but I don't want to just steal it without asking ;) LADY LOTUS • TALK 20:56, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Feel free :-) -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 21:58, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Sound of Contact Changes

Hi Winkelvi

We keep changing part of the Misplaced Pages entry for Sound of Contact and you keep changing it back!

At the moment it says:

"In early January 2014, Kerzner announced his departure from the band, expressing a desire to continue his work with Sonic Reality and pursue his own music projects."

This is not true. Dave did not leave to pursue other projects. We would like this changed to reflect what really happened which should read:

"In early January 2014, it was announced that the band had parted ways with Kerzner. The band followed up this news by releasing a new video via USA Today for their forthcoming single, 'Pale Blue Dot'"

Otherwise it reads that Dave left the band and it was infact a mutual decision. It was a parting of ways - he did not leave.

Many thanks

Lucy Jordache - Manager of Sound of Contact. 213.120.109.140 (talk) 12:56, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the message.

First of all, yes, I keep changing it to match what the source cited at the time it the article was changed to reflect Kerzner's departure. Second, you can't just copy and paste something from the band's personal website into a Misplaced Pages article. That would be a copyright violation. Please do not revert that content back in. That you keep reverting essentially constitutes an edit war, which is not allowed in Misplaced Pages. Other, non-biased sources state Kerzner left for the reasons the article stated apart from the content you keep reverting back in. At this time, I will change it to something more neutral, leaving out the reason why he left. My guess is the original version on the page is more correct and the new information you keep pushing is the "press release" whitewashed version. But that's just my opinion.

Now to conflict of interest: Since you are the band's manager, you probably shouldn't be editing the band's article or any other articles closely connected with the band. The same goes for Marillion. If you'd like to edit articles unrelated to Sound of Contact, you are certainly welcome to do so. One more note: you keep inserting in content about "Pale Blue Dot" with the info about Kerzner's departure into the "History" section. From the standpoint of an encyclopedia article, Pale Blue Dot has nothing to do with Kerzner leaving and does not belong in the "History" section. Final thought: Please understand that Misplaced Pages is an online encyclopedia. It is not meant to be a news release source or online resume and advertisement for the article's subject. Again, if you'd like to contribute to Misplaced Pages on other articles, that would be great. Sincerely, -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 15:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Philip Seymour Hoffman

Hi. I just reworded the text slightly. I did not insert the IMDb link, nor did you remove it. What gives? Quis separabit? 20:12, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Just an error of hitting enter accidentally. Referenced such in my last edit there. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 20:14, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, no problems. What a tragedy. I had no idea Hoffman had ever had any kind of addiction or substance abuse problems. Quis separabit? 20:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it's such a sad waste of a life, talent, and a father of children. I had no idea he suffered from addiction, either. But, I guess the truth is so many in Hollywood do. It's been that way since Hollywood was invented, I think. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 20:27, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your discussing it, and I honestly don't think a templated message is harsh; "reportedly" is equivocation, which is the term I would use but the template says "weasel." In this case, I'd certainly think we need to have perspective and not jump to conclusions. An investigator is not an M.E., and while he may think it was drug overdose, death could have been from drowning or a heart attack, c.f. Whitney Houston. We cannot in good conscience state unequivocally that it was a drug overdose, and "reported to be" is simply a way of getting around that and avoiding responsibility. We should only state the simple eyewitness statement of his being found with a syringe in his arm. Anything else is speculation, wouldn't you agree? --Tenebrae (talk) 20:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't disagree with your reasons, I disagree with your approach. Which, to me, seemed a bit harsh. That's all I was saying. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 21:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Philip Seymour Hoffman shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Msnicki (talk) 22:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)