Revision as of 05:36, 25 April 2014

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Carrite, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Morris Hillquit. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Marek.69 20:15, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy thoughts

Not alone

Thank you. Good to know I'm not alone in that view. Antandrus (talk) 17:58, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

That made me a grouchy Santa. Carrite (talk) 18:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

the Bad Site

Saw your comment on FAs at WR: "I've submitted none of my articles to the A/GA/FA process and I never will. When I'm done, it's a B -- and it's perfectly......................... satisfactory.".

Same here. I think Fishery Protection Squadron is my best one, but I can't be bothered to put it forward for GA and go through all the nonsense with the manual of style and dashes in the right place. It teaches people, and that's good enough for me. The Cavalry (Message me) 00:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

✰

		The Original Barnstar
		Came here via my watchlist, which I have seen you on frequently. You have expanded quite a few of my stubs. Thanks for that! Reading your talk page you also appear to be doing a lot of other work I approve of, so cheers :) jorgenev (t|c|s) 07:29, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey there

I do know that you have clear views on administration. At the same time, in one perspective of mine, there might be no harm in giving mature editors like you additional tools that they may utilize in times of need to improve the project; and may not utilize when they are editing. Of course, my view may be gravely incorrect. But there's no harm in asking you - would you up for adminship? It'll be a privilege to nominate you. Kind regards. Wifione 18:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Summary of reply: "Thanks, but no thanks." Carrite (talk)

Silk Purse Award

		Silk Purse Award
		I am both pleased and honored to present you with the Silk Purse Award in appreciation for your improvements to the Cynthia Basinet article, essentially changing what was seen as a sow's ear into a terrific silk purse. Schmidt, 23:38, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to say hello Thanks and Happy New Year.

		The Original Barnstar
		I see you are still encouraging new editors and you are helping anyone who asks you to in a mature and objective way. Just wanted to say I have never forgot how you help me in the first few weeks when I wanted to throw a computer monitor out of the window at times. You are the best wishing you a great 2012 It is always reassuring to new editors that you are here JoeyD2010 (talk) 08:24, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Sadly, too few disputes here seem to be independently resolved well. Your actions at an AfD are deeply appreciated and deserve recognition. VQuakr (talk) 00:32, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For your special work to help build the place where neutral should be keep! Farewellmyfriend (talk) 02:05, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar

The Genuine Barnstar

Tim, this is just the second barnstar I've ever presented. You and I haven't chatted much in recent months, but every time I see your work here, I am impressed and gladdened that an editor such as you is active here. I took this photo in Petaluma, California, home town of my father-in-law, and also home of Jewish socialist chicken ranchers 100 years ago. That's the milieu he grew up in. Cullen Let's discuss it 06:40, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		For your excellent detective work in finding solid sources for Donald Duncan. Thanks for your hard work! I, Jethrobot (note: not a bot!) 21:22, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for your sensible comments at Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost/2012-10-01/Paid_editing.

Bearian (talk) 20:50, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

@Carrite/Tim,

It is another moment of integrity, one in a long list, where the principal, principled defenders of free speech and critics of harassment of conservatives are leftists, notably you (Carrite). Well done! Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For being level headed, helpful and polite wrt Sally Season Sædon 00:48, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

About zombies

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For this. Made me chuckle. Good work! xanchester (t) 09:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Just the right words

		The Socratic Barnstar
		For giving it the whoopty fuckin' doo on the Lynette Nusbacher AFD NetNus (talk) 23:28, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

For making me smile at the end of a long day. Evanh2008  11:10, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

I left a more detailed comment at Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Proposed decision#General thanks to the parties & participants, but I wanted to thank you and the other parties to the arbitration case for your excellent conduct throughout the process. You should also know that the case is due to close in a few hours (about midnight UTC at the earliest). Hersfold non-admin 17:21, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I misjudged you

You would make a great administrator.

Hypothetically speaking, I mean. Obviously it's not for everyone. Kurtis 20:10, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the nice words. We are indeed dealing with hypotheticals here, as I have no interest in the buttons. Happy editing. Carrite (talk) 20:23, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I know that, which is precisely why I used the term "hypothetically speaking". :-) Kurtis 14:17, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for creating the new Victor Kamkin Bookstore article, and for all of your work to improve Misplaced Pages! Northamerica1000 05:07, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For this comment. Bearian (talk) 17:28, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For your kind words here. Bearian (talk) 20:20, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Passing comment

Beautifully said. Really. I wish everyone on the project would read that, especially the long-time contributors, the more burnt-out ones. Antandrus (talk) 03:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate it very much, you're one of my Misplaced Pages heroes. Best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 04:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

For making me laugh today. I loved the Timbo rule about IP editors being dressed moose at hunting season time. FYI you have two rule #6.

...William 00:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

You Have Mail...

Disambiguation link notification for December 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Harvey Klehr, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rank-and-file (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) 08:56, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement

A typical Nepali meal Hello, Carrite. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Meal Previous selections: Recorded history • Micronesia Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: Northamerica1000 22:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Understanding Section 230

You wrote "You're kidding, right? WMF is all about religiously guarding their Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protection from liability of posted content." As a matter of fact, that's completely untrue. I can't remember any board or staff discussions about that point in... forever. The reason you might think otherwise, and I say this based on long experience, is that you may have a mistaken idea of how it works. An obvious place to start would be Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act but I wanted to highlight a few key points.

The law is specifically designed to avoid the need for websites to take a radical "common carrier" approach in which to preserve immunity they must not ever edit or supervise anything. To the contrary, section 230 would allow the WMF to hire editors, hire administrators, directly set policy, pay ArbCom, etc. Just about all the things that people who see Section 230 conspiracies everywhere think that the WMF isn't doing because of fear of legal liability have nothing to do with anything at all.

If the WMF did those sorts of things they would in fact be liable for what employees do - so there is a very minor risk there of course - but the same is true for newspapers and other traditional media. It's not a big risk and one for which the WMF already is covered by normal business insurance practices. I doubt if the insurance rates would be materially affected by any choices made in this area.

It is simply a myth that our governance structures being in the hands of the community has anything to do with Section 230.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 09:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy New Year Carrite!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Carrite: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Misplaced Pages's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000 04:25, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Your edit to the Black mamba

It was inappropriate for you to delete a substantial amount of information on a GA level article. It should first be discussed in the talk page. Yes, it is quack medicine, but "provings" are what homoeopathic medicine practitioners use as a method to "prove" their remedies. It is all quackery, yes I agree. However, that is why it was under the "Relationship with humans" section. It is to show the spectrum of how humans relate to that species. From fear and awe to use as a remedy. It is not for me to judge homoeopathic medicine in the article because that is irrelevant. The purpose, as I have said, is to show the black mamba's different types of relationships it has with people. I personally think that homoeopathic medicine is a bunch of crap, but that's besides the point. I am not trying to promote it, but just show the relationships that humans have with mambas. I can't even comment on what I think of it - that would be violate WP:POV because homoeopathic medicine is practised by millions in the world, who fully trust and believe in it. They would argue against you (and I for that matter because I think it is all B.S). Removing the section was an act of violation of WP:POV in itself because you made it about your own personal beliefs on homoeopathic medicine instead of looking at it as a demonstration of human-black mamba relations. They do have millions of remedies, so what? It has nothing to do with the article. The mention of homoeopathic medicine and a an example case with it just showed the relationship of the two species - Homo sapiens and Dendroaspis polylepis. It has nothing to do with homoeopathic medicine itself or whether it is a valid form of medicine. I don't believe it is, but I couldn't make such controversial personal beliefs on article not even about homoeopathic medicine. It is none of my business on whether the type of medicine practice is valid or not, my business was to show the relations between us and the species. --DendroNaja (talk) 09:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Nonsense. See the Black Mamba Talk page - how has that article achieved its GA status? It's very bad to have all that stuff about homeopathy, and Carrite is to be applauded for deleting it. --Roxy the dog (resonate) 15:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

GA status means nothing, other than a handful of obsessive editors have sweated a piece for MOS "violations." That entire section was undue twaddle in a piece nearly 120K long — Too Long, Didn't Read for most WP users. BOLD - REVERT - DISCUSS is how we do things at Misplaced Pages. I was BOLD. I'll see you at the discussion. Carrite (talk) 17:21, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

What an exciting tangent. Actually GA status often means only a single (sometimes inexperienced) editor has examined a piece, and requires compliance with only a very limited subset of the MOS. Some GAs are promoted inappropriately. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

It sounds like the piece was nominated for GA and then the homeopathy bunkum was tucked in after that. Not sure that's right, but so it was claimed in the discussion. It doesn't need to be there and shouldn't be there. Carrite (talk) 00:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Indeed. I read what you removed earlier. It was utterly bizarre. If I have a dream about a crocodile and also get cracked lips in winter, I need some heavily diluted black mamba venom to cure me? Amazing what you can learn around here... --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

An apology

I didn't mean to be rude to you during our last interaction. From reading your userpage, you are clearly undervalued and I didn't mean to disturb you. Your content contributions far exceed mine, so I hope to play catch up and see how it goes. The last thing this place needs is any more conflict. If I see anything you might be interested in or if I'm able to help your efforts, just let me know. It's rare to see someone who says "Misplaced Pages has a bad reputation among many academics. That will change as we move along, trust me... We already kick the living crap out of Encyclopedia Britannica on these topics and every day it gets a little better." Hope to working with you in the new year. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:05, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

ChrisGualtieri, you have been on my radar screen for a while because of your conflict with a certain editor who will go unnamed. This editor blames many issues on mobile phone problems. Also, I have over 4000 pages on my watch list for some reason. In the past few months, I have seen you do good work on many pages on my watch list. Thank you very much! Maybe you have a few rough edges and can benefit from studying diplomacy. Every singe editor here can do better, including me. But your kind words to my friend Carrite shows that you are trying to do better, and so I commend you for that. Cullen Let's discuss it 06:23, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Bill Luckett (businessman) (2nd nomination)

Please comment. Bearian (talk) 18:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Carrite commons category

Hello, I appreciate the large number of historical images you've uploaded. So much so that I went through all the files of yours that got moved to Commons and put them into a category. Letting you know here as you seem less active over yonder, and, well.... Tried to avoid images that you uploaded there, or didn't upload at all, etc. Hope this might help with anything. djr13 (talk) 00:15, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Sun King Brewing

Hello Tim,

Let me start by saying that I do not know for sure whether or not Sarah got paid for this particular article, or another you mentioned. But I want to pass along some information that may shed some light on the matter. Since we live near San Francisco and have attended edit-a-thons at the WMF office, my wife and I have befriended several of the staffers including Sarah, and we have been Facebook friends with Sarah for a couple of years. We have exchanged many personal comments in that time, for whatever that's worth. My relationship with her is almost entirely an online one.

Sarah was a DJ in Indianapolis about ten years ago, and was a minor local celebrity in the party and club scene. I have a cousin who owns the most upscale wine and liquor store in Indianapolis, a business that Sarah knows well going back to childhood, when her parents shopped there. She appreciates and is interested in alcoholic beverages. So, we've discussed Indianapolis and booze.

I was in Hawaii in late September and early October with my wife and son, and was hanging out at the Longboard Brewery restaurant in the Honolulu Airport on October 6, waiting for a long delayed flight home. Sarah posted on Facebook that she was not feeling well, and was spending time on the couch. She was then planning a trip back to Indianapolis, and arrived there on October 10. To pass the time while she was feeling sick, she said she would write articles about two of her favorite Indianapolis businesses. The other was Melody Inn (nightclub). Her Facebook friends, including me, commented on the articles. In both cases, she commented that the articles needed photos. There was give and take with various people, including several Wikipedians and Indianapolis residents, about the notability of the topics and how she might be able to convince a local photographer she knew to add a photo to Commons.

Her initial comment was "Wrote another article about one of my favorite hometown companies. Sun King Brewing Company now has a Misplaced Pages article!". Several of her friends responded enthusiastically, indicating that this company is popular in her Indianapolis social circle. About five or six days later, when she was in Indianapolis, she commented that she was drinking Sun King beer at a bar, and there was another round of positive comments from her Indianapolis buddies.

It seems to me that if she was paid for these articles, then the people paying for them would have also provided photos, or had her visit their businesses and take photos herself. She said nothing on Facebook about visiting either business in October, and neither article now contains a photo.

As for Blackbird Vineyards, her father now lives in Sonoma, and they are very close. She visits the Napa and Sonoma valleys frequently, likes to tour wineries, and has commented dozens of times on Facebook about these visits. This is a field that's she's genuinely interested in personally, and would have every reason to write an article about a winery that struck her fancy.

I am well aware that nothing I have told you is proof of anything. But I am moderately confident that these two Indianapolis articles were the product of time spent on a couch feeling lousy, while thinking of an upcoming trip to her home town. If either or both were straight paying gigs, I doubt that she would have been schmoozing about the articles on Facebook with Wikipedians, and openly discussing the lack of photos. That's my theory, anyway, for what it's worth. Cullen Let's discuss it 06:27, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

That strikes me as a very reasonable explanation, Jim — in which case the already tiny molehill is chopped in half. The vineyard piece she came back to work on about 5 or 6 times in the year, which is not what one would do if they were fulfilling a job or working on the clock. I was already pretty positive that one was not a paid job after I looked at things again this evening. At the end of the day, it's gonna be one cheesy article on a book and one fluffy bit on its author — which is literally about 0.05% of the total work she did on Misplaced Pages last year. She just needs to say, "Yes, Yes, No, No, No, and there's nothing else" and to run up a couple belated COI flags, in my view. This whole thing is really stupid and she got squished by WMF's paranoia and hypocrisy. Best regards and I hope you have a great year! —Tim //// Carrite (talk) 06:46, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Gibraltaring

Nice verb. Andreas JN466 01:05, 12 January 2014 (UTC) Btw, was this the article you were looking at? Andreas JN466 01:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

No, it was the one on the winery. Carrite (talk) 01:36, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Verification not truth

Thoughts?

Talk:Viralheat#Pricing

CorporateM (Talk) 15:04, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Carrite. FYI - Another editor has shown support for the edit, but I don't think it is appropriate for me to make the edit myself on account of my COI. I went ahead and added a Request Edit to it. CorporateM (Talk) 01:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

hello

Hi. I started Burevestnik (1921), but I'm having problems sourcing further (albeit Avrich is a relatively strong authority on the subject, I'd prefer having more references). Have you come across this publication in other references? --Soman (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll get back on the scan offer. I liked your footnote on the meaning of the name burevestnik, do we have a source for it? (preferably linking it with Gorki as well?) Two Burevestnik articles are now DYK length, Burevestnik (1906) and Burevestnik (Petrograd, 1917), and that would be a good DYK hook fact. --Soman (talk) 02:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Rhodes 19

This is the edit you're looking for, by 12.33.211.29 (talk · contribs) (which looks untraceable), not user:Kevin Murray's. Shouldn't believe every bit of mud-slinging one reads on Wikipediocracy. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:14, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm completely lost here, Andy, please help me out... Carrite (talk) 03:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Tell me truthfully...

Are all you guys that young? That's my main takeaway from the video. I knew that Misplaced Pages editors tend to be younger, but I had an image of people in their thirties and not individuals who look they've just been weaned. Seriously, I just can't conceive of Misplaced Pages taking on highly trained PR operatives with a group of volunteer high school students. By the way, I do appreciate the link to the video as it was interesting and definitely an eye-opener. Coretheapple (talk) 05:46, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

"Highly trained" sounds a bit suspect. Incidentally, it seems often to be the case that younger people are more strongly opposed to paid editing. Thinking of User:Jéské Couriano for one. (I imagine he's older than high school age though.)

Photos of smaller Misplaced Pages meet-ups that I've seen appear mostly to depict people in their 30s, 40s and 50s. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:52, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Don't sell PR people short. Theirs is a profession, a difficult one, and there are college and graduate programs in the practice of public relations. I'm actually impressed with some of the PR people I've encountered on Misplaced Pages. They do their job well, know how to work the system, how to exploit its vulnerabilities. I expect that someday soon we'll see a paid editor, someone who plants articles in Misplaced Pages for a living, work his way up into the administrator ranks, if that hasn't already happened.

I'm glad that there is more of a mix of editors than I have seen; I haven't done a study of it. Senior citizens have plenty of real-world experience and sometimes have time on their hands. More effort should be made to recruit and use them. I was saddened when Buster7, an older gent, failed in his effort recently to become an administrator. Coretheapple (talk) 17:02, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

The PR people you see aren't the problem — CREWE, etc. They're the good guys in terms of understanding what WP is and how abusing NPOV is ultimately counterproductive for their clients. It's the ones you can't see that are the issue. I'm for a world where the good ones can work with supervision and the bad ones get tossed for their bad deeds. The question is how to achieve this. I'm completely convinced that the "prohibition" model not only doesn't work, it exacerbates the problem by driving paid editing further underground. There WILL be paid editing at WP, just like there will be people smoking pot or drinking liquor or whatever whether it is officially prohibited or not. Far better to have the system regularized and supervised than underground and unsupervised, with no real mechanism to eliminate the bad actors. Carrite (talk) 17:37, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

My issue with that is disclosure to the reader. Perhaps, there can be supervision but ethically the reader of the article should still be informed on the article page that a financial COI editor has participated in the writing, but I am doubtful from what I have seen that such disclosure notice will fly long term - given the allergic reaction to special disclaimers for specific articles. Off wiki in reputable publication there are two ethical ways to deal with it 1) don't do it and 2) if it is done - disclose to the reader. But if we are not going to disclose to the reader, than that leaves don't do it. I get what you are saying about enforcement, but all enforcement on-wiki is catch as catch can, and the primary means of enforcement (the front line) is "you editor: do the right thing" and our policies are "here is the right thing, now go do it, and uphold it." Alanscottwalker (talk) 18:03, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you about disclosure. I raised the issue a while back and it was treated with such derision that I realized that Wikipedians are so hopelessly naive on this issue (or as I put it at the time, "have their heads wedged so firmly up their rectums") to come to grips with paid editing and its ramifications. Coretheapple (talk) 18:49, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Disclosure to the reader...? We have that; it is a 'standardized' template even. I didn't even think such was controversial. Link to the rectums, por favor? Uh, maybe that's poorly phrased. Link to the discussion wherein physically implausible skull-to-anus-transplant was mentioned, presumably somewhere near the end?  :-)

  See for instance SORCER, which says in *bold* at the top: a major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. The talkpage also lists the uids of said contributors explicitly. These people aren't even paid (directly) for their work on the article, they just work for a corporation that is commercializing a fork of the open-source-flavor, or work at military labs which use classified forks of same. They started off direct-editing, but are now gamely trying to follow the Bright Line stuff. Once I get the text cleaned of WP:PEACOCK and rewritten, I'm planning on removing the big banner, and putting a smaller ... but thus paradoxically more likely to be noticed ... box which says "certified Bright Line prose — Jimbo's got yer back, dear readers... see talkpage for gory details" or something along those lines.

  If the article was directly edited, by a paid PR consultant, I'd expect the larger snark-tag to be a permanent feature. And ideally all their edits would be in glowing fiery letters of a deep blood-red color, with an unmistakably eye-searing fire-engine-yellow-green background, and blink-tag-enhanced {{danger}} icons on either end. Or well, just a mini-banner at the top of each major section touched directly by the PR rep, would prolly suffice.  :-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Tim, how *does* one achieve your desired modus operandi, where the folks with COI disclose it transparently (not via moral suasion but via following the plainly-marked pathway which leads to their self-interest), and furthermore, how in practice to we separate the Good Eggs from the Bad Eggs, so the latter can be tossed on their ears? Tossing is easy; separating the eggs, is the trick. I have some schemes, but I'd like to hear what ideas you've already heard and dismissed, since, um, prolly mine are not actually new.  ;-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I think one approach is to carve out an exception in the outing rules for "paid for hire" PR operatives. They run nice little businesses using (in my opinion abusing) Misplaced Pages; in return, if they are to be allowed to operate, they should disclose who they are and provide the URLs of the website(s) and advertisements they use to solicit business. They don't have to disclose, of course. All they have to do is to join the rest of us and edit as a hobby, not as a profession. In one instance involving a high visibility paid editor, it seems that everyone except Misplaced Pages editors know who that person is and the URL of his website. His clients have this information; why not Misplaced Pages editors? This person wants "privacy" but he also wants to run a business using his status as a Misplaced Pages editor. In other words, he wants to have his cake and eat it too.

Paid editors can and should also say on their user pages, in plain talk and not euphemisms, that they accept money to edit Misplaced Pages. They also should list all the articles that they were and are paid to create and edit, and list how much they were paid for each. There is a similar rule for people who create paid corporate research for dissemination to investors. See, if we have a rule like this, editors can then scrutinize the edits for POV and completeness.

Even better than this is to just eliminate paid editing completely.

One other point, Tim, regarding Kohs. I don't like his on-wiki behavior but I completely understand his frustration. People with his exact business model are allowed to operate on Misplaced Pages. The more I look at those other operations, see them praised for "transparency" when they are not transparent, and lauded for articles that they were paid to edit, the more I understand his frustration and even his rage. I do think it would be in his interests if he stopped his anti-Wales vendetta. It doesn't hurt Wales but it hurts him. Coretheapple (talk) 17:54, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Kohs has burned every bridge back to "legitimate" Misplaced Pages participation three times; which doesn't mean he doesn't edit here, because he does. As for laying off The Boss, I completely agree he needs to do that, but it's Hatfields v. McCoys for both of them now... Very, very personal. Carrite (talk) 18:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

As for "Paid editors can and should also say on their user pages, in plain talk and not euphemisms, that they accept money to edit Misplaced Pages," that's probably right. I'll take your advice and change my page now. Carrite (talk) 18:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I'll bet a lot of editors are testing the waters. Coretheapple (talk) 19:02, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I dunno. Probably, unemployment and underemployment of young people being what it is... I'll give you a spoiler about what I've learned about paid editing so far: most of the topics which people seek to have done are very, very, very, very boring. And, number two, people legitimately confuse fame and recognition in their field with WP notability, which is entirely different. Carrite (talk) 19:08, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

There's absolutely no question that the subjects are boring. That is why they pay. Coretheapple (talk) 19:36, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Therein lies part of the reason why paid editing of such things is a fact of life. Those pieces aren't gonna happen on their own if volunteers are left to their own devices. Carrite (talk) 00:23, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Kohs has burned every bridge back to "legitimate" Misplaced Pages participation three times; which doesn't mean he doesn't edit here, because he does. That's for sure. And he doesn't try to hide it, either. Was I being sympathetic earlier? My bad. Coretheapple (talk) 16:22, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

As Alanscottwalker says above, disclosure to the reader is key. As I said elsewhere the other day, the Wikimedia Foundation and Misplaced Pages community essentially have three options:

• Option 1: The Wikimedia Foundation makes it clear in its Terms of Use that paid editing on behalf of an employer or paying client is forbidden. (That includes cases where users claim the editing was done in their spare time.) This will of course mean that edits of a type that has occurred tens of thousands of times in the past will be forbidden under the new rules. It will be a major change, one that every new user would have to be advised of during account creation. Remember, even Sue Gardner has confessed that she edited articles on her then-employer, in violation of Jimmy Wales' bright-line rule, before becoming Executive Director of the WMF. (And so have many WMF staff, who have edited articles on their own organisation here. And as Greg Kohs pointed out in an Examiner piece, even the legal firm that sent the cease-and-desist letter to Wiki-PR has violated this rule, by having staff edit the article on their own firm here.)

• Option 2: The Wikimedia Foundation clearly forbids paid editing on behalf of an employer or paying client in its Terms of Use, UNLESS people use a self-declared paid-editor account on those articles where they have a conflict of interest. Advice on this is made part of account registration. Edits made by such an account are flagged as paid edits in watchlists. Articles that have received such edits are automatically marked with a corresponding icon or heading. This would also meet disclosure requirements for paid editors, ensuring that they could not possibly fall foul of disclosure requirements under the deceptive advertising laws of various countries. The icon will have something like a "What's this?" pop-up or link to explain to the reader what a watchlist is, and how they can identify the paid-editor edits in it, and explain that the paid editor is a good guy/gal for having declared their interest. Eventually, this may change the current culture of secrecy, which leaves the reader ignorant about the amount of paid editing that has gone into any given article.

• Option 3: Do nothing until the project's reputation is further damaged by further scandals.

I would favour option 2, because it would maximise disclosure to the reader and would more than comply with European and US law. Option 3 is worst, but seems currently to be the path preferred by both WMF and the community. Andreas JN466 18:23, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I revived this dormant conversation for a separate reason, not to revive a general discussion of paid editing, and I don't know how Carrite feels about hosting such a discussion. I think that Option 2 is probably not adequate disclosure to readers. To be adequate, it would have to say explicitly that the article was a product of editors paid by the subject. Option 1 is optimal but would be resisted by the libertarian wing of the editors, the ones who are still in kindergarten and/or have their heads stuck up their butts, and the ones who want to get on the gravy train themselves. I think that all three segments I've just described constitute a majority of the editors active in such policy-formulation activity. Coretheapple (talk) 19:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

You forgot to mention all those who are on some gravy train already and don't want it to end, or who have some similar COI skeleton in their cupboard. If you add those, then it's definitely a majority against change. Andreas JN466 22:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm fine with discussion here, if it's useful. I've sort of said my piece on it. It's a thoroughly stalemated issue and I don't have much else to say about it myself though. Carrite (talk) 03:41, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I think that's a fair statement. Coretheapple (talk) 13:08, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

In that case.  :-)

• Option 4. We start welcoming edits by employees and/or family members, but we insist that we get to pick the employee. Instead of the marketing department, or the PR consultant, we can go for the engineer. As the cartoon says, engineers cannot lie, mwuuaahahahaha.  :-)
• Option 5. We insist that paid editors perform at least two community-service edits, for every one edit they make to the articles where they have COI. In particular, this system would allow paid editors to police each other for compliance. We might specify that their 2-per-1 edits would have to be outside their industry and outside their family... or more simply, we might just specify they had to edit a *new* article each time, by clicking "random article".
• Option 6. We create some additional "separate" domain-names, www.wikipediaWhitepages.com for BLPs, www.wikipediaYellowpages.com for organizations, and www.wikipediaCatalogue.com (or somesuch... the exact names do not matter as long as the WMF maintains trademark-control). These new URLs have the same standards as mainspace does today, except for WP:NOTWEBHOST and WP:NOTDIRECTORY are revoked. Additionally, the WP:GNG standard is lowered, and WP:NOTEWORTHY is all that is needed for a dedicated article (stub!). We count being mentioned in the phonebook as good enough for WP:NOTEWORTHY. To keep the place from becoming totally spammy, this idea should be combined with the 2-per-1 rule mentioned in option five. We still enforce WP:NOTPROMOTION, prolly thataway. We also still enforce the WP:ABOUTSELF rules.
• Option 7. We dramatically increase the WP:GNG rules for BLPs and for organizations and for products: minimum 10 impeccably WP:RS stories from 10 distinct publishers (ultimate parent holding-company if we really wanna turn the screws) each of which has the name of the BLP/company/product in the title of the piece. That would eliminate about 90% of our existing BLPs and companies and products. It would also solve the WP:AFC backlog instantaneously.
• Option 8. We formalize the idea of companies paying editors... in the same way that corporations sponsor athletes / celebrities / etc. This is not the same thing as option two, in which company X pays editor Y who then edits Company X (via talkpage + WP:ERQ or directly in mainspace). I'm talking about sponsorship in the NASCAR sense: company X donates cash to the WMF in the name of editor Z, who has explicitly accepted them as a sponsor. When editor Z makes edits, they put the <sponsor n=Duracell /> tags into their edit-summaries. Ideally, the donation is then earmarked for WMF projects that editor Z supports: they control whether the cash from company X is spent on the vizEd && wpFlow, or instead on glam && wikimania, or instead on disk && cpu, or instead on salary && consultants.

Most of these are orthogonal; we could combine option 2+5+7 for example. HTH. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement

Your surreal barnstar

Move Like This
by 28bytes

Thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I hope Gerda Arendt doesn't mind if I take over her section ... since as a notorious wikiCriminal, she is probably also quite interested in the topic of Teh Killah Infoboxen.  :-)   Anyhoo, Tim this note was actually for you, and Gerda was gonna get her own note, but now she shalt be slighted, and merely pinged rather than getting a real message.

  I *was* worried that the decline in pageviews represented a decline in readership... and was going to blame it on either the rise of tablets or the hardships of being a beginning editor or both... but now I have a much better scapegoat, and can blame the Evil Infoboxen for the declining pageviews! Gerda is in soooo much deep doo-doo now. Actually, though, maybe we don't need to weigh Gerda to see if she is a fire-breathing duck. Google still officially lists "don't be evil" as their bylaw or slogan or cover story or something, right? Right. But if it is true that Google is materially reducing pageviews on wikipedia, then we will see a material impact on donations-per-reader, right? Because fewer people will see the WMF-approved banner-adverts ... instead they will be seeing Google-AdWords ... which are totally NOT EVIL it says so right on the tin ... placed strategically in and around wikipedia-content harvested from our handy-dandy-infoboxen. Simultaneously, we are already having declines in our editor-counts. Not just relatively-casual with 5+edits/mo, but also just this past year we've started to see a steady net decline in relatively-hardcore editors with 99+edits/mo. More people staying on google's websites, rather than coming to wikipedia, seems unlikely to help with that issue.

  Anyhoo, I have a few ideas about solving both, see here if you are interested. meta:User_talk:PiRSquared17#waray-waray_stats.2C_plus_non-mobile-pageviews Ignore the waray-waray stuff in the first paragraph, answering that question is what happened to lead me to the pageview-decline-stats, is all. Thanks for improving wikipedia; sorry about the WP:WALLOFTEXT. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 02:34, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Insight, thank you! Same "name": did you know that in 2012 I went to the Swedish Misplaced Pages to find the mason of the insightful article 'tis the season (link under "This" above) by Mason, which I had distributed widely in 2012, including to the one who - to my delight - is the right one. (It should have told me something that 1) he didn't respond to that gift, 2) the article mentioned a detail even I didn't know.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:33, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Did you know that a blue duck attacks the German Main page right now? - had to happen on the 28th ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:00, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Free to continue your discussion about Bitcoin on my talkpage

Hi. I saw your interest in talking about Bitcoin. If you wish to continue discussing it, you are free to on my talkpage. And no, I don't have an agenda. I have not mined these coins. These are a few I purchased. I use them for Humble Bundle. Though since in my country it is currently difficult to purchase Bitcoins, I can't acquire some new ones. That means I'm not really spending many any more. We have a restaurant here in Stockholm who take Bitcoin experimentally but due to my difficulty in obtaining them I have not yet visited the restaurant which is a shame. Logictheo (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I actually don't care much about discussing Ponzi Pointz.™ Carrite (talk) 05:45, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For keeping up the spirit of collegiality and not allowing differences over policy to become personal. Coretheapple (talk) 18:00, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Alex 21:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

My apologies. ): I should've only commented your argument, not your personality. (And I commented your argument.) It must be that I somehow misinterpreted some rule about the user not-being-related to the subject of the article. Anyway, why do you think I am a "Balkan nationalist", and why do you think I'm from the Balkans? Alex 21:56, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for making the change. I don't know your politics, I was just trying to draw up an easy-to-understand analogy for you. Best, —Tim //// Carrite (talk) 23:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement

The Low Countries as seen from space Hello, Carrite. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Low Countries Previous selections: Nordic art • Gopher (animal) Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 01:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

oh well....

Thanks for trying, anyway... 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 20:16, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 6, 2014)

The life sciences involve the study of living organisms Hello, Carrite. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Life sciences Previous selections: Low Countries • Nordic art Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 02:33, 3 February 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

WP:TFAR

Hello there - Cirt's complained on my talk page about some of the comments that you've made relating to him / the TFAR nomination, both at Jimbo's talk page and at TFAR itself. I appreciate that feelings are running high on both sides of this debate, but if you could try to avoid making comments like that in future, or other comments that are, or which might reasonably be construed to be, directed at Cirt in an attacking manner, I'd appreciate it and I'm sure he would too. (If not for him, then for me, please - at some point, I've got to try and write a closing rationale for a discussion in which more than 50 people have already commented - a new record for TFAR - and the less extraneous matter I have to wade through, the better!) Thanks, Bencherlite 23:27, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

It's a pretty obvious close, I think: to run, targeted for a "special day," the matter of a star used in the title to be determined. They did use that in the movie posters, by the way, for what it's worth. Of course the "don't censor me, maaaaaaaan!" chorus will never accept anything as rational as that. As for complaints about my calling a spade a spade — boo fucking hoo, as they say... Carrite (talk) 03:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 7, 2014)

This staircase is an impossible object Hello, Carrite. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Impossible object Previous selections: Life sciences • Low Countries Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 01:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Thank you

Greetings, although my ban will likely be initiated soon (or sent up to Arbcom) I just wanted to take a moment in my last edits here to thank you for your oppose of my ban. Good luck and happy editing. Kumioko 108.45.104.158 (talk) 03:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem. Even if you aren't banned, take a month off, get away from the drama, recharge. WP is still worthwhile, you just have to look at the good parts and forgive the bad parts. Carrite (talk) 05:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

KeepLocal

Thank you for your comment at my RfA. I certainly agree that Commons has a number of issues. Would it make you feel safer if I'd note that I am aware of {{Keep local}} and I intend on respecting it? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:19, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

That's good, but it's also really not the issue. "Keep Local" should be the default until that distant day when Commons gets its house in order. Carrite (talk) 17:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

I am fresh out of wiki kittens; please accept this cake as a thank you for your thoughtful comments during my (now withdrawn) RfA. Thank you for drawing my attention to potential problems with Commons. If you'd like to elaborate on them, I'd be interested in reading your more detailed thoughts on the subject. Cheers, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

This week's article for improvement (week 8, 2014)

Model of a German SAR-Lupe reconnaissance satellite inside a Cosmos-3M rocket Hello, Carrite. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Reconnaissance satellite Previous selections: Impossible object • Life sciences Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 16:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

File permission problem with File:Macpherson-kitty-and-hector-c1991.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Macpherson-kitty-and-hector-c1991.jpg, which you've attributed to Miriam Haugen. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Misplaced Pages:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Misplaced Pages's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:270700-lapakko-wallpapercommittee-color.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:270700-lapakko-wallpapercommittee-color.jpg, which you've attributed to Victor E. Lapakko. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Misplaced Pages:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Misplaced Pages's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:26, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I just fucking LOVE getting templated by file volunteers months after the fact. It makes it so much simpler to have the rights holders fill out the bullshit paperwork having to dig email addresses out of my spooler and renewing long dead conversations. Of course, these are extremely high risk files, like 1927 summer camp snapshots and photos of parents by daughters... Carrite (talk) 18:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

T. Gillis Nutter

Carrite, I just came across your comprehensive article for T. Gillis Nutter! Have you considered nominating this for Template talk:Did you know? I'm sure a lot of our readers would definitely find this article as interesting as I did if it were to appear on the front page! Great job! -- Caponer (talk) 13:31, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the nice words, but not ready for primetime until somebody figures out the later years and death date part of the story. Carrite (talk) 07:00, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Ernie Lazar FOIA collection at the archive

Hey! Maybe you're already aware of this, although it seems to be fairly recently arrived: Thousands of pages of FBI files on all kinds of things, including the CPUSA, with files from HQ as well as local offices. Primary, so not useful in articles, but good for external links I think, and general fascination. Cheers!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 02:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm up on this site through Historians of American Communism, which periodically links to updates in its H-Net list. Carrite (talk) 03:15, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, I figured it was a possibility. Excellent stuff on hate groups, too. I'll be working on that for a long, long time. See ya round...— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 03:20, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Right on. Thanks for the tip. Carrite (talk) 04:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to bump an old thread, but I just found something super-interesting author-wise in the Eustace Mullins talk archive which I can only share with someone who'll appreciate it without me having to explain it since to do so would violate the RULES: and . Maybe you already knew about this too.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 00:52, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

That is interesting. He needs to come back to WP. Carrite (talk) 01:34, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Indeed.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 01:52, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Hillquit Haywood debate

We discussed this some time ago. I wonder if it has become available? TFD (talk) 10:52, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I still don't have The Call for that year (working on finishing my run of St. Louis Labor at the moment). It's also not digitized as a publication. So far so bad. I will try to remember to fill out my Call run when I get the bucks (film comes from New York Public Library and runs about $105 a reel or something like that...). Best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 16:28, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Charles Edward Russell

On the Charles Edward Russell talk page I saw your discussions about a re-write of his article. I have read several of Russell's books I would like to help out. I am not a strong WP editor, but I have access to a lot of historical content and I'm good with references. If your are moving the article to a more modern citation format, I can assist with that too. Are you currently working on the article in a sandbox? Thanks. Ctatkinson (talk) 14:36, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

License tagging for File:2108-young-arrestthisman.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:2108-young-arrestthisman.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Misplaced Pages uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Misplaced Pages. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:05, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Icarians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican (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) 08:49, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Leo Huberman

Since you added this reference, maybe you know where it was published or where one can read it? I just wondered if it meets WP:SOURCE. --bender235 (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:46, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

from Smerus

Many thanks for your kind and completely unexpected post and barnstar! --Smerus (talk) 15:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

and from GuillaumeTell

Thanks for the barnstar, not that I've been doing anything much here recently, but I've been meaning to for about 16 months. I've still got a whole lot of half-finished stuff that I'm interested in, and I'll try to knuckle down and get going again. Best wishes. --GuillaumeTell 16:14, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

and from Viva-Verdi.....

Many thanks for your kind words and the Barnstar, of course! As a Verdi-lover who has seen all but one of his many operas (Aroldo is still to come!), I've found myself drawn to what the Italians call the primo ottocento era, and so Rossini, Bellini, and Donizetti, as well some of the lesser-known composers such as Saverio Mercadante, are my focus for WP Opera. As more of their rarely-heard works keep appearing, it's fun to do the research and enlarge the scope of many of the articles - and then travel to see/hear them performed - as I shall be doing this coming autumn, for example, by coming to London for Donizetti's Les martyrs at the Royal Festival Hall. Viva-Verdi (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Hockey enforcer????

Moi? --Orange Mike | Talk 01:09, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

"An enforcer's job is to deter and respond to dirty or violent play by the opposition. When such play occurs, the enforcer is expected to respond aggressively, by fighting or checking the offender." — Yeah, that about covers it, does it not? best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 01:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Icarians (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Leon, Red River and Havre

Dave Benett (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Brixton riots

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:49, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

JSTOR Survey (and an update)

Hi! Just a quick update that while JSTOR and The Misplaced Pages Library discuss expanding the partnership, they've gone ahead and extended the pilot access again, until May 31st. Thanks, JSTOR!

It would be really helpful for growing the program if you would fill out this short survey about your usage and experience with JSTOR:

SURVEY

Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:47, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

but GIGO

You mentioned the term GIGO in Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_dictatorships, did you mean "garbage in garbage out"? If so, do you have any citations or sources that claim the DD index or Polity data series as garbage so that I can incorporate them per WP:DUE and WP:SUBSTANTIATE. Thanks.--_{(comparingChinese Misplaced Pages vs Baidu Baike by hanteng)} 05:19, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Documenting undefinable concepts like "dictatorship" with sources is straight out of Alice in Wonderland. The very point I'm making is that rounding up this, that, or the other (tendentiously created) source to "prove" that a country is a dictatorship is ridiculous. Political activists grinding axes use the concept "dictatorship" as part of a dichotomy with "democracy." Serious scholars do not and have not since the 1960s. Carrite (talk) 15:29, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

not sure if you have read my response to the Afd, which I partially quote here:

Carrite said, 'the concept "dictatorship" — which is really out of vogue among serious academic historians and political scientists alike and has been for several decades'. May I ask if recent "vogueness" among academic research a criteria for Afd? Please try Google scholar dictatorship (not sure if your localized version will produce the same results). I see the "Democracy and dictatorship revisited", the same author who produced the DD index published in 2010 with at least 548 citations. I am not sure how can one measure academic vogueness even I use scientometrics and webometrics concepts and tools for my research on Baidu Baike and Chinese Misplaced Pages, but I believe that this provides enough evidence for the academic attention on the dataset, along with it, on the concept and measurement of dictatorship, as being done by democracy index, Polity data series, etc.

Do you have any reliable sources stating that the binary method is "out of vouge" since the 1960s for serious scholars? From what I have read, it does not appear to be such. For example, try google "Przeworski, Alvarez, and Cheibub's dichotomous classification" and you should find examples such as (2012), (2014) that the dichotomous method and datasets are still being used. Thus I would like you to reconsider to make your point with sources and evidence. Thanks. --_{(comparingChinese Misplaced Pages vs Baidu Baike by hanteng)} 13:30, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I've stated what I'm going to state on this matter. Moving on. Carrite (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Adrienne Harun

This one is brand-spanking new and could do with some expansion. Drmies (talk) 19:12, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

It's a rare, rare thing when I touch a non-sports BLP (they squirm way too much) and I don't have the books for sourcing out novelists. Do toss me a couple 1920s politicians if they come down the pike, however. Best, —Tim //// Carrite (talk) 04:01, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

showdown at the OK corral

Thank again for your support, despite all those such as yourself who "get me" and know the forces I'm up against, I know how this will go; "votes" will be counted on a numerical basis instead of qualitative grounds or with respect to fairness, and a permanent site ban will be invoked against me soon. Presumably my opponents will then refile RMs to overturn all those where my quoting guidelines has been a success, and proceed to butcher articles and titles right and left, without me being able to comment/criticize. See User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Site_ban_proposal_now_.22on.22.Skookum1 (talk) 05:56, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Nonplussed

I think you are pretty fantastic. (I'll be giving you a barnstar sometime; I need to work on it first.) Sincere, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 13:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm back....for now

Gonna stay out of the way and get busy in areas where constructive work is needed e.g. improving English in Asian and South American articles, and creating new history and geography articles long put off because of the ongoing disturbances and stonewalling at RMs and re harassment on my talkpage. See recent additions to the "Your block" and "Forks" sections on my talkpage.Skookum1 (talk) 04:45, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I've always more or less followed this strategy. There is a massive, massive, massive amount of work to be done. I try to dodge the idiots and find a nice open area where one can work in peace. Best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 06:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Category:South America, Category:Philippines, Category:Southeast Asia, even Category:Norway there's lots in need of doing; and very little in the way of title/category b.s.Skookum1 (talk) 06:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edwin Black, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Syndicated (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) 08:54, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

List of newspapers in Oregon

Zoikies! That's a lot of defunct newspapers. We had better get busy! Oh and don't forget the Flumgudgeon Gazette and Bumble Bee Budget Valfontis (talk) 19:41, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Replied on my talk page. Valfontis (talk) 20:26, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

barnstar havoc

All new sections added to the end of User_talk:Viva-Verdi are being sucked into your barnstar box ... any ideas? Scarabocchio (talk) 12:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Perfect! thanks .. Scarabocchio (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

The article "Jews and Communism"

Hello - I hope you don't mind me dropping you this note to ask if you could have a look at that article, see what you think of it, and make suggestions for what you think should be done, perhaps to include your sensible suggestions for changing the title that you made on Jimbo's talk page. Thank you.Smeat75 (talk) 05:36, 25 April 2014 (UTC)