Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:16, 1 March 2015

Welcome to Misplaced Pages

I love your decisive edits and your furious edit summaries. Keep up the good work. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 01:11, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! Nice of you to say so. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 03:12, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Please stop

It's clear you do not wish to be polite.

Therefore, please stop posting to my user talk page.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 03:21, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

You reverted my work for no good reason. You left a dishonest edit summary. You deleted my post asking you why. And then you dare to accuse me of not wishing to be polite? Don't be such an idiot. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 07:07, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  — MusikAnimal 16:30, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

@MusikAnimal: I have unblocked this account, because the slip of phrase "such an idiot" was not sufficient enough to warrant the block despite being unnecessary. If the user where not an IP the block would not have happened. No other contributions in the last few days anything but Good faith editing and attempts at solutions.

To 200.83.101.199: Cirt did do something not exactly courteous, by reverting the edit; however this is in part, because the language you used is rough. Generally, we try to be extra courteous when interacting with editors, because like in other places on the web, users are very prone to reading or misreading the intentions of hard language. That being said: if Cirt asks not to converse on the item: there are plenty of other places on Misplaced Pages that could use editor attention, so I would suggest working on those: sometimes users just disagree on what is the best way to write/edit. Please do not revert to name calling, like "such an idiot" in the future: this does not support a collaborative environment, only inflaming any other disagreement. If you continue on that course, we will replace the block, Sadads (talk) 16:46, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

I am disgusted that User:Cirt falsely accused me of vandalism. I am even more disgusted that someone took their false claim at face value and blocked me. However, it is extremely pleasing to see that someone else undid the block so quickly. I am very grateful to you for that, User:Sadads. However, I cannot see which language might have been "rough" enough to cause him to undo my edit for no reason. I can't imagine any language rough enough to excuse that, and certainly not "totally unnecessary link" and "already in the text".

Note that this user made their false accusation even after we had discussed the content issue and agreed a compromise; that was incredibly immature and vindictive. I saw that no-one had warned User:Cirt about false accusations of vandalism being damaging and disruptive, so I pointed it out to them.

Well anyway, thanks again Sadads for undoing the block so promptly. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 05:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

I see that once again, ] deleted my post from their talk page. I see that no-one else has warned them against lying to get other users blocked. It seems to me this kind of behaviour is tolerated and even encouraged. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 13:20, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Users are free to delete post from their own talk page Bentogoa (talk) 14:08, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't respond earlier. +1 to Bentogoa's comment: user pages are consider personal space, and in many ways, we let users request for them to be kept in certain ways. Some users respond quicker to different types of activity and language, and when you get into content specific arguments, its generally not a good idea to also bring that argument to someones talk page (that is what he reverted you on), because that is, in some ways, a form of aggression. I hope you find ways to be productive in other spaces :) Sadads (talk) 17:48, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I take content-specific issues to article talk pages, and user-specific issues to user talk pages. I consider reverting for no reason to be an insulting act of aggression, and can't see how complaining about it could be considered in similar terms. And of course, a user can delete whatever they like, but if someone reverts for no reason, makes false accusations of vandalism, gets me blocked, and faces no sanction of any kind, then I'm going to leave them messages telling them not to behave in such a disgraceful way, whether they like it or not. If you consider that a form of aggression, then consider me unrepentantly violent. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 13:46, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi again

I didn't realise you'd been blocked, and am glad you were rapidly unblocked. However, I've been summoned to have a look at your recent edits, specifically on Tosca, and I'd like to see you respond at Talk:Tosca. Looking at the previous talk-page section linked there, it does seem there is an impressive list of references to that quote as "famous". We may have the exception that proves the rule. However, come on over there and let's talk about it, please. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:08, 14 February 2015 (UTC) You were doing so as I posted. I have now weighed in there myself. Jumped in with big gumboots on, more like. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. My arguments are over there. If you feel like considering something entirely different, I wonder whether you think it's a good idea to say what a hurricane was before saying what damage it caused? I do, but others seem not to. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 19:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately that one further contributed to my headscratching over GA: "Severe other countries" jumped out at me. Anyway, I agree with you in this instance and was additionally able to fix that. Now I fear I must shortly go to bed. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

A fast note to draw your attention to the bottom of my talk page and what I've just said there. If I had time I would post at WikiProject Russia, but right now I don't. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:28, 15 February 2015 (UTC) ... and again, see my talk page, since I can't ping you. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the manual pings, much appreciated. Haven't responded yet due to general disgust with the relentless stalking and harassment of SummerPhD but I will get to it soon. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 13:46, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:

• Contributing to Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• Simplified Manual of Style

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Misplaced Pages, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create an account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

• Create new pages and rename pages
• Edit semi-protected pages
• Upload images
• Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed

If you edit without an account, your IP address (200.83.101.199) is used to identify you instead.

We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing! Pyrotle…the "y" is silent, BTW. 19:59, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015

The lede in Belushya Guba corresponds to the lede in the articles in ALL Russian localities. Please stop reverting. I see that you have already been blocked, and I promise you the next block is approaching if you continue this behavior. If you do not like the layout, plese open a topic at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Russia.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:11, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

If they all contain badly written redundant text, then they all need correcting, don't they? I can't believe you're edit warring to force things that aren't even sentences into the article. Well, I guess some people have funny ways of enjoying themselves. If making articles look like primary school projects is your thing, then carry on. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 21:20, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: I agree with 200.83.101.199; his/her edit was justified and the revert unnecessary. Repeating something that was just a paragraph or two back is indeed redundant, and the IP did in fact change a non-sentence into a sentence.

@200.83.101.199: If you may, please bring this issue up onto either Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Russia or request comment on the article's talk page so this can be officially settled. If you do not want to bring this issue up yourself, then I may do so for you (but you should tell me if you want me to do if for you). Pyrotle…the "y" is silent, BTW. 21:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your input, Pyrotle. I don't plan to bring this issue up at the wikiproject because I really don't think it is an issue. It's not like a wikiproject can decide that in "their" articles, sentences don't need to be completed, and certain things should be said twice. I tend to think that my edit was reverted simply because people like to revert anonymous edits, and it would never have happened if it had been made by someone with an account. Indeed, no-one reverted the edit when you made it.

Thanks also for your welcome earlier. Much appreciated. I've been around rather a long time, in fact, though of course that is not apparent as I don't have an account. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. Also, I myself brought the issue up here (sort of); if there's any development to this (i.e., if an answer has been given and I can request comment on what has been said), I'll ask for your input (ignore it for now, though).

Also, if you feel you're being discriminated for simply being an IP, or otherwise having a serious problem with a user, feel free to bring it up here (but don't go overboard with it). Pyrotle…the "y" is silent, BTW. 03:35, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Your reappearance led me to take a look at that discussion and weigh in there. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, good to see your input there. I also rejoined the discussion, having previously forgotten about it. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 00:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Tom Baker Article

This post is to inform you that I have posted a neutral request for more editors to give their opinions on our disagreement in accordance with WP:Canvassing, which I have posted at WP:DOCTORWHO (here to go directly to post). Vyselink (talk) 04:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Insults

Do not go on insulting editors whom you have no idea about. You may discuss things, yes, but when you just run around and a leave message assuming nothing but bad faith, that is not very constructive. Your style is unacceptable. Hafspajen (talk) 03:10, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not assuming bad faith, I'm observing it. I've seen you reverting for no good reason on several occasions. You and your ilk cause immense damage to Misplaced Pages. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 03:17, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

• NOW you are definitively involved in edit war, removing a valid warning. Three times. I was about rewriting the text and adding references - AND you keep removing it, too. Hafspajen (talk) 03:28, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not a guidebook or an instruction manual, and anyone is free to remove whatever they like from their own talk page. You've amply demonstrated that you don't understand basic policies and that you're just here to antagonise, so don't expect anything else you post here to remain. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 03:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

• listen here. You start an edit war, than you don't want to discuss ANYTHING. You keep removing each an every attempt to leave messages . You've amply demonstrated that you don't understand basic policies - the basic idea of discussing. You don't want to listen to any arguments, the only thing you do as soon I leave a message, in ten seconds - you just remove it. I don't know what kind of interaction you had with Yngvadottir, but she could explain to you that this is not the way to act. Actually I know only one editor acting like this, on the whole Wikpedia, and that one is from South-America too. I expect you will remove this one too, but when you start reverting people you SHOULD DISCUSS THING with them not remove their post non-stop like machine. Hafspajen (talk) 04:45, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

@200, @Hafspajen: I got up not long ago, I have just given a cursory look at the recent editing history between you, and I have to get ready for work like now. So I'm leaving a quick message for you both here. Hafspajen, the IP editor is right: people are allowed to remove warnings from their talk pages. IP: the section may have encyclopaedic use; this is the kind of topic print encyclopaedias traditionally didn't have much space for anyway, but we can and do cast our net wider. However, it needs to be based on more than just Finnish sources, and it should be as non-discursive as possible. Please talk about this at Talk:Wilderness hut. Hafspajen, I suggest you post a draft of the section there. Note that we also have Mountain hut. Now I am out of time, sorry. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:28, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Yngvadottir - The IP started the whole exchange by telling me to GROW UP: Really? Hafspajen (talk) 05:36, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

• she/ he stops me from editing the article, and rewording the section. Than he goes removing practically every edit -from his page, NOT only warnings. and he tells me to grow up? what kind of crappy rules that say he can behave rudely, remove every edit from his page and than he is right too??? several times - If I go back to the article to rewrote that part -he will be on me in a second, and revert, and than he will remove warning- come on. Hafspajen (talk) 05:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

• I'm now on my break at work; I don't know how much time I'll have. Since I can't ping you, alerting you that I'm going to be posting to the article talk page. Also, it has to be said that even after a statement about reverting for no reason, "You and your ilk cause immense damage to Misplaced Pages" is a hurtful thing to say that makes discussion harder. We now have an interpersonal mess between to editors both of whom I know to be assets to the encyclopaedia. In fact Hafspajen has been trying - albeit through templating a regular - to explain why he reverted in this instance: he was trying to improve the text in situ. Now I am off to the article talk page, and if I have time, to Hafspajen's user talk also, but him I can ping. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:19, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
• IP, there's a half dozen admins chomping at the bit to block you, no doubt. Please don't give them a reason to. Play nice--Hafspajen is a good person. You may have been right in this or that matter, but that doesn't mean everything. Look at me: I'm always right, and look where it got me. Please. Drmies (talk) 16:23, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Why didn't you told me, Yngvadottir, that this editor is a blocked editor who was unblocked, read here high up. Two admins, Drmies and Yngvadottir, have unblocked with a WP:0RR restriction. Looks to me that he was on called 1RR (one-revert rule) or 0RR (zero-revert rule). That means he should never been reverting anything at all - ever, he was under restrictions. And this actually means that he was way ahead me on reverts. Hafspajen (talk) 21:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

That's out of date. (There was a small edit war at that abuse page, look at the history; and those abuse pages are not official.) No, IP, I won't delete that page - it would bring down more fire on all of our heads. But the IP is under no current restrictions. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:36, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

• It may. But considering that history, his behaviour today, - surely nobody could miss the point in that there is no difference whatsoever in his current behaviour - versus the past - and it seems to me that proclaming this editor for a valuable editor - it is so way out in the blue as it only possible. This editor will continue to cause trouble, as sure as that the sun will go up tomorrow. I don't care any more about that article - he can have it and eat it - but I sincerely do not understand on what grounds you two are protecting such an uncivil, disruptive editor - because there is no doubt about that this is a serious problem-editor - with a absolute 'huge past in edit warring, endless blocks and uncivility who proved today he hasn't changed a bit. And that - good edits or not. There were plenty of brilliant editors who were banned for less than this. Even Coat was doing good, clear edits. I didn't realized this before - only when I read this remark att the editwar noticeboard - about the Misplaced Pages:Long-term_abuse/Best_known_for_IP -record. I am disappointed. Many more good and nice editors will get hurt because of this one. Hafspajen (talk) 23:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I know there are plenty of admins who want to block me, Drmies; several have already blocked me for no reason and then wasted a few minutes of their time undoing many hours of my work, just because they hate quality so much. Some have even falsely and repeatedly claimed that I was banned. I'm used to that. And I'm used to people reverting my work for no reason at all. Hafspajen already did this at least three times before, and chose to do so again here. You tell me they are a good person and have the best interests of the encyclopaedia at heart, and I try to believe you, but my own experience doesn't support that. I'm afraid I do consider that reverting for no reason is immensely damaging to Misplaced Pages and I won't apologise for saying so. Well anyway, whatever we might disagree on, I greatly appreciate and respect your opinions, Drmies and Yngvadottir. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 02:52, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Ah, there we go. Blocked for spurious reasons, again. The War On Quality continues. 200.83.101.199 (talk) 16:44, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

• Kww doesn't need much of a reason, and they found enough: for them there is only resolution if there's a block. It's not Hafspajen who hates quality--they just have a different opinion on various things, and I wish they would have acted differently here. I can find little to cheer in anyone's contributions (with the exception of Y, of course), including my own. I know you'll be back, and it'll count as block evasion (technically correct, of course), which is exacerbated by the extraordinary length of the block. To the person behind the IP: all the best. Drmies (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

• I don't know whether you'll see this, and I wish we could have had a discussion over the hut article. But I'm afraid it looks as if the attempt has failed and we're pretty much back to square one. Thank you for working with us, and also of course thank you for the edits; although I still reserve the right to disagree with you, I hope when your block is up, that if you get reverted you'll consider pinging me before re-reverting. If you were to register an account, you would also be welcome to e-mail me, but you must have reasons for not registering, so that will have to remain theoretical. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2015 (UTC)