Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:39, 23 August 2015

This is my talk page, aka my home. I will try to keep it clutter free, and you should keep it free of verbal abuse. Thank you very much. If we have an ongoing conversation it will be here. If you want to see my recent conversations use the history. Thank you and have a good day.

DYK nomination of Lahore church bombings

Hello! Your submission of Lahore church bombings at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:56, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

@ OccultZone I read your review. Thank you very very much for it. Care to advise me on how to edit the article? Should I rephrase or just put in a quotation? FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:31, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Rephrase the quotation if it is too big compared to the rest of the section, unless your section exceeded 500 words, then maybe it would've been better to keep the whole quotation. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:36, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

@ OccultZone. I redid reference 51 and changed "said" to claimed in the lynching section. Also added another ref. I hope it is ok now.FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:47, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Good Luck! Loved & Beloved (talk) 12:55, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy delete declined

Free, I declined your speedy nomination at Ashmont Hill. Charting on several Billboard charts is a clear claim of significance. In fact, in this case, this article would probably be kept at articles for deletion. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:40, 3 May 2015 (UTC) @Oiyarbepsy kk. Ty for heads up. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:46, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Editing at Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 15:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Discussion on Talk Page of Ant & Dec

Hi FreeatlastChitchat,

I see you have edited Ant & Dec previously, there is a discussion on the Talk Page regarding the main image, i.e. which image best shows the two. Please leave your comments...SethWhales

TW

Just so you know, you can log the CSD taggings you perform with twinkle, enable "Keep a log in userspace of all CSD nominations" here: WP:TW/P --Fauzan_{✉ mail} 17:29, 4 May 2015 (UTC) Thanks man. Appreciate the help.FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 02:45, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Surin Elephant Round-up

On 9 May 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Surin Elephant Round-up, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that 100 soldiers compete against a single elephant in a tug of war during the Surin Elephant Round-up (procession pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Surin Elephant Round-up. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

FreeatlastChitchat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Perhaps an admin can look at this ANI thread. I have detailed at length what at rationale for removal was. Also the first edit I made was changed and I did not revert that, how is that edit warring? IF you require I can copy paste that here. BTW I just want to ask why I have been blocked without anyone warning me or telling me about any ongoing thread against me? I see that one of the reasons about my block is "Also, you gave no source whatever to support the claim you made in that edit, despite repeatedly removing other editors' contributions on the ground that you think their sources are inadequate." So I would dare to ask was consensus established at these nine (•RSN: 1 2 3 4 5 6 •NPOVN: 7 •TP: 8 9) places 'wrong'? I mean how much more consensus should there be about removal before the content is actually removed without getting blocked? Also another reason given is "Again, in the edit summary to this edit you wrote "No mention of rape jihad Anywhere in the sources given", despite the fact that the exact words "Rape Jihad" feature both in the title of one of the sources and in the body of its text." Well why doesn't someone read the article and then look at this policy quote from WP:NEO 'To support an article about a particular term or concept, we must cite what reliable secondary sources, such as books and papers, say about the term or concept, not books and papers that use the term. An editor's personal observations and research (e.g. finding blogs, books, and articles that use the term rather than are about the term) are insufficient to support articles on neologisms because this may require analysis and synthesis of primary source material to advance a position, which is explicitly prohibited by the original research policy.' Where does the article describe the practice? where does it mention it except in the title and then just a passing mention at the start? The entire article talks about slavery in 21st century Islamism. Even a blind man can see that. So allow me to ask why I have been blocked when I have been acting in accordance with consensus and Misplaced Pages policies. If all this is not enough then an admin should take a look at the Rape Jihad talk page. If the said admin still thinks that my adding the words "Ultra right wing, conservative and Islamophobic", along with my removal of content was grounds for a block, he should feel free to siteban me permanently, for what is the use of editing wikipedia when you are going to get blocked even when doing the right thing according to policies. Am I allowed to ping an admin here? It has been more than 12 hours (16 now) (22 now) since the block was placed, it takes less than 15 minutes to read through everything I posted and the material at ANI/TP. I hope an admin can spare that time. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 14:49, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Your request only further demonstrates that you do not understand our WP:NPOV policy. OhNoitsJamie 16:49, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

DYK nomination of High Orbit Ion Cannon

Hello! Your submission of High Orbit Ion Cannon at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Carl Henderson (talk) 06:34, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

FreeatlastChitchat, this nomination needs your attention the next time you edit here. DYK nominations cannot be held open indefinitely, so if you want this to appear, we'll need to hear from you soon. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:26, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

rape jihad afd?

Hi FreeatlastChitchat, just wondering why i wasn't pinged for the 4th nomination even though i commented on the 2nd nomination with a suggestion that it might be a keep? See Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Rape jihad (2nd nomination) Also, im a bit confused about the timing of the final two nominations - 4th opened 0605 on 13 April (only two days after previous nomination was closed?) and closed at 1534 on 13 April and then the 5th nomination opened at 17:39 on 10 May 2015 and closed at 17:01, 11 May 2015. I am also copying this message (with some more words:)) to Tokyogirl79 an administrator who may be able to clear up the timing issues of this afd avalanche and puts up with my, at times, naive 'kittenish' comments/questions.thanks, Coolabahapple (talk) 06:43, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Zara Cisco Brough

Thank you very much for creating the article on Zara Cisco Brough. I am just curious as to how you came to write it. One of my students was working on a draft about her just shortly before you posted your article, and she is distressed, though I've explained that's how things go on Misplaced Pages.Ssenier (talk) 18:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: T&T High School motijheel

Hello FreeatlastChitchat. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of T&T High School motijheel, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools, not unambiguously promotional. Might fail GNG, so a PROD or AFD is more appropriate. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrog 04:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Kk ty, gonna prod it. The article is pretty useless I think. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Lahore church bombings

On 21 May 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lahore church bombings, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that at least 15 people were killed and 70 injured during the Lahore church bombings? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lahore church bombings. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Panyd 13:31, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Empire Bay (city)

Hello FreeatlastChitchat. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Empire Bay (city), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to topics like these (unfortunately). Thank you. §FreeRangeFrog 20:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Prussiate

I have restored prussiate. If you really think it should be deleted, please start a discussion. Trouble is, I not sure where you would do it! WP:AfD is not suitable because it is not an article. WP:RfD is probably OK even though it is not a straight redirect. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi FalC. The above admin., Roger, described his restore here, after my request.

I'm sure your tagging was well intended but, just so as you know, wp:soft redirects from WP to Wiktionary are commonplace, & don't merit A1 or G1 speedy-delete tags. Please also see Talk:Prussiate.

Regards, Trafford09 (talk) 21:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

GOCE May 2015 copy edit drive recognition

		The Modest Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to FreeatlastChitchat for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words during the GOCE May 2015 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:28, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for High Orbit Ion Cannon

On 27 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article High Orbit Ion Cannon, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a High Orbit Ion Cannon took out the FBI and the US Department of Justice websites? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/High Orbit Ion Cannon. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:05, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

You should know discretionary sanctions

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Template:Z33

--Human3015  07:06, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

3rr

Your recent editing history at 2014–15 India–Pakistan border skirmishes shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --Human3015  07:15, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. The thread is Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:FreeatlastChitchat reported by User:Human3015 (Result: ). Thank you. Human3015  07:32, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

3rr

Your recent editing history at Siachen Glacier shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --Human3015  03:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. The thread is Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:FreeatlastChitchat reported by User:Human3015 (Result: ). Thank you. Human3015  03:44, 18 August 2015 (UTC) And the result of this report by human is the following comment by SWARM

Page protected for one week. Human, looking at the discussion, you seem to be misrepresenting the situation. The previous RfC did yield a consensus "that in some way the infobox should recognise the region is disputed". You're reverting based on claims that "there is "no consesnus" to add it to infobox" and that he should "let the ongoing RfC on same issue be closed". On its face this seems to be nothing less than a flagrant misrepresentation of the situation, as the current RfC is a follow up to determine how exactly the infobox should say it, not on whether it can be added to begin with. Furthermore, your argument that AlbinoFerret's RfC close is somehow invalid because he's not an administrator and/or because he interpreted a "rough consensus". This is simply wrong. As an uninvolved editor in good standing, he was completely and entirely within his rights to close the RfC, and misrepresenting consensus in an edit war is nothing short of disruptive. Yes, WP:BRD is the appropriate means of going about having one's edit reverted, but I honestly can't see any legitimate reasoning being given for the revert aside from a false procedural concern. I'm not sure what you're doing Human, but stop. Let me further clarify, since you apparently aren't particularly deterred by the threat of a block (based on your above comment): yes, your opponents may absolutely be blocked alongside you in some of these situations, but given your prior and current incidents of edit warring it's difficult not to see a problematic behavioral pattern on your part, and the next block you receive will be substantially lengthier, especially given the leniency I've opted for regarding these last two reports. Stop edit warring. Last warning from me before the consequences start getting serious. Swarm ♠ 06:56, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

August 2015

Hello, I'm Human3015. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Hafiz Muhammad Saeed that didn't seem very civil, and it should be removed. Misplaced Pages needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Human3015  08:00, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I have read this but I still stand by what I wrote. You should stop discussing me, my country and my emotional state and start discussing the article. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 08:12, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

3RR

Your recent editing history at Pakistan shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --Human3015  10:10, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Consider your notice delivered. I'll 'LOVE' to take this to ANI. please please report me and lets get the ball rolling. You have been hounding me for the past 5/6 hours so lets get this underway. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 10:14, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. The thread is Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:FreeatlastChitchat reported by User:Human3015 (Result: ). Thank you. Human3015  10:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Stop removing sourced content because you disagree with the POV

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Misplaced Pages, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you.Sakimonk 17:29, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I think you can improve Misplaced Pages just have some patience and control. Best of Luck. ScholarM (talk) 17:36, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Misplaced Pages account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Faizan, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Misplaced Pages administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Misplaced Pages policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Misplaced Pages community.

Human3015  21:22, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you!

I cracked a couple of ribs too. Cheers. Faizan (talk) 20:39, 23 August 2015 (UTC)