Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:11, 17 February 2016

Hello

Please go to whatever page you are wondering about and hold the discussion there.

Reference errors on 16 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the The Zeitgeist Movement page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Single coil

Done properly now. Mendezes Cousins (talk) 18:17, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey there

Can you please explain to me why you won't allow me to bring up that archived 9/11 conspiracies conversation. It says on the archived pages that these conversations may be brought up in the current talk page. I'm not sure if you read my comments before you deleted them. I'd like to get your opinion on my points as well. Also, is there any way that I can edit my comments to the 9/11 conspiracies page so that it doesn't risk getting deleted?

Thanks. New User Person (talk) 19:53, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Creating a user page like you did will help. Misplaced Pages goes by consensus which is different than democracy or voting. Arguments have to be persuasive if there is an editing dispute. Edit a bunch of different articles to get the hang of editing. Ideas like reliable citations, neutrality etc. seem simple but actually there is a little to it. Copy pasting a bunch of old stuff on a talk page is not really good if the original consensus did not favor the idea it presents. Try to reformulate in your own words in short and make your point without trying to convince with long circular arguments. Earl King Jr. (talk) 04:51, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Post-scarcity economy

Whoa! What were you thinking with this edit? Viriditas (talk) 06:13, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Article talk pages are good places for content discussions ] Thanks Earl King Jr. (talk) 07:04, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Note/warning

Since I've described problems with your editing that could lead to a block, I want to make sure you saw my response to you on my talk page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:15, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Continuing disruption

None of the information by latest edit was sourced, cited.

On the contrary, most of the content was sourced but lacked explicit footnotes. You need to read for comprehension. Examples of sourcing implicit in the section include:

• Carlo Cafiero claimed...
  • A quotation attributed to an author. Did you make an attempt to check and add the relevant citation?
• Peter Kropotkin wrote Fields, Factories, and Workshops, using empirical data...
  • Content attributed to a book. Did you make an attempt to check and add the relevant citation?
• Post-scarcity became a central concern of anarchism in the 1960s with the publication of Post-Scarcity Anarchism by Murray Bookchin...
  • Content attributed to a book. Did you make an attempt to check and add the relevant citation?
• Mutualist Kevin Carson, in his study Homebrew Industrial Revolution, has continued this approach...
  • Content attributed to a study. Did you make an attempt to check and add the relevant citation?

So we see, contrary to your claim that the entire section was unsourced, in fact the opposite is true. Every single paragraph in the section you deleted is attributed to a specific source, yet lacks a physical citation. We don't delete such content; instead, we check and verify the citations, and add them if required. And if you can't do that, you add a maintenance tag requesting others to do it for you. We preserve content in the hopes of fixing it. What we don't do is delete content that already has sources embedded in the text. Viriditas (talk) 19:35, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

I see you are still engaging in the same disruptive behavior that you warned about previously by an admin. You recently removed material for no reason once again, citing the following justification:

unknown person making unknown claims

We have an extensive Misplaced Pages article on Kevin Carson, indicating he is neither unknown nor are his claims unknown. You were warned about making these kind of edits before when you removed the most notable writer on nanotechnology in history by claiming he was unknown. Do you need to be blocked in order to stop this disruption? Viriditas (talk) 03:45, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

I request you no longer post on my page. Thanks. Earl King Jr. (talk) 03:54, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Technocracy movement

Unless this image can be sized it should not be used. Too huge

Please stop disrupting Misplaced Pages. The image is appropriately thumbnailed. Further, the sizing of images is controlled in your preferences, not in the article. Please learn more about how we use images. Viriditas (talk) 19:41, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Wiki-stalking can get you bl0cked if done the way you are doing it talking of disruption and picking fights. I think your last block regarding 'you know what' is influencing ] your current actions. I suggest you take me off your watch list if you can not be civil. Earl King Jr. (talk) 03:41, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

==Your vandalism on 9/11 conspiracy theories

You have been warned many times about your tendency to vandalize the work of others. If you want to hack up the page with IDLI edits, you discuss it first. Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 05:08, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

It is not a good idea to call a fellow editor a vandal. A vandal is a specific thing. I would appreciate you removing the above comment and you may then also remove this rejoinder comment from my talk page that I am now making. Earl King Jr. (talk) 06:10, 17 February 2016 (UTC)