Misplaced Pages

User talk:Meters: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:26, 25 May 2016 editMeters (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers172,711 editsm Reverted edits by Gentlejackjones (talk) to last version by Meters← Previous edit Revision as of 02:29, 25 May 2016 edit undoGentlejackjones (talk | contribs)126 edits Undid revision 721955309 by Meters (talk) Again, it seems like you are preparing to violate the 3rr. Please leave this up for the admins.Next edit →
Line 183: Line 183:
Hi Mr/Ms Meters, No no, you have it back to front - if you have a look at my edits, and those of others, you will see that I have included Palestine, then others have removed it, without comment or explanation. I don't understand why someone else - not me! - has been doing this. ] (]) 02:34, 23 May 2016 (UTC) Hi Mr/Ms Meters, No no, you have it back to front - if you have a look at my edits, and those of others, you will see that I have included Palestine, then others have removed it, without comment or explanation. I don't understand why someone else - not me! - has been doing this. ] (]) 02:34, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
:I did look at the edits. That's why I asked you what you were doing. You deleted the 2016 data for Palestine and then you did it again and complained that people were vandalizing the article by removing the Palestine data. As I said on your talk page, look at what you are doing, or stop messing around. ] (]) 04:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC) :I did look at the edits. That's why I asked you what you were doing. You deleted the 2016 data for Palestine and then you did it again and complained that people were vandalizing the article by removing the Palestine data. As I said on your talk page, look at what you are doing, or stop messing around. ] (]) 04:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

==Biting the Newbies==

I honestly think you should ramp it down considerably when dealing with your fellow editors. I am considering an admin request regarding this, but would like to discuss with you before hand. As a reminder:

From :

Understand that newcomers are both necessary for and valuable to the community. By empowering newcomers, we can improve the diversity of knowledge, perspectives, and ideas on Misplaced Pages, thereby preserving its neutrality and integrity as a resource and ultimately increasing its value. In fact, it has been found that newcomers are responsible for adding the majority of lasting content to Misplaced Pages (i.e., substantive edits); while insiders and administrators are responsible for a large bulk of total edits, these often involve tweaking, reverting, and rearranging content.
Remember, our motto and our invitation to the newcomer is be bold. We have a set of rules, standards, and traditions, but they must not be applied in such a way as to thwart the efforts of newcomers who take that invitation at face value. A newcomer brings a wealth of ideas, creativity and experience from other areas that, current rules and standards aside, have the potential to better our community and Misplaced Pages as a whole. It may be that the rules and standards need revising or expanding; perhaps what the newcomer is doing "wrong" may ultimately improve Misplaced Pages. '''Observe for a while and, if necessary, ask what the newcomer is trying to achieve before concluding that their efforts are wanting or that they are simply "wrong".'''
If a newcomer seems to have made a small mistake (e.g., forgetting to put book titles in italics), try to correct it yourself: do not slam the newcomer. A gentle note at their user page explaining the Misplaced Pages standard and how to achieve it in the future may prove helpful, as they may be unfamiliar with the norm or merely how to achieve it. Remember, this is a place where anyone may edit and therefore it is each person's responsibility to edit and complement, rather than to criticize or supervise others. If you use bad manners or curse at newcomers, they may decide not to contribute to the encyclopedia again.
'''If you feel that you must say something to a newcomer about a mistake, please do so in a constructive and respectful manner. Begin by introducing yourself with a greeting on the user's talk page to let them know that they are welcome here, and present your corrections calmly and as a peer.''' If possible, point out things that they've done correctly or well. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Edited for grammar/bold emphasis and signature.] (]) 00:48, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Also, please see:

Distinguished from productive editing
Editors often post minority views to articles. '''This fits within Misplaced Pages's mission so long as the contributions are verifiable''', do not give undue weight, and where appropriate, comply with WP:FRINGE. The burden of evidence rests with the editor who initially provides the information or wishes the information to remain.

From Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view:

'''Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources''', in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint. Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means that articles should not give minority views as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views.

Verifiable and noteworthy viewpoints include protoscience when this is published in reputable peer-reviewed journals. Editors may reasonably present active public disputes or controversies which are documented by reliable sources. For example, citing a viewpoint stated in a mainstream scholarly journal, textbook, or monograph is not per se disruptive editing. This exemption does not apply to settled disputes; for example, insertion of claims that the Sun revolves around the Earth would not be appropriate today, even though this issue was active controversy in the time of Galileo. Mentioning such disputes in the article may however be appropriate if the controversy itself was notable (such as in this example).

'''Sometimes well-meaning editors may be misled by fringe publications''' or make honest mistakes when representing a citation. Such people may reasonably defend their positions for a short time, then concede the issue when they encounter better evidence or impartial feedback.

1) I apologize for letting "fringe publications" carry my original edit too far-- you were right about that one.
2) I really think we can work this out without resort to admins. I have no reason to "beef" with you at all.

Many thanks and kind regards,

] (]) 00:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:29, 25 May 2016

If this page has been protected and you cannot edit it you may leave messages here. Meters (talk) 22:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist and topic subscriptions to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15


A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
For your user page, which took me a lot longer to get than I care to admit. Corvoe (speak to me) 19:23, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


Merger of High school into Secondary school

Sorry, but the merger of High school into Secondary school, which you supported (merely based on the fact that high schools are secondary schools, like apples are fruits), seems to be particularly ill-judged. Note that I have just proposed undoing that merger, with a quite comprehensive rationale on Talk:Secondary school#Revert merger of Secondary school and High school. Feel free to join into the discussion. Regards, PanchoS (talk) 11:30, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

PanchoS It's a pity you didn't see fit to contribute your opinions during the three months the merger proposal was open, instead of attempting to undo the merger less than three hours after it was done. Calling the merger discussion "particularly ill-judged" is a slap in the face to the people who did participate. Did you bother to read the two articles? It's quite clear that this is not a case of "apples and oranges" but rather a case of "apples" and "pommes". The secondary school article is discussing education "after primary school and before higher education". Secondary school made multiple references to "high school" and High school made multiple references to secondary school or education. Meters (talk) 17:05, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
"Didn't see fit" doesn't hit the nail. For some reason I missed the discussion or possibly didn't find the time to join in – I admit I don't really remember. No doubt it would have been better if I joined in earlier. Believe me, it would have been preferable for me, too. Only when the articles were actually merged, the changes popped up in my watchlist. Now I understand this is deplorable, but while the procedure does matter, a reasonable result is what our encyclopedic work is all about.
High schools are a specific type of secondary schools. Middle schools, gymnasiums, grammar schools, lyceums, Gesamtschulen etc. are other types of secondary schools. Finally, there are secondary schools named "secondary schools". We clearly don't need another article listing all kinds of secondary schools per country, as secondary education already does. Rather we need to be more precise in working out the specifics of the different types of secondary schools, while covering as well the country-to-country differences within the respective school types. Undoing the merger doesn't solve the deficiencies of these articles, but the merger has substantially aggravated it. --PanchoS (talk) 17:29, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Re: The secondary school article is discussing education "after primary school and before higher education".
While lacking precision, this is a basic definition of generic secondary schools. Now that you supported merging in the more specific type of high schools – what would be your argument not to merge in Middle schools, gymnasiums, grammar schools, lyceums and other specific types of a secondary school. Then again, do you believe this would improve our coverage of the topic, given that it would then be essentially redundant to secondary education which already constitutes an overview article about all kinds of secondary schools worldwide. --PanchoS (talk) 17:39, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm not getting into a long discussion here. It's counterproductive to split this between the demerger discussion and individual talk pages. As I said on the demerger propoasal, "as the articles stood when merged, the merge was appropriate." There's no point in having two articles that discuss the same concept under different names. Meters (talk) 18:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

delta Delta Phi Zeta

Who get to say that the page is notable or not? Isn't that just opinion? Becuase in my opinion, I do think that it is notable. Thanks. Xmskab (talk) 18:36, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

I suggest that you read Misplaced Pages:Notability and WP:CLUB. Your single chapter sorority does not appear to be notable. Meters (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this. :) Kailey 2001 (talk) 23:21, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

No problem. There are quite a few boards to keep track of. Thanks for pointing out that username. I agree that it was unacceptable. Meters (talk) 23:35, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Henry I. Miller

I am not Wiki-literate and I have no interest in editing except to end the harassment from others, as manifested in recent (and previous) edits to my entry. You may not like the terminology, but additions such as "Tobacco industry" and "Climate change" are inaccurate, intentionally misleading and defamatory. I cannot tolerate the damage to my reputation that such misrepresentations cause.

See, for example, my discussion of the tobacco industry claims at http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/12/a-david-and-goliath-parable/, and also in http://www.hoover.org/research/cigarette-smokescreen, where I explain that the primary hazard from smoking is not the nicotine but the inhalation of smoke. I refer to smoking as a "scourge" and observe that, "Tobacco is an inherently, irredeemably dangerous product." Those sentiments are exactly the opposite of what the editors of my entry are trying to convey. I have never received any compensation of any kind, direct or indirect, from the tobacco industry or tobacco companies.

Similarly, with regards to climate change, I do not work on or write about climate change. My connection to the George Marshall Institute ended at least 15 years ago, and in any case had nothing at all to do with climate change. Once again, its mention in my entry is simply harassment and an attempt to defame me.

I have no interest in promoting myself via Misplaced Pages. I just want an end to the harassment and distractions.

Henryimillermd (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Henry Miller

User:Henryimillermd If the article is about you, as it appears to be, and there are issues with the content, the correct thing in most cases is to discuss the issues on that talk page so that editors without conflicts of interest can make the changes. See WP:BIOSELF. Whether it is about you or not, anything which is a WP:BLP violation should immediately be removed. If there is any disagreement about this the venues to raise the concern is WP:BLPN. The article needs to be balanced and written in a neutral tone. However, some of the material you are removing is well sourced and does not appear to be an issue. The article should not misinterpret anything and if Miller (you?) has changed his position then a balanced article should say so, but you don't get to remove material simply because you don't like it. Continuing to edit the article while ignoring the attempts to discuss COI and content issues with you on your talk page and on the article's talk page is not helping. That's why I've raised the issue at COIN. I'm asking for a consensus that you are a COI editor with respect to Henry I. Miller.
I agree that some of your concerns over the material you removed are valid, but my talk page is not the place to discuss the particulars of your edits. Please take this to the article's talk page where the discussion has already started so other editors will see your concerns and participate in the discussion. Meters (talk) 18:14, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
I will copy this to the article's talk page. Meters (talk) 18:16, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments by another editor with an apparent COI

Hello - forgive my Misplaced Pages ignorance. I don't know whether I'm supposed to reply to your comment on my Talk page there or here.

I don't have an external relationship with Henry Miller. I've met him a handful of times over the past five years. I don't have any professional or compensatory relationship with him, his organization, employer, competitor, product, etc. He once mentioned to me the inaccuracies he felt were written about him on the Misplaced Pages page, and I looked into the matter and found what I believed to be inaccurate statements and/or statements unsupported by citations. Cfulbright (talk) 01:46, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Did you read the Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest#Writing about yourself, family, friends link I pointed you to on your talk page? You don't have to have a financial or professional relationship with him or any of his organizations to have a conflict of interest. You know him personally. Thus you have a conflict of interest. Per your own edits here File:Henry Miller and dog.jpg you know him well enough to have visited him at his home, to have taken the picture of him and his dog that is now in the article, and to call his wife by her first name. As i said on your talk page "Some of your edits are clearly not corrections of serious errors or defamation, and should not be made by you. Instead you should disclose your connection to the subject and propose changes on the article's talk page so that uninvolved editors may consider them." There were definite problems with the article, and it was indeed slanted negatively and unfairly, so I'm trying to WP:assume good faith on your part, but claiming that edits such as this are COI justified as correcting inaccurate statements and/or statements unsupported by citations" does not help. I've managed to get other editors involved and the worst of the problems with the article were quickly corrected. Any remianing problems should be discussed on the talk page. Continuing to edit the article, and commenting on the talk page without disclosing your conflict of interest are a problem.
If you are editing the article because Miller complained to you about it that is a form of sock puppetry. You should read WP:SOCK, particularly WP:MTPPT. It's more than a bit suspicious that twice now you have shown up on this article at the same time Miller was being warned for his conflict of interest in editing it. Meters (talk) 04:18, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

For you

The Original Barnstar
For caring about me. <3 Kailey 2001 (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

The Longest Palindrome in the world

Thank you for your corrections and deletions. I understand your point completely.You are absolutely right that there is not at all point to collect hundreds of foreign language examples to English site. It made the whole article look like a circus. On the other hand that has nothing to do with the important fact about the longest palindromes in the world. If not in Misplaced Pages, then where should people search information about world's longest palindromes? Media, scientific journals or other official authorities aren't at all interested in such a marginal, crazy and unique "hobby". Now English speaking world may incorrectly claim also in the future that for example David Stepehen's palindrome is the longest in the whole world with 58 00 letters. Original referring was leading the reader to see just one of those many Finnish palindromes which often are much longer than Stephens's and includes only meaningful sentences all the way. Talking about the quality is of course impossible. But if you want to get to know more if Finnish should be mentioned also in English "palindrome-Article" or not, then please really read that removed referring to Juha Kotonen's palindrome. At this very moment Finns are also translating the longest palindrome in the world into English.

I'm not going to get into this on my talk page. My comments are already on your talk page, and if you want to discuss the usefulness of your addition the correct place to do so is on the article's talk page, so that the other editors who have undone your additions can participate. Meters (talk) 03:26, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Peyton Manning "former"

Hey. When a player retires, they become a "former" player, not "retired." Look at any other player (Brett Favre, Terrell Owens, Terrell Davis). If you want to lead a crusade and get the opening line changed, go for it. But I'm just following the example set by every other former player. TropicAces (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

User:TropicAcesI'm sure that I have seen an essay that no-longer active players should be listed as "retired" rather than as "former" since former has the connotation that they have died. I'm not starting a crusade... you were the one who added the comment with the all caps yelling. Meters (talk) 18:39, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Rona Ambrose Reversion

Hello Meters,

I left the content of the paragraph intact.

I edited unnecessary superfluous and redundant material. Misplaced Pages discourages needless wordiness, and rather encourages short and concise content. Please see Misplaced Pages:Too long; didn't read for more details.

I specifically removed, "Continued opposition discontent over Ambrose's conduct led the" as this sentence is unnecessary, and redundant. I removed "Had the motion passed, a vote would then have been held in the House of Commons, and, because this was deemed to be a matter of confidence, could possibly have triggered an election.". because it is completely unnecessary. It is mere superfluous speculation. Please undo your reversion. The unsourced content I removed kept all key aspects of the original content intact, and reduced unnecessary wordiness, redundancy, and superfluous detail. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 01:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah, where to start?
  1. Please don't create talk threads on my user page (or anyone's). That's what the talk pages are for, and why I have moved this thread here.
  2. As I pointed out, your edit was not a minor edit, and your edit summary was inaccurate since it did not leave all content intact, as you claimed. it does not matter if you think the content was redundant, or superfluous, or speculative. You cannot remove content and leave an edit summary saying that you left all content intact. Leaving that edit summary and calling it a minor edit might be seen as an attempt to hide your changes.
  3. Misplaced Pages:Too long; didn't read is an essay. It's not a policy (which has wide acceptance and should normally be followed), or even a guideline (which has general consensus). It's just the opinion of a number of editors, and this one is usually only used as a snarky dismissal of an overly-long talk page thread. It's not justification for your content removal.
  4. Will I remove the material for you? No. You recently came off an edit warring block for something that involved Rona Ambrose, so I'm not touching this. Please follow WP:BRD and discuss the edit on the article's talk page. If the changes are good consensus will easily be reached. I would suggest that you not attempt to use WP:TLDR in your reasoning. Meters (talk) 05:39, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much. I had no idea I was breaking a rule. I feel badly and want to apologize. Thanks again.Lollollolll (talk) 21:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Note on SPI

Hi,

Just wanted to let you know that the Barnyard pecker case is almost certainly another incident of socking by LTA Sheds thus guys argh g ugh b. Their typical MO involves username violations, harassment (especially of Bongwarrior, but there are certainly others), and spamming of phony block notices. Thanks, GAB 20:38, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Meters (talk) 02:09, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Summer

I think we should add August 15, known as "Ferragosto". --Sean Ago (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't know anything about that one, but you should stop removing January dates from the southern hemisphere. Meters (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
I've just seen and read your edit; I didn't find a note about it in the page. --Sean Ago (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Try reading the lede. "when it is summer in the Northern Hemisphere, it is winter in the Southern Hemisphere, and vice versa." Meters (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


Since you deleted my edit while I was logged out at work, I have to ask the question, how have you not lost your admin rights? Care to answer the question now? Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I already deleted that post once. If you want to out yourself that's up to you. I'm not a mind reader so I couldn't tell the anonymous IP was you rather than one of the many other IPs who vandalize and troll my talk page. In fact, it might have been an outing violation for me to assume that IP was you. As for discussing the edits, I have already explained on your talk page here so if you want to discuss it please keep the discussion there. I'm not going to respond to any further posting by you on my talk page on this issue. Since you deleted that thread I assume you don't want to discuss it. As for my admin rights, I am not an admin. If you think there is a problem with my edits feel free to raise it at the appropriate noticeboard. Meters (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Pro-life feminism

Hello Meters,

You have recently reverted Rona Ambrose's inclusion in the Pro-life feminism article. You have not explained why. Please provide an explanation for your reversion on the talk page. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I did indeed give a reason. I pointed you to the talk page discussion where inclusion of this material was questioned, and I expanded on the talk page section. You are edit warring on this again. Meters (talk) 22:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Hillsborough - "crowd crush" vs "human crush"

Hi,

I've left a longish reply at User talk:Crystal.seed#Hillsborough - the short version is that an editor restored the term "human crush" to the article some time ago. As an editor who expressed a preference for "crowd crush" I thought you might like to be made aware of this. There are some suggestions in my reply over there. Personally, this is the limit of my involvement (although I tend to agree also) since I'm teetering on the edge of letting Misplaced Pages become a time sink once again (this is why I only edit as an IP these days) and am about to pull back from that edge. Good luck, if you choose to get involved. Cheers. 2.25.105.253 (talk) 04:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Someone else put it back to "human crush" again. Consensus seems to be supporting that version. To me it seems a better term. They are not synonymous. A stampede does not necessarily result in a crush, and crushing incidents do not always start with stampedes. The article the link redirects to (Stampede) does a fairly good job of distinguishing the two. I agree with the suggestion at Talk:Stampede#Stampede_vs._crush that we're probably at the point where human crushes should be forked from stampedes. Meters (talk) 21:48, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Rona Ambrose a "Prominent feminist"?

Pls see Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Rona Ambrose--Moxy (talk) 04:24, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Meters (talk) 16:46, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Labor Day and summer

I've a question about this. According to informations, on September 1 autumn begins: so, already the first day of month is fall season. Summer is from June 1 to August 31. It appears like a contraddiction. --Sean Ago (talk) 18:37, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

I've never edited that page as far as I know, and I see no problem with it. It says 'Labor Day is called the "unofficial end of summer" because it marks the end of the cultural summer season (summer scientifically ends at the September Equinox anytime from September 21 to 24).' There's no contradiction there. It's clear the reference is not to the scientifically defined summer of the Northern hemisphere (June solstice to September equinox}. Meters (talk) 20:27, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

For diligently addressing vandalism to the Adolf Hitler's bodyguard page by you know who (he-who-shall-not-be-named) NotaBene 鹰百利 19:51, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much, Sir of Ma'am. I'll save it for the next hot day. We certainly don't need usernames such as that one. Meters (talk) 19:55, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

"Sanitizing" a page

It is to bad that you saw fit to (for lack of a better word) "sanitize" our local high schools Misplaced Pages page. The way it was before quite literally thousands of local residents (I've got over a dozen calls just this morning) enjoyed the page and used it for reference. Now the information displayed is so generic as to be almost useless. Nothing that was removed was harmful or untrue, and was actually being used by coaches and administrators.

The edits that were present on the page prior to the deletions was much more "encyclopedic" about the high school's community than what is now presented. Hermanns 99 (talk) 18:35, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Hermanns 99 Really? Thousands of local people are viewing this page and more than a dozen have phoned you about it this morning alone? Strange, given that Rio Rancho High School averages less than 25 views a day, Or didn't you know that we can see how many people actually view a given page?
I didn't sanitize it. I brought it into line with the applicable guidelines. It's not a case of the information being harmful or untrue. It simple isn't worth mentioning on Misplaced Pages. Again, read WP:WPSCH/AG. This in't your school's webpage. If you want to list all sorts of material that isn't of interest to general readers I suggest that you create a web page for the school where you can put whatever information up that you desire.

User:Meters So you no longer wish to discuss it but simply remove it from your talk page? If that is the case than we need to proceed to one of the conflict resolution options on Misplaced Pages. I will be moving this to conversation to the Dispute resolution noticeboard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hermanns 99 (talkcontribs) 21:01, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm perfectly willing to discuss the edit, but I see no reason to leave your copies of material on my talk page, especially after I have already removed it once. If you want to discuss the material removed from the article then bring it up on the article's talk page where the other editors involved can participate. Conflict resolution is not an option until a serious effort has been made to discuss the edit. Sorry if I didn't take your hyperbole about thousands of people from the little town using the page as a serious attempt to argue that this material should be in the article. Usually junk such as that and personal attacks are not a sign of someone who wants to actually discuss the issue. If you read the links and don't agree then take it to the article's talk page. Pinging User:John from Idegon , the other editor who removed the material today. Meters (talk) 21:13, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Continued on User talk:Hermanns 99 and Talk:Rio Rancho High School]] Meters (talk) 00:43, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Left a message in a similar vein at article talk. Let's please take it there for continuity. PS. Please consider archiving? I edit from an Android and trying to copy over my edit conflict crashed Chrome. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 01:03, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for the reminder and the nice explanation. Meters (talk) 01:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
User:Hermanns 99 called our edits censorship and has decided to no longer participate in Misplaced Pages. Unfortunate that he wasn't interested in contributing content that could be used. Meters (talk) 01:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Have you by chance looked thru his contributions for the "2 or 3 other school articles he maintained", or was that just more hyperbole? John from Idegon (talk) 02:56, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

User:John from IdegonI don't know about "maintaining" but he did some work on Montezuma-Cortez High School one day two years ago. I have not checked them all but many of them were useful small tweaks. Nothing was sourced and there is a bit of puffery. He was probably also editing as an IP as some of the IP's tables look very much like the problematic ones we just dealt with. The individual athletic results should go, and the Music sections needs some trimming, sources and clarification on some undated claims. Meters (talk) 03:22, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm not done with Rio yet, but I'll add the other to my to do list. I actually noticed Rio about a month ago but it obviously needed so much work I was trying to wait til I could go at it on a pc. Androids are great for most stuff but when you need to use multiple Windows, they suck. Thanks for your help. John from Idegon (talk) 04:21, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm updating the athletics section league divisions but i think I'm going to eliminate most of it. It doesn't make sense to list the divisions for just a few of the many teams they have, and the divisions are all over the place, changing with boys' teams/girls teams and each sport. Meters (talk) 04:26, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Not really sure what you mean by divisions. Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan have enrollment based classification designated by letters. However, the actual enrollment basis for each class changes nearly every year and in some cases the names of the different size levels have changed numerous times over the decades. Also there is no naming convention state to state. An A school in one state may be the same size as a 6A school in another. It is so confusing as to be meaningless. If you take a look in my sandbox I have a format that I made for Indiana schools that works well for any state that has conferences. Some apparently including New Mexico do not. Keep up your great work Meters. You are an awesome asset to the school's project and to Misplaced Pages as a whole. If you ever feel masochistic enough to stand for RfA, I would wholly support you. John from Idegon (talk) 05:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
That's what I concluded. The athletic divisions for different team sports vary from 5A to 3A (sometimes not even the same for boys' and girls' teams in the same sport) so it's not worth making a big deal of what division a few of the teams are in. Your sandbox looks good so I'll model the coverage after that.
Thanks for the vote of confidence. Much appreciated. Meters (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Usernames for attention

I fixed two of your reports. It looks like you misspelled each of the user names. 1 2. Brianga (talk) 17:13, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Whoops. Thank you. Meters (talk) 17:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Disappearing Palestine

Hi Mr/Ms Meters, No no, you have it back to front - if you have a look at my edits, and those of others, you will see that I have included Palestine, then others have removed it, without comment or explanation. I don't understand why someone else - not me! - has been doing this. Hurunui99 (talk) 02:34, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I did look at the edits. That's why I asked you what you were doing. You deleted the 2016 data for Palestine here and then you did it again here and complained that people were vandalizing the article by removing the Palestine data. As I said on your talk page, look at what you are doing, or stop messing around. Meters (talk) 04:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Biting the Newbies

I honestly think you should ramp it down considerably when dealing with your fellow editors. I am considering an admin request regarding this, but would like to discuss with you before hand. As a reminder:

From :

Understand that newcomers are both necessary for and valuable to the community. By empowering newcomers, we can improve the diversity of knowledge, perspectives, and ideas on Misplaced Pages, thereby preserving its neutrality and integrity as a resource and ultimately increasing its value. In fact, it has been found that newcomers are responsible for adding the majority of lasting content to Misplaced Pages (i.e., substantive edits); while insiders and administrators are responsible for a large bulk of total edits, these often involve tweaking, reverting, and rearranging content. Remember, our motto and our invitation to the newcomer is be bold. We have a set of rules, standards, and traditions, but they must not be applied in such a way as to thwart the efforts of newcomers who take that invitation at face value. A newcomer brings a wealth of ideas, creativity and experience from other areas that, current rules and standards aside, have the potential to better our community and Misplaced Pages as a whole. It may be that the rules and standards need revising or expanding; perhaps what the newcomer is doing "wrong" may ultimately improve Misplaced Pages. Observe for a while and, if necessary, ask what the newcomer is trying to achieve before concluding that their efforts are wanting or that they are simply "wrong". If a newcomer seems to have made a small mistake (e.g., forgetting to put book titles in italics), try to correct it yourself: do not slam the newcomer. A gentle note at their user page explaining the Misplaced Pages standard and how to achieve it in the future may prove helpful, as they may be unfamiliar with the norm or merely how to achieve it. Remember, this is a place where anyone may edit and therefore it is each person's responsibility to edit and complement, rather than to criticize or supervise others. If you use bad manners or curse at newcomers, they may decide not to contribute to the encyclopedia again. If you feel that you must say something to a newcomer about a mistake, please do so in a constructive and respectful manner. Begin by introducing yourself with a greeting on the user's talk page to let them know that they are welcome here, and present your corrections calmly and as a peer. If possible, point out things that they've done correctly or well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gentlejackjones (talkcontribs) 00:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Edited for grammar/bold emphasis and signature.Gentlejackjones (talk) 00:48, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Also, please see:

Distinguished from productive editing Editors often post minority views to articles. This fits within Misplaced Pages's mission so long as the contributions are verifiable, do not give undue weight, and where appropriate, comply with WP:FRINGE. The burden of evidence rests with the editor who initially provides the information or wishes the information to remain.

From Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view:

Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint. Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means that articles should not give minority views as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views.

Verifiable and noteworthy viewpoints include protoscience when this is published in reputable peer-reviewed journals. Editors may reasonably present active public disputes or controversies which are documented by reliable sources. For example, citing a viewpoint stated in a mainstream scholarly journal, textbook, or monograph is not per se disruptive editing. This exemption does not apply to settled disputes; for example, insertion of claims that the Sun revolves around the Earth would not be appropriate today, even though this issue was active controversy in the time of Galileo. Mentioning such disputes in the article may however be appropriate if the controversy itself was notable (such as in this example).

Sometimes well-meaning editors may be misled by fringe publications or make honest mistakes when representing a citation. Such people may reasonably defend their positions for a short time, then concede the issue when they encounter better evidence or impartial feedback.

1) I apologize for letting "fringe publications" carry my original edit too far-- you were right about that one. 2) I really think we can work this out without resort to admins. I have no reason to "beef" with you at all.

Many thanks and kind regards,

Gentlejackjones (talk) 00:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)