Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:23, 13 October 2016

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

The Sega Article

Before you revert the edits on the Sega Article, present me good arguments why the article was good the way it was before. You still haven't responded to my points responding to your concerns. Talk:Sega#Proposed mass deletion

Talkback

Random note

Hi, TTAAC. Crossing paths with you in recent discussions, after not seeing you for quite a while, reminded me that long ago I wanted to drop a note here regarding something I noticed in your contributions. So better late than never; the note from me to you would have read something like: "If I find out that you worked for Insomniac Games, and have a license plate on your car that reads 'GO SONIC', I'm going to completely "lose my shit" and demand that you call me immediately." If such a message is nonsensical to you, and it likely is (but I just can't shake this nagging notion), please disregard it. Best, Xenophrenic (talk)

"pinko nutjobs"

TTAAC, you're well aware of WP:NPA, surely you know that edit summaries like this one, or the long rant you posted on that talk page, are not a good idea? Keep your comments to the content, for goodness sake. Vanamonde (talk) 05:35, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

"Safe spaces," huh? My penchant for polemics may not be wise and it may be a character flaw, but I didn't personally name any editor, and lecturing me probably isn't going to change my behavior.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 05:55, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

NPA is a policy, period. If you want to interpret that in terms of liberal notions of "safe spaces," go right ahead: but the policy remains in place, and odds are the next person to notice will haul you to the drama boards rather than leave a message here. Me, I just want you to stop, not interested so much in sanctioning you: but hey, it's your lookout, not mine. Vanamonde (talk) 06:02, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, golly, if you really think anything in that "long rant" is actionable, you should report me! After all, that's the right thing do. (Not that it will accomplish anything.)TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 06:09, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

May I? @Vanamonde93: Describing filthy liberals as "pinko nutjobs" is perfectly merited. If he was also speaking of out-and-out Leftists, then he has indeed erred most grievously, and I will take him to the relevant board myself.

In any event, here is some Phil Ochs, and I also really like this section by Frankie Boyle about those droopy liberal Remainers (Run the vote again! Have Parliament vote to ignore it!) who don't understand democracy:

Milexpert101 (talk) 19:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Remainers have spent so much time online calling people racist that Chinese primary school children are getting a raise for mining the lithium for their new batteries. Seriously, do you want the right to stop acting as if the Brexit vote was a mandate for racism? Stop telling them that it was a mandate for racism. A generation of liberals who voted for Blair and then Clegg are demonising the people who gut their salmon at 4am for not knowing that leave were lying to them. "We were changing the EU from within!" cry a group of people who stayed home watching Netflix while 21 Ukip members were voted in at the 2014 European elections. Meanwhile, Farage spent the referendum taking a group of undecideds and, with Nazi imagery and a pledge to let Syrians die, got their support. A trick he learned from Hillary Benn.

Everyone hates liberals. With <3. --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 19:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Austin, the Cold War is over!

- Basil Exposition, Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery

Milexpert101 (talk) 19:11, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

There is no need for ad hominem attacks or political rants on Misplaced Pages. WTF is a "safe space" anyhow? Content and quality of sources is what matters here; the editors perceived political orientation has no relevance. I take it you were probably referring to me as a "Pinko Nutjob", which is presumptuous to say the least. I want objective content and information and have no political motives here. I WANT FACTS. If you have good solid sources on the extent of Cuban and Eastern Bloc Involvement with the Guatemalan guerrillas or any information on the guerrilla infrastructure it would be awesome if you could put it here or at least steer me in the right direction. I've been able to find allot on Israeli, Argentine and North American involvement but very little on the involvement of Eastern Bloc countries. Milexpert101 (talk) 19:11, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

@Milexpert101: What kind of liberal are you, if you don't know your safe spaces? Anyway, you lot are just so narrow-minded. Right-wingers, like TTAAC here, are immeasurably more interesting than filthy libbies like you and Vagabond.

My advice? Leave TTAAC alone, stop the lectures, and get a grip. I repeat: get a grip. Shame on you. #sickofit --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 19:53, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

I apologize to everyone for the editor formerly known as Iloveandrea's bizarre sense of humor. To the author of the above comment: Can't we just agree to disagree, and leave each other's talk pages alone?TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 20:01, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@TheTimesAreAChanging: BowlandSpoon is a constructive editor with deep insights. I am appalled that you would try to deny him the right to use this page as positive space to express his feelings. Don't you think he should be able to do that without feeling marginalized. Milexpert101 (talk) 23:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@TheTimesAreAChanging: Milexpert101 makes a valid point: my edits are constructive and betray intimidating erudition. I am likewise appalled, and suggest you let me continue to post here so that your right-wing mind may soften and morph into something more human. Until that process has taken place, consider this. --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 08:28, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

WP:AE

Your editing was brought up at WP:AE, here - , but the editor doing this didn't bother to notify you. Epson Salts (talk) 21:38, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Can't resist poking the beehive

it really seems like Gucci's bitterness is personal; i.e., his Russian background is clouding his judgement, causing him to literally read hidden messages into Brzezinski's innocuous CNN interview that are not apparent to objective observers. I've never denied that all editors have their biases, myself included (in fact, those who claim to speak only the objective truth are usually the most doctrinaire POV-pushers), but I have also maintained that the key to neutral editing is acknowledging those biases, and perhaps taking a step back on topics that arouse one's emotions.

Tone it down a notch. You can yell "thief!" all you want, but you remain the only super-patriot—or any kind of "patriot"—in the debate (putting Wishes' weirdly displaced Valeria Novodvorskaya-style patriotism to one side) . There's nothing that reminds me more of the simultaneously glib and mendacious propaganda I'm bombarded with 24/7 in Moscow than your latest rants. Whatever it is that's "clouding my judgement", it sure as hell ain't Russophilia: that fact should be blindingly obvious from past discussions. Anyway, don't let me get in the way of you patting yourself on the back while demanding self-criticism from others. P.S. I plead guilty to knowing a language other than American and not being a member of the Mayflower club. Guccisamsclub (talk) 15:42, 3 October 2016 (UTC) Btw, your cute apocryphal story about Fusako Shigenobu is a little hard to believe, given that she was half a world away from Japan when the Red Army started killing its own members. Probably some shit Becker made up to go along with her story about how George Habash (and not Wadie Haddad) was the mastermind of the Lod hijacking-massacre. Not an a particularly convincing first attempt at "Leftism in an Nutshell". Guccisamsclub (talk) 17:21, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

• Commenting since I was mentioned here... I think this has nothing to do with any "biases". I think that Guccisamsclub is simply WP:Nothere: what he does in the project is mostly following other contributors and engaging them in very long and unproductive discussions. These discussions are unproductive because: (a) they concern subjects of marginal interest and importance for corresponding pages, (b) I do not think that G. really understands these subjects (this is not really a matter of bias), (c) he frequently resort to Straw man "arguments". Of course he also edits the corresponding pages, but I have an impression that his edits in such cases (e.g. this, this on a page he never edited before and no one else edited for years) are frequently an attempt to engage others in another senseless discussion. My very best wishes (talk) 17:38, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

• Gucci has made many positive contributions to Misplaced Pages—primarily in the form of correcting serious inaccuracies related to the Second Indochina War and its aftermath (i.e., 1 million "re-educated" in post-1975 Vietnam, 650,000 famine deaths in post Khmer Rouge-Cambodia, 2.7 million tons of U.S. bombs dropped on Cambodia)—but (for whatever the reason) I am reluctantly drawn to the conclusion that Wishes quite accurately describes Gucci's editing behavior whenever the subject is the former Soviet Union.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 19:53, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, you definitely have more experience here. So whatever. I just can see a recent pattern. My very best wishes (talk) 20:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

• We can shake hands on that note, I suppose. Although I still don't get why you decided to paint me as an Anti-American Russophile Russian conspiracy theorist. I don't mind personal attacks when they have a grain of truth to them. But that was the equivalent of calling Angela Davis a stooge for American imperialism and a member of the John Birch Society. Bizarre. I mean I even supported the NATO operation in Libya, for chrissake. My interest in the article has nothing to do with blaming the invasion on someone other than the Soviets, as I've stated explicitly. The US "pushed" the Soviets into Afghanistan is the same way that it left Putin no choice but invade Ukraine and bomb Syria, all in the name of "defense". The USSR's security concerns about Afghanistan were probably more legitimate (for various reasons I'll not go into) — but fundamentally these cases are equivalent. Nobody "pushed" them anywhere. Now if you could only see American interventions the same way I see Russian ones, that'd be great. 21:11, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

- In the interest of fairness, I should add that Novodvorskaya (mentioned up top) should at least be credited with publicly defending the Chechen cause in Russia. Wishes is just sloppily (violating all guidelines) pushing some banal "anti-Soviet" POV on the english wiki, i.e. in the West. Guccisamsclub (talk) 21:11, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

"Now if you could only see American interventions the same way I see Russian ones." I'm not the one who supported the NATO intervention in Libya.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 21:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

I'll take that as a retraction. Guccisamsclub (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

What am I supposed to be retracting? I doubt you can find an edit of mine that could be construed as supporting NATO in Libya, so I'm guessing the retraction must be related to my insinuation that your apologia for the USSR is related to your ethnic background. Well, I could think of a far more accurate slur than calling you a Russian, but—unlike calling you a Russian—it would likely result in my being perma-banned.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 22:41, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

How about calling G's behaviour as attesting to a tragic case of nostalgia for the Soviet Union... Some people seem to think there are golden ages in history, particularly if they didn't live through them. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

How about listening to what the other 'person actually says? Or would that get in the way of POV-pushing too much? Guccisamsclub (talk) 23:02, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

That would only be relevant if the other person didn't leave walls of text (and if the 'person' wasn't actually the 'elephant' in the room). Aside from that, I'm eruditer than you. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:10, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

You can go ahead and measure the walls of text in Talk:Soviet-Afghan war with a ruler. Report back on your results. Anyway, enjoy your your eruditiness.Guccisamsclub (talk) 23:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it often requires more time and energy to refute bullshit than it does to make it up.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:13, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep in mind that students who studied humanities in Moscow State University (for example) also studied a "secret" discipline known in old times as "military disinformer". This includes skills how to manipulate other people. BTW, I did not study humanities. My additional, "military" speciality was parasitology. That's funny.My very best wishes (talk) 13:52, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

@Iryna Harpy: "Aside from that, I'm eruditer tha you." --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 18:21, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

@Guccisamsclub: Your USSR-kissing is so blatant it's embarrassing. --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 18:22, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

BowlAndSpoon is a sockpuppet troll. Do not feed him.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 18:30, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

That's eruditeninity, Guccisamsclub. Stick with me, son, and you'll learn how to speak propa English real good. In fact, you might even learn how to write a terse response on a talk page without other editors having to print it out in order to read it. You must be a marvel in face to face debates. Contrary to what you appear to believe, talking over people whilst bewailing the fact that they're not listening to you isn't a debate. Keep measuring your rewriting of articles based on the fact that you've worn them down as a 'victory'. You're going to be disillusioned when you discover how quickly biased content is overturned once editors have had jack of you. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:14, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

As if what anything you just said has any connection to reality. Even if it did, it would prove nothing: for example, the person who writes more is not necessarily wrong, etc.. Your jokes are lame; Wishes "humor" is weird as hell. Guccisamsclub (talk) 23:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Why am I not surprised that you take yourself so seriously? Oh, probably because it seems apparent that you have no sense of humour... other than gleaning some perverse sense of 'fun' out worrying the beehive... and you don't appreciate MVBW's jibe. Hornet, meet the para-psychologist (or is that parasitecologist?). He knows more about you than you're comfortable with. Uff, you'd be a truly difficult person to live with. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok. Guccisamsclub (talk) 00:37, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

@Guccisamsclub: Imagine living with Iryna Harpy!! Something like this? There is an awesome disparity between her self-image and her actual intellectual abilities. Along with her other obnoxious traits (the magisterial self-regard etc.), this strongly indicates a narcissist: "These individuals often display arrogance, a sense of superiority … people with NPD may exhibit fragile egos, an inability to tolerate criticism, and a tendency to belittle others in an attempt to validate their own superiority." --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 07:38, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Re: Space Harrier

Yeah, I thought it odd as well that a 32X port released in '92 wouldn't be reviewed until three years later (GamePro), but shame on me for not following up on it anyway. Ugh. Anyway, thanks for the detective work and your edits on the article. sixtynine 03:31, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Sure. Thank you for turning the article around so quickly.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 05:46, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

SH is one of my all-time favorite games and holds a lot of memories for me, so it's been a labor of love. :') sixtynine 16:11, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Blind reverts

Please do not repeat the likes of this . It is not "being bold". If you have objections to specific sentences or content, please confront them on an issue by issue basis. By blind reverting you inserted obviously false content (like the outdated box office figures) and unsourced pov (like "blessings that constitute the greatness of America" the was being falsely claimed to be a "statement"). Those two bits of content change were explained in my edit summaries - this blind revert also revealed that you ignored those summaries. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 14:54, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

You misunderstood the edit summary. The POV-pushing likely sock was being BOLD; per BRD, I reverted him. Unless you explain why Alan Dershowitz, who you blindly deleted, is unreliable, I am going to revert right back.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 14:56, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Talk about blind reverts: Sowell quite explicitly says "Perhaps it takes somebody from outside to truly appreciate all the blessings that too many native-born Americans take for granted. D’Souza understands how rare — sometimes unique — these blessings are." This is in the second paragraph! How blind can you be?TheTimesAreAChanging (talk)

It is NOT a quote. There is no "greatness of America" quote. Do you actually think that this CONTENT wording is npov language suitable for an encyclopedia? Such hagiography is only appropriate if it is contained within an actual quote. And the quote has to be from someone notable or an expert, otherwise it is pointless. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:08, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

As for the other issue you raised - address it without a blanket removal of other editors' work. If you blind revert again, I will report you. Remember that this article is subject to various restrictions regarding US politics-related articles. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:13, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

And I actually support the position that it is not appropriate mention in the first sentence of the lede that the subject of this article is a convicted felon. It is over emphasis to have it in the first sentence, it is not what he is most notable for (though he actually seems to be playing up his conviction, based on reviews of his recent documentary) and there was certainly no need to mention the conviction twice in the lede. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:18, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

The other editor was mass deleting content based on a misleading edit summary designed to obscure their intentions while fragrantly violating BLP and inserting D'Souza's mugshot. Per BRD, that editor needs consensus for such sweeping changes.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 15:18, 13 October 2016 (UTC)