| Revision as of 07:26, 20 February 2007 editGuettarda (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators63,420 edits →Mischaracterisation← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:13, 13 January 2024 edit undoAirshipJungleman29 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors44,277 edits Forth (programming language) listed for good article reassessment (GAR-helper) | ||
| (461 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
| == Archives == | == Archives == | ||
| ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | |||
| ]. ] 05:14, 19 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Top-importance computer science articles == | |||
| ]. ] 23:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Hi Ideogram, | |||
| ]. ] 11:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| You classified a number of articles as "top-importance". A few months ago I went through ] and made sure all the articles in there where truly of top importance. Although there undoubtedly still a few articles missing, I don't think this category should exceed 100 articles. Could you double check to see if the articles you added (such as ]) are really as important as ] or the ubiquitous ], as opposed to simply of ] (which in turn probably shouldn't exceed a 1000 articles). Cheers, —'']'' 17:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ]. ] 12:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ] |
:OK ] (]) 20:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC) | ||
| == Birthright Israel == | |||
| ]. ] 14:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Hello, | |||
| == Reverting vandalism == | |||
| I think there needs to be mediation on the Birthright Israel page. There seem to be several issues but the most important can be found on talk page under controversy. I invite you to take the opportunity to read through what has been said, and would really appreciate you weighing in. As I am on the newer side, I wanted some mediation for responding to those who seem to want to keep the article, what I would call, biased. ] (]) 01:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for fixing my talk page after vandalism. --<small>] (] | ])</small> 14:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==MfD nomination of ]== | |||
| ], a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ] (]) 00:52, 15 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ==MfD nomination of ]== | |||
| ], a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ''']''' (]) 22:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == List of libraries in Taipei listed at ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ]. Since you had some involvement with the ''List of libraries in Taipei'' redirect, you might want to participate in ] if you have not already done so. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ]]] 00:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ==MfD nomination of ]== | |||
| ], a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ] (]) 12:16, 15 August 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| == Re: Inhuman == | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| How can anyone human revert so much vandalism? --] 00:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692013717 --> | |||
| == Good article reassessment for ] == | |||
| : Easy. Go have a look at Recent Changes, at any given moment there are dozens of vandalized pages, as fast as you fix them, more appear. Having nothing much else to do helps, too (I'll be busier tomorrow...) – ] 00:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 17:13, 13 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: MedCab Case == | |||
| Not until 18:03 UTC, but after that time; if you desire to close it, you may. ] 14:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] mediation == | |||
| Sorry for the delay in responding, but, yes, it was fine to close ]. I was never contacted by the initiating party. However, in keeping the page on my watchlist, it seems as though there are still some substantial disagreements and possibly a slow edit-war going on. I wouldn't be surprised to see a reappearance of this dispute somewhere. --] <sup>(]!])</sup> 06:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == WP:CHINA help == | |||
| Hey, I just want to pop in and thank you for your recent help in finding and evaluating China related articles. There are quite a few of them, so it is a daunting task. | |||
| Incidentally, in my evaluations, I find it useful to rate the importance of the article at the same time that I assess it. That way, it is "finished" and fully categorized. (I'm a perfectionist, I know) I realize that rating importance is a much more subjective process than assessing the article, but give it a try. There is no harm in changing it later if need be. --] 18:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Looking at all of the rating of importance that you have done, I gather that you disagree with a good number of my ratings. For example, you rate provinces as being of High importance. I rate according to the guidelines on the assessment page, which state that Mid rankings are for things important in China, and things of High importance have had some impact outside of China. Things like the ] and ] province are important in China, but have not had much impact outside of China, thus my ranking of "Mid". | |||
| :You shouldn't take this comment to mean that I object strenuously to your rankings. I certainly won't be changing them back or anything. I'm just giving you my spin on it. Besides, going through and rerating everything that I have rated must be really tedious. I remain impressed with the work that you have done for WP:China. --] 06:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks for the feedback. The main reason I decided to rank provinces High is because there is an imbalance between the High and Mid categories. I already see a lot of High importance articles that I think should be Mid, and I'm preparing for that by lowering the bar for what constitutes a High importance. | |||
| ::Also, as you know, provinces in China are the size of countries in Europe. | |||
| ::If other people agree that provinces should not be High, I will certainly change them back. --] 06:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Political Status== | |||
| Ideogram, I think the phrase "Whereas the Republic of China administers themselves as an ] ] ] with a ] elected ] and government" does have a place in the article. I think it is one point both the green and blue camps agree upon. I think it should be left in to balance the argument from the PRC. ] 04:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Please discuss with the other editors on the talk page. --] 04:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==GimmeBot on Go (board game)== | |||
| GimmeBot will be through in a few days to build the articlehistory template; he's getting through them as fast as he can, and I'm just doing some of the prep work. ] (]) 04:48, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == East of Eden == | |||
| I am going to close this case. Catbird222's haughty attitude and comments show that (s)he wants the Cabal to approve of actions that (s)he has taken. ]]]. ] 07:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :No problem ]]]. ] 09:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Why I need help? Because neither side wants to give up any ground whatsoever; some want the image at the top like a normal article, others. It doesn't seem like there is going to be much consensus... · ] <sup><font color="DarkSlateGray">]</font></sup> 10:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Well, someone is helping you now, but let me note that you do have the option of declaring the mediation insoluble and walking away. --] 11:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I'll upgrade it. <font style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:15px;">AQu01rius</font> <small>(] • ])</small> 15:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Since you were so dead-set on moving this page (without any discussion), you had better now fix all the redirects. It should just be about a day's work. ] 20:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm almost done. --] 20:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| No, you're not--there are at least 50 pages that link to the old name. ] 20:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :You really are an idiot. I only have to fix double redirects, not single ones. --] 20:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| If you felt you must change the title of the article, you must fix all of the redirects (this is the way a real Wikipedian behaves). The use of insults is very poor form, and un-Wikipedian. ] 20:33, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Excuse me, if that was true, how did all these redirects happen in the first place? --] 20:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Because, obviously, you changed the name of the article today (without any discussion). ] 20:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Would you please think. If I created one redirect, where did all the double redirects come from? --] 21:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Are you now implying that I am not thinking? I think, in fact, that I am the one that created most of the articles about Chinese instruments in the first place. Regarding your question, I've just gone through all the broken links and find that all of them, as I have stated twice now, are now broken because of your change, today, of the article's title. The broken links direct to ], which was the title of the article before you changed it, today. Thus, they all need to be fixed. If you want to change the title, you have to put in the work. It's part of working here. ] 21:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :You went through all of them? That was fast. Would you mind listing some of those broken links here so I can fix them? --] 21:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I went through most. To find them, simply go to ], then look to the left. Under the search bar, there's a link that says "What links here." Click that, and all the redirects show up. One goes through, finds the link in each article, and fixes it. That's the correct way to deal with a page change. Unfortunately there is no automatic way to do this. ] 21:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Yes, I know that. You said the links are broken. I take that to mean that when you click on one, you don't get to the right article. Is that what you mean? --] 21:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Yes, with the redirect from TCMI to LoTCMI, the links will work, but as redirects. They should be fixed, however, and correct WP editing practice is that the page-name-changer is the one who does this. ] 21:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :If you can find policy that states this, I will do it. Otherwise, I have better things to do than to argue with you. --] 21:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ] now tells me that those fixes do not need to be made (although in the past they were done), for the reason that leaving the redirects saves WP bandwidth. ] 21:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == 4RR == | |||
| You've just reverted 4 times in a 24-hour period. Didn't you know that isn't permitted? Please change the edit back now, or give me a reason why I should not report you for this (added to the fact that you are repeatedly removing a valid link, something I personally would consider ]). Thanks. ] 20:31, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Not to the same article, idiot. Click on the damn link you are so proud of and see what you get. --] 20:33, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::] Please ] other editors{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, which you did here: ]}}. If you continue, you '''will''' be ] from editing Misplaced Pages.{{{2|}}}<!-- {{uw-npa3}} --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Redirects == | |||
| You seem to misunderstand the purpose of redirects. I've been going through ] (which is how I found you in the first place) and I keep running into your work. A redirect does not need to be deleted just because nothing links to it. They are also used for when people actually search for a term. If it's a pretty reasonable variant (like ] redirecting to ], then it's fine where it is. | |||
| Furthermore, since the moves you're making are obviously causing concern with at least one other editor, the right thing to do is to use ] and let the community come to an agreement on the right location. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I do understand that redirects can be useful when they correspond to something someone might type in, and I have left some redirects alone that I felt qualified. I can certainly be more careful in that regard. I have moved probably twenty pages already and this is the first time someone complained. I am trying to bring some rationality to Chinese related article names, and it will slow me down immensely if I have to ask for permission for every move. --] 21:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::We do need to get our users to the information they need, and I'm glad you agree that someone typing "Chinese instruments" getting to ] is a good thing. I myself do a large amount of work on Chinese musical instrument articles, and often type "Chinese instruments" in the search box in order to get to the aforementioned article, to save keystrokes. ] 21:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::All right, we got off on the wrong foot and that was my fault, for which I apologize. I hope you realize that up until now I have indeed been fixing all redirects, even single ones, as you recommended. But I really don't want to fix all fifty of these unless I have to. --] 21:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :The idea of Requested Moves ''is'' kind of to slow things down. Misplaced Pages works on consensus; if you see that people disagree with what you're doing, you ''should'' slow down. What seems rational to you might seem irrational to someone else; let more people weigh in to see who is right. Don't worry: ]. Everything will be sorted out in due time. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::That's true enough, and I will keep it in mind. For what it's worth, I'm done with the subtask of fixing List-type articles so I probably won't be making more page moves soon. --] 21:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| {| class="messagebox standard-talk" | |||
| |- | |||
| | | |||
| | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #F8EABA;" |] | |||
| |align="center"|'''It's Miller time!'''<br>Good talk, guys. Thanks to both of you for bearing with me and keeping up the conversation. Looks like we've all come to a good understanding, and that's all anyone can ask. Some people would give you a cup of ] for that, but this argument deserves a beer. So sit back, relax, and have a cold one on me. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| == Guqin == | |||
| The removal of guqin templates was not helpful, hence my revert there. ] 23:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :How exactly does that answer my point? Are you capable of distinguishing between edits that serve different purposes? --] 23:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| It wasn't correct to remove the guqin template from the article. CharlieHuang, a guqin specialist who edits here and created most of the guqin articles, created it for a reason. Try to first introduce and acclimate yourself to some of the Chinese music articles, and we'll be very happy to have you, working together to build our Chinese music articles into the best they can be. ] 23:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :No, you still aren't answering my point. You can replace the template without undoing all my other work. No one ] an article. --] 23:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Right. And, equally, you could have made uncontroversial copyedits without removing a template that you knew other editors objected to your removing previously, in other guqin-related articles. ] 23:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Oh, so because I didn't split up my edits you have the right to revert me entirely? What if I removed the template first and then made my copyedits so you couldn't revert the first without reverting both? And you were the first to object. Do you ever listen to yourself? --] 23:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| That's not quite true, because in this page I did go back and replace most of those other edits of yours. ] 23:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Only after I complained. Your first instinct was to revert me entirely, and you did this to me ''three'' times. If your only issue was the template, ''all you had to do was copy and paste one line back in''. You clearly are prejudiced against all my edits. --] 23:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Mischaracterisation == | |||
| Regarding edit, your statement: ''We can't really force them to discuss. Once you get them talking to you, we can mediate. If you can't do that, I will have to close this case'' really isn't a fair characterisation of the situation. I find your statement offensive, given that no one bothered to inform me of the "mediation attempt". Please strike your mischaracterisation of my actions. ] 06:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :So when someone points out that your false accusations are offensive, your reaction is to move up to insults? That is your idea of civil behaviour? Again, I ask you to strike your offensive mischaracterisation of my actions...and maybe, just maybe, try communicating with other people without the insults. ] 07:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::I have no interest in continuing this conversation. --] 07:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::Then simply strike your mischaracterisation. Is that really so hard? ] 07:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Do not post here again. Any further posts by you here will be removed. --] 07:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::So you have now escalated from mischaracterisation (which totally fails to assume good faith), to insults, to threats? I am simply asking that you strike your offensive comments. I never said that you intentionally acted in bad faith, but your failure to strike the comments, your failure to assume good faith, your use of insults, and now your incivil threats are totally unacceptable. I made a simple request. Please strike your comments, they are offensive. ] 07:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Mistake in RfC== | |||
| Sorry, I made a mistake regarding where to put RfC posts. Apologies.--] 06:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:13, 13 January 2024
 | I try to keep conversations threaded. I generally reply to posts here on this page. Usually if I post on your talk page I watchlist you. |
Welcome!
Hello, Ideogram, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Allan McInnes (talk) 22:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Hello and welcome
Hello Ideogram, Welcome to Misplaced Pages.
Thank you for the very kind message you left for me. It came as a very pleasant and welcome surprise. I think Misplaced Pages has a lot of potential, although it has its detractors, but I'm glad you've decided to make up your own mind about it and the best way to do that is to get involved. In the long run things usually work out well, and there are lot of very capable and dedicated editors here that ensure the integrity of the project is protected as much as possible. (The abilities of the various monkeys here are diverse but the mix seems to work.) Please let me know if there's anything you ever need help with and I look forward to hearing from you. Once again, welcome! Rossrs 00:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Archives
to 17 Jun 2006 | to 21 Jun 2006 | to 26 Jun 2006 | to 07 Sep 2006 | to 17 Nov 2006 | to 07 Feb 2007 | to 08 Mar 2007 | to 23 Apr 2007 | to 10 Jun 2007 | to 8 Aug 2007 | to 16 Jul 2011
Top-importance computer science articles
Hi Ideogram,
You classified a number of articles as "top-importance". A few months ago I went through Category:Top-importance Computer science articles and made sure all the articles in there where truly of top importance. Although there undoubtedly still a few articles missing, I don't think this category should exceed 100 articles. Could you double check to see if the articles you added (such as Compile time) are really as important as Alan Turing or the ubiquitous quicksort, as opposed to simply of high importance (which in turn probably shouldn't exceed a 1000 articles). Cheers, —Ruud 17:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Birthright Israel
Hello,
I think there needs to be mediation on the Birthright Israel page. There seem to be several issues but the most important can be found on talk page under controversy. I invite you to take the opportunity to read through what has been said, and would really appreciate you weighing in. As I am on the newer side, I wanted some mediation for responding to those who seem to want to keep the article, what I would call, biased. Yaakov Birthright Franklin (talk) 01:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
MfD nomination of Talk:Chinese calligraphy/Comments
Talk:Chinese calligraphy/Comments, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Chinese calligraphy/Comments and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Chinese calligraphy/Comments during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kumioko (talk) 00:52, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
MfD nomination of Portal:People's Republic of China
Portal:People's Republic of China, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:People's Republic of China and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:People's Republic of China during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JJ98 (Talk) 22:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
List of libraries in Taipei listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of libraries in Taipei. Since you had some involvement with the List of libraries in Taipei redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. TheChampionMan1234 00:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
MfD nomination of Portal:People's Republic of China
Portal:People's Republic of China, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:People's Republic of China (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:People's Republic of China during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Huangjinghai (talk) 12:16, 15 August 2014 (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) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Forth (programming language)
Forth (programming language) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:13, 13 January 2024 (UTC)