Misplaced Pages

User talk:Geogre: 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 editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:12, 2 February 2008 editBellwether BC (talk | contribs)2,462 edits Pure poetry: reply← Previous edit Latest revision as of 02:36, 11 March 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{not around|3=29 July 2009}}
'''Essays''' '''Essays'''


It's new! It's exciting! It's an idea whose time came months ago: ''']''' Continuation: ]. If RFA is "broken," let's not make it FUBAR: ] It's newer! It's not exciting! ] My attempt at impersonating Marshal MacLuhan: ] ]: My first attempt at hip artwerkx. ]: People are still getting blocked by "unanimous" IRC consent. ] An essay on how to tell if you may already have the qualifications to be an edit warrior and not even know it! It's new! It's exciting! It's an idea whose time came months ago: ''']''' Continuation: ]. If RFA is "broken," let's not make it FUBAR: ] It's newer! It's not exciting! ] My attempt at impersonating Marshal MacLuhan: ] ]: My first attempt at hip artwerkx. ]: People are still getting blocked by "unanimous" IRC consent. ] An essay on how to tell if you may already have the qualifications to be an edit warrior and not even know it!

'''''New''''': ] explains pretty well why Misplaced Pages lost ''three'' of its most serious content contributors to salve the egos of some few people and save the playtime of those same few people. ]: An explanation of "What happened" during the IRC arbitration case, and why it cost Misplaced Pages far, far more than it gave. ]


'''''New Messages''''' '''''New Messages'''''

{| cellpadding=3 cellspacing=0 style="float:right;text-align:center; border:solid 1px blue; background:PapayaWhip;margin=5" {| cellpadding=3 cellspacing=0 style="float:right;text-align:center; border:solid 1px blue; background:PapayaWhip;margin=5"
| align=center|<big>Talk archives</big><br>] | align=center|<big>Talk archives</big><br>]
Line 34: Line 38:
] ]
] ]
] ]<br>
]
]
]
]
|} |}




'''Massages'''
== Query ==


== For the children ==
Geogre, do you recall a discussion some time ago about one-second blocks for purposes of leaving notes in a block log? I vaguely recall such a discussion and I vaguely recall that you participated. Anyway, the issue has come up at ], if you'd care to comment. Best, ] ] 02:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks. Yes, I did. I don't ''like'' doing them, but I don't see the evil of them as a general thing. ] 10:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
:You know, I think we need to come to a "For Great Justice" thing. Let's figure out the difference between eye for eye justice and actual justice. There is a just principle that we can and should approach, and then there is revenge, which is stupid. However, justice demands alleviation of the harm. If the harm is verbal, then one can easily reverse it with an apology. If the harm is otherwise, then the reversal must be. So, if the harm is "Blocked: troll," then the reversal should be either removal of the comment or a truly official and corresponding "Please disregard the previous." Well, we can't do that. We can offer ''words.'' We can offer an official, "We apologize for any inconvenience." I agree that everyone throwing 1 sec. blocks to enter commentary is bad. It's just that it's the nearest thing to justice available. ] 11:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


For the many readers, there is a new blog entry. (If this makes no sense to you, then ignore it.) ] (]) 10:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
== Irpen / AN ==


== For the adult-ering ==
Geogre, with all due respect, this is the second time you commented in an AN(I) thread regarding Irpen and me, and I get the impression you are trying to play his behaviour down in order to defend him. I would greatly appreciate it if you would abstain from further comments unless unavoidable. If it's just my own paranoid perception, please forgive me. I'd still appreciate the gesture. Thank you. I&nbsp;] I&nbsp;] I&nbsp;12:02,&nbsp;],&nbsp;2007
:Playing it down? No. I think he had cause for bringing it up. He got an answer. Then folks started acting like this was Central Europe War vol. 4. I don't think it was. My feeling is that we create those conflicts by overreacting, and I thought people were overreacting. Was there an overreaction to your RFA? Not entirely: it goes in user talk space. Was it a grave offense? No. I just want folks to be calm about this stuff and not rush to conclusions, and that includes Irpen. ] 12:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
::You may want to read my follow-up at AN. I&nbsp;] I&nbsp;] I&nbsp;12:11,&nbsp;],&nbsp;2007


I would like input from the people who have seen my ideas for how to form a council to advise on the future. I've written some up, and I've sent them to a few people via e-mail. Should I post them here? ] (]) 18:52, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
== new Quorum thread ==


:I'm interested too, Geogre -- please post here (or shoot me an e-mail). We seem to be coming unglued rather badly, at least in the matter of governance, and I fear the process is accelerating. ] ] 19:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
I was considering Gurch's report page ], and had an epiphany re quorum. I think you could effectively achieve this right now, if you could convince "voters" of the value of a blocking oppose. If people stopped taking them personally, and were urged to not only vote '''for''' candidates they positively supported, but to vote '''against''' those on whom they had insufficient opinion, as the default option, then all candidates would start from a net negative assumption. To overcome this, nominees would either have to drum up even higher levels of support, or actively contain opposition - wallflowers could no longer drift by unnoticed. Either way, it would effectively institutionalize de facto quorum.


Initially, I was concerned that my name is too "big." I don't mean that I am, but rather that there are people who will oppose anything simply if my name is near it. I had preferred the ideas to come out anonymously or from several directions, because I think they're good (well, I would) and should answer our needs without introducing new griefs. I'll post 'em here by tomorrow, I suppose, and, wiki-style, leave them for anyone to adapt as they see fit. ] (]) 21:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Am I right? If so, maybe someone should pen a voter strategy handbook? ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 01:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


:I've noticed, at least in the past three years or so, that popularity on Misplaced Pages negatively correlates with content contribution, and sometimes even with integrity. But don't quote me: I'm just a nasty old fool. And people skilled with words are not always popular, for we are after all writing an encyclopedia, where words are important, and envy is more implacable than hatred (La Rochefoucauld was right about everything). But I'll shut up now. ] ] 21:30, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
:Yeesh. Well, I rather agree that people shouldn't take it personally, but I think rather than an automatic ''vote'' to oppose, we could do a few things. One would be to count "neutral" votes as "failure to achieve consensus." If we did ''that,'' then a great many people would feel freer to vote in that category. It would register not as "I have reason to believe that M.I.L.Quetoast is bad" but rather that, "I cannot support." If RFA is an assertion of trust, then trust can never be silent. Trust is a positive extension of faith beyond "user in good standing." Another way would be to assume 30 "neutral" votes in the absence of votes.
:The usual nastiness has had an effect as well. Why, after 8 featured articles, have I stopped working up any article to that standard? Is it because I have no more knowledge in me and no more intellectual curiosity? No. It's because WP:FAC has become a place full of hatred and pettifoggers. Why do people stop going to WP:AFD? Is it because they have no opinions on keep/delete? Of course not. They get overwhelmed by the numbers and get weary of the pissing contests. Why do few people go to WP:RFA? Well, part of it is above -- new users without substantial contributions -- and part of it is insufficiently policed "vote" stacks, where people argue, glare, stare, and growl at one another. It gets hard to get motivated to investigate a user, when everything you say is going to get challenged by Glasscobra or some similarly functioning user. It additionally gets hard to get motivated when the user's edits are 15,000 changes of a single character here and there, adding endashes, or "assessing" articles.
:So, if RFA is going to be one of the toxic pages (it shouldn't be, but that's not my concern here) and people going up are going to be 100% stuffing and 0% mattress, we need to have a more institutional and automatic corrective. Perhaps counting "neutral" as "not consensus" would help. Lots of folks would vote "neutral," and the knee jerk "how dare you oppose my friend" users would have a really tough time making that noxious. ] (]) 11:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
::So we agree, except you'd rather we call them "neutral" votes, rather than "oppose"? I can live with that, but your neutralsitional behaviour is noted. On the other hand, "institutional and automatic corrective" is a wonderful turn of phrase, at least out of context, so you're still winning. It's actually the first time I've ever been told "yeesh", and I'm at a loss for a response, so maybe I'll cry a little and get back to you later. On reflection, that reaction would solve many of the behaviours you seek to correct - maybe we should add a column to vote "yeesh"? Think about it. ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 12:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


Well, see below for the big kahuna idea. I really, really don't care who gets credit for it. Let Kelly Martin take credit for it, if she wants, so long as they do get a policy council and get it in something like what I've described. You know, I was reflecting, the other day, when I was explaining why I don't need Misplaced Pages and it doesn't need me anymore, that it's not the same thing as it was when I heard a call on National Public Radio for over-educated, under-employed people to add stuff. I remember hearing that, when I was working as a librarian in a closed library. I thought it was genius that they were taking advantage of all the ABD's and grad students in the world, but those people are now the ones Misplaced Pages doesn't want. -Bot operators with less personal skill than their creation are "mediators," and "cool" is a long comment. Theses are all original research. Footnotes dominate here, where they don't even exist in academia, and people expect a citation to "the Earth is the third planet from the sun." O tempore, O mores. (But John Gay said envy's a sharper spur than pay for wits; it's a cudgel for those without wit.) ] (]) 22:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
== Favour please ==


== How to ''get'' and structure an advisory council ==
Hello hello. You all probably hate me for the position I took on FT2. But it was done in good faith. There is a lot of nasty bullying going on. refers. If you could help to stop this. I have offered to delete the offending page and do the rest by email. Best ] (]) 20:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
''What you will need for this project'': One Misplaced Pages, an estimate of a representative sample of active editors, and several stewards. You will also need an Initiator. That's YOU, and hopefully you are plural, not singular.
: Someone has to do something about . ] (]) 21:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


1. Outline a set of criteria that would make a person qualified -- experience with all elements of Misplaced Pages, breadth of edits, calm, intelligence. Think about the criteria very, very carefully and word them even more carefully. This is the one place to be excruciatingly careful, to get a great deal of input, and to be sure that the end goal is always in mind. That goal is ''wise policy'', nothing else.
No, I have no involvement in FT2 at all, and after what I endured during my ArbCom run, I'm pretty against blocking one but not another. However, it looks like the temperature has reduced some, there. I hope it stays cool. ] (]) 21:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


::''Why: Criteria keep people from wandering, and most people will be more honest, if they're given qualities to assess than if they're asked who they think is best. It's one of those paradoxes of evaluation that's pretty well known in business and education. This is why, for example, most employee and educational assessments are structured. ''
=="Troublesome"==
You think I'm ? And to think, I voted for you last year. Maybe my judgement ''could'' use some improvement, huh? ] (]) 04:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
:I'm sorry you took offense, but I did choose that word carefully, and it's not an insult in intent or context. I've answered more fully at your user talk page. ] (]) 12:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
::I have never tried to cause problems; I have only tried to solve them. ] (]) 09:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
:Yes, well, when it comes to that, even Phil Sandifer and Ed Poor can say the same. The problem with cutting the ] is that you've still got a sword in your hand. Sometimes, you know the trouble that's going to result and you calculate that the problems demand it (because status quo is more trouble than the trouble that results from a bold/violent/disruptive solution). It was not your motives that I questioned. ] (]) 10:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


2. Ask editors to recommend '''someone other than themselves''' according to those criteria, rating the person on a 1-10 on each. The recommendations go to a group of coordinators or the stewards. They are not posted openly, and any person advocating or discussing voting or canvassing for members to the council will be in violation of ], including on IRC and e-mail. We will have to rely upon honor, but Misplaced Pages was founded on such principles.
==Reverts at ]==


::''Why: Obvious, really. The idea is not to be competing, but rather looking for elements of trust. This cuts down on some of the, "Oh, well, that person is evil" stuff. Obviously, it leaves big weaknesses, but step 3 can help forefend. Additionally, prior and future attempts stall because of politics and personalities and self-love and self-importance. Provided that alternate accounts are not involved, this should avoid that to some degree, and since these are simply ''sent in'' rather than posted publicly, it will help. We don't want cadres and factions and points of view trying to fight. We want wise policy and we want trust. Have people assess ''for'' someone, not against.''
Hi, Geogre. I saw your comments on an IP page, and I thought I'd ask your opinion about and others made by the IP editor.


3. Get a list of the top 60 finishers and then make them candidates for consideration listed on a namespace page by the stewards. '''There will be positively no statements by the candidates, and no oppose votes.''' Instead, there will be a two week assessment period, during which editors will, again using the criteria, give 1-10 scores on the various criteria for the sixty persons listed.
I figured with me and Athene making different sets of well-intentioned edits, we are simply against someone with an ax to grind. I would like to think that none of my edits were biased, but I leave it to you and others to decide that. I'm just trying to show both sides of a very difficult issue. How am I doing? --] (]) 18:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


3a. Selection will not be a balance of oppose and support or anything so compromised. Instead, the stewards will have determined a '''representative sample of the editing population''' and divided that by ten. No candidate will be successful without an aggregate score above that mark (this functioning like ''quorum'').
:It's one of those topics, isn't it? I see that the page is now protected, pending working things out on the talk page, which is the proper thing anyway (working them out, I mean, not protecting). I have a feeling that the IP editor may not comment much on the talk page, but I found his behavior to be pretty belligerent when I dealt with him. In fact, he really, really acts like an old time POV person who is at war.
:As for this article, though, Ed, you have to know that the title is a euphemism. While the term ''could'' mean, and probably ''should'' mean, "when science is controlled by political interests or when scientific findings are used for political advancement," the term is hot in politics today in the US. I.e. the very ''title'' reflects the current politicization of science. :-( I say this for a reason.
:#This phrase has become popular due to dissent to the Bush administration
:#Defenders, apologists, and dissenters of the administration are eager to
:##redefine
:##shift the ground (who's doing it, how political) of the debate.
:#Sources that link to think tanks are not only going to have an assumption of bad faith, but are going to have to meet higher scrutiny
:#Anyone who redefines to speak of ''general'' political roles of ''general'' science will be fighting against the primary usage and coverage of the present term.
:So, we're stuck. It's a political term and a ''partisan'' term. It's like "judicial activism" in that the very coverage of the term places Misplaced Pages within a battle of POV's. The only potential way out is to never define or cover the thing, but to describe the political fight. If we try to describe the phenomenon, we're participating in it.
:This is why I used to prefer that we delete such articles or merely redirect them to sections of existing articles. It's not because I'm an enemy of the topic, but because I think the topic is a ping pong ball. Until the game ends, we can't get near the table without either hitting the ball ourselves or getting hit by it, and, either way, the players get ticked off. ] (]) 11:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


3b. If a person sees a very serious reason for disqualification, he or she will inform the stewards and coordinators. ''Disqualification criteria are that the person will be likely to act in a private, national, or special interest rather than a wide, international, or community interest.'' Disqualification will have nothing to do with "conflict" or "drama" or even "policy violations" of the candidate, as it is not up to the stewards or coordinators to tell the project who it trusts. However, if a person has a vested interest or a conflict of interest or has evidence of a private desire that trumps the general, then that would be a reason for disqualification.
==FAR==
Would you be interested in Mediating the scope and purpose of FAR? Your comments on ] indicate that you would retain FA with fewer footnotes than I would, and I am plainly considered a dangerous radical. (I agree that the article appears perfectly sound, but I would like ''some'' more indications of what comes from where.)


3c. The coordinators and stewards simply tabulate the scores. All parties are prohibited from revealing or discussing results on any medium until the final 60 are posted.
In the meantime, would you have a look at {{tl|FAR-instructions}}? The current flap began when I attempted to get rid of some of uses of ''facilitate'', and of the Bureaucratic Passive; if FAR is going to encourage good writing, its instructions really ought to be in decent English. ] <small>]</small> 19:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


::''Why: This council will not have "power" to harm or help people, so the idea that a person on it will get to be important is silly. When matters are "tied" in the minds of the stewards and coordinators, the presumption should be for safety/disqualification, but the criteria must be solely oriented toward communal/private interest and wisdom/folly. A wise thought from an unpleasant person is worth a dozen banal platitudes. Secrecy is vital, because any hints about how things will going, especially on non-portable, non-transparent media like IRC and e-mail, will result in "votes" and hate fests.''
:The current flap began, it should be noted, because no indication of changes was made on talk. I can live with greater brevity in the template.
::It was a ''copyedit''; at that it received exactly as much prior discussion as, for example, . I discussed as soon as I was reverted; I really that it was going to be uncontroversial, and that the response would be further tweaks. ] <small>]</small> 19:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
:::I'd suggest we not clutter this talk page. ] (]) 20:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
:I thought your comment on AN/I was quite astute today, Geogre—not necessarily innocent is not necessarily stalking. And you're right that we should not water down the word "stalk" through overuse (as has happened, to some extent, with "civility"). ] (]) 19:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


::Thanks. We can certainly be pains in the butts without being stalkers, and we can be fighting without it. The ''real'' stalkers are another matter, and even the wiki-stalkers are a different matter. People do pick on each other. People do follow a bit. The kind that get blocked are, or at least should be, the ones who are disrupting (undoing every edit), creating a war (going along to shout opposition everywhere the user is in a discussion), trolling (going to every page to ask a repetitive question or introduce an unrelated dispute). Frankly, what some of the long term feuding parties do bugs me more. The people who check contribs and collect diffs of every bad moment at Misplaced Pages shows treacherousness. I can deal with an honest opponent. The sneaks are another matter. ] (]) 11:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Let me be clear: I think that FA would profit by an interaction of various POVs, not all of them often represented in its deliberations. I was asking if you would be interested in speaking for one of them; we would obtain a mediator to oversee the process from the Committee or the Cabal, as people thought better. ] <small>]</small> 03:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
:I'll take a look. FAC needs other points of view, and FAR needs to stop its ] routine. When we start with the mentality that we are the missionaries trying to ''save'' articles, we immediately disrespect previous editors. When we start with the idea that our recent change is great, and the woeful world dwells in ignorance and must be reformed to it, we're begging for a holy war. FAC has had too few points of view, in my view. Bishonen, Giano, and I produced some solid work. I'm the most dissenting from current FAC, Giano least, but we all three dissent from the way things are now, and we all three decided that the atmosphere was too ... too ... let's just say "bad" and be vague (as I can only speak for myself) ... to argue all of the rules, rules, rules, rules, rules.
:I prefer judgment to rules. I prefer human intelligence to -bots. I prefer FA's being approved and then left alone unless they possess ''grievous'' issues (not merely "has not achieved upgrade to formatX.a9"). The star doesn't mean "you can believe this article," and it less and less means "best of Misplaced Pages." It is increasingly meaning "adheres to a ''form''." ] (]) 11:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


4. The result of the assessment will be a council of '''TWENTY''' people. Of the twenty, five will serve at a time for one month periods. Membership will rotate every month.
::I think the idea of saving articles is quite sound, in many cases. Particularly where the nominator is long gone. We talk about saving Emsworth's, for instance. See qp10qp's stupendous save on ] recently; just today I was trying to .


::''Why: This may be the most vital part of the plan. By having the groups rotate, it prevents personalities from dominating, so no one person can bully or dominate the rest. Additionally, it keeps one person or five people from becoming "important" or thinking they have power of any sort. All of the anxiety about the council being a "government" or being "power" or being a "revolution" should be put to bed instantly by the knowledge that it will be a continually shifting set of persons.''
::The word may be patronizing if you're sitting on a review yourself arguing "this is as good as when I first wrote it." But as I've said to you previously Geogre, yours and Giano's FAs are '''not''' the norm for pre-'05. A large majority of the old one's that have come through FAR deserved removing. Blanket grandfathering simply wouldn't have worked. I've thought about a limited grandfathering, however, where the nominator is still active and can vouch for all of the information. (A principal reason I kept ].) But the idea will drive people on the other extreme batshit. ] (]) 13:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


==Personal attack==
First, it tries to say that another person being uncivil is an excuse for a new administrator exhibiting different vices. Second, it throws "civility" around as if it were the paramount crime, when, in fact, there are times for drawing a hard line against specific individuals who are doing things that specifically harm the site, and "civility" must never, ever be understood as "politeness" or "niceness." Third, it is one of those cheap, theatrical comments that everyone can apply to someone else and no one can apply to himself, and therefore it cannot ever catch the proper targets. It was a wretched comment and betrayed a very cheap intellect or extremely derelict rhetoric. ] (]) 12:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


5. '''Method:''' The council should appoint or seek representatives to speak for separate viewpoints on a given issue. These "champions" or representatives will present arguments for their position, arguments against alternative positions, along with careful rebuttals of claims against their position. They will not involve themselves in direct, interlined conversation with champions/representatives of other points of view on council pages. The council will review all cases, plus any volunteer cases ("amicus briefs"), and submit questions to champions. They will then fashion their own policy recommendation(s).
== Accusation of "bad faith" FAR ==


::''Why: Again, we've seen death by argument too many times to count, and we especially see the routine "forest for the trees" sort of argument that Misplaced Pages is famous for. No one gets anywhere when discussing policy because every single person needs to offer his opinion, even if it's almost identical to the twenty opinions just above. All of the "me too" and the "yeah but" stuff gets so thick that no one can support anyone or any thing. If the council wants to actually review and fashion policy recommendations (only recommendations), then it needs to basically '''research''' policy alternatives. They can find the passionate true believers of the sides and let them get all the best ideas from their side together and speak with one voice, and then they can also listen to anyone who walks by who happens to have thought about things. Additionally, many times our best thinking is ''not found'' among the advocates, because people have gone away from an issue in disgust. Open the issue of infoboxes, and you'll see hundreds of editors who hate them but gave up arguing. The point is that the "champion" method and the "amicus" system allows clear presentation and consideration for the council.''
Hi, I felt I needed to respond to your accusation of "bad faith" at ]
You said "'''''Bad faith''' nomination again. Is it a surprise or coincidence that the primary author of this and the Lisbon Earthquake left last week and two articles are on FAR this week? These articles were fine for a long time, apparently, and just got bad as soon as the author left. Why?''" with an edit summary of: "''Let's see: who leaves? Let's FAR them immediately! (petty, childish villains))''"
I do not appreciate that and I hope you will look at some of the edits listed below which I hope show my good faith:
*I started actively editing ] (as part of ]) on 28th Nov 2007 to get it to GA (since successful).
*As part of that process I looked at ] and was surprised that it was an FA (and had been since 2004 before I started editing wikipedia) as it had no inline citations.
*On 4th Dec I put a comment on ] suggesting the need for inline citations to be added & started added refs to the article. I also added a request on ] & ] asking people to help improve the article. Nothing happened.
*On 9th Dec I did the FAR & then added the notice to the talk pages of the most prolific editors of the article (as requested as part of the FAR process) - until that point I had no idea who the primary editors were. At that point I noticed a "goodbye" message on the talk page of ] (dated July 2007)
My intention was to improve the quality of the article, and wikipedia in general, and I would be grateful if you would remove your accusation of "bad faith" and being a "petty, childish villain". I hope that my 18,000+ edits & several FA's GA's etc show that I have the best of the project at heart.&mdash; ] <sup>]</sup> 20:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


6. When the council concludes its deliberations, it makes a '''policy recommendation to Misplaced Pages''' that Misplaced Pages must approve. It is not automatically policy, but it is also not for arguing about. It is an up or down vote, with a '''presumption of approval.''' This means that any proposal that garners quorum and an approval rate of 67% or more will be adopted.
== Quoting you ==


::''Why: If this is a thing where the council makes a big RFC, the result will be "no consensus" to everything. Instead, the council should get a bit of a break, so that a council recommendation simply needs approval (say a 2/3rds majority, with quorum in place). If it goes to Village Pump where every person gets a brand new opinion, then we'll have every person trying to speak for the novelty of speaking, and then we'll get reiteration, and then....''
Just a brief to note to say I've quoted you . Hope I didn't misrepresent you or take that quote out of context. More generally, I think you've commented on some parts of this case. Was wondering what you thought now? ] (]) 00:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
:No, that's it exactly, and ID is definitely one of those ping pong games. The only part I left out of my analogy is that the players absolutely ''hate'' it when you try to take their paddles. :-) This is why these things get intractable in such an almighty hurry. The way I look at it, the original "BATTLEGROUND" stated that ''articles should not be political battlefields.'' That was a reference to the old Gdanzig problem and the current Russia-killed-my-joy/Russia-made-your-economy arguments. The same is true of ''all'' these ongoing games. (I was on a roll, morning before last. I had my metaphor mojo.) If we were to write ], I think it would have to be a document of practical advice for how to stop these games. We don't need more "policy" to yell at malefactors. We need more guidance for the do-gooders and the people who have to deal with all the yelling. ] (]) 12:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


===What to do with these?===
==editors investigating each other==
Use 'em. Claim 'em as your idea, if you want. I don't care. I just think it's a good idea, and I think it's a damn sight better than ArbCom picking their favorite warriors or votes or some other rot. Tell me, honestly, if I haven't avoided the problems.


The point is, ''there are ways of doing these things, people,'' if we just stop thinking in terms of power and appointing ourselves demigods. ] (]) 21:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Geogre, you have recently commented on the practice of editors' digging through each other's contributions with the aim to get an opponent sanctioned, especially postponing doing so until some future point when the moment seems "best", recording anything they find for future use, then running around various pages with the complaints aimed at sanctioning the opponents, rather than address the disputes and also on admins on the civility vigilantism crusade. As you know well, we all agree that civility is a good thing. But this persistent misuse of WP:CIV as a weapon against the opponents is frustrating. Even more frustrating is this mutual stalking, snitching and non-nuanced interference from outside into this already delicate mess with warnings and block buttons thus making things worse by showing that vigilant mutual stalking with the aim to undig more violations is actually working.
:Thanks for that Geogre - I've pasted it to , on my way out.......--] (]) 17:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


::I hope it does some good. I don't care about the credit, but it seems to me that one of the reasons Misplaced Pages has been doomed is that the project is a good deal more socially adventurous than the people at it. While ''it'' does all kinds of interesting things to notions of authority and control, ''they'' keep looking for authority and control. It's as if they're here, but they don't believe in it.
I'm a little frustrated by language and the fact that Ioeth is definitely meaning well but making some mistakes. Could you take a look at ], ], ], ]. While some users may be pleased by such incidents and mark small "victories", I am afraid the editing climate would actually be getting even more disharmonious. Thanks in advance, --] 15:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
::If we managed to get 100,000 articles and to move up to the top 20 in Alexa with just people and no freaking out about power, then I'm going to bet we can negotiate among ourselves to find the possible and impossible solutions for policy, too, so long as no one gets to be in charge. (There are two ways to win. One is a dictator. The other is a monastery. I've never heard of a monastery accidentally wiping out the population of a country before.) ] (]) 19:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Yeah. Of course all the people here exist in the real world within structures of power and authority - more acutely for the kids of course, so it's hardly a surprise that they bring shackles of the mind with them to this place. Look forward to your paper G - buzz me when it's published will you? --] (]) 19:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
::I guess I gave too much of a preview, there, but, of course, that's what it's all about. The historical moment. No one is to be blamed for being in a historical moment, but when the reason they never look above and beyond it is neediness and personal psychology, it can get really distasteful. I would ''love'' to have real surveys of Misplaced Pages administrators to make my case, but no one can get such surveys. Anyway, I'm writing, forever writing, and the thing is a monster. It's taking forever to get down, and then it will take a while to trim and dress up, and then I'll have to find the right outlet for it. I'll let you know, though. ] (]) 00:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Don't these paradigm shifts usually have some kind of Charismatic Leader, some agent of change? Or at least, some voices in the wind, from the same direction? Cometh the hour, cometh the man. Unfortunately ]. <small>up to Lexington......hmmm hmmm.</small> Your fundamental material for the historical moment though, is still pretty much the same homo sapien of 200,000 years ago. "'''Fred.F.Stone''' likes hunting, screwing, acceptance and problem solving for profit, will gladly bash neighbour in pursuance of these, but recently finds more profit in cooperation." Whatever the future holds, it would be surprising if it wasn't affected by some abstracts of those fundamentals. In short, to overcome neediness and personal psychology, aren't crowds usually invited to put them aside in favour of he 'lofty purpose'? WP might have the lofty purpose, but somehow it rewards the needy and sick - hardly Darwinian, but perhaps the societal aspects of this place do have a use after all. ] (]) 00:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
:As I told a friend, recently, I have ] dentures, but they're fitted on ] gums. The great man theory's problem is that, after ], he inevitably turns ] or nasty. The odd thing is that the Great Man is, interestingly, not at home in a real Darwinian model, and yet it seems to fit so well with our concepts of the "primitive" that we forget that every time, in history, that we see a great man arise, he is promising to lead us boldly to the future, to ] of the past and make the trains run on time (by changing the time tables to match their departure and arrivals).
:I'll have to go with e-mail on the rewards of neediness. I think Misplaced Pages is curiously designed for that. There is a particularity about this project that attracts and promotes particular sets of psychological profiles that are very ill suited to analysis. In essence, I think Misplaced Pages is a second life, and people who are looking for a chance to reconstruct and who are ''seeking recompense'' for the wounds and grievances of the first life are going to devote their energies toward the reconstruction and mirroring of the social orders that "went wrong" in reality. Unlike ], Misplaced Pages is an actual do-over for a good many people, and therefore one has varying degrees of attraction based on varying degrees of "wrong" suffered. ] (]) 10:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
::I'm not so sure about the 'great man' not being at home in the Darwinian model. Certainly it worked for Genghis Khan - what percentage of Asia now carries his genes? 1 in 12? . It certainly didn't do JFK's chances of finding a date any harm either :-) <small>An interesting question is, if Obama delivers on the promise invested in him, will that be a competitive advantage for his children?</small> I'm not so sure about the ''inevitable'' corruption of 'great leaders' either (where's Luther King, Gandhi or Mandela in that model - apart from 2/3rds of them having the sense of timing to die at the 'right' moment?). My Grandparents are still firmly of the opinion, that without Churchill to demonstrate the bulldog spirit, to remind us of our national traits and to buck us up with brilliant rhetoric, we'd be lost by now. It's speculative of course, maybe we could have done better than the bad-tempered depressive alcoholic with a boy's-own-adventure sense of military strategy (the nation certainly thought so in peacetime), but leadership is not to be dismissed so glibly I think - that generation is still marked by the tangible excitement of having experienced a nation truly pulling together. Maybe what's really missing at WP is an external threat - but now I'm sounding like Rumsfeld - lawsuits anyone? In any event, it's not cohesion we need, but values embedded in the system that serve our purpose better - an encyclopaedia is a strange place to find systemic anti-intellectualism.


::Really though, aren't we all fundamentally motivated by selfishness? Even if I devote my life to charity, I feel better, I'm rewarded in some way. I try to remember that about people's motives, it makes me generally less disappointed in people :-) The long term trouble with Marxism, in my v. humble and uniformed view, is it appeals to idealism. Idealism can sublimate these selfish desires in the short term, because the idea of being part of 'something new and consequential', works as a reward in itself, not to mention the reward of love/respect/acceptance from being part of the 'group'. But in the long term, we revert to more petty and prosaic behaviours. That doesn't deny though that lifting our heads once in a while and running after someone or some group with vision is an entirely ]. But, as you say Geogre, your essentially un-clubbable, so you'll probably see that differently to your ovine peers --] (]) 13:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
:Kind of ironic that after expressing concern over editors investigating each other (and I agree with Irpen that it shouldn't turn into a vigilantism crusade), he should then ask one admin to investigate another.


==Sauce for a gander==
:Seriously, I think the Digwuren general restriction on civility for Eastern European area will be an effective means of restoring harmony. I really can't see how enforcing civility would make things more disharmonious. I've checked with ] and I am fully satisfied with his approach after he explained it to me, and none of the editors he warned had any real complaints either. ] (]) 03:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
There's a surprisingly interesting and cordial conversation going on about reliable academic sources, which you might be interested in bringing your laser scalpel to. --] (]) 18:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
:I've tried, but the problem is that, although they're all on the right track, they're falling victim to Misplaced Pages argument. One can find exceptions to everything. There are always going to be peer reviewed bits of horse hockey, and there are going to be eminent people who lose their minds. The ''general guideline'' is sound, but once we start trying to use general guidelines as if they were predictive laws without employing individual consideration, it's hopeless. The problem is that we are never going to shed ourselves of someone trying to say, "Oh, but there are books supporting my crank view, and they're from academic presses." To see where things get '''really''' hot, look at the nationalism wars. The fringe science stuff is tame in comparison. In those cases, you have the most prestigious presses of two nations offering up officially sanctioned accounts that say opposing things, and then, here at Misplaced Pages, we get bloody battles, with both trying to throw fecal matter at the other's press and universities and nation. The Russian/Polish "arguments" are crimes in progress, for example, and they are entirely insoluble without saying, "Well, we're Anglo-Americans, and so we're going to use ''our'' nationalist points of view." Shy of that, there's practically nothing to say to distinguish or quiet them. ] (]) 00:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


== Motion re alternate account ==
::And this above is exactly a type of stalking I was talking about. What on earth brought Martin to this page besides following me around? But seriously, I did not ask Geogre to investigate anything, less so to block or warn anyone. I asked him to provide his opinion on the matter. (Interesting who would show up here next.) --] 07:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


There is a motion at ] concerning your alternate account; you are invited to comment if you wish. --]&nbsp;(]) 13:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
:::"Exactly a type of stalking"? Are you assuming bad faith here? In fact I came here on another matter entirely, and noticed your comment here was related to the issue i discussed earlier with ], hence I made my comment. That other issue was my request to Arbcom to suspend both Digwuren's and Petri's ban ] in which I cited ] view that the remedies were too harsh. Now I pleaded with you before you took this case to ArbCom to follow mediation first, since the outcome of Arbcom could be quite unpredictable. In the end the result was Petri Krohn being banned along with Digwuren and findings of fact against youself in regards to incivility and consequently you being noticed in on remedy 11 general restriction. Now this mess can be undone somewhat if you could support this request to suspend the ban of both digwuren and Petri by making a positive comment on the ArbCom request page. I would also appreciate it if ] could also make a comment in support of this too. ] (]) 12:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


== Fielding ==
:Marting, Irpen asked me, as a person who has interacted with him many times before, to take a look. Taking a look is not investigating. I'm rather famous, if anyone is famous on Misplaced Pages, among the administrators for taking a consistent line against using civility as a truncheon. As recently as two days ago, I made an impassioned, and actually mildly ill-tempered, comment to Morven about this. Irpen was posting on the same page and in the same place. This is consistent, and asking me to weigh in on a new-ish administrator and try to keep him from going astray is pretty nearly the highest principles of Misplaced Pages.
:Misplaced Pages is big. We have to look for the interested people, because our system for coordinating people doesn't work and hasn't ever worked. This is entirely different from following a user about (are you suggesting that Irpen is following me?) and trying to clip single lines of conversations to get a case.
:Finally, I made a rather strong point (if I say so myself) at that RFAR. I did not make it to hurt or help any one person but because I very much believe it. I ''hope'' that people remember the point and do seek me out if I can be of help. ] (]) 11:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
::Due to the ArbCom case that Irpen initiated, there is now a ] in force across all of Eastern Europe topics, where any personal attack, assumption of bad faith or incivility will be immediately punished. This remedy requires that any editor engaging in incivility in Eastern Europe topics be first warned with a notice on their talk page (which ] has correctly done) then immediately blocked if that incivility continues. Like you, I don't believe civility should be used as a truncheon, thus I sought ] with ArbCom on the matter. The view is that named involved parties, like Irpen, by virtue of the fact that they have already been noticed on their talk pages at the conclusion of the case, are liable for instant block for any incivility, assumption of bad faith or personal attacks. I pleaded with ArbCom to atleast allow those involved parties be warned first, but they were quite firm on this point that named involved parties should get no warning before a block. Perhaps you could plead with them, given your fame you may have more success. ] (]) 12:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


Regardless of what happens, I would like to have your input on Fielding related stuff. There are a few pages that you were directly involved in, and some others that your opinion would be important. I plan on finishing the later plays coming up this fall and try to produce the bulk of his major works (including some poems and the rest). The one priority coming up will be '']''. When I have a chance, I will be adding some more information on the literary criticism and other notable aspects in order to prepare it for GA level. ] (]) 18:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
== Barbara Schwartz ==


:Could you please weigh in on the above discussion? I proposed adding some more about specific criticism and the such. AD cut it down and left some in. However, you may have some differing opinions from us on what would be effective or not. ] (]) 21:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Can you take a look at this first stab at a draft, and see how it strikes you?


== ] ==
]
A request for arbitration has been filed. You may wish to make a statement. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 02:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
::*Someone (I'm not sure who) once said "''Don't let the bastards get you down''" a motto I have always kept, so I recommend it. Unlike you, I only do poetry that I was compelled to learn in school, but I think many would do well to remember this "''IF you can keep your head when all about you - Are losing theirs and blaming it on you, - If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you - But make allowance for their doubting too''" and so on, I forget the rest, but I think the meaning is clear, and then my own favourite line "''Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch''" which is something you do very well! You see the other day, someone kindly fixed up this thing for me, which makes all the admins names on my watchlist appear blue, and do you know? - They are so in the majority, it has led me to the conclusion that not being an Admin is almost an affectation these days - rather like saying "look at me, I'm special" Funny how things turn out isn't it? ] (]) 21:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


== Arbitration motion: Geogre ==
It could be trimmed more ruthlessly if needed, but I've written as a first try, to the limits of what I felt could be represented fairly and within BLP. I've used government sources and her own filings for claims, where they exist, and drafted with care to make sure the wording does not imply a stance.


As a first question, is it reasonably fair, neutral, covers the main bases, and BLP compliant in your view? ]&nbsp;<sup><span style="font-style:italic">(]&nbsp;|&nbsp;])</span></sup> 19:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


I have just added calling for your de-sysopping. It is in your best interests to respond on the arbitration pages urgently to this and the other interests raised. I am sending you a copy of this message by email. &nbsp;] <sup>]</sup> 08:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
:My primary concern is that we're going to that phenomenological approach of circling the truth we can't know. It's a common strategy, and we're all accustomed to journalists doing it ("And we searched for someone in ''favor'' of euthanasia for cute puppies and eventually found him. In the interests of neutrality, we will now give him equal time with the Society for the Protection of Animals. We go now to St. Bethlehem's Hospital for comment by Heywood U. Quoteme."), and it's what happens when the truth is unsettled. This is the case when dealing with present events (and a reason I tend to stay in the past).
::The problem is that once you have taken something from them (in this case - the tools) then they can threaten to take something away from you. Everyone who knows you, is 100% certain, beyond any possible doubt, that deceiving or building false concencus had never even crossed your too philosophical mind. In that respect, you are probably the mosy naively honest person on Misplaced Pages. The reasons you created Utgard were completely understandable and justified; they are also none of Durova and co's business. However, an ignorance of those facts has proven a source of long sought jubilation and glee to certain editors - and those whose most philosophical thoughts probably concern only their digestion and bowels. This is the crux of the problem, those who have their minds on higher things, seldom give sufficient thought to matters more base in appearance. Hence, you are in this predicament. It's not as though you use the tools - so if I were you, I would tell them where to stuff their bloody tools, but of course you are not me - which is why they are still whooping with such obscene joy as they seek to take from you and you remain silent. At least, this way, you have a dignity that others in this sorry case appear to lack. ] (]) 09:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
:I think critics of both sides have a point if they start to be vicious about the "reliable sources." If they didn't have a point, the truth wouldn't be so hard to know. To be ''fair'' we circle the invisible truth in the center by having multiple points of view, but I'm not sure that being ''neutral'' is possible.
::*As silent types go, you are proving pretty affective. However, I and some others are having some problems here. Why has this very commonly known alternative account, known in the highest circles, suddenly become a problem, that needs such public and drastic attention? There seems to be a huge movement wanting you de-sysopped; you certainly seem to have attracted some once powerful people (a whole unprecedented platoon of ex-arbs, undermining the present ArbCom, anxious to see you disposed of) I am just wondering why they and so many others from a certain quarter of Misplaced Pages are demanding your downfall - As disciples of Machiavelli they are provincial and clumsy, but they are singing in unison almost like a heavenly choir - or at least an orchestrated body. Any ideas, you would like to share with us? ] (]) 21:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
:I haven't replied because I'm still trying to think of what I could say. I really don't see the figure as being notable enough for an article on her own, a biography, so I'm not sure I can be satisfied, and this is on top of the fact that sometimes "vandal magnet" means that we need really powerful claims of importance to justify the amount of work we have to put in. For Madeline O'Hare, Lyndon LaRouche, Ralph Nader, Mary Whitehouse, and others the profile of the controversial figure is so unbelievably high that we have to put in the work.
:Still, I will weigh in, per your request, at the bottom of the DRV. I understand the strategy: get something neutral and BLP-free, and ''then'' work on issues of AfD/deletion guidelines. I'm just pessimistic. ] (]) 12:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC) :::*All I need to know is- did you use the "secondary" account to add to discussions/voting anyplace that your Geogre account was used. If not, then wheres the harm? If so... well that's a whole'nuther can o' worms. Good luck, because I've always appreciated your abilities/intellect. Best Regards, ] (]) 22:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


== Ego sum tristis ==
==]==
Thank you for your comments in my RfA, and eventual support. Also, I'd just like to clear the air a bit, if I may. I'll be honest that my previous perception of your voting pattern was that, as far as I was concerned, you didn't so much make up your own mind, as have your opinion handed to you by others, and then you would come up with articulate rationalizations afterwards. So I was actually surprised to see you supporting me for adminship, and pleased that you were able to at least consider changing your mind about me. My own comments in the RfA were sincere, and I really do intend to further incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I sincerely doubt you'll see anything controversial coming from my new access level. My main goals, as far as the tools are involved, are simply to help out with various backlogs. As an editor though, I fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are a few more that I definitely want to get to ] status. Probably the most controversial things that you'll see from me in the future, is that I intend to get more involved in policy discussions. Misplaced Pages definitely has some problems that need to be addressed, and I'd like to see what I can do to help Misplaced Pages navigate itself to a healthier culture. I hope that, if you do take the time to look at my actions in the future, you will see that my intentions are genuinely positive ones, even if it does mean that I have to butt heads with people every so often, to make progress towards those positive goals. If you ever do have any concerns about my actions though, I encourage you to speak up at my talkpage. I will do my best to listen to everyone who has good faith concerns. --]]] 16:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC) {{-}}


I have really enjoyed reading your work here, especially that which you've done on the older literature articles. I discovered the troubles you're having when I checked in on a case in which user:Abd had listed my username in his evidence. As you've now not edited since the case began, I'm afraid we may have lost you, and that makes me very sad, if true. While I hope it's not true, I just wanted to post a note here to let you know that your contributions here are greatly appreciated, by more people than you'll probably every know. As the thread topic says, ''Ego sum tristis''. ] 05:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
*I ''do'' hope that those who clamored for his "administrative head" on a platter enjoy what they have wrought. ]] 18:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


== The beautiful page! == ==Sorry to hear ...==


Nice edit Geogre - I wish there was a WP-most beautiful page section - i really think that one could win it! ] (]) 15:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC) Of your troubles. You have been kind to me in the past and very fair, and I wish you the best. ] (]) 21:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
:Good. I knew I knew the term for what you were referring to, and then I saw something about Disneyland employing forced perspective, and a Christmas light went off in my head. ] (]) 13:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


==Merry Christmas== == Motion 4 ==
] (]) 01:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)]]
:Thank you! What an interesting engraving, too. I have this brief break between work, and I have vowed to write a real paper for a real presentation in a real... Anyway, I'm enjoying having a bit of a break (to actually get some work done in), and I can manage somewhat to duck the Christmas speeches from ... well ... YouKnowWho, which are a bit worse than the Queen, I'm afraid, in speechify making. (The man is the ] of syntax, the incinerator of morphemes.) Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night this night. ] (]) 13:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


Hello,
] (]) 20:44, 23 December 2007 (UTC)]]


I've moved your latest statement to the new motion I've posted to propose that ] be unblocked and available for your use as an alternate account, provided it is clearly identified as such. This is partly to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to read your statement given that the motions they were attached to will close shortly and it would have been archived along with them. &mdash;&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 21:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
:Thanks, Giano. You know, I think that may be my favorite Mary of any Renaissance painting. It's not the obvious maternal part, but the fact that she's so ''young'' and innocent looking. There is still that hieratic neck, but the artist seems to have genuinely loved his model, and she seems to have really trusted him. It's very touching. ] (]) 18:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


== Motion Passed ==
].]]
Hey Geogre, unfortunately the ] has ] to desysop your account. You are free to re-apply through the usual channels. ''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' ''']''' '''<small>]</small>''' 00:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
:Please note that another motion is also close to passing. ] (]) 01:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


== G'day Geogre ==
:Wow, Irpen, that lady is blushing so much that it's making her blouse pink. Thank you. And merry Christmas to you, too, in a few days. ] (]) 18:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


seems a bit trite to say 'hope you're well' - but I do, so there you go..... Anywhoo... I thought I'd come by here to let you know that I've put a note on Utgard's userpage mentioning the connection to this account - I felt that the template was a bit rude, so replaced it. The only place therefore that a 'geogre sock' template is in use is over at my userpage, where it's a sort of poor man's satire / comment on the whole situation - I'm thinking of being Spartacus on tuesdays, thursdays and saturdays, and Geogre on mondays, wednesdays and fridays. Sundays I'll pick a new and exciting 'master' account, and wear that label with pride, don't tell anyone, but I've always wanted to be SandyGeorgia ;-)
== ] ==


Doesn't really need saying, but you should obviously feel free to revert, edit, or whatever at Utgard's page - certainly if you feel my oar is getting in the way. Take care, and insert a genuine 'I hope you can rise above all this, because your contributions to the project, in various 'spaces', really are among the absolute finest' type statement here :-) ] (]) 02:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I've been bold and rewritten it. Your comments would be appreciated. ] (]) 16:53, 25 December 2007 (UTC)


:I, too, wish to convey my sympathy to you—and my contempt to the rash, harsh punishment you've suffered, of course, without being afforded a chance to defend yourself. Orwellian process, from start to finish. ] 09:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
==Request for arbitration==
I have filed a request for arbitration which involves you. Please see ]. ] 04:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)


::The AC is far too incompetent to do Orwellian. This was more like a ].--] (]) 21:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
== "Verb mood"? ==
:::They're as full of promise and ultimate disappointment as ], we're clearly into the Brown phase. --] (]) 22:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


::I think everyone is mistaken about Orwell. Normally, people responding in such a manner to such a situation would say ]. ] (]) 22:17, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
.—] (]) 06:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
:And yet it was. I was replacing a passive voice construction with active voice. There had been '''no''' rationale for removing what I had written, no discussion on the talk page, so I assume that the removal had been vandalism. I was correcting that mistake. ] (]) 12:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)


==You still on strike?== == An offer ==
There is an offer for you at ]. Contact me if you wish to pursue it. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 14:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about the RFPP, but it had to be done - and done by someone previously uninvolved and in a very public way, for everyone's protection. In any case, someone stuck a link to your essay ] on the talk page and I found it very erudite. It strikes me, however, that the issue of logging has turned out to be something of a canard, and there isn't really a copyright issue from Freenode's perspective. I will try to root out the statement, it might be on meta, but it is definitely around here somewhere and it was fairly recent as well. <small> I am still snickering to myself about Irpen's caption. </small> ] (]) 09:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
:Oh, I agree with you. Logging is, in fact, not disallowed. Additionally, there is no reason, within Misplaced Pages's practices and procedures, for not posting logs. There are no copyright issues, and the thought that there are privacy issues is simply incredible. No one has ever licensed privacy. What's more, though, Giano has tried to do this the most polite way possible: passing on only to those who seek (by saying, "Where's the proof?"). That's what you're supposed to do, and yet another block. ] (]) 12:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
:My essay was born in frustration -- much like my "Fork This" on ]. I wanted to point out that, if people just ''think,'' they can come to proper conclusions, that they can't edit because "I like IRC, so it's kewel" or "Well, I've never seen any abuse, so there is none." If people only think about what various media do, they would figure it why they're heading for trouble. Now, of course, I'm being ''belittled'' for doing the right damn thing and keeping it in user space? Hell, the talk at the time was to put it as a page that...well, the page that David rushed forward to write without input. Being arrogant pays among cows, I guess. ] (]) 13:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)


:Why don't you just knit him a nice sweater instead...or maybe a scarf?--] (]) 21:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
== IRC essay ==
::Or a noose. --] (]) 21:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Only if he accepts her nomination for RfA.--] (]) 22:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
::(EC) Now, now, Joopers, I'm ] Durova didn't mean her essay to sound at all conditional or baiting. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 22:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Really? Because it sounded awfully to me like Durova has offered to cut her toenails if Geogre cuts his throat - now that's reciprocity folk! --] (]) 22:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
::::Well she should cut hers first, since they keep tearing holes in her favorite ].--] (]) 22:22, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
::Given the level of almost paranoid distrust displayed by some individuals on this page, I can well understand why you might like to avoid the politics of this place. And, yes, I'm fairly sure that you and some others might count me as one of the "enemy" as well. I did and do think that it might be a good idea for you to be subject to a confirmation vote, primarily for two reasons (1) the fact that the two names could be seen by those with no prior knowledge of the dual identity as being two individuals taking part in one discussion, and (2) far more importantly, as a form of, well, warning, to any admin in the future who might take recourse to multiple accounts, and, like NYB said, probably by accident have eventually wound up using them for a purpose for which they were never initially intended, but which could be seen as being to some level problematic. Having said all that, I would also be honored to second (or third or whatever) your nomination for reconfirmation should that situation develop. ] (]) 22:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


::Guys, Durova has to be allowed to disagree without being personally attacked. It was this vituperative atmosphere we've created around ourselves that caused Geogre to want another account in the first place. It would be great if we could learn from this that differences of opinion and criticism don't have to escalate into wikihounding and disrespect. We may be about to lose a really great contributor because of it. ] <small><sup>]]</sup></small> 23:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Very good. Thanks. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 16:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
:It would seem the offer is being viewed with the distain it deserves, as an attempt to wash blood from stained sheets. I wonder if Risker whould have been given the same 'opportunity' if Durova had managed to bring her down as collateral damage. This is high politics of the kind Durova has been so careful to distance herself from since !!; so the slate can be forgiven and wiped clean. I think all that effort is ruined here. Ouch, opps. The self interest and politics here are so naked and obvious here, I have to agree with Geogre in that 'ye all bore me'. ] (]) 15:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


== Stallo ==
==]==
Given that the image was used on this very page, it seemed appropriate that we have an article about the things. So I've started off ] for you. ] (]) 01:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located ]. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, ]. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, ].


== Motion Passed ==
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ] 00:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello Geogre, just noting for the record that a new motion has passed relating to you at ] ''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 01:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


== Let's not quarrel == == An impotent rogue speaks... ==
Re: , ] has always been a reason to delete. Your vote already expresses you disagree. I have great respect for you and the project is too divided. Let's state our separate opinions here and find some other area where we can work together. Respectfully, <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 20:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
:You are misunderstanding what "BATTLEGROUND" says. It is important that, when we use it to delete, we know what it means. It is therefore important to correct you there so that others who read it realize that "disagreement" is not the same thing as a violation of BATTLEGROUND. It's important to know what the deletion guideline says and to use it appropriately. ] (]) 20:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
::Walk a mile in these moccasins, Geogre, and you may view that differently. At any rate, may I invite you to visit ]? I've been raising ] with an eye toward ] and it would be wonderful to have another experienced editor in the neighborhood. Regards, <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 20:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


Per your comment at the arbcom case "Little did I know that such a collection of impotent rogues would gather to express their grave displeasure and sober defense of the letter of the law. Each of them united solely by the fact that, in the past, I had been instrumental in exposing his misdeeds ..." I would be grateful to know what misdeeds you imagine I have committed or that you have exposed. ] (]) 15:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
== On the Arbcom ==


== Sysop status ==
Geogre-


If you do seek to regain sysop status, as I have already said, I would be honored to be allowed to be one of your nominators. ] (]) 14:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
As someone who agrees with you totally on the issues at hand at the Arbcom (and have currently become so frustrated that I've chosen to shut down my MrWhich account), please don't allow those out for Giano's hide to take you down. I've never seen you so frustrated and angry. I'm not sure I agree or disagree with your characterization of some of those currently working to get those who disagree with them banned/desysoped as "monsters." I ''do'' know that your characterizing them as such will be thrown up as further "evidence" to desysop you, and to discredit you. Phil, and Tony, and many, ''many'' others are who they are. They have done what they have done. They know it, and will never admit it. Nothing we say will ever change that. I'm beginning to think it would be better to leave them to slap each others' backs, mischaracterize their opponenents actions, and congratulate each other on how well they're doing in "cleaning up" the project. They've gotten rid of Giano. Others have followed, and more will follow later. Arbcom will make their decision, and if they unwisely choose to desysop you, or ban Giano, then simply leave the project, and if you choose to return, start again, write great articles, and do your best again to be an agitating force for change. I know that is what I will most likely be doing. --]]05:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
:What I said is that ''I regard such'' as monsters, and it is unwise for anyone to read my comments, especially significant ones like that, without thinking about the words precisely. I could even argue out that they are monsters. However, Tony is on the workshop comparing Giano to a monster (Mr. Hyde), and there is ample evidence of his regarding ''de facto'' anyone he wishes to malign as a "problem user" who doesn't get a hearing.
:What's also important to know is that Phil Sandifer has been looking for something to fight with me about for three years or so. I was instrumental in shooting down "semi-policy" with the departed user Orthogonal. I was a leader in getting rid of his prima facia absurd version of NPA. I was at least significant in stopping his move to have "experts" get double votes on things like web comics (where he boasted of getting a Ph.D. ''in web comics''). I.e. Phil's animus toward me is much, much greater than his arguments.
:If people are ready to demote me for "incivility," then it will be well done, for it will mean that Misplaced Pages's arbitrators have abandoned reason altogether. The "evidence" Phil has should be read in total. I am confident that any rational person would see the silliness of it.
:I've been editing pretty calmly, actually, although I may be counting on other people being smarter than Phil. I know that I am, but I hope other people are, too. For example, if my "incivil" comments are such, then where was the reaction? My talk pages have not been deleted. Where are the protests? Where are the efforts to get a nicer set of words from me? Where is the upset by the "victims?" Indeed, where was Phil, so mortally wounded by my warning to him to not act out of malice, expressing this pain from such an attack? Where were the efforts at mediation? Additionally, I'm tacked on, principally by Phil Sandifer, with a great big "he was mean to me" encoded in a thousand diffs that show little. If I'm to be arbitrated on anything but the edit war, then we need to see attempts at working things out by the involved parties. I haven't received ''a single comment'' on my talk page from any of these supposedly aggrieved parties.
:Lastly, though, that brings us to the folly of the whole of the proceeding: where was the "other side" trying to work things out? Whether we're talking about the edit war or... what are the other issues supposedly involved?... where is the evidence that people tried to talk them out before using protection (David Gerard), using rollback, or starting vexatious and punitive RfAr? I assume that people on ArbCom are intelligent and dispassionate enough to see and ask these questions.
:As for Phil: he'll continue to argue out of his self-interest, I imagine, as he has for some time now, and he'll continue to look for anything he can to say against me. Meh. If ArbCom agrees with him, then I really needn't be here, because that would mean that all of those who want Misplaced Pages to reflect their ego deficiencies will have a piece of the reward. I'm not interested in MyFace.com. ] (]) 14:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)


==This week's blog post==
== ] ==
Honey, that is so beautifully written!


And some great quotes: "Ignorance is the mother of admiration"! Ha! :-D I'd never heard that one.
Hi Geogre. I note you've put the old intro back into Architecture of Aylesbury. I suggest you take a moment to read what it says. There is no supporting references for it. It is clearly either a copyvio or a piece of Original Research. I'm going to pop it back to the version I'm currently working on. I'll put a work in progress tag on it, and ask that you come talk to me about my very real concerns about the article. I've been working on it for some time, trying to salvage it. It's mostly a well written personal essay, though it does have the structure of a decent article. Excessive - and possibly not notable, however, worth saving. Please - before reverting any more - take a close look at some of the personal assertions on it - most of them I've now removed! Many regards - <span style="border: 1px #F10; background-color:cream;">''']''' *]</span> 18:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
:The problem is that saying that it's "clearly" copyvio is not sufficient for removing something that large. We have to '''find''' that it's copyvio before we eradicate that much text. Additionally, saying that it is ''clearly'' original research is, again, not sufficient for removing that much text, in my view, unless you have a challenge to it. I.e. if you have reason to believe that it is either 1) incorrect, 2) so tenuous that it's likely to be challenged, 3) contradicts what is said elsewhere, then it is fitting to demand references. Otherwise, the absence of citation does not imply either copyvio nor OR. Simply put, eliminating a vast swathe, especially in a case like this particular one, where the original author is temporarily (I hope) unavailable to answer your questions, demands, essentially, substituting one set of judgments for another.
:Putting an "in progress" stamp on is probably fine. I hope that Wetman and Giano II and others with more direct knowledge of the particularities can talk things through, but the "like an essay" and "incorrect tone" is quite dismissive of the work. Given the author(s), I have every reason to extend much more faith than that. They have histories of extremely thoroughly researched work, but they also believe, as I do, that one does not cite common knowledge, nor cite simply because one is making a thesis statement. ] (]) 18:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


What's a divot? ] | ] 21:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC).
::I too admire the work of Giano, and, like you, supported him in the ArbCom election. This Aylesbury Architecture essay, however, is a bit naughty. I want to save it and that's what I am doing - though I have got mad at it a number of times while working on it! Stuff like this: "Hampden House at the junction between the High Street and Vale Park Way is one of the town's most interesting modern buildings. It is in a style seldom seen elsewhere. Conceived as an office block for an international company, its curved facades hint at a revival of the ]: this is further enhanced by the upper floors themselves appearing as bands of brickwork and glass. The large store on the ground floor is recessed into a faux arcade of a lighter stonework than the upper floors, providing a mixture of light and shade in an almost ] effect of ] to the more solid floors above." is fascinating. It is a very authoritative piece. But who is speaking? Who has declared the building to be one of Aylesbury's most interesting? Who has found it to be a style seldom seen elsewhere? Who is reviewing the building and feels it is an almost Baroque effect of chiaroscuro? This is clearly against the principles of Wiki. It's a cheeky essay - nicely written, but far too personal! <span style="border: 1px #F10; background-color:cream;">''']''' *]</span> 19:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


'tis true. Reminded me of the much missed ]. (The beeb never did find a way to plug the gap he left and the ocean between us can only widen without it - How's your radio voice Geogre?). 'Replace your Divots' is parlance from that dreadful waste of a good walk, meaning clods of earth belted out with a driver. --] (]) 21:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
:You're being far, far too fine. I've never been to the town, but even I would say that it's "one of the town's most interesting modern buildings." You can accuse it more of using wiggle words than of being too demonstrative. Streamline Moderne is rare, and if the building is an example of that, then it sure as shootin' would be a style rarely seen elsewhere. I.e. the next sentence justifies the claim made, and the two together justify the "most interesting" appellation. I don't see the outrage at all. Again, I see this as a standard compositional technique. You set up the claim, and then you show all the evidence. You don't use a citation for the claim, because 1) it's not necessary, if the proof follows 2) you're often at a point where you have to cite common knowledge. This much I do know about architecture: International Moderne was fascinating, short-lived, and is rare today. I don't know if the building qualifies, but, if it does, it's got to be worthy of study. (The drummer for my punk band was an architect, and he was always raving about international moderne and how it was killed by fat cat businessmen falling for Bauhaus's cheapness rather than design.) ] (]) 05:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
::Indeed! Are we sharing this, with a link, or keeping it for ourselves? ] (]) 21:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
::: --] (]) 21:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
::::Sorry to correct you Joopers, but a driver is usually swung at a teed ball, so no divots there. Nitpickingly yours, ] (]) 08:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::You've clearly not seen the rare occasions I've teed off. --] (]) 21:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


== Apologies ==
==Edit warring block warning==
Hi Geogre. Thank you for your message. Please note that the dicussion has rather been on the article title (initially ]), as it was considered POV by some, hence the attempt at changing it to something more neutral (]). The content itself is highly referenced and has always been available on the ] page (which, at 170k, needs some sub-article creation). Regards. ] (]) 05:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
:The problem is forking during a dissent-filled discussion. More particularly, you seem to have been more than bold in striking out for a minority point of view. These are not merely acts that create animosity, but they virtually never serve the interests of the people making the forks. When the issue is naming and where to lodge an article, Misplaced Pages has a long tradition, even if it has weaknesses, of always trying to lodge an article at ''the most likely search term'' location. Therefore, if hypothetically there were a question of "Little Big Horn Massacre" or "Defeat of George Custer" or "Death of George Custer" or "Sioux victory against the 7th Cavalry," we'd go for the "massacre." It's the more valuative, the less neutral, but it's the likely search, ''if there is no compelling reason to prefer another title.'' Among those others that I mentioned, they all have their advantages, all correct one problem with the others or another, but, ''if there is no consensus among scholars'' and then there ''is no consensus among editors,'' we have to default to the bad but common location and seek to correct it in the text. You simply '''must''' get consensus among editors or demonstrate an ''Anglophone'' consensus among scholars to win the argument about locating the article. ] (]) 21:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


I hope it's Ok with you, but I have made this edit to your user page it was upsetting some people and causing concern that the ritual drumming out of the regiment had not been performed. It's funny isn't it, how on this case the honour was drummed out with you. ] (]) 18:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
== ] ==


==I miss you==
This article, to which you contributed, will be featured on the Main Page on January 5, 2008. ] (]) 17:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
]
:Far out! I wonder how the article ever got written, illustrated, or edited, as its author is, I'm told repeatedly, hostile and doesn't get along with people. I wonder.... Could it be...just maybe...that the author is ''not'' hard to work with? Is it possible that... that... people who communicate with the author on his talk page and try to work ''with'' him report a delightful experience? I guess we'll never know, as the people who assure me that he's horrible never seem to have written to him on his talk page. ] (]) 18:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


I miss you. :-( ] | ] 00:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC).
::Oh, sometimes we do. Happy new year, Geogre; I bet there's dozens of us who appreciate your work here more than you ever know. ] ] 18:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


:Well Geogre, I am just the messenger here. I will point out, however, that the message went to 28 different people all told, from start to end of the FAC drive. Leadership is demonstrated in giving control as well as assuming it. ] (]) 18:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC) :I agree with the sentiment. At the risk of gushing, something I doubt Geogre appreciates much, I think he's the finest writer I've encountered in almost six years at this place. Geogre, be well; some of us do miss you more than you may ever know. ] ] 00:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


:Eh what? I popped up merely to point you to ]; can you really be gone? I hope it's merely a vacation. Come back rested and refreshed. -- ] (]) 06:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I should be explicit, because I might have been making too rueful a point, there. Giano is characterized at arbitration, over and over again, as some kind of 'orrible monster who is just impossible to get along with. However, that's a reflection of the horrible, dreadful, and inappropriate people making those characterizations. None of them have been at Giano's talk page trying to ''communicate.'' They do not listen, do not compromise, do not try to work '''with''' others, and they complain that anyone who complains about ''their'' actions (not words, not motions, but actions) is some how "incivil." Civility begins and ends with discussion. Let no one complain of Giano's "civility" who has never discussed matters with Giano. In fact, Giano's FA articles are never solo endeavors. He works ''with'' people (imagine that!) and cooperates with them to produce the articles (there should be a website where people edit cooperatively...I bet it would be a big hit). ] is probably the most outstanding example of a page that Giano did that was fully cooperative. He relied heavily on the efforts of others and was gracious with them all along. It is an article that makes all of these charges of "incivility" a lie. I can immodestly say of myself that I ''am'' sometimes difficult, but I am generally willing to speak with anyone who listens and to listen to anyone who reasons. However, the FA's Giano makes are not only an embarrassment to those accusers who manage to write a -bot or come up with 10k of changes to articles reflecting some point of view, but a wholesale rebuttal to charges that Giano does not cooperate well with others. The fact that the accusers ''have no evidence of communicating with Giano'' is just another stone on the grave of the "Giano" strawman. ] (]) 21:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
:Wow! What a truly horrible mixed metaphor upon which to end. You're exactly right about everything else, though. ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 23:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, well, they can't all be winners. I had a professor who ''swore'' that he had actually gotten the following on a paper, "It was a virgin field into which the hand of man had not yet set foot." For my part, I never get anything so elaborate, although I did once get someone write that something was outlandishly expensive. It "cost a nominal egg." I have been largely forswearing the arbitration and leaving it to the hyperactive ministrations of the people with beefs, but I do hope that someone is noticing that the people with beefs never attempted in any form or fashion to settle them (just to cook them (couldn't resist)). ] (]) 20:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
:That was so awful, it felt like a steak through my heart. Why can't being right be enough for you? ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 21:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


== NowCommons: File:Hogarth-Southwark-Fair-1734.png ==
:Ref: "It was a virgin field into which the hand of man had not yet set foot." I am going to steal that and put it on my userpage. The first thought that came to my mind when reading it was "Does this mean Jesus was a ]?" ] (]) 21:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
] is now available on ] as ]. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: <nowiki>]</nowiki>. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --] (]) 17:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
<!-- ncnotifier -->


== Aelle of Sussex pronunciation == == Invitation, if you're so inclined... ==


Hi Geogre.
Geogre, you were helpful on the pronunciation of ] a while back; I wonder if you could be similarly helpful for ]? Someone has posted a question on ], and I have no idea either how it should be pronounced or how to write an IPA pronunciation. I can probably figure the latter out; any chance you can help with the former? If you have time, it would be appreciated -- the article's going on the main page on Monday, I just found out, so it would be nice to fix it by then. ] ] 00:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
:Have done. I must say, though, that ] is confusing and really a mess, so I didn't direct anyone there for a discussion of the vowel "ash." The only thing I can't tell is whether or not the terminal vowel got any voicing. It ''probably'' did. Therefore, take the a sound in "ash" and then add "lluh." Ash is a great letter, by the way, and we need it today. "Apple" and "all" use different sounds and get one lousy vowel, but in Old English we had two vowels for the two sounds. We kept the sounds and lost the vowel. (We also had two letters for the two different /th/'s. "Thin" and "then" are pronounced exactly the same except for the /th/. In OE, we had two letters for the two sounds. We kept the sounds, lost the letters.) ] (]) 04:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
::Now that's a ]! ""Thin" and "then" are pronounced exactly the same except for the /th/." Maybe in your neck of the woods. Our article says, not in Savannah. And certainly not up north. ] (]) 01:52, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
:The vowel distinctions are really, really subtle, and I should not have said "exactly." The critical matter is the aspirated and non-aspirated /th/. I.e. the difference between thorn and eth. (And, by the way, loads of dialects conflate the /e/ and what is represented by an i in those words. That i wobbles back and forth all over the US and many places in the UK and all over Aust. What's interesting from a dialectological point of view is that there is a bizarre "Valley Girl" dialect that has been running in parallel to regional dialect for about 30 years now, and it has pushed the /e/ in "then" into a full epsilon -- a position it hasn't had in oh so many years. Listen to Paris Hilton say "then," and you'll hear this lengthening of the e. (By the way again, the dialect had nothing to do with the San Fernando Valley, nor the song "Valley Girl," nor the movie "Valley Girl," and yet it was spreading across college age women, and solely women, for decades.)) Anyway, I've lived all over the eastern US and never heard a population with much of a vowel distinction in those words, but all of them carry the thorn/eth. ] (]) 13:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::It's really clear that vowels just won't stay put. I try to read some of the science describing them eg Labov's simpler summaries; they're tough. The big chain shifts are complicated, but there are other things going on. The Certainly what happens before 'r's is strange, and before 'n's, too. There are spots in the midwest where I swear Ian and Anne sound the same. The development of different sounds or patterns for men and women is fascinating. Elsewhere (and perhaps in English, further back) affected extreme pitch differences occur. I've heard it in Japanese (without understanding, just a subtitled movie). Kind of shocking.
::But the science explaining why these things occur? Separation, influences, homogenization, ok, ok, but why in one direction sna not another? Got me. Consonants seem a bit more conservative. The voiced th shows up initially only in a few "special" words - and later in not all that many. They both show up later, sometimes as alternates (breath/breathe, bath/bathe, swath/swathe, froth/well, there should be something), but my favorite bit of th-iania is the non-productive -th suffix - making a list of the words with it makes a neat party game with a dull enough party.
::This is a place, btw, where WP appears to produce reasonable content. ] (]) 02:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Thanks, Geogre; I didn't get to add this to the article -- I was too nervous to add the IPA, possibly incorrectly, just prior to it going on the main page -- but I will at some point. I really appreciate the help. ] ] 01:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


I'm here to ask if you're interested in participating in a public discussion. I've been talking with some people about deletion processes around here, and we're talking about doing a moderated discussion for the next newsletter. The idea is that, although "inclusionist" and "deletionist" are clearly divisive terms when applied to people, they do represent certain archetypal Misplaced Pages philosophies.
==Zacharey Grey==


We're thinking that it would be interesting, and perhaps bring out some good points for the community's rumination, if we have people meet in a discussion in order to articulate opposing perspectives on a number of questions. I know that you have written some meta-pages on the subject of deletion, and I wonder if you'd be interested in being a participant in such an event. I seem to have volunteered to be a mergist-minded moderator, and part of that gig involves looking for people who can eloquently express ideas about deleting and keeping articles. I thought of you.
Beautiful. Funny, I was just thinking about you when I wrote ] And did you get the express approval of Wikiproject RubberStamp to write this article without a single inline citation? And without an infobox? The article is naked without the input of Wikiproject Widgets! The gall! But I joke. I am glad you are still writing; thank you. ] ] 01:12, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
::Antardus, that is wonderful. I concur with #60 entirely. Thank you, by the way, for reverting the vandalism of '''my''' user page. It turned out that that person was up to no good. An IP editor with almost no edits and then two user page changes in a night? Seems like something fishy was going on there. At any rate, I did Grey because he was red, and because he fought Oldmixon, and because I'm researching Pope just now for a thing I'm doing on ''Essay on Man,'' and I had to go find Isaac Watts, and that led me to do a bunch of assorted grazing in the library, and ''that'' led me to grab a DNB and start looking for people I might have overlooked. (Grey is important for my Popery because of his arch-arch-arch-hyper Establishment stance and his tussle with Warburton, because Warburton wrote the standard explanation of ''Essay on Man,'' and there is reason to suspect that the poem does not mean what we have all taken it to mean, that we have been reading Warburton rather than Pope for all this time.)
::However, I did not get the permission of the projectors, and so, no doubt, my article is "Start class" or "Stub," and of "Low" importance, and I neglected to ''get a photograph of him'' for the infobox. I also did not indicate whether he had natural breasts or implants. I don't know why I keep writing these desperately incomplete articles, but at least I give the projectors something to do. ] (]) 04:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


Would you have any interest in participating in something like this? -]<sup>(])</sup> 20:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
:By chance today I've received an 1801 edition of his annotated ''Hudibras'', so you've saved me the trouble of hunting for sources on the chap. ]] 01:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
:Wait... you're gone? Oh hell. -]<sup>(])</sup> 20:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


== FAR Notice ==
::That's good stuff. You can see that he's quite partisan, but you can also see that, although he had a really big axe to grind, no one can say that his annotations are ''wrong.'' They're partisan as all get out, but so is ''Hudibras.'' I love Part One, but Part Two is not nearly as fun or funny. ''Hudibras'' is one of the forgotten masterpieces. All of the early 18th c. stuff, and all of the late 17th c. stuff and then some, needs heavy apparatus to be comprehensible to modern readers, and that really hurts. I have seen any number of people read even Swift, of all things, and say, "I can tell it's funny, but I don't get the joke." I tell people that reading these pieces is like watching ''Saturday Night Live'' or ''The Daily Show'' 100 years from now. The topical references and the ongoing political fights that make the stuff so good to contemporaries can bury it to later generations. The great stuff has fantastic performance too, though, and I think ''Hudibras'' qualifies. ] (]) 04:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. -- ]&nbsp;(]&nbsp;'''·''' ]) 17:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
== Guess the Point ==


== Restoration spectacular ==
] infestation.]] I could be making any one of a number of metaphors with this picture. ] (]) 18:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
::::::::::::::elephants are suprisingly good at hiding? ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 00:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::::::::::::::I think you might mean ], no? ] (]) 00:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::yup, that's exactly what I meant, I just couldn't bring myself to say it. I'm a petty, spiteful man. ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 00:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::::::::::::::: Personally, I think it is more of a ]. A much rarer breed. ] (]) 01:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::That's a brilliant compromise that we can all agree upon, which is all the clue I need that it's anathema to the wiki spirit. Unless Snuffy went berserk and gored Bird, but they don't show that episode anymore... ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 01:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
:Spanish moss ''can'' be wadded up and shoved down a gun barrel and fired at one's enemies. Suppose you're irritated at the other person, and you want to shoot them, but you don't have any ]. You grab hold of the moss, make a plug of it, and shove it down your gun barrel, after the powder, of course. You then touch off the pan, and, two months later, there is a lot of smoke, a "pfloomp" noise, and a pellet of flaming Spanish moss moves toward your enemy and lights the woods on fire. ] (]) 13:34, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


You have mail. ] (]) 20:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC) Please see ] as an informal FAR. ] (]) 19:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


*''Explaining the point:'' The image has nothing to do with Spain. Spanish Moss is found not in Spain, but in the southern US, as well as through Central and Southern America. The image has nothing to do with moss, either. All of this is about a ''group'' of users of Misplaced Pages and not a group of ''editors'' of Misplaced Pages. If anyone sees the image and derives a ''personal'' application, or, worst of all, an ethnic or national one, that person is inferring something I did not imply nor intend. I will make an explicit response, later, to the group of user I have in mind, but not now. ] (]) 11:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


== Memory == == Over three months ==
<ul class="listify">{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asiaphile}}</ul>
Have you remembered that name, yet? ] (]) 12:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
*It simply can't be. With the promises of good behavior, etc., there is simply no ''way'' that that particular user would show up to rewrite articles by Giano. That's just unimaginable. ''Surely'' the highly ethical, rational, dispassionate friends of that user would warn him not to do that kind of thing. (Not, though, that I have changed my view on that article. It's a poor name, and it's a goofy idea to try to have an article on the subject that focuses solely upon the "I dig Japanese girls" nonsense.) ] (]) 13:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
**You've lost me on the "Giano" business. I don't see any contributions by xem in the edit history of that article. I've no idea who "that user" is. But yes, that's why I'm asking whether you remembered that better name. My best guidance at the moment is a book, the as cited in the AFD discussion, whose subject headings and content are making me lean towards a merger of the two articles into ] or some such title. ] (]) 18:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
*Oh, just wondering about the "delete" nominators and wondering if they're the same, given the other thing that ST has done to come to my lazy attention.
*Anyway, I have a serious problem with the subject. It's a big, big topic. See, we have to distinguish the cultural from the physical, the historical from the current. A lot of the desire for "Asian women" is this b.s. desire for the submissive creature, some of it is for the porcelain doll, some of it is the love of exoticism, some of it is just the conflation of the love of small women, some of it is historically the transgressive impulse, some of it is indeed a desire for women with straight black hair, etc., In other words, the elements are such a mish mash of epochs and mythologies, so much a part of yearning for the Other, so much part of that dreadful Orientalism and Occidentalism stuff, that I don't see how on earth there can be an article that isn't just 1) blind, 2) a mash note, 3) if none of the previous, a dictionary definition. ''Of course'' there is a big historical fetishizing of the oriental woman, but it's not the ''same'' at any given time. (E.g. is it commonplace in populations where Oriental and Caucasian/African populations exist in equal numbers, or is it always a product of distance and rarity?) ] (]) 19:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


It's been over three months since you left, you can't allow this shower to drive you off for good. <small><span style="border:1px solid Black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 19:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
==Who watches the London Spy?==
Won't one of you who watches Geogre's talk page and has a copy of the DNB concealed about their person please take pity on poor ]? He may be a dunce but he deserves a better than that stub. (Geogre, I apologise for using your page as a clearing house, but you do attract a better class of editor at your ]) ]] 17:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
:I second your motion, in fact. Ned needs better. Poor Ned, he was much maligned in his own time, and he's ripe, absolutely ripe, for a doctoral dissertation. If I were advising any doctoral students, I'd aim them straight at Ned and tell them to pick up Foucault in one hand and ''London Spy'' in the other. Talk about a man clawing and scraping to create himself: Ned's him. ] (]) 19:43, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
::I don't have the time or expertise to do anything with him myself, but could probably email a copy of the ODNB article (and possibly the original DNB) to someone. ] (]) 20:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
:::I have access to print ''DNB'' 2004, obviously, since I rifle through it constantly, but I've stayed away from Ned because he deserves a fuller article than DNB gives. It's too bad, really, that there isn't a recent full bio., because he's a great study, like ] or ]. ] (]) 20:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Speaking of rifling: ]. That's the thing. This guy wrote a book that was very pious and serious, and he was rich all along, ruling class, etc. The ''life'' is stable and calm, the book a bit high minded, and it's just not as ''interesting'' as someone like Ward, who had to fight and scrape and whose work shows it. Nearly a century later, ] is a scrapper. These are the fun and endlessly ''interesting'' people, and there is so very, very much to '''say''' about them, if only we have time and resources. ] (]) 00:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


== ] FAR ==
==Cows and Horns==
Geogre, Geogre, Geogre. Surely edit was a joke. Someone as intellectual as you must know of a little cow called ]? I guess all that English Literature knowledge in your brain didn't leave any room for animal husbandry? --] 21:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. ] (]) 03:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Oh for heaven's sake. It's a Highland, of course the cow has horns. I'm trying to remember what a wide forehead is supposed to mean, phrenologically speaking... ] (]) 22:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


== ] FAR ==
:Prrrbt! Must be some kind of ''European'' thing! Elsie was cross dressing as ], I always thought, but good old American cows, like they were meant to be when John Wayne created 'em, don't have no horns! (As for me, I have a high brow, a low down, and I've taken my lumps. (I did see a book that told me how to do palm reading, and, according to ''that,'' I've been dead for a while, now.)) ] (]) 22:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
::Well, that explains a lot. ] (]) 22:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">] ]</span> 19:00, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
:Well, I grew up in Texas and I've had a few interactions with horned cows in my day. <small>(No, not those kind of interactions!)</small> --] 23:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


== Sockpuppetry Comment in '07 ==
The funny thing is that I've got cattle all around me. Well, not very ''close'' and all around, but within a mile all around, and I'm pretty sure that some of my charges ride cows when they can't get the golf cart charged up, but these are all white face and brahmins and such like 'at 'ere. I don't see horns on them, but I learned long ago that it's better if I just eat them and let someone else do the handling and killing and packaging (and cooking). ] (]) 23:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


I hate to dredge up the past, but I just wanted to make a comment on , where it was stated that is was almost assured that I was using sockpuppets. I just want to set the record straight that I wasn't -- the other user in question approached me while I was a developer and notified me --- that community is -very- hotheaded, but he wasn't a sockpuppet and I asked him repeatedly in private (which is against policy but I didn't want more trouble) to calm down as I did.
==Digwuren restriction==


No hard feelings, just want to set the record straight.
I have asked arbcom to concerning this clause, and named you as another user who raised a query about it. I hope I have not mischaracterized your position, but anyway, you are welcome to comment there if you choose. Regards, ] (]) 11:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
:No, I have big questions, too. It seems to me that the restrictions were intended to cover the proliferation of sock puppets and fast-moving block evasion, not to empower any person who complains. The difficulty of "incivil" behavior is that they're in the eye of the beholder, ''unless we look to the effects of the behavior or avowed intent.'' It seems to me that the restrictions employed "administrator" as a short hand for "uninvolved" administrator and assumed that the administrators would use tests for evaluating. Thatcher seems to aim for a zero-tolerance, but, in doing so, that is getting back to the unintended result of giving the most offended person the power to get anyone else blocked. That ''can't'' be a good idea, because it rewards sock puppets and rapidly moving block evasion. ] (]) 11:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


<font size="1" face="Verdana">] -- ]</font> 10:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
::Okay, so basically what you're saying, is that you think the initial bar should be set higher? I'm hardly likely to disagree :) ] (]) 13:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


== A delectation of a page called Fashcool ==
===Enforcement on X-Ethnicity/Nationality disruption===
Suppose we have a problem with ]. Fredonians and their natural enemies, the ]ns, are editing Misplaced Pages sometimes to sing their own praises, sometimes to tweak the noses of their enemies, sometimes to deny critical terminology, other times to insert critical terminology. When a particular user is blocked, half a dozen new names appear to reinstate that user's point and to complain about how the nasty Elbonians/Fredonians are controlling Misplaced Pages.


Dear Georgre ...
To deal with this, ArbCom might issue a restriction designed to prevent ''any'' episode from escalating. If so, they can do so only by relying upon independent, dispassionate, and thorough investigation. Without that, disruption will be ''enabled'' rather than prevented, because six Fredonians can go to say, "This Elbonian is disrupting us," and six Elbonians can come to say, "This Fredonian is being incivil to us." In other words, without investigation and independence, all that happens is that '''more disruption''' results. Complaining is just as effective as name calling, if the goal is silencing another user.
in 17:00, 12 June 2009, I put a contribution material on wikipedia called '''Fashcool''' but you, as an editor removed it, if you have any dubt that the information is incurrect, please visit the Fashcool Gallery in the folowing link.
http://www.facebook.com/fashcool#/pages/Fashcool/8241702429?ref=ts


If the deletation due that I cant write about my work as cartoonist hope you can help me in doing so .
"Incivility" is supposed to mean (by most lexical standards), that behavior that is against societal norms, something that arises from barbarity, a behavior that shows no awareness of the rules of conversation and which erodes civility. Well, that is only something we can interpret either A) by knowing exactly the rules of social behavior, B) assessing the effect of the speech or behavior and ''demonstrating'' a deterioration of social action. The only way that A) can be employed is by a survey or gaging "community standards." B) is easier, but, when we apply it in ''these'' cases (the Fredonians and Elbonians), what we see is that societies are at odds with one another, that the origin of the speech and behavior is one social group against another. It can therefore be a matter of insult or being insulted. If I can be insulted and offended on behalf of my Fredonian countrymen, then I can uphold my Fredonianism against the outsiders. If I can call the Fredonians murderous half-wits, then I can affirm my Elbonian society by putting down the awful Fredonians.


Ramzy taweel <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 08:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
In other words, any administrator applying "incivility" to nationalist or ethnic or religious communities at odds with one another is completely out of his or her tree. Looking for "who feels insulted" is, simply put, nuts.


== ] nomination of ] ==
Obviously, we apply "civility" as a standard in these instances because we are silently (and, I think, unconsciously and ill-advisedly) supposing "in accordance with building an '''overall''' social group that is beyond and between the subgroups and ethnicities." In other words, what an uninvolved administrator has to look for is not insult, but, instead, "Who is trying to pit one group against another? Who is trying to subdivide the editing population to create an us and them?"


<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>I have nominated ], an article that you created, for ]. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.{{-}}Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. <!-- Template:AFDWarning --> ] (]) 17:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Anyway, that's what I think. Any subgroup that acts as a subgroup to define, block, or control another subgroup is being uncivil. Thus, when six or seven users mobilize instantly to try to get the editing privileges of another user curtailed, I fear that a new orthodoxy and control is being offered, and that's anathema. ] (]) 20:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
:This nomination is quite incredible. I suggest you withdraw it at once. <small><span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 18:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


:The problem with the approach of looking for "Who is trying to pit one group against another? Who is trying to subdivide the editing population to create an us and them?", particularly when applied to ethnic groups, is that it is a recipe for the kind of xenophobia and scapegoating that was prevalent in certain countries in the 1930's. ] (]) 02:56, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


== It's been a long time ==
::What the hell? Trying to find out who is trying to create a subpopulation ''at Misplaced Pages'' is xenophobia? Gosh. That's not much of a stretch. This is Misplaced Pages, and the English Misplaced Pages, and it has to serve neutral points of view. It has to serve an overriding and unified editing group. Any faction is unwelcome. ] (]) 03:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
It's been a long time since you turned your back on all the insults delivered to you - don't you think it's perhaps time to come back? - no need to forgive or forget (I certainly would not), but perhaps move on and do some writing - someone has to write some decent pages around the place, and I certainly see none from your attackers - so perhaps it's time for you to be the big man. <small><span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 20:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


:Thursday next, 29 July, will be the anniversary of the last time Geogre made a contribution to Misplaced Pages. Both you and your Norse alter-ego are very much missed. I just hope that you'll find the opportunity to let your fans and friends know you're ok, and allow us the possibility that one day you'll return. Best wishes --] (]) 23:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
:::One neutral point of view, one unified editing group, one English Misplaced Pages, is that it? Perhaps you ought to discuss your approach in dealing with these ethnic groups allegedly behind pitting one subgroup against another on Jimbo's talkpage: ]. Maybe you could identify these groups for the benefit of the community. ] (]) 04:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:::PS, once you identify these groups, how would you go about identifying its members so other admins know who they are dealing with? ] (]) 04:24, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


::It was claimed by {{user|173.186.127.134}} on the ] of ] that this user had died. Hopefully that's not the case, but if it is that would perhaps explain his absence. ''']''' <small>''']'''</small> 18:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
::Ohhhh, I see. Wanting harmonious editing is "eine volk, ein Gott," eh? Well, you know, you should really be campaigning against the local ]. They say that people who won't stand in the line are not going to get served. Obviously, they're Nazis. And the police who demand that all people refrain from beating each other up are actually storm troopers? You're... umm... well, let's just say that ] needs not me to deride. ("Hitler was a vegetarian. So is X. Therefore, X is a Nazi!") ] (]) 13:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


:::No, Geogre hasn't died. I was chatting with him just now, and asked him if he had, and he definitely told me "no". ] | ] 19:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC).
:::?? You are making the assumptions and analogies here, I am merely attempting to understand where you are coming from. Your proposals to achieve "harmony" appear to be thus: Identify those "disruptive" ethnic groups that are wrecking the "harmony" of Misplaced Pages. Then if User:xxxx makes a complaint against User:yyyy over some incivility, first check if User:xxxx belongs to the designated "disruptive" ethnic group, if so, dismiss/admonish/sanction/block/ban User:xxxx without regard to the substance of the original complaint, since membership of the designated group alone is sufficient evidence of bad faith. Did I get that right? If so, how do you propose these members of the designated "disruptive" ethnic group be identified for the benefit of other admins who may have to deal with them in the future, have them wear a little badge on their talk pages? ] (]) 19:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


:::(edit conflict, ... that itself is a chuckle, on this page) He appears to be very much alive, unless a ghost is doing the typing. I for one am happy to see one of my favorite editors returning, if but for a moment, as an anon. Giano, shall we dub this brief visitor the "] of Geogre"? ] ] 19:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
::I do all that? I was thinking, instead, that I looked to see if the user is part of warring parties and then looked to see if the complaint is designed to win in a struggle, and thus prevent harmonious editing, or if it was trivial, or if it was a form of insult itself. If you go complain that I'm a Nazi for wanting to suppress parties at Misplaced Pages, your complaint is an insult. From what I've seen, many of the complaints ''are, in fact, insults.'' They are never, "X said Y, and this was an insult." They are, "X pursued his pro-fascist agenda by saying Y to the heroic and innocent angels of Z." Complaints can be insults. Complaints can be war by other means. Insults can be insults, and they can be complaints, and they can be war by other means. Therefore, I recommend making sure that administrators investigate and be sure that the people involved are ''not warring.'' If they are, then zero tolerance means putting the complainers as well as the "incivil" person "on notice."
*Mr Antradus, how dare you mock the dead? I can assure you, young man (I assume you are a man, no woman would ever be so insensitive) that being dead is not a life-style choice! In fact, we are a discriminated against majority: we do not even have the luxury of "Proud to be dead" marches causing mayhem with traffic, such as are enjoyed by other discriminated against groups. Geogre is most certainly not dead, or he would be one of our leading campaigners for equal rights and recognition. Sometimes, I wish he were dead, then I could enjoy some more stimulating company; ] and ] bitching and fighting to be heard over the luncheon table with ] and her infernal megaphone is not my idea of heaven! Get a life! Young man and stop insulting the likes of myself! ] (]) 19:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
::It's pretty simple: don't fight. That's about it. ] (]) 20:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


I too would very much like to see Geogre return to editing. ] (]) 20:08, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
:::Hmmm... This approach could be seen as a massive assumption of bad faith on the part of the admin which is open to gaming. There is a content dispute between an individual and a group of editors which is proceeding reasonably civilly. However the tide of consensus is turning against that individual, so he insults the group "you are just a bunch of xxxx POV pushers" (where xxxx = some political, ethnic, national, religious tag) and stirs the pot with a bit of disruptive edit warring too. The other party brings a complaint to an admin, however the admin believes this complaint is "warring by other means" because he believes the complainants belong to a particular group, and thus he sanctions the complainants. Thus it is a positive result for the individual who initiated the incivility, the complainants gets sanctioned, the ethnic group the complainant belongs gets further stigmatised, leading to admins further doubting the good faith of members of this particular group in future. ] (]) 20:57, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
::A little late in the day to come here saying that - aweeping and awailing! You should have thought of that before the Arbcom drove him awf - with their stupid ill-conceived and ignorant sanctions playing to a dribbling and equally ignorant gallery or their peanutting supporters. Plus the fact, you have had months - a year to do something about it! Were I on that ridiculous Arbcom, things would be very different, of that you can be assured. ] (]) 20:53, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


== ]'s FAR ==
''"Who is trying to pit one group against another? Who is trying to subdivide the editing population to create an us and them?"''


{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. ] (]) 21:55, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, I can see you've thought about these issues quite deeply Geogre. I guess I could comment further, but I'd probably run the risk of being accused of "bigotry" or something again if I did, LOL.


Anyhow, I decided to withdraw my request for clarification at arbcom. For one thing, I have an obvious COI in raising the issue. For another, I really don't want to put Thatcher on the spot, because regardless of what one may think of her decisions, I'm sure she made them in good faith and I can understand why she did what she did. If she hadn't sanctioned me as well as the others there probably would have been a new round of complaint, so by doing so she effectively stopped the dispute from continuing.


== Pity you're not here anymore ==
Apart from which, she's indicated she will consider removing my notice in future given good behaviour, so I really don't have that much left to complain about. ] (]) 04:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
This whole section reminds me of you . Didn't you go on strike once years ago - in the happy days before the '''Arbcom decided they could dispense with your services''' and drove you off. Never mind, who needs dull boring old serious English literature, when one can read a comic. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 08:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


:Just my opinion here -- I think Geogre ''is'' on strike, and that's exactly why we haven't heard from him. He just hasn't used the word. He kicked the dust off his shoes and left. That part that's desperately sad to me is that very few people seem to have noticed the departure of one of Misplaced Pages's finest-ever content contributors at all; indeed some of the worst non-contributors were likely happy to have him go. I suspect the same thing would happen on a larger, and more tragicomic scale, if content contributors did as you suggest.
:Thatcher is a good egg, generally, so I can only think that he or she was acting upon general practice rather than creating practice. However, the above argument is shocking. The Nazis invoked language of one people. I invoke language of a harmonious group of editors that do not subdivide for real world nationalist reasons. Therefore, I must be just like the Nazis. It's staggering. ] (]) 13:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:There's a story by C.M. Kornbluth called "The Marching Morons" in which a small group of intelligent people do all the work on a future Earth, while serving the billions of imbeciles bred by unnatural selection. These people go on strike, only to discover that they've but made the problems worse; the only thing to do, they learn, is to get rid of ''all'' the morons. ] ] 13:22, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


::I am normally in favour of the wikipedia model, but having just read the review process by which Geogre's work on ] was demoted from FA status, I have some sympathy with critics of wikipedia and with the impatience of people who don't like to see excellent work being denied due recognition. The rules were enforced in a situation where they clearly need not have been enforced. Nobody wanted to suggest that Geogre didn't have massive command of the sources, but a lot of people wanted to bring him down for being an arrogant so-and-so, which to be fair he is; proof enough that it's one thing to know what you're talking about on wikipedia, but you'd better not annoy people because, unfortunately for the encyclopedia itself, if you want to be a star contributor it's at least as important to be well-liked as it is to know what you're talking about. This, of course, is merely my personal opinion. My opinion of the people who voted to demote the article from FA status for reasons that had nothing to do with its intrinsic quality but everything to do with politics and personal antipathy, and of the process that allowed their opinion to count for anything and not to be disregarded for what it so obviously was, is not fit to be expressed in public.
::Sorry, what argument are you talking about? Are you talking about Thatcher's apparent decision to sanction all parties regardless of guilt? ] (]) 14:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


::In the meantime, I am annoyed because I wanted to consult Geogre on a reference I found in an essay by ], who inferred the authorship of ''A Tale of a Tub'' from a coincidence of numbers in both that book and ''Gulliver's Travels''. But if he's not here, he can't confirm if he knew about it already.] (]) 23:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
=='']''==


==File source problem with File:Slaveship.JPG==
Could you have a look at this if you get a chance (end of the Background section). Paulson advances a theory that it is anti-Pope, and I'm not sure of some his conclusions. Though I've been careful to point out they are his, a second opinion on whether it is worth including would be handy. (and what's this ] who is the great post-industrial bookbinder?) ]] 12:56, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
]
:I will. Paulson scares me. He has been known to be mean to people who disagree with him. I can't see how the painting could be anti-Pope, since it ''repeats'' Pope's characterization of the scribbler from ''Dunciad''. As for Mearne, I didn't know what to say. I have never had the money or the trainspotting impulse to notice bindings or value them, so I wanted to find a way that an outsider like myself could assert that the guy's work is good (and notice that I used the ''passive'': it ruined my whole day to do it), so "is considered" and yet I haven't the vaguest about computer-assisted book lathes spinning out embedded chips that play "Jingle Bells" when you open the book, and shifting holographic covers that change the cover every time you move, etc. I went for the pre-industrial and actually ''meant'' pre-Industrial Revolution. Please to fix. It is an ugly sentence from someone who knew not how to praise a book binder. ] (]) 13:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
::Thanks. The anti-Pope idea did surprise me, but Paulson makes a good argument for it - which I've poorly paraphrased in the article - if you accept the view of Pope as a continental dandy and sycophant (or accept the view of Hogarth viewing him as such). I see the problem with Mearne now - if you don't say that then you end up saying he is the greatest bookbinder ever (CITE NEEDED! NPOV!) or nothing at all. ]] 15:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Pope ''was'' a self-promoter, although hardly a dandy or Continental. There was strong backlash against Pope from men who should have been of his own view, later. Johnson, for example, sniffs at Pope (and Swift), for thinking too much of himself. At the same time, none of these people would have dreamed of taking the side of Pope's enemies. ''That said,'' Pope effectively lost against Theobald. Bardolatry is growing and growing from 1737 to 1800, and the indeterminate state of Shakespeare texts was getting more and more nailed down, and Pope looks a fool. It's hard, if not impossible, for anyone to think Theobald has any worth in general, but it's hard for anyone to agree with Pope's tirades against ''Shakespear Restor'd.'' I.e. I can see Hogarth disliking Pope, but I can't see him liking Pope's enemies or making Pope a scribbler. More to the point, if Pope is the distressed poet, that takes some serious imagination. A 4' tall hunchback with no female companionship who made himself wealthy by his pen just wouldn't be painted as a tall, thin, married family man starving in a garret. (It always helps to remember the basic stuff.) ] (]) 18:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
::::Oh, I obviously need to make that clearer. Paulson doesn't suggest the "distrest poet" is Pope, but that he is the ultimate unseen villain of the piece, the "Great Poet" that the bloke depicted wishes to become. Hard to see what Pope's "crime" is though. Being successful and encouraging others to do the same by the fact? Hogarth is equally guilty there. I'm more of the view that it was pro-Pope and slowly toned down during the various iterations until the poet who was perhaps Theobald in the beginning is just a stereotype by the time of issue. Still, it wouldn't be a comprehensive article if we left Paulson's views out. ]] 19:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''' per Misplaced Pages's ], ]. If the image is ] and ], '''the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)''' per ] criterion ]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 14:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
==Props for Bishonen?==
Geogre, you've always been able to translate American into English for me. What is the usage of 'props' seen on the Swedish page - as in "major props to Bishonen". Obviously its congratulations/kudos etc. is it short for something? where does it come from? --] (]) 14:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC) :The source is clearly stated as "British Library" within the image. I've added a template including that information to help the bots who can't read image text. It's a pity that ] doesn't seem to apply to images. *Sigh* --] (]) 16:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:It's extremely recent slang, and I'm only aware of its originating in Black English. In particular, it seems to be urban and from the hip-hop community. At least that's where I first heard it and how it has been transmitted. I ''believe'' it comes from "prop up," which refers to "elevate" and "hold high." I.e. something like, "We carry X up high (as if on our shoulders, in celebration)." It has lost some of its force and now means "compliments" or, as you say, "kudos" (which is also figurative, I believe). ] (]) 14:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
::Ah "we prop Bishonen on our shoulders and parade through the laneways of wikiland..........like gay pride for editors!" :-) --] (]) 14:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:::I suspect urban/youth music rather than Black English. I first saw it in print in the context of kid social networking maybe Spring '03, and heard it October of that year. No idea about the origin. And I get sympathetic smiles from kids when I use it today - it's old, at least in my corner of NY. ] (]) 03:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
::On Bob Dylan's ''Theme Time Radio Hour,'' he played an R&B song from 1947 or thereabouts that had the first recorded usage of "homie," so sometimes these terms have a lot more history than we suspect. "Props" is either a clip of some other word or is "prop up." I can't tell its history, because the sorts of serious journals that would note and weigh it are unavailable to me, and the sorts that are available (urban dictionary) are junk or (Partridge) out of date. ] (]) 11:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
:::OED Online gives
{{cquote|''slang'' (orig. in African-American usage).


==Better source request for File:Slaveship.JPG==
Due respect; approval, compliments, esteem.


Thanks for uploading ''']'''. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the ] status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the ''exact'' source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.


If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following . If you have any questions please ask them at the ] or me at my talk page. Thank you. ] (]) 23:11, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
'''1990''' ''Chicago Tribune'' 29 July 2/4, I was one of the first female rappers, but I've always gotten my props. '''1997''' ''Touch'' May 24 Why do certain sectors of the music fraternity still refuse to give him due props? '''2002''' ''Electronic Gaming Monthly'' Feb. 164/1 Props to Tiburon for making use of the C stick on the controller.}}


== Restoration literature FAR ==
:::for what that's worth. ] (]) 15:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. ] (] · ]) 09:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
::Well, it seems like OED half agrees with me and half doesn't. Propers/propriety...alright. That ''must'' be speculative. If they can't get a better first usage than that, they've got to be dealing with something that had a multi-point origin, where the word spread more quickly than its meaning. Not that I think I'm right. I'm sure I'm not. It's just that, if it's of that recent a mintage, the derivation's got to be a guess. (Certain words have usage go way up, and their initial meanings are either lost or just not at work. See, for example "proactive," which became this business community mantra. While the poor thing originally meant "relating to, caused by, or being interference between previous learning and the recall or performance of later learning *proactive inhibition of memory" (Merriam-Webster 15th), it started to mean something like "active" or, at its very best, "preventative.") (For my part, every time the Republican Party is in power in the US, I lobby for the spreading of the word "barmecidal.") ] (]) 20:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


== ] missing description details ==
== FAR notice ==


<div style="padding:5px; background-color:#E1F1DE;">'''Dear uploader:''' The media file you uploaded as ] is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.
] has been nominated for a ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. Reviewers' concerns are ]. ] (]) 14:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC).
:I second the question: have you read the book? ] (]) 17:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
::So, all people who come to read the Misplaced Pages article must have read the book first in order to understand the article and the various ] points mentioned at the ] ? You should put a notice at the top of the article then, something like: ''"All those reading this article should first go and read the book '''A Tale of a Tub''', in order to understand this article."'' No, that would be silly, right? ] (]) 23:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC).
:I asked you a question. Your FAR nomination can only have come from someone who has never read it. You call things OR that are so blindingly, staggeringly, incredibly ''in the damn book'' that you can't have read it. It isn't OR if everyone, every single one, of the readers sees the same thing. Something like, oh, Jonathan Swift saying "for the allegory I had in mind" or any of the ten thousand introductions discussing the elements. You do NOT FOOTNOTE COMMON KNOWLEDGE. You put up references to things likely to be challenged. Show a challenge to any of the facts, any at all, from any print source, any at all. Better yet, read just 50 pages of the book. It'll be good for you. It will also keep you from making a fool of yourself. ] (]) 12:29, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
::Perhaps Cirt might prefer the ? --] (]) 12:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
:Oh, for the love of Mike! I think Swift would have approved, though. A book about reading read by a machine that is incapable of reading, on behalf of people who are incapable of understanding is just perfect, in a way. Of course, for the blind, there are much better sources than that, and they're free, so it's not as though Guttenberg is serving in that regard. "I need a footnote that the second brother represents the Church of England!" Indeed, if you have never read the book, you do. If you have, you have already ''seen'' the footnote provided by Swift, of Curll or Wotton's "key." The glorious choice of being a fool among knaves. ] (]) 21:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
::Sorry Geogre, I imagine that was a shock. The full text version is also there for Cirt's (and mine) edification. I enjoyed Gulliver's Travels, much more biting and bawdy than I was expecting - I'm put of a little by the 'difficult satire' description - does it have things to say to modern man about the human condition, or is only of interest to historical literature buffs? --] (]) 21:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
::He he, your response reminds me of Zappa "Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read." --] (]) 22:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
:+10 points to you! I had the Zappa quote in mind. (I'll be by to award the points.) Yes, it has a great deal to say to modern man. The issues of indeterminacy that you see in Bk III of ''GT'' are mainly featured. It's also a more subtle satire, because it ''claims'' to explain why the CoE is the best, but ends up saying, "The CoE is not as bad as the others." That's quite different. If you're familiar with the concept of the unreliable narrator, that's who you've got throughout ''Tale.'' It's the non-linearity of it that throws readers, really. It's a difficult teaching text for that reason: every time you try it, some students (over half, last time I went into it) simply "don't get it." They want a plot. They want a story. They don't understand why there are all these digressions. (The digressions are the tale. The story is a digression from them.) If you're at home with anarchic works like ''Tristram Shandy'' (which was modeled on ''Tale'' in many ways) or ''Sartor Resartus'' (which is even more explicitly modeled on ''Tale'', although, unlike Sterne, Carlyle wouldn't admit it), or modern works like Flann O'Brien's '']'' or Italo Calvino's (disappointing, to me) ''If On a Winter's Night A Traveller,'' then you won't find the ''Tale'' difficult at all. If it's a satire of any one thing, it's a satire of being unable to read metaphors properly. That and the credulity.
:Imagine a person who reads all of the web, and only the web, and believes everything he reads, but only if it's a conspiracy theory. That's the sort of narrator you have in ''A Tale of a Tub'': he's sure that he's right, because he's ''new.'' It's that kind of thing. ] (]) 22:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
:Well I made it through the Naked Lunch while hitching around spain in my early 20s so anythings possible (horrible book)- I loved Calvino's Invisible Cities - A truly romantic architectural vision. I just remembered I liked it so much I gifted it to a friend - must buy again.... Cheers Geogre, when I'm done with the Time Traveler's Wife I'll go there next..--] (]) 22:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
::And finally a gift to you - my word of the week ]! --] (]) 00:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Te-he: "Gongoozlers in action" -- probably a typo for "Gongoozlers inaction." :-) I say this, but I love to watch rivers, and ] has a very moving song entitled "I Often Dream of Trains." I enjoyed the descriptive power of ''Invisible Cities,'' and it is a deeply Romantic notion, although I'm not sure, in the end, that it is a vision of cities. I should like to ignore my colleagues who tell me what Calvino's "really" doing, as they never seem to get it right. Anyway, ''Tale'' is an explosion. ] (]) 11:19, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
== ] ==
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.


If you have any questions please see ]. Thank you. ] (]) 14:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:Add-desc -->
I think this is a good article and if someone more knowledgable on the topic isn't available to clean it up then I'll take a stab at it. But please don't remove the maintenance tags if you aren't willing to make any effort of your own; that's not helpful. &mdash;] (]) 15:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
:Maintenance tags? I asked and ask still that people explain ''what needs to be cleaned up to meet Misplaced Pages standards.'' Without anyone saying what's wrong, how can anyone else clean it up? I removed the tag after removing a section that '''was''' in violation of Misplaced Pages policies -- a personal guru philosophy boost. You do me two disservices, here. First, you ignore the fact that I did clean up the article, and, second, you insist that tags should stay in the absence of any explanation of what they're about. A person putting a tag has no priority over anyone else, if there's no discussion on the talk page. Use your words, not your tags. ] (]) 17:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
::Also, for anyone coming by and seeing this, please note that Kymacpherson's "clean up" was creating a single wikilink. Why not just do that? Why put a tag up with indefinite purport and insist that it remain, esp. when the tag is ''supposed'' to be used for the really woeful articles created by newbies. There '''had''' been someone who inserted 2 paragraphs of personal vision and guru worship, and I knocked those out. Apparently, though, no one noticed that it had been cleaned up. (I think I'm owed an apology, frankly.) ] (]) 21:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


:I don't think that it's a smart idea to place the notice on the page of a contributor who sadly has not edited for over a year. Despite the fact that the file actually had a description, I've added some extra information to try to keep the bot happy. --] (]) 01:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
==DYK==


::Most likely not. It is probably on the same level as placing notices on the talk page of editors who just happened to revert some vandalism on the image in question but otherwise has no clue as to the origin or circumstances of said image. --] (]) 01:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
{| class="messagebox {{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|small|standard}}-talk"

::: Agreed, and please accept my apologies, as I wrote the snotty comments for the bot, before I realised you'd justifiably moved the bot notification from your page here. I admit I find these sort of bot notifications irksome, particularly as the apparent reason for the notice turned out to be inaccurate anyway. Still, a few minutes of googling found some extra information on the image, so it should keep the bot from causing you further nuisance. Thanks for your reversion of the vandalism anyway! --] (]) 02:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

==File copyright problem with File:Hutchenson-witch.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ]. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes ] very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the '''license''' and the '''source''' of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a ''']''' to the ].

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in .

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the ]. Thanks again for your cooperation.<!-- Template:Di-no license-notice --> ] (]) 22:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

== cool myth ==

Check out ]. Never even knew of it. What a deliciously wrong thing. And pushed forward by a new and young Wikipedian. Stop on by and edit. ] (]) 21:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
==]==
According to you , the name of the plot means ''"the treason '''at Maine'''"'' . Could you please cite the source for this information? Tks. ] (]) 18:15, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

==Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Red list==

''']''', which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ]] 12:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

== Two years is a long time ==

to be without your contributions. Friday next will be another year gone by and so I guess we ought to report on the last twelve months. It's felt a bit like the Dutch boy trying to plug the holes in the dyke – not yet a disaster, but seems awfully close to one.

Anyway, ] was saved, but at the cost of a vandal changing all the parenthetical references to harvard-style in a ''fait accompli'' – the upside was that we found {{User|Nikkimaria}}, who worked so hard to answer all the carping and verified many sources.
{| class="wikitable"
|- |-
|]
|]
|]
|On ], ], ''']''' was updated with {{#if:{{{4|}}}|facts|a fact}} from the article{{#if:{{{4|}}}|s|}} ''''']'''''{{#if:{{{4|}}}|{{#if:{{{5|}}}|, |, and}} ''''']'''''
|]
}}{{#if:{{{5|}}}|{{#if:{{{6|}}}|, |, and}} ''''']'''''
|}
}}{{#if:{{{6|}}}|, and ''''']'''''}}, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ].
The three image files above survived and had a few extra bits of info added to them to reduce the chances of being deleted. ] had an extra sentence added to cover the possibility that it was so named to fit with the ].
|} <!-- ], ] --> --] (]) 15:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


That's about it, as far as I'm aware. Ultimately, no measurable progress, but no obvious decay in your work, by and large. I just had a image of Dewey from the end of '']'' flash through my mind. --] (]) 00:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
== Protection of ] ==


== File:Geogre-1.png listed for deletion ==
On 17 January, following a series of edits to ], ] protected the page and added the following in an edit summary: ''"I protected the page from all editing until the case is closed or edits all agree to make all productive comments about the proposed ruling and not other editors"''. Flonight has not left any further messages as yet, so I am posting this message to all those who edited the page in this period, and asking them to consider signing ] at Flonight's talk page indicating that they will abide by this request. Hopefully this will help move the situation forward, and enable the talk page to be unprotected (with any necessary warnings added) so that any editor (including those uninvolved in this) can comment on the proposed decision. Thank you. ] (]) 05:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] (]) 00:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
:In case you missed it, I replied on Giano's talk page about the mailing lists. ] (]) 03:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
::The point that should be jabbing every arb in the ribs is that there are a half dozen solutions to the general mailing list issue, while none of the rationalizations of the status quo ring true, and then there is the problem that a ''named party'' of a case is the owner of the mailing list. It's rather like when ''that person'' announced that en.admins.irc need do absolutely nothing that ArbCom said, that it was simply at his own pleasure and JamesF's pleasure, to even listen. ] (]) 13:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


== File:Geogre-7.png listed for deletion ==
== Somerset ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:24, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


== File:Geogre-5.png listed for deletion ==
Geogre, I am looking at ], which is at ], and I noticed that the history of the name uses the form "Sumorsǣte", with a bar on the æsc. I was wondering both what the difference is, and also whether it's correct in this form -- I assume the editor of the article got it from the source they cite for it, which is Victor Watts, ''Cambridge Dictionary of English Place-Names'', but I thought you'd be a better person to ask for the first question. If you have a moment I'd be interested to know. Thanks -- ] ] 04:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
:Odd. The long mark doesn't belong there. In fact... well, that looks like a pronunciation guide, not ... That particular book would need to be consulted in its front matter to find out what their practice is. I'll go to the ''OED'' (place names are included). Another would be the American Heritage etymological dictionary. Despite its name, it's the finest etymological dictionary out there. It's in many libraries. ] (]) 13:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


== File:Geogre-6.png listed for deletion ==
==Idea==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
(Cross posted to Giano's talk page)


== File:Geogre-4.png listed for deletion ==
Does sound like something you'd be interested in? ] (]) 03:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:27, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


== File:Geogre-3.png listed for deletion ==
: --] (]) 10:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


==Non-free rationale for File:Red-Man2.png==
Joopercoopers, I went there. I can't believe how cavalierly Marksell was insulting people in his opening salvo. It's a "mess" if people don't play along. Some dinosaurs like me write horrible articles like Emsworth's. (And yet, paradoxically, he also notes that people don't come forward to defend Emsworth, but they do when the articles are mine, and he has no explanation for that except that I'm still here. It couldn't be that these are not at all like one another, could it?) As for the person who is offering to reform our awful messes in the 18th c., I don't have anything against her, but these are not messes. In particular, having something like Bishonen's footnote-loaded ] (we ''all'' have a copy of ''The Apology''; the hard part is getting ahold of the scandalous letters) put in with my parenthetical-or-none articles is a real mistake, and I chide her for that alone. It's also offensive to have even the implication that I or others don't allow people to add citations. Hell, look at how much I had to suffer while they "fixed" Restoration literature. Just get serious sources, and for statements ''likely to be challenged'' (by sources), not "likely to be challenged by people wanting to be involved at FAR." ] (]) 12:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to ''']'''. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under ], but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages is acceptable. Please go to ], and edit it to include a ].


If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on ]. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion --> If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no fair use rationale-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:55, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
:Just thought you should be involved in the discussion. For what it's worth I rather rate Awadewit. She's personable, intelligent, courteous and I think she's doing a phd in lit of roughly your vintage. If she's prepared to add the necessary cites - I'd say, bite her hand off. --] (]) 14:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::I don't want to bite her at all, but you can see what's going on now with ]. There are some good references being added (like the 1967 last-ever discussion of authorship), but there are also references that just aren't needed. Let me put it this way: the person who reads the article is probably reading the book or has read it. Therefore, that person has already met with the basic facts of the 1700 Whig/Tory split, probably already read an introduction that says something about the narrator, and so putting a footnote in to say that whigs were associated with dissenters (see an anthology of 18th c. lit) is somewhat weird: the reader should already know that. The reason I ''mentioned it'' in the article is strictly to explain the polemical grounding of the book. Swift is lodged strictly and joyously in a political fight, and he's making fun of people. I therefore need to give the reader a playbill, but these identifications are so well known that it's impossible to find anyone who ''doesn't'' say these things, and that's why I think we shouldn't have citations there.
::It makes us look worse, in my opinion. If you read something that says, "The dissenters had felt their interests thwarted by the accession of Anne," do you feel like it's entirely made up? When you read, "The dissenters were the people who did not agree with the Church of England (note to the dictionary), and many of them were Puritans (note to a general history)," don't you feel like the author doesn't know what he or she is talking about? When I see notes to common knowledge, I conclude that the author is a dolt or trying to impress me.
::Yes, we can figure out when things are "common knowledge" by testing them. We can test them a number of ways, but one of them is stability.
::So, no, I don't want to bite anyone being helpful, and some of the stuff being added now is absolutely fantastic, but when we give in to "gee, I dunno; I've never heard of Lilliput before, so I demand a footnote," we make our articles both less reliable and less readable, ''and'' we kill the ability of anyone to write.
::Most of the footnote festivals that pass these days, by the way, are to '''web sites.''' That means that 90% of the time they didn't get reliable at all. They just got notated. ] (]) 20:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::"I can't believe how cavalierly Marksell was insulting people in his opening salvo." I must have missed that. There was certainly no insult intended. ] (]) 14:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


==Orphaned non-free image File:Red-Man.png==
==ATT==
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]).
How about I sandbox the article and add cites to that only. I'm aware of the book for only 19 days, I only know the period from paintings, but am fanicated by the sources I've found so far on Swift. I need to spend some time reading up, but if you could vet the sources I find, that would be great. ]
:Althogh that might sound weak, this is an article for casual readers; is my excuse. (]) 20:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
*Again, I appreciate the effort. I'm not intending any discourtesy to you, by any means. I have a problem with the way that people are concluding that "a person could ask" is the same thing as "likely to be challenged." To me, "likely to be challenged" means "by another source," not "by a reader in a bad mood." The nomination for that article for FAR was simply one of the most extreme cases of something that has been lingering for a while. The nominator picked an article that really leaned heavily on knowledge of a field that is common ''in the field'' and not outside and then listed a number of things that were simply foolish ("Who says it's a difficult satire" and "Who says it's an allegory"). I feel like our links are partly our footnotes. I remember reading print encyclopedias, and I was constantly running across statements about events I had never heard of, so I'd go look them up. I remember getting references to works I'd never heard of, so I'd go look for them. I'm not going to remove any of the citations you're adding. I'd rather talk than cut or revert. (I wish other people would prefer to talk than FAR, too.) ] (]) 21:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::No you dint bite at all, and I need to closely look at the respectability of the diff authors before I add any more shiny dinky refs. The authorship debate was the first thing that leaped out at me, and it was foul, to be surre. Anyway, as a side note, any interest in in ]; its close to a keep, but could do with work from a skilled editor. ] (]) 21:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:::Abbey is later than my own knowledge, but there are some hilarious things ] said (he thought it was pompous, and he was fed up with Yeats's Ireland, I think). I'll take a look. ] (]) 21:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::::There was alot of pomp and back stabig in those days. The Abbey's history is full of drama, a look would be great. ] (]) 21:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:Have been reading about ]'s dismissal from the abbey all morning, and its fascinating and vicious, and I highly recomment you look it up. I'm no fan of O'Connor's work but the man had balls. And thanks for the look. ] (]) 13:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


==File source problem with File:E-Montagu.jpg==
I rather like Frank O'Connor. What I find interesting, among many other things, is just how ''twee'' Yeats and Gregory's vision was and how it was a course carried forward by the strength of name, and therefore one that was endlessly confining to other Irish writers. Basically, a cabal, if you will. O'Connor was more of a Dostoevskian writer, in my view, and aligned with American fiction to some degree, and O'Brien, of course (Brian O'Nolan, Flann O'Brien, Myles na gCopaleen), was aligned with American literature and what was happening in US circles. Either way, there was a heavy resentment of this Ireland of Myth, on the one hand, and Synge's Ireland of Cute People. (I have sympathy. As a southerner, I have seen the same strains in "southern literature." We get a great one like Faulkner or O'Connor, and suddenly all southern literature has to have sweaty plantations or "grotesques," and a bunch of southern writers are happy to oblige. The ] side of things, the southern tradition influenced by Romanticism and French symbolism, is out of the picture (except sometimes in ]). The difference is that southern literature never got a group (with imported money) announcing that it was The Cultural Center.) Any group setting itself up as the power is a tyrannical and unrepresentative group almost instantly. It gets very quickly to a monoculture and an echo chamber of voices. Uh, I seem to have wandered. ] (]) 15:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].


If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->
::Yes, Yeats was a one/two-handed cabal. If you read any critical overview of Irish poetry written between the mid sixties (it took that long for discent to be published) and the early 80s it's all hangover from the fierce and jealous presence of Yeats. And the echo of his twee vision was implemented in stone for 30 years or so in statute by ]. I suppose you know that the powers that be in IRL hoped at the time for nothing more that such naive 'celtic' mystism. And any writer that dissented was...with O'Connor in the grave. ] (]) 16:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Your talk about southern reminds me about how Cork and dublin bands are treated by papers of record. Forgive me the leap of logic, but dublin bands are given grativas in dublin's eyes, while the best of cork is 'quirky and momentarly distracting'. It's seems a universal principal is at work here. ] (]) 16:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
== ] ==


<!-- License: Public domain, transcluded from Template:PD-old -->{{imbox
I hate to bother you with this, but since its a complex issue and you may be aware of some of the details since you've warned {{user|PHG}} before, I was hoping you could take a new look. Recently I've become more involved in the talk page discussions and even reverted the article once, so I don't feel it would be appropriate for me to consider using any tools in the situation. The gist is this:
| type = license
| image = ]
| imageright =
| text = This file is in the ''']''' because its copyright has expired in the United States and those countries with a copyright term of no more than the life of the author plus '''100''' years.


}} --] (]) 20:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
PHG's behavior continues to become increasingly disruptive. He's now created a slow moving revert war with 3 other editors and is wikilawyering in great amounts on the talk page in an attempt to advocate for his preferred version. He's canvassed editors who've been in previous disputes with his opponents, editors who voted to keep one of his POV forks and invited in an editor who's already under ArbCom restrictions in the subject area in an attempt to bolster his side of the debate. I've also recently discovered that he's been using misleading edit summaries and his "reverts" have also included the addition of more than 40 new paragraphs of highly disputed information (the unsupportable pov he's been pushing for four months now) and enough quotations and summaries from supposed sources to bring the number of total article notes to 401 (). In total, he's managed to sneak in another 50k worth of absolute crap (for comparison's sake, his original preferred version was 147k and the rewrite he keeps reverting is only 80k). See ] for more details. Not to mention he's created scads of POV forks in further attempts to keep "his" OR somewhere (detailed ]). You may also want to see for a refresher on the background issues as well.

==File source problem with File:Stephenblois.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

{{imbox|
|type=license
|image=none
|text=This image is in the public domain because under ], ] is necessary for copyright protection, and a mere photograph of an out-of-copyright two-dimensional work may not be protected under American copyright law. The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin (even in countries where ] is enough to make a reproduction eligible for protection).
|below={{imbox
| type = license
| image = ]
| imageright = ]
| text = This image is in the ''']''' in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see ] for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image '''might not''' be in the public domain outside the United States. See ] and ] for more details.}}
}} --] (]) 20:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

==File source problem with File:Matilda-coin.gif==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

==File source problem with File:R-Steele.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:03, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

{{imbox|
|type=license
|image=none
|text=This image is in the public domain because under ], ] is necessary for copyright protection, and a mere photograph of an out-of-copyright two-dimensional work may not be protected under American copyright law. The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin (even in countries where ] is enough to make a reproduction eligible for protection).
|below={{imbox
| type = license
| image = ]
| imageright = ]
| text = This image is in the ''']''' in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see ] for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image '''might not''' be in the public domain outside the United States. See ] and ] for more details.}}
}} --] (]) 20:42, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:Rupert-Salzburg.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:Davanent.gif==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:CharlesII.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:J-Dryden.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
== File:Dorothea.gif listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

== ''Ichthus'': January 2012 ==

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
{| style="text-align:center; border:10px solid black; background-color:black; width:100%;"
|-
|]
|- padding:15em;padding-top:5em;"
|style="font-size: 350%; color:gold; "|<br>'''<big>I</big>CHTHUS''' <br><br>
|- padding:15em;padding-top:5em;"
|style="color:gold;"|'''January 2012'''
|}
<div style="background-color:#FFF;"><div style="font-size: 120%;">
'''''In this issue...''''' <br>
<big>'''
*]
*]
*]
*]
'''</big>
</div>
-----
<center><small>''Ichthus'' is the newsletter of Christianity on Misplaced Pages • It is published by ]<br>For submissions contact the ] • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list ]</small></center>
</div>
</div></div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0237 -->


== Douaihy ==
I'd like to see the other editors who are discussing on the talk page and trying to improve the article get a chance at it and if I weren't involved, I'd consider blocking him for this continued disruption. Could you take a gander and see what your feeling is on the issue? ] <sup>]</sup> 22:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi George, you once deleted douaihy page. How I can give you consent from our site to let the article written <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 02:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: I'm sorry but Geogre hasn't edited for over two years, so he may not notice your request. Misplaced Pages articles are only appropriate for subjects that meet our standards for notability, so I'd suggest you read the page ]. That should give you an idea of what sources need to be found to write an article that won't be deleted. Hope that helps, --] (]) 15:54, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:Diagram of a slave ship.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].


If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->
== Re: Aiding and abetting a known criminal? ==


Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 04:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
You are incorrect that there has been no finding regarding Giano's behavior; ] is less than two months old, and Giano has ''again'' done virtually everything that was mentioned there.


:Fixed. Obvious public domain image. University of Virginia had source info. ] ] 04:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Fundamentally, the success of the project requires that we maintain an atmosphere that is at least broadly tolerable, if not necessarily pleasant. Disputes are supposed to be resolved through polite discussion; Giano, however, is more likely to use rumor-mongering, provocation, insults, calumny, and character assassination. These are more effective methods, to be sure; but that doesn't make them acceptable. This is not a political arena.


::And fixed some more. All&nbsp;the&nbsp;best: '']&nbsp;]'',&nbsp;<small>22:48,&nbsp;26&nbsp;May&nbsp;2014&nbsp;(UTC).</small><br />
And it is your responsibility, as a respected administrator, to act as a moderating influence—to calm the dispute and encourage editors to act in a manner compatible with community norms—rather than throwing gasoline on the flames. The same applies to Bishonen.


==] navbox colour discussion==
So what happened here? This is not a case of routine 3RR or even wheel-warring, originally. Rather, Giano set out to add comments that were deliberately provocative to the other editors of the page and, more importantly, clearly intended to besmirch the reputation of anyone using the IRC channel. That he felt their reputations were worthy of besmirching is utterly irrelevant; this is ''not how we do things here''. And then, rather than pulling him aside and asking him to act with a bit more decorum, both of you stepped in to carry on the dispute. Again, you may have been correct in substance; but the way in which you acted was unbecoming.
Hullo, fellow WikiProject-er. We're having a discussion about the ]. Please do come along and weigh in. ''''']]]''''' 18:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


== Just to let you know ==
Or, to quote the infamous ]:<blockquote>Being right about an issue does not mean you're not being a dick! Dicks can be right — but they're still dicks; if there's something in what they say that is worth hearing, it goes unheard, because no one likes listening to dicks. It doesn't matter how right they are.</blockquote>The sad thing in all this is that Giano says a great many things that we would listen to if not for his thoroughly atrocious manner of saying them. ] 17:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


You have been mentioned at ]. X] (]) 14:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
:Yes, yes, I'm terribly evil. We all know that. Just look at all the acrimony on this page for proof.
:The question was what Bishonen did.
:Let's do be specific, though, and not general, and let's do talk about specific insults rather than "designed to provoke a group." I was asking about Bishonen, not me, and not Giano. I was asking what Bishonen ''did.'' I could ask what I ''did,'' too, but I don't much care. The way "incivil" is used at the proposed decision page, it has no meaning whatever. No one can tell what it ''is,'' and therefore there is no way for anyone to contest that he or she is ''not,'' and I'm not in any case concerned with it, as "civility" is an absurd goal. (And see how people reacted to Bishonen quoting David Gerard, the man at the center who never gets any derision, who wrote an essay... which is still here!... and in the wrong space (again!) on "fuckheadism." The way that people will get shocked at "civility" and then quote "don't be a dick," which is an insult, simply evacuates any whiff of meaning from what they're saying.)
:No, what did Bishonen do?
:Also, who was insulted? Were you insulted, as a user of that IRC channel? Who found it difficult to edit Misplaced Pages because of the changes to that page? Who found it difficult to edit Misplaced Pages because of the illicit page protection there? Who found it impossible to go on with matters because the page describing that IRC channel said what was actually true -- that there is no redress from abuse there -- and who found it difficult to go on after having an unheard of (and never checkusered) party start a frivolous arbitration and have that accepted without any charges?
:If harmonious editing is the goal, you would never, ever have voted to accept this "case." You would have '''spoken to''' the people who were so displeasing (at least once would be something). You wouldn't use vague language with no purport and make valuable administrators leave to register your unhappiness. ] (]) 21:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
::Me, insulted? I've never been on that channel—I don't even have access to it—and avoid IRC altogether.
::The point is simply this: we do not go out of our way to blacken the reputations of our colleagues, or hang their dirty laundry in prominent places to "shame" them into reform. That's simply not the proper behavior expected of participants in this project.
::As for Bishonen, she made several edits to a page already in dispute which were at best unconstructive and had the effect of further inflaming said dispute rather than calming it. Which is not to say that she didn't have a valid point; but the way in which she made it was not an appropriate one. ] 21:42, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


== Notification of automated file description generation ==
==Could you respond?==
Your upload of ] or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.


This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions ]. Thanks!<!--Template:Un-botfill-null--> ''Message delivered by ] (])'' 14:59, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Four threads up, Geogre, you suggested that "cavalierly, Marksell was insulting people." . I responded that I intended no insult. I would like the field to be clear, so to speak. What I find cavalier is that, after numerous hours spent crafting responses to you over two years (honestly, check), you'd so casually lack AGF when you see my sig.


*Another one of your uploads, ], has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks!<!--Template:Un-botfill--> ''Message delivered by ] (])'' 15:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
I don't get it. I honestly don't. Maybe you don't pay attention to sigs? Or maybe you conflate them? You've conflated mine with what you don't like about FAR? What is it? I'm not going to kiss your ass re main space contributions, because I think you're an editor that doesn't need his ass kissed. So, really: could you respond? And respond to me, man—I've already read the boilerplate about your hating bots and this and that. Can I talk to you? If not, why not? ] (]) 21:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
:Sorry. I accept your account, and I have no problem with believing that it was an accidental insult. It looked to me that my old FA's were being lumped in with Emsworth's and that there was an implication that I'm somewhat trouble. It sure looked to me at the time that I was being singled out as a dinosaur writer of woefully inadequate FA's who stands in the way of progress. I think on that page we had others offer up the real answer: we need a ''fair'' and complete examination of "likely to be challenged." If there is no consensus that emerges from that, then we ''must'' go back to allowing the FAC voters to have priority over FAR voters. Otherwise, it's like double jeopardy. (Yes, we all know that no consensus will emerge.)
:I have an idea or two for how we could debate the matter and avoid the ball of threads chaos that usually results, if you want to move ahead with it. ] (]) 22:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
::OK, thank you. The comparison to Emsworth was merely temporal: the literature and architecture reviews are a patch from '04 that regularly turn up at FAR, just as his do. Read the salvo again and you'll see no comparison re writing quality. Quite the opposite: if I thought the pages you've worked on are terrible, dinosaur writing why would I have even gone to FAC talk to argue for grandfathering? The only comment on prose was "Prose quality is never a serious issue." As for the implication of trouble, the ''reviews'' are trouble—that's a plain fact—but it's a different thing to say that ''you'' are trouble. The ''Tale of a Tub'' review turned into trouble without you typing a word; can't really blame you for that. The only criticisms I'd offer are that you sometimes fail to assume good faith of nominators and that you seem to think that there's an agenda to have things defeatured. Again, quite the opposite.
::Anyhow, lay out your idea or two by all means. You can use ], if you like. ] (]) 12:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


== Possibly unfree File:Millenium Hall.jpg ==
== Pre-emptive answer ==
] A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ] because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the ]. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at ] if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw-puf --> ] (]) 16:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


:How on earth could this possibly be unfree? The photographer uploaded it, gave it a public domain license, and has since left the project. The subject of the photograph is itself a public domain book. ] ] 17:59, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
I say that sages and projects as determinants of whether an article is properly cited is outside of Misplaced Pages's remit. Why? Well, Misplaced Pages replaced an "expert only" project and was attractive because it accepted all persons. The belief that licenses this is that all of us, collectively, are smarter than any of us, individually. Of course, there are numerous debunkings of this idea. It's not an accurate model. '''However,''' whatever problems there are with the utopian ideal of the GNU folks, the fact is that Misplaced Pages does not demand that editors establish credentials, does not accept authority based upon them, does not test them, and does not work with external status as "experts" in any form. It therefore really does not do well to have an ''internal'' establishment of a "Sage" as anything but an informal and ''fluid'' expression of trust. It cannot be given, cannot be cemented, cannot be affixed like a gold star to the forehead. (Yes, I say this as a person who ''could'' pass any external verification, but I don't want to have more say in matters because of anything like that. I demand that I get respect by my words and deeds, and not my diplomas or publications.)
::
:: It couldn't possibly be unfree, but it was one of many files nominated for deletion today by {{u|Stefan2}}. It is clear that he has mixed up the concept of a photograph of a ''3D work of art'' such as a statue, with a photograph of 3D object such as a book or a painting, where the artwork is 2D and inegible to generate a fresh copyright. This is hardly surprising considering the rate he is working - he and could not possibly be doing due diligence in checking his nominations. This isn't the first time this has happened and I'm now sorely tempted to take this issue to ] and ask for a topic ban on his nominating files for deletion. What do you think, {{u|Antandrus}}? --] (]) 20:50, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
::: This is a photograph of a 3D object (a book), not a photograph of a 2D object (a page of a book). If the 3D parts of the picture are removed, then the picture can be kept, otherwise it has to be deleted. Also, {{u|Antandrus}}, you claimed that the picture was uploaded by the photographer and that the photographer gave it a public domain licence, but I can't see any evidence for your claim. It doesn't say who the photographer is, and no licence was provided. The copyright tag which the uploader provided states that the author died more than 100 years ago and that the file therefore is in the public domain in countries with a copyright term of 100 years or less, and that the file also is in the public domain in the United States for an unstated reason. However, the copyright tag is not a ''licence'' since it doesn't contain any permission from a copyright holder but only provides information about limitations in copyright law. --] (]) 21:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
:::: The work of art is 2D, just as it is when we take a photograph of a portrait. Are you going to go around nominating all the images we have of portraits because they are 3D objects? You'll be suggesting next that the thickness of the paint on the painting makes it 3D. --] (]) 00:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
::::: The work of art is 2D, but this is not just a photograph of a 2D work of art. It is a photograph of a 3D object (a book on a table) which happens to contain a 2D artwork. Since the picture includes 3D stuff, it's non-free. --] (]) 10:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::: The solid realisation of any 2D art is bound to exist as part of a 3D object, but that in itself does not invalidate ''Bridgeman v Corel'' as we all know. In this case, the table and the paper are such an insignificant part of the final image that '']'' is bound to apply. If you don't understand that, then please consult: <samp>{{cite journal |last1=Webbink |first1=Mark |last2=Johnny |first2=Omar |last3=Miller |first3=Marc |title=Copyright in Open Source Software - Understanding the Boundaries |doi = 10.5033/ifosslr.v2i1.30 |journal = International Free and Open Source Software Law Review |volume=2 |year=2010}}</samp> We are trying on this project to support and expand free content; we don't need your uninformed rhetoric whose only effect is to needlessly impede or block the progress of open knowledge. --] (]) 18:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)


== Precious ==
Projects are another matter, slightly. They're voluntary and self-selected, and I generally applaud them as the inevitable result of our chaos. However, so long as they are self-selected and voluntary, they don't have ''power.'' There is a huge, huge difference between acting as a nexus for writing and editing and acting as ''an authority.'' A project is great as the former. It's onanism as the latter (at best). Nothing wrong with projects existing -- they would in any case -- but there is nothing right with them being in "control" of anything. ] (]) 15:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
{{user precious|header=sonnets of knowledge with passion|thanks=for quality articles on literature and religion such as ], ] ("Wrote it. Fought over it. Rewrote it from scratch") and ], for the insight of your essay ] "anyone who thinks that they can win a struggle against the voices of oppression on Misplaced Pages is misdirecting his or her energies grossly, if not criminally", for your user page as a piece of inspiring literature including critical commentary, for "The idea is not to be competing, but rather looking for elements of trust." - missed - repeating from ] ("I'm sick of words: they are so lightly spoken"):}} --] (]) 12:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)


{{User QAIbox
:Have you seen ] (and its talk page)? ] (]) 19:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
| title = Awesome
| image = Cscr-featured.svg
| image_upright = 0.35
| bold = ]
}}
--] (]) 06:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
::Carcharoth: I just dropped by because I was going to link the same thing. Geogre, you might have something worthwhile to say there. ] (]) 22:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
<blockquote>unused, low-res, no obvious use</blockquote>
::Well, you've already commented. Maybe too many fires to tend at once. I do appreciate that you took the time to work up a robust comment at WT:FAR. ] (]) 22:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
:I'm all for people expressing their wills, but a strike only means anything if there is some definite group that is trying to assert control. When I've gone on strike before, I have been demonstrating that people who try to create "power" or to assert "authority" have nothing. It makes sense to me, in cases like that, to point those people to the ultimate fact that nobody works here, that we all volunteer, and there is no power, no authority, no rights, no status, that there is only an agreement between volunteers, and this agreement can be stopped at any time. I really feel that they need to jump in the boat with the other academic standard folks and try to develop a voice that will assert something ''normative,'' rather than merely object to the death by a thousand cuts that is being right at a project where that does not impart any power. ] (]) 11:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
::], which has supplanted Stable versions, could go a long way to assuaging concerns if the flagging is properly rationalized. Surely the greatest disincentive to anyone adding in goodwill is the knowledge that it can all be undone. But if flagging is just another thing for partisans to war over, it will do as much harm as good. ] (]) 11:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify -->
== Notification of FAR on ] ==


<span style="color:red;font-weight:bold;">This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual file for details.</span> Thanks, ] (]) 01:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Since no one currently participating in the review (restarted ''very'' shortly after the last was closed as "keep"), I thought I would let you know that the review process has ]. I'm sure you'd probably noticed, but if none of them were willing to notify you per protocol, I thought I would do it. Regards, -- ] ]] 01:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:
:What the heck? How many bites of the apple are there? That's nonsense. I understand, now, why Giano, last time this happened, said that he would far, far, far rather have the FA status go than have the aura of ''tribunal'' and the exposure to people who didn't have justifications for their complaints. Show me any work, and I can pick it apart, from ''Hamlet'' to ]. Putting up an article at random or in series to see what people can pull at is no virtue and no improvement. ] (]) 12:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
: It's worth noting that a higher resolution version of the file is available at https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Arbuthnot so presumably Britannica finds the image useful. In any case, if the image is required here in future, it can always be sourced from the Britannica article as any image of a portrait by an 18th century artist is clearly in the public domain under US law. --] (]) 02:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
:*], Geogre. I didn't agree with the nomination, especially given that it was just closed as "keep" not long past. No one else there seemed willing to notify you (assuming you already knew, I guess), so I did the notification. -- ] ]] 13:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:: Couldn't we simply use it in the person's article? --] (]) 07:08, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
::Blech. Geogre, I think Bellwether was just trying to be nice. The notifications can seem annoyingly...bot-like? But presumably it would be more annoying to have a review go through with you not noticing it. Bellwether was just making the notification step official, even if it's obvious you've noticed. ] (]) 20:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
:::
::: {{re|Gerda Arendt}} We could, but I don't think it would improve the article; it would be merely decorative. It was actually in use as the lead image from 2006 to 2008 when it was changed for the present colour image by . As that has remained in place for eleven years, I think that there's a consensus that the present image is superior to this one which is being considered for deletion. In other words, there's no information that I can see in this image that the one in the article doesn't already convey in a more pleasing fashion. --] (]) 13:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
:::: I didn't think of using it instead of the lead image, but in addition, showing him at a different angle, and age as it seems. --] (]) 13:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
::::: It was the idea of adding it that I meant would be "merely decorative". Nevertheless, it might work if you think it brings something extra to the article. The original caption for that image was "John Arbuthnot by Sir Godfrey Kneller shows him at the height of his literary output." So you could use that perhaps further down the article. If you do add the image, then decline the prod as "now in use". Cheers --] (]) 14:05, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
:::::: done --] (]) 10:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)


== note ==
Geogre, I'm partly to blame for this. The last time it was FAR'd, Marskell thought it was too hot for him to handle and asked me to take care it. I dropped the ball and Marskell ended up having to sort it out. The new FAR nom was started off shortly after the last one closed, and I told Marskell I really would keep an eye on it the second time around. I've decided to let this one go forward. The goal here is not to torment you, but to get an otherwise FA-quality article up to standard where the references are concerned. ] (]) 21:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


:Up to the level of a single episode of a popular TV show (wonder how many ''books'' were cited, there) or a single sports game. I can see the dilemma. ] (]) 11:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC) interesting page. thanks for posting your essays here!! --] (]) 23:13, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The article ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
== Pure poetry ==
<blockquote>Without sources for nine years. I don't see real indication of notability here. BEFORE completed in Google Books and News (I have no access to British newspapers). Deprod if you can cite significant coverage, but be sure to actually cite it, or it'll go to AfD.</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
The truest words you have ever written on Misplaced Pages . congratulations. ] (]) 21:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
:Thank you. No one seems to even notice that this is supposed to be a flat hierarchy, and I, the last Cassandra, am on my way to being a "problem user" for even being able to remember 2003. Things have changed: the clueful must rise up and whip the lumpen mob. The "trusted" must show the untrusted their power. The -bots can take care of "content": the ''real'' Wikipedians talk to each other all day and all night, and in the crepuscular gloom they ''act'' by boldly, cleverly, powerfully, and masterfully blocking half a dozen users for a length of time determined by a random spin of a wheel. Dusk gone, they go back to talking to each other about how well they blocked, how unfair it is that anyone disagrees, and how meaningless all these ''words'' are in articles. ] (]) 11:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
::The pain may be keenest for those of us who have been here the longest, and remember when it was still possible to write an article on an important topic from scratch. Doesn't it seem to you that for about 90% of users here there is "nothing left to do" but invent assessment drives, chat rooms, tagging contests, review boards, vandal-shooting hunts, new forms of rack and pillory? I think it is harder to do meaningful work on Misplaced Pages than it used to be, but easier than ever to join the project and collect a bunch of shiny userspace widgets. A lot of our problem is a ''demographic'' shift. I'm not sure it's fixable. For more than a year now I feel I've been playing defense, and much of my work is scraping corrosion off of things I wrote in 2004 and 2005. Anyway, probably two cents more than you asked for. Cheers, ] ] 17:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
:::Yes, I do agree with you, but I still find new pages to write and so do some others, I think it helps though if one is interested in writing an encyclopedia. ] (]) 17:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
:Antardus is one of the few authors left, one of the few to have been at the old VfD, one of the few to remember the call for editors, one of the few to remember that driving someone off Misplaced Pages was the greatest crime you could do (not a triumph to celebrate on IRC). Indeed, I recall when we dealt with vandals just fine without trying to figure out their IP's, and where we just ''deleted'' "BLP" issues without super secret emergency councils of the high order of defensior fidelii. I remember when we used to try to get attention on articles and had no "projects." I remember when the issue of "civility" was introduced. What happened then was that a ''person'' complained about ''another person,'' and then that other person, when there had been many complaints, would be warned. There was no looking about for things a user had said and announcing that, despite the other people being fine with it, the words contain some mysterious essence of "incivility." I remember when the fun of writing articles overcome the annoyance of the youth of mind and body of the other editors. None of this is true any more. ] (]) 22:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
::I know who Antandrus is! My above comment read all wrong! It was not Antandrus I was suggesting was not interested in writng an encyclopedia (appologies if it sems that way), perhaps we need to start a geriatric Wikipedian club! ] (]) 22:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 22:54, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
:::LOL, I'm probably older than either of you. One never knows though!
:::Are you both familiar with the gorgeous story by Franz Kafka, '']'' (''Ein Hungerkünstler''). I feel that way sometimes. We who write starve ourselves in our pitiful cages, while the excitement of baiting live tigers happens elsewhere in the circus. Perhaps my interpretation of the story is perverse, but it ''does'' feel that way. At any rate we have an abundance of energy on the project; most of the energetic newbies are in their early 20s, or younger; and most of the encyclopedia articles are written.
:::I have more than 50 more articles to write on 16th century Italian composers alone, and I haven't even started on Germany yet. But I'm just one of those in the cages off to the side, making irritating sounds in the straw. The circus-goers notice me only during their "article improvement drives" and tagging contests. Nothing I've written merits anything above a bot-assessed "start" though ... Sigh.
:::I admire those who have stuck it out this long. It's that top Google hit that keeps me here. Cheers, ] ] 23:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


:Hi Diamond -- Geogre has been gone for a while. I removed the prod, as this is a significant organization. Needs some references to bring it to 2020 standards, as in 2005 we usually did not include footnotes, only a general links/sources/references section at the end. (Any watchers on this page still?) ] ] 23:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
I can describe my own process:
:: I know of a couple. {{smiley|wink}} --] (]) 00:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
#Write, because we had horrible gaps,
:: ... count me in --] (]) 10:12, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
#Suggest policies, because the suggestions were there, and because doing other things might lead to bad stuff,
#Try to get rid of the abuses in articles,
#Try to correct the bad, self-serving policies,
#Decide that idiots always outnumber bright people and that they can be convinced only when they are dispassionate,
#Give up on VfD, concentrate only on writing articles (because we have gaps), and addressing new policy ideas and developments,
#Decide that the idiots are easily impassioned, that they have now achieved critical mass, and therefore give up on any new policy suggestions except where the audience seems to be sane,
#Decide that that doesn't work, focus solely on writing, because the chin-drooling idiots are rampant all other places,
#''Then'' I discovered that the reason the idiots seemed to be all listening to inaudible arguments was that they had been hanging out at an IRC ice cream parlor, where only the goofiest speak and a competition for most sensational goes on,
#Make one last effort at pointing the lamp at the door out of the asylum,
#Go back, as now, to only writing, being uninvolved unless something interfered with this sole delight,
#Find that this only means that the goofy and yelping organize into a human wave and voice corporate outrage at the inequalities of achievement by forming Drives (waves) and Projects (human pyramids, with some ] on top,
#Now, today, deciding that all of them are parasites on Rambot, their authorial ideal, and that writers are not needed, that gaps are not known, and that even getting top Google spot is useless, because "in popular culture and Anime" will soon be there and someone will be along momently to tell you that you don't have lots of ''footnotes'' the way that the article on a ''Green Day song does.''
To say that I'm considering alternatives is an understatement. I and my 300 articles aren't doing much good as they wait for some random insult or injury. I did very good work for the form, but I also understand the form -- it's a form that is largely impossible to find -- and I find that the form is neither understood nor desired by the "writing" side, and writing is neither understood nor desired by the IRC hobbyists. Why, then, give the unwanted to the unknowing, when they will soon, out of revenge or native spite or bumbling ineptitude, mar it so that the unseen and unheard Reader will be unserved. ] (]) 14:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


== Featured article review for Restoration Spectacular ==
*I'd just like to say, I'm in love with your talkpage, Geogre. Where else on Misplaced Pages can one find smart people actually talking about the historical goodness of this damn addiction I've fallen into over the past 18 months or so? The writing of articles is a pleasure that seems lost on some, but there are those of us about for whom that joy is still paramount. (Oh, and I also love your talkpage because somehow Kafka was dragged into the conversation, and what smart person doesn't adore Kafka? Or at least claim to, while having never read a word he wrote?) Regards, -- ] ]] 14:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
**And ] with Kafka! :-)
**I'm sorry I didn't answer, above. I was distracted by the ongoing exsanguination of an RfAr. I know you were only the messenger, and my biting was aimed at the process more than the individuals.
**I talk about "the form," and I think it's important. Antardus and Giano both know the form I'm talking about. It's the ''encyclopedia article.'' I know that those two are near me in chronological age, or at least, like me, people who grew up without the Internet and got used to print encyclopedias. I try to be very guarded about actual personal details, but I will say this: I almost had my MA thesis failed. I wrote 325 pp. One member on my committee said that I had written a dissertation, and I had been assigned a thesis. She said that she would accept it as a dissertation, in fact, that it wasn't missing any qualities of one, but that's not what I was supposed to write. Her point was that there is a thing known as "the MA thesis." I hadn't hit it, and I now would do the same as her.
**The "encyclopedia article" has an overview, a thesis or point of view to organize the material, a principle of exclusion, a presentation of material (with references for further reading for the excluded material, if needed), and a list of readings for those who want to know where this information came from. That's not just the old ''Britannica'' 1911 model, it's the encyclopedia model.
**We have a two-fold split in approach, these days. We have one group that thinks that an article is a fact or a couple of facts. We have another group that thinks that it is an undergraduate research paper, where every statement not opinion must have a citation and every statement that is opinion has to be cut. So, between all of these "Route 9 is a road" and the "The earth is a large planet (note) classified as M class (note) that orbits a star called the sun (note)," the idea of a thesis to organize the information and the ''shaping'' of an article to present the reader with a clear path through all the information that could be out there is lost.
**I guess ''sic transit gloria mundi'' and all that. ] (]) 15:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


I have nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. -- ] (]) 00:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
::::Our posts crossed paths. Thanks for the above reply. I've simply given in to the "citations are king" crowd, and have littered all articles that I write with them. I'm excited about migrating my articles to (and writing new articles for) CZ, as the citations-crowd doesn't seem to be nearly so prominent there.


== Featured Article Review for ''The Country Wife'' ==
::::As for Dr. Seuss, I've always felt Geisel was a philosopher in picture book author's clothing. -- ] ]] 15:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


I have nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. -- ] (]) 20:04, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
*I'd also like to cordially invite you to ]. I'm sure you've investigated, and perhaps you're not interested in the "real names" side of it, but I've recently opened an account, contributed my first article, and plan on moving much more of my work to that project. The only reason I keep this account open is for my students, who still retain the passion for creating new articles they care about, but are not old enough to qualify for Citizendium as yet. CZ needs good writers, and both you and Giano, as well as Antandrus, qualify as such. -- ] ]] 15:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ].


The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
== Always a pleasure ==


Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Thanks again for lending a neuron or two, it's still very much a work in (slow) progress at ]. Another and perhaps not overly original idea at ] - suggestions for de-bullshitting always welcome. Just in case you've got nothing better to do. ] (]) 13:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> ] (] &#124; ]) 08:03, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 02:36, 11 March 2022

This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Geogre has not edited Misplaced Pages since 29 July 2009. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Essays

It's new! It's exciting! It's an idea whose time came months ago: The Tags and Boxes Player's Guide Continuation: The Demotion Idea. If RFA is "broken," let's not make it FUBAR: The RFA Derby It's newer! It's not exciting! Essay on Wiki Cults of Personality My attempt at impersonating Marshal MacLuhan: IRC considered Blocklogz, A Wikiwebi Comix: My first attempt at hip artwerkx. Oh, more IRC bashing from an IRC hater, etc. You know -- just whining from a luzer.: People are still getting blocked by "unanimous" IRC consent. So You Wanna Be An Edit Warrior? An essay on how to tell if you may already have the qualifications to be an edit warrior and not even know it!

New: User:Kosebamse/IRC explains pretty well why Misplaced Pages lost three of its most serious content contributors to salve the egos of some few people and save the playtime of those same few people. The "IRC RfAr": An explanation of "What happened" during the IRC arbitration case, and why it cost Misplaced Pages far, far more than it gave. The long winded analysis of "civility," with a short and succinct page to follow

New Messages

Talk archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31


Massages

For the children

For the many readers, there is a new blog entry. (If this makes no sense to you, then ignore it.) Geogre (talk) 10:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

For the adult-ering

I would like input from the people who have seen my ideas for how to form a council to advise on the future. I've written some up, and I've sent them to a few people via e-mail. Should I post them here? Geogre (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm interested too, Geogre -- please post here (or shoot me an e-mail). We seem to be coming unglued rather badly, at least in the matter of governance, and I fear the process is accelerating. Antandrus (talk) 19:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Initially, I was concerned that my name is too "big." I don't mean that I am, but rather that there are people who will oppose anything simply if my name is near it. I had preferred the ideas to come out anonymously or from several directions, because I think they're good (well, I would) and should answer our needs without introducing new griefs. I'll post 'em here by tomorrow, I suppose, and, wiki-style, leave them for anyone to adapt as they see fit. Geogre (talk) 21:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed, at least in the past three years or so, that popularity on Misplaced Pages negatively correlates with content contribution, and sometimes even with integrity. But don't quote me: I'm just a nasty old fool. And people skilled with words are not always popular, for we are after all writing an encyclopedia, where words are important, and envy is more implacable than hatred (La Rochefoucauld was right about everything). But I'll shut up now. Antandrus (talk) 21:30, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, see below for the big kahuna idea. I really, really don't care who gets credit for it. Let Kelly Martin take credit for it, if she wants, so long as they do get a policy council and get it in something like what I've described. You know, I was reflecting, the other day, when I was explaining why I don't need Misplaced Pages and it doesn't need me anymore, that it's not the same thing as it was when I heard a call on National Public Radio for over-educated, under-employed people to add stuff. I remember hearing that, when I was working as a librarian in a closed library. I thought it was genius that they were taking advantage of all the ABD's and grad students in the world, but those people are now the ones Misplaced Pages doesn't want. -Bot operators with less personal skill than their creation are "mediators," and "cool" is a long comment. Theses are all original research. Footnotes dominate here, where they don't even exist in academia, and people expect a citation to "the Earth is the third planet from the sun." O tempore, O mores. (But John Gay said envy's a sharper spur than pay for wits; it's a cudgel for those without wit.) Geogre (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

How to get and structure an advisory council

What you will need for this project: One Misplaced Pages, an estimate of a representative sample of active editors, and several stewards. You will also need an Initiator. That's YOU, and hopefully you are plural, not singular.

1. Outline a set of criteria that would make a person qualified -- experience with all elements of Misplaced Pages, breadth of edits, calm, intelligence. Think about the criteria very, very carefully and word them even more carefully. This is the one place to be excruciatingly careful, to get a great deal of input, and to be sure that the end goal is always in mind. That goal is wise policy, nothing else.

Why: Criteria keep people from wandering, and most people will be more honest, if they're given qualities to assess than if they're asked who they think is best. It's one of those paradoxes of evaluation that's pretty well known in business and education. This is why, for example, most employee and educational assessments are structured.

2. Ask editors to recommend someone other than themselves according to those criteria, rating the person on a 1-10 on each. The recommendations go to a group of coordinators or the stewards. They are not posted openly, and any person advocating or discussing voting or canvassing for members to the council will be in violation of WP:CANVAS, including on IRC and e-mail. We will have to rely upon honor, but Misplaced Pages was founded on such principles.

Why: Obvious, really. The idea is not to be competing, but rather looking for elements of trust. This cuts down on some of the, "Oh, well, that person is evil" stuff. Obviously, it leaves big weaknesses, but step 3 can help forefend. Additionally, prior and future attempts stall because of politics and personalities and self-love and self-importance. Provided that alternate accounts are not involved, this should avoid that to some degree, and since these are simply sent in rather than posted publicly, it will help. We don't want cadres and factions and points of view trying to fight. We want wise policy and we want trust. Have people assess for someone, not against.

3. Get a list of the top 60 finishers and then make them candidates for consideration listed on a namespace page by the stewards. There will be positively no statements by the candidates, and no oppose votes. Instead, there will be a two week assessment period, during which editors will, again using the criteria, give 1-10 scores on the various criteria for the sixty persons listed.

3a. Selection will not be a balance of oppose and support or anything so compromised. Instead, the stewards will have determined a representative sample of the editing population and divided that by ten. No candidate will be successful without an aggregate score above that mark (this functioning like quorum).

3b. If a person sees a very serious reason for disqualification, he or she will inform the stewards and coordinators. Disqualification criteria are that the person will be likely to act in a private, national, or special interest rather than a wide, international, or community interest. Disqualification will have nothing to do with "conflict" or "drama" or even "policy violations" of the candidate, as it is not up to the stewards or coordinators to tell the project who it trusts. However, if a person has a vested interest or a conflict of interest or has evidence of a private desire that trumps the general, then that would be a reason for disqualification.

3c. The coordinators and stewards simply tabulate the scores. All parties are prohibited from revealing or discussing results on any medium until the final 60 are posted.

Why: This council will not have "power" to harm or help people, so the idea that a person on it will get to be important is silly. When matters are "tied" in the minds of the stewards and coordinators, the presumption should be for safety/disqualification, but the criteria must be solely oriented toward communal/private interest and wisdom/folly. A wise thought from an unpleasant person is worth a dozen banal platitudes. Secrecy is vital, because any hints about how things will going, especially on non-portable, non-transparent media like IRC and e-mail, will result in "votes" and hate fests.


4. The result of the assessment will be a council of TWENTY people. Of the twenty, five will serve at a time for one month periods. Membership will rotate every month.

Why: This may be the most vital part of the plan. By having the groups rotate, it prevents personalities from dominating, so no one person can bully or dominate the rest. Additionally, it keeps one person or five people from becoming "important" or thinking they have power of any sort. All of the anxiety about the council being a "government" or being "power" or being a "revolution" should be put to bed instantly by the knowledge that it will be a continually shifting set of persons.


5. Method: The council should appoint or seek representatives to speak for separate viewpoints on a given issue. These "champions" or representatives will present arguments for their position, arguments against alternative positions, along with careful rebuttals of claims against their position. They will not involve themselves in direct, interlined conversation with champions/representatives of other points of view on council pages. The council will review all cases, plus any volunteer cases ("amicus briefs"), and submit questions to champions. They will then fashion their own policy recommendation(s).

Why: Again, we've seen death by argument too many times to count, and we especially see the routine "forest for the trees" sort of argument that Misplaced Pages is famous for. No one gets anywhere when discussing policy because every single person needs to offer his opinion, even if it's almost identical to the twenty opinions just above. All of the "me too" and the "yeah but" stuff gets so thick that no one can support anyone or any thing. If the council wants to actually review and fashion policy recommendations (only recommendations), then it needs to basically research policy alternatives. They can find the passionate true believers of the sides and let them get all the best ideas from their side together and speak with one voice, and then they can also listen to anyone who walks by who happens to have thought about things. Additionally, many times our best thinking is not found among the advocates, because people have gone away from an issue in disgust. Open the issue of infoboxes, and you'll see hundreds of editors who hate them but gave up arguing. The point is that the "champion" method and the "amicus" system allows clear presentation and consideration for the council.

6. When the council concludes its deliberations, it makes a policy recommendation to Misplaced Pages that Misplaced Pages must approve. It is not automatically policy, but it is also not for arguing about. It is an up or down vote, with a presumption of approval. This means that any proposal that garners quorum and an approval rate of 67% or more will be adopted.

Why: If this is a thing where the council makes a big RFC, the result will be "no consensus" to everything. Instead, the council should get a bit of a break, so that a council recommendation simply needs approval (say a 2/3rds majority, with quorum in place). If it goes to Village Pump where every person gets a brand new opinion, then we'll have every person trying to speak for the novelty of speaking, and then we'll get reiteration, and then....

What to do with these?

Use 'em. Claim 'em as your idea, if you want. I don't care. I just think it's a good idea, and I think it's a damn sight better than ArbCom picking their favorite warriors or votes or some other rot. Tell me, honestly, if I haven't avoided the problems.

The point is, there are ways of doing these things, people, if we just stop thinking in terms of power and appointing ourselves demigods. Geogre (talk) 21:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that Geogre - I've pasted it to , on my way out.......--Joopercoopers (talk) 17:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I hope it does some good. I don't care about the credit, but it seems to me that one of the reasons Misplaced Pages has been doomed is that the project is a good deal more socially adventurous than the people at it. While it does all kinds of interesting things to notions of authority and control, they keep looking for authority and control. It's as if they're here, but they don't believe in it.
If we managed to get 100,000 articles and to move up to the top 20 in Alexa with just people and no freaking out about power, then I'm going to bet we can negotiate among ourselves to find the possible and impossible solutions for policy, too, so long as no one gets to be in charge. (There are two ways to win. One is a dictator. The other is a monastery. I've never heard of a monastery accidentally wiping out the population of a country before.) Geogre (talk) 19:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah. Of course all the people here exist in the real world within structures of power and authority - more acutely for the kids of course, so it's hardly a surprise that they bring shackles of the mind with them to this place. Look forward to your paper G - buzz me when it's published will you? --Joopercoopers (talk) 19:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I guess I gave too much of a preview, there, but, of course, that's what it's all about. The historical moment. No one is to be blamed for being in a historical moment, but when the reason they never look above and beyond it is neediness and personal psychology, it can get really distasteful. I would love to have real surveys of Misplaced Pages administrators to make my case, but no one can get such surveys. Anyway, I'm writing, forever writing, and the thing is a monster. It's taking forever to get down, and then it will take a while to trim and dress up, and then I'll have to find the right outlet for it. I'll let you know, though. Geogre (talk) 00:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't these paradigm shifts usually have some kind of Charismatic Leader, some agent of change? Or at least, some voices in the wind, from the same direction? Cometh the hour, cometh the man. Unfortunately we're still waiting for the man. up to Lexington......hmmm hmmm. Your fundamental material for the historical moment though, is still pretty much the same homo sapien of 200,000 years ago. "Fred.F.Stone likes hunting, screwing, acceptance and problem solving for profit, will gladly bash neighbour in pursuance of these, but recently finds more profit in cooperation." Whatever the future holds, it would be surprising if it wasn't affected by some abstracts of those fundamentals. In short, to overcome neediness and personal psychology, aren't crowds usually invited to put them aside in favour of he 'lofty purpose'? WP might have the lofty purpose, but somehow it rewards the needy and sick - hardly Darwinian, but perhaps the societal aspects of this place do have a use after all. Joopercoopers (talk) 00:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
As I told a friend, recently, I have reception aesthetics dentures, but they're fitted on Marxist gums. The great man theory's problem is that, after he chases all your women around, he inevitably turns insipid or nasty. The odd thing is that the Great Man is, interestingly, not at home in a real Darwinian model, and yet it seems to fit so well with our concepts of the "primitive" that we forget that every time, in history, that we see a great man arise, he is promising to lead us boldly to the future, to clear away the brush of the past and make the trains run on time (by changing the time tables to match their departure and arrivals).
I'll have to go with e-mail on the rewards of neediness. I think Misplaced Pages is curiously designed for that. There is a particularity about this project that attracts and promotes particular sets of psychological profiles that are very ill suited to analysis. In essence, I think Misplaced Pages is a second life, and people who are looking for a chance to reconstruct and who are seeking recompense for the wounds and grievances of the first life are going to devote their energies toward the reconstruction and mirroring of the social orders that "went wrong" in reality. Unlike Second Life, Misplaced Pages is an actual do-over for a good many people, and therefore one has varying degrees of attraction based on varying degrees of "wrong" suffered. Geogre (talk) 10:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not so sure about the 'great man' not being at home in the Darwinian model. Certainly it worked for Genghis Khan - what percentage of Asia now carries his genes? 1 in 12? . It certainly didn't do JFK's chances of finding a date any harm either :-) An interesting question is, if Obama delivers on the promise invested in him, will that be a competitive advantage for his children? I'm not so sure about the inevitable corruption of 'great leaders' either (where's Luther King, Gandhi or Mandela in that model - apart from 2/3rds of them having the sense of timing to die at the 'right' moment?). My Grandparents are still firmly of the opinion, that without Churchill to demonstrate the bulldog spirit, to remind us of our national traits and to buck us up with brilliant rhetoric, we'd be lost by now. It's speculative of course, maybe we could have done better than the bad-tempered depressive alcoholic with a boy's-own-adventure sense of military strategy (the nation certainly thought so in peacetime), but leadership is not to be dismissed so glibly I think - that generation is still marked by the tangible excitement of having experienced a nation truly pulling together. Maybe what's really missing at WP is an external threat - but now I'm sounding like Rumsfeld - lawsuits anyone? In any event, it's not cohesion we need, but values embedded in the system that serve our purpose better - an encyclopaedia is a strange place to find systemic anti-intellectualism.
Really though, aren't we all fundamentally motivated by selfishness? Even if I devote my life to charity, I feel better, I'm rewarded in some way. I try to remember that about people's motives, it makes me generally less disappointed in people :-) The long term trouble with Marxism, in my v. humble and uniformed view, is it appeals to idealism. Idealism can sublimate these selfish desires in the short term, because the idea of being part of 'something new and consequential', works as a reward in itself, not to mention the reward of love/respect/acceptance from being part of the 'group'. But in the long term, we revert to more petty and prosaic behaviours. That doesn't deny though that lifting our heads once in a while and running after someone or some group with vision is an entirely useless pursuit. But, as you say Geogre, your essentially un-clubbable, so you'll probably see that differently to your ovine peers --Joopercoopers (talk) 13:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Sauce for a gander

There's a surprisingly interesting and cordial conversation going on here about reliable academic sources, which you might be interested in bringing your laser scalpel to. --Joopercoopers (talk) 18:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I've tried, but the problem is that, although they're all on the right track, they're falling victim to Misplaced Pages argument. One can find exceptions to everything. There are always going to be peer reviewed bits of horse hockey, and there are going to be eminent people who lose their minds. The general guideline is sound, but once we start trying to use general guidelines as if they were predictive laws without employing individual consideration, it's hopeless. The problem is that we are never going to shed ourselves of someone trying to say, "Oh, but there are books supporting my crank view, and they're from academic presses." To see where things get really hot, look at the nationalism wars. The fringe science stuff is tame in comparison. In those cases, you have the most prestigious presses of two nations offering up officially sanctioned accounts that say opposing things, and then, here at Misplaced Pages, we get bloody battles, with both trying to throw fecal matter at the other's press and universities and nation. The Russian/Polish "arguments" are crimes in progress, for example, and they are entirely insoluble without saying, "Well, we're Anglo-Americans, and so we're going to use our nationalist points of view." Shy of that, there's practically nothing to say to distinguish or quiet them. Geogre (talk) 00:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Motion re alternate account

There is a motion at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Motions concerning your alternate account; you are invited to comment if you wish. --bainer (talk) 13:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Fielding

Regardless of what happens, I would like to have your input on Fielding related stuff. There are a few pages that you were directly involved in, and some others that your opinion would be important. I plan on finishing the later plays coming up this fall and try to produce the bulk of his major works (including some poems and the rest). The one priority coming up will be The Covent-Garden Journal‎. When I have a chance, I will be adding some more information on the literary criticism and other notable aspects in order to prepare it for GA level. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Could you please weigh in on the above discussion? I proposed adding some more about specific criticism and the such. AD cut it down and left some in. However, you may have some differing opinions from us on what would be effective or not. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Geogre_and_Risker

A request for arbitration has been filed. You may wish to make a statement. Durova 02:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Someone (I'm not sure who) once said "Don't let the bastards get you down" a motto I have always kept, so I recommend it. Unlike you, I only do poetry that I was compelled to learn in school, but I think many would do well to remember this "IF you can keep your head when all about you - Are losing theirs and blaming it on you, - If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you - But make allowance for their doubting too" and so on, I forget the rest, but I think the meaning is clear, and then my own favourite line "Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch" which is something you do very well! You see the other day, someone kindly fixed up this thing for me, which makes all the admins names on my watchlist appear blue, and do you know? - They are so in the majority, it has led me to the conclusion that not being an Admin is almost an affectation these days - rather like saying "look at me, I'm special" Funny how things turn out isn't it? Giano (talk) 21:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration motion: Geogre

I have just added Motion 3 calling for your de-sysopping. It is in your best interests to respond on the arbitration pages urgently to this and the other interests raised. I am sending you a copy of this message by email.  Roger Davies 08:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that once you have taken something from them (in this case - the tools) then they can threaten to take something away from you. Everyone who knows you, is 100% certain, beyond any possible doubt, that deceiving or building false concencus had never even crossed your too philosophical mind. In that respect, you are probably the mosy naively honest person on Misplaced Pages. The reasons you created Utgard were completely understandable and justified; they are also none of Durova and co's business. However, an ignorance of those facts has proven a source of long sought jubilation and glee to certain editors - and those whose most philosophical thoughts probably concern only their digestion and bowels. This is the crux of the problem, those who have their minds on higher things, seldom give sufficient thought to matters more base in appearance. Hence, you are in this predicament. It's not as though you use the tools - so if I were you, I would tell them where to stuff their bloody tools, but of course you are not me - which is why they are still whooping with such obscene joy as they seek to take from you and you remain silent. At least, this way, you have a dignity that others in this sorry case appear to lack. Giano (talk) 09:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
  • As silent types go, you are proving pretty affective. However, I and some others are having some problems here. Why has this very commonly known alternative account, known in the highest circles, suddenly become a problem, that needs such public and drastic attention? There seems to be a huge movement wanting you de-sysopped; you certainly seem to have attracted some once powerful people (a whole unprecedented platoon of ex-arbs, undermining the present ArbCom, anxious to see you disposed of) I am just wondering why they and so many others from a certain quarter of Misplaced Pages are demanding your downfall - As disciples of Machiavelli they are provincial and clumsy, but they are singing in unison almost like a heavenly choir - or at least an orchestrated body. Any ideas, you would like to share with us? Giano (talk) 21:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
  • All I need to know is- did you use the "secondary" account to add to discussions/voting anyplace that your Geogre account was used. If not, then wheres the harm? If so... well that's a whole'nuther can o' worms. Good luck, because I've always appreciated your abilities/intellect. Best Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 22:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Ego sum tristis

I have really enjoyed reading your work here, especially that which you've done on the older literature articles. I discovered the troubles you're having when I checked in on a case in which user:Abd had listed my username in his evidence. As you've now not edited since the case began, I'm afraid we may have lost you, and that makes me very sad, if true. While I hope it's not true, I just wanted to post a note here to let you know that your contributions here are greatly appreciated, by more people than you'll probably every know. As the thread topic says, Ego sum tristis. Unitanode 05:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to hear ...

Of your troubles. You have been kind to me in the past and very fair, and I wish you the best. Peter Damian (talk) 21:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Motion 4

Hello,

I've moved your latest statement to the new motion I've posted to propose that User:Utgard Loki be unblocked and available for your use as an alternate account, provided it is clearly identified as such. This is partly to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to read your statement given that the motions they were attached to will close shortly and it would have been archived along with them. — Coren  21:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Motion Passed

Hey Geogre, unfortunately the Arbitration Committee has passed a motion to desysop your account. You are free to re-apply through the usual channels. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 00:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Please note that another motion is also close to passing. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

G'day Geogre

seems a bit trite to say 'hope you're well' - but I do, so there you go..... Anywhoo... I thought I'd come by here to let you know that I've put a note on Utgard's userpage mentioning the connection to this account - I felt that the template was a bit rude, so replaced it. The only place therefore that a 'geogre sock' template is in use is over at my userpage, where it's a sort of poor man's satire / comment on the whole situation - I'm thinking of being Spartacus on tuesdays, thursdays and saturdays, and Geogre on mondays, wednesdays and fridays. Sundays I'll pick a new and exciting 'master' account, and wear that label with pride, don't tell anyone, but I've always wanted to be SandyGeorgia ;-)

Doesn't really need saying, but you should obviously feel free to revert, edit, or whatever at Utgard's page - certainly if you feel my oar is getting in the way. Take care, and insert a genuine 'I hope you can rise above all this, because your contributions to the project, in various 'spaces', really are among the absolute finest' type statement here :-) Privatemusings (talk) 02:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I, too, wish to convey my sympathy to you—and my contempt to the rash, harsh punishment you've suffered, of course, without being afforded a chance to defend yourself. Orwellian process, from start to finish. El_C 09:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
The AC is far too incompetent to do Orwellian. This was more like a Drumhead court-martial.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 21:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
They're as full of promise and ultimate disappointment as New Labour, we're clearly into the Brown phase. --Joopercoopers (talk) 22:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I think everyone is mistaken about Orwell. Normally, people responding in such a manner to such a situation would say Kafkaesque. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:17, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

An offer

There is an offer for you at Misplaced Pages:RFAR#Statement_from_Durova. Contact me if you wish to pursue it. Durova 14:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you just knit him a nice sweater instead...or maybe a scarf?--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 21:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Or a noose. --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Only if he accepts her nomination for RfA.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 22:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
(EC) Now, now, Joopers, I'm sure Durova didn't mean her essay to sound at all conditional or baiting. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 22:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Really? Because it sounded awfully to me like Durova has offered to cut her toenails if Geogre cuts his throat - now that's reciprocity folk! --Joopercoopers (talk) 22:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Well she should cut hers first, since they keep tearing holes in her favorite moccasins.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 22:22, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Given the level of almost paranoid distrust displayed by some individuals on this page, I can well understand why you might like to avoid the politics of this place. And, yes, I'm fairly sure that you and some others might count me as one of the "enemy" as well. I did and do think that it might be a good idea for you to be subject to a confirmation vote, primarily for two reasons (1) the fact that the two names could be seen by those with no prior knowledge of the dual identity as being two individuals taking part in one discussion, and (2) far more importantly, as a form of, well, warning, to any admin in the future who might take recourse to multiple accounts, and, like NYB said, probably by accident have eventually wound up using them for a purpose for which they were never initially intended, but which could be seen as being to some level problematic. Having said all that, I would also be honored to second (or third or whatever) your nomination for reconfirmation should that situation develop. John Carter (talk) 22:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Guys, Durova has to be allowed to disagree without being personally attacked. It was this vituperative atmosphere we've created around ourselves that caused Geogre to want another account in the first place. It would be great if we could learn from this that differences of opinion and criticism don't have to escalate into wikihounding and disrespect. We may be about to lose a really great contributor because of it. SlimVirgin 23:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
It would seem the offer is being viewed with the distain it deserves, as an attempt to wash blood from stained sheets. I wonder if Risker whould have been given the same 'opportunity' if Durova had managed to bring her down as collateral damage. This is high politics of the kind Durova has been so careful to distance herself from since !!; so the slate can be forgiven and wiped clean. I think all that effort is ruined here. Ouch, opps. The self interest and politics here are so naked and obvious here, I have to agree with Geogre in that 'ye all bore me'. Ceoil (talk) 15:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Stallo

Given that the image was used on this very page, it seemed appropriate that we have an article about the things. So I've started off Stallo for you. Uncle G (talk) 01:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Motion Passed

Hello Geogre, just noting for the record that a new motion has passed relating to you at WP:AC/N On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, MBisanz 01:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

An impotent rogue speaks...

Per your comment at the arbcom case "Little did I know that such a collection of impotent rogues would gather to express their grave displeasure and sober defense of the letter of the law. Each of them united solely by the fact that, in the past, I had been instrumental in exposing his misdeeds ..." I would be grateful to know what misdeeds you imagine I have committed or that you have exposed. DuncanHill (talk) 15:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Sysop status

If you do seek to regain sysop status, as I have already said, I would be honored to be allowed to be one of your nominators. John Carter (talk) 14:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

This week's blog post

Honey, that is so beautifully written!

And some great quotes: "Ignorance is the mother of admiration"! Ha! :-D I'd never heard that one.

What's a divot? Bishonen | talk 21:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC).

'tis true. Reminded me of the much missed Alistair Cooke. (The beeb never did find a way to plug the gap he left and the ocean between us can only widen without it - How's your radio voice Geogre?). 'Replace your Divots' is parlance from that dreadful waste of a good walk, meaning clods of earth belted out with a driver. --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed! Are we sharing this, with a link, or keeping it for ourselves? Giano (talk) 21:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Heel America Part One --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to correct you Joopers, but a driver is usually swung at a teed ball, so no divots there. Nitpickingly yours, Kosebamse (talk) 08:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
You've clearly not seen the rare occasions I've teed off. --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Apologies

I hope it's Ok with you, but I have made this edit to your user page it was upsetting some people and causing concern that the ritual drumming out of the regiment had not been performed. It's funny isn't it, how on this case the honour was drummed out with you. Giano (talk) 18:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I miss you

You are much missed.

I miss you. :-( Bishonen | talk 00:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC).

I agree with the sentiment. At the risk of gushing, something I doubt Geogre appreciates much, I think he's the finest writer I've encountered in almost six years at this place. Geogre, be well; some of us do miss you more than you may ever know. Antandrus (talk) 00:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Eh what? I popped up merely to point you to this sensible proposal; can you really be gone? I hope it's merely a vacation. Come back rested and refreshed. -- Hoary (talk) 06:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Hogarth-Southwark-Fair-1734.png

File:Hogarth-Southwark-Fair-1734.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Hogarth-Southwark-Fair-1734.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: ]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Invitation, if you're so inclined...

Hi Geogre.

I'm here to ask if you're interested in participating in a public discussion. I've been talking with some people about deletion processes around here, and we're talking about doing a moderated discussion for the next newsletter. The idea is that, although "inclusionist" and "deletionist" are clearly divisive terms when applied to people, they do represent certain archetypal Misplaced Pages philosophies.

We're thinking that it would be interesting, and perhaps bring out some good points for the community's rumination, if we have people meet in a discussion in order to articulate opposing perspectives on a number of questions. I know that you have written some meta-pages on the subject of deletion, and I wonder if you'd be interested in being a participant in such an event. I seem to have volunteered to be a mergist-minded moderator, and part of that gig involves looking for people who can eloquently express ideas about deleting and keeping articles. I thought of you.

Would you have any interest in participating in something like this? -GTBacchus 20:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Wait... you're gone? Oh hell. -GTBacchus 20:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

FAR Notice

I have nominated Oroonoko for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Restoration spectacular

Please see Talk:Restoration spectacular#4 years on as an informal FAR. Simply south (talk) 19:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


Over three months

It's been over three months since you left, you can't allow this shower to drive you off for good.  Giano  19:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Colley Cibber FAR

I have nominated Colley Cibber for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Mm40 (talk) 03:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Jonathan Wild FAR

I have nominated Jonathan Wild for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Parrot of Doom 19:00, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry Comment in '07

I hate to dredge up the past, but I just wanted to make a comment on , where it was stated that is was almost assured that I was using sockpuppets. I just want to set the record straight that I wasn't -- the other user in question approached me while I was a developer and notified me --- that community is -very- hotheaded, but he wasn't a sockpuppet and I asked him repeatedly in private (which is against policy but I didn't want more trouble) to calm down as I did.

No hard feelings, just want to set the record straight.

Antman -- chat 10:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

A delectation of a page called Fashcool

Dear Georgre ... in 17:00, 12 June 2009, I put a contribution material on wikipedia called Fashcool but you, as an editor removed it, if you have any dubt that the information is incurrect, please visit the Fashcool Gallery in the folowing link. http://www.facebook.com/fashcool#/pages/Fashcool/8241702429?ref=ts

If the deletation due that I cant write about my work as cartoonist hope you can help me in doing so .

Ramzy taweel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramzytaweel (talkcontribs) 08:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Afflatus

I have nominated Afflatus, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Afflatus. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Claritas (talk) 17:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

This nomination is quite incredible. I suggest you withdraw it at once.  Giacomo  18:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


It's been a long time

It's been a long time since you turned your back on all the insults delivered to you - don't you think it's perhaps time to come back? - no need to forgive or forget (I certainly would not), but perhaps move on and do some writing - someone has to write some decent pages around the place, and I certainly see none from your attackers - so perhaps it's time for you to be the big man.  Giacomo  20:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thursday next, 29 July, will be the anniversary of the last time Geogre made a contribution to Misplaced Pages. Both you and your Norse alter-ego are very much missed. I just hope that you'll find the opportunity to let your fans and friends know you're ok, and allow us the possibility that one day you'll return. Best wishes --RexxS (talk) 23:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
It was claimed by 173.186.127.134 (talk · contribs) on the talk page of Ormulum that this user had died. Hopefully that's not the case, but if it is that would perhaps explain his absence. Bob talk 18:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
No, Geogre hasn't died. I was chatting with him just now, and asked him if he had, and he definitely told me "no". Bishonen | talk 19:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC).
(edit conflict, ... that itself is a chuckle, on this page) He appears to be very much alive, unless a ghost is doing the typing. I for one am happy to see one of my favorite editors returning, if but for a moment, as an anon. Giano, shall we dub this brief visitor the "Ka of Geogre"? Antandrus (talk) 19:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Mr Antradus, how dare you mock the dead? I can assure you, young man (I assume you are a man, no woman would ever be so insensitive) that being dead is not a life-style choice! In fact, we are a discriminated against majority: we do not even have the luxury of "Proud to be dead" marches causing mayhem with traffic, such as are enjoyed by other discriminated against groups. Geogre is most certainly not dead, or he would be one of our leading campaigners for equal rights and recognition. Sometimes, I wish he were dead, then I could enjoy some more stimulating company; dearest Noel and warbling Ivor bitching and fighting to be heard over the luncheon table with dear poor Edie and her infernal megaphone is not my idea of heaven! Get a life! Young man and stop insulting the likes of myself! Lady Catherine de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 19:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I too would very much like to see Geogre return to editing. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:08, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

A little late in the day to come here saying that - aweeping and awailing! You should have thought of that before the Arbcom drove him awf - with their stupid ill-conceived and ignorant sanctions playing to a dribbling and equally ignorant gallery or their peanutting supporters. Plus the fact, you have had months - a year to do something about it! Were I on that ridiculous Arbcom, things would be very different, of that you can be assured. Lady Catherine de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 20:53, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Ormulum's FAR

I have nominated Ormulum for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. GamerPro64 (talk) 21:55, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


Pity you're not here anymore

This whole section reminds me of you . Didn't you go on strike once years ago - in the happy days before the Arbcom decided they could dispense with your services and drove you off. Never mind, who needs dull boring old serious English literature, when one can read a comic.  Giacomo  08:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Just my opinion here -- I think Geogre is on strike, and that's exactly why we haven't heard from him. He just hasn't used the word. He kicked the dust off his shoes and left. That part that's desperately sad to me is that very few people seem to have noticed the departure of one of Misplaced Pages's finest-ever content contributors at all; indeed some of the worst non-contributors were likely happy to have him go. I suspect the same thing would happen on a larger, and more tragicomic scale, if content contributors did as you suggest.
There's a story by C.M. Kornbluth called "The Marching Morons" in which a small group of intelligent people do all the work on a future Earth, while serving the billions of imbeciles bred by unnatural selection. These people go on strike, only to discover that they've but made the problems worse; the only thing to do, they learn, is to get rid of all the morons. Antandrus (talk) 13:22, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I am normally in favour of the wikipedia model, but having just read the review process by which Geogre's work on A Tale of a Tub was demoted from FA status, I have some sympathy with critics of wikipedia and with the impatience of people who don't like to see excellent work being denied due recognition. The rules were enforced in a situation where they clearly need not have been enforced. Nobody wanted to suggest that Geogre didn't have massive command of the sources, but a lot of people wanted to bring him down for being an arrogant so-and-so, which to be fair he is; proof enough that it's one thing to know what you're talking about on wikipedia, but you'd better not annoy people because, unfortunately for the encyclopedia itself, if you want to be a star contributor it's at least as important to be well-liked as it is to know what you're talking about. This, of course, is merely my personal opinion. My opinion of the people who voted to demote the article from FA status for reasons that had nothing to do with its intrinsic quality but everything to do with politics and personal antipathy, and of the process that allowed their opinion to count for anything and not to be disregarded for what it so obviously was, is not fit to be expressed in public.
In the meantime, I am annoyed because I wanted to consult Geogre on a reference I found in an essay by Richard Porson, who inferred the authorship of A Tale of a Tub from a coincidence of numbers in both that book and Gulliver's Travels. But if he's not here, he can't confirm if he knew about it already.Lexo (talk) 23:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Slaveship.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Slaveship.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Misplaced Pages's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

The source is clearly stated as "British Library" within the image. I've added a template including that information to help the bots who can't read image text. It's a pity that WP:BEFORE doesn't seem to apply to images. *Sigh* --RexxS (talk) 16:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Slaveship.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Slaveship.JPG. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:11, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Restoration literature FAR

I have nominated Restoration literature for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Maddog.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Maddog.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think that it's a smart idea to place the notice on the page of a contributor who sadly has not edited for over a year. Despite the fact that the file actually had a description, I've added some extra information to try to keep the bot happy. --RexxS (talk) 01:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Most likely not. It is probably on the same level as placing notices on the talk page of editors who just happened to revert some vandalism on the image in question but otherwise has no clue as to the origin or circumstances of said image. --Saddhiyama (talk) 01:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Agreed, and please accept my apologies, as I wrote the snotty comments for the bot, before I realised you'd justifiably moved the bot notification from your page here. I admit I find these sort of bot notifications irksome, particularly as the apparent reason for the notice turned out to be inaccurate anyway. Still, a few minutes of googling found some extra information on the image, so it should keep the bot from causing you further nuisance. Thanks for your reversion of the vandalism anyway! --RexxS (talk) 02:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Hutchenson-witch.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Hutchenson-witch.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

cool myth

Check out Myrrha. Never even knew of it. What a deliciously wrong thing. And pushed forward by a new and young Wikipedian. Stop on by and edit. TCO (talk) 21:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Main Plot

According to you , the name of the plot means "the treason at Maine" . Could you please cite the source for this information? Tks. Yone Fernandes (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Red list

Category:Red list, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. œ 12:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Two years is a long time

to be without your contributions. Friday next will be another year gone by and so I guess we ought to report on the last twelve months. It's felt a bit like the Dutch boy trying to plug the holes in the dyke – not yet a disaster, but seems awfully close to one.

Anyway, Ormulum was saved, but at the cost of a vandal changing all the parenthetical references to harvard-style in a fait accompli – the upside was that we found Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), who worked so hard to answer all the carping and verified many sources.

Slaveship
Mad dog in a coffee house
Hutchenson-witch

The three image files above survived and had a few extra bits of info added to them to reduce the chances of being deleted. Main Plot had an extra sentence added to cover the possibility that it was so named to fit with the Bye Plot.

That's about it, as far as I'm aware. Ultimately, no measurable progress, but no obvious decay in your work, by and large. I just had a image of Dewey from the end of Silent Running flash through my mind. --RexxS (talk) 00:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-1.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-1.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 00:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-7.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-7.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:24, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-5.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-5.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-6.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-6.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-4.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-4.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:27, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-3.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-3.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Red-Man2.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Red-Man2.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 19:55, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Red-Man.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Red-Man.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Kelly 19:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:E-Montagu.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:E-Montagu.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 20:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Public licenseThis file is in the public domain because its copyright has expired in the United States and those countries with a copyright term of no more than the life of the author plus 100 years.

--RexxS (talk) 20:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Stephenblois.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Stephenblois.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 20:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

This image is in the public domain because under United States copyright law, originality of expression is necessary for copyright protection, and a mere photograph of an out-of-copyright two-dimensional work may not be protected under American copyright law. The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin (even in countries where mere labor is enough to make a reproduction eligible for protection).
This image is in the public domain in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see the template documentation for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image might not be in the public domain outside the United States. See Misplaced Pages:Public domain and Misplaced Pages:Copyrights for more details.

--RexxS (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Matilda-coin.gif

Thank you for uploading File:Matilda-coin.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 20:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:R-Steele.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:R-Steele.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 20:03, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

This image is in the public domain because under United States copyright law, originality of expression is necessary for copyright protection, and a mere photograph of an out-of-copyright two-dimensional work may not be protected under American copyright law. The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin (even in countries where mere labor is enough to make a reproduction eligible for protection).
This image is in the public domain in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see the template documentation for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image might not be in the public domain outside the United States. See Misplaced Pages:Public domain and Misplaced Pages:Copyrights for more details.

--RexxS (talk) 20:42, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Rupert-Salzburg.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Rupert-Salzburg.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 21:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Davanent.gif

Thank you for uploading File:Davanent.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 21:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:CharlesII.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:CharlesII.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 21:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:J-Dryden.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:J-Dryden.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 21:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Dorothea.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dorothea.gif, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 21:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Ichthus: January 2012


ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...


Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Misplaced Pages • It is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here

Douaihy

Hi George, you once deleted douaihy page. How I can give you consent from our site to let the article written — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.141.62.41 (talk) 02:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry but Geogre hasn't edited for over two years, so he may not notice your request. Misplaced Pages articles are only appropriate for subjects that meet our standards for notability, so I'd suggest you read the page Misplaced Pages:Notability. That should give you an idea of what sources need to be found to write an article that won't be deleted. Hope that helps, --RexxS (talk) 15:54, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Diagram of a slave ship.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Diagram of a slave ship.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 04:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Obvious public domain image. University of Virginia had source info. Antandrus (talk) 04:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
And fixed some more. All the best: Rich Farmbrough22:48, 26 May 2014 (UTC).

WP:Anglican navbox colour discussion

Hullo, fellow WikiProject-er. We're having a discussion about the colours of Anglicanism navboxes. Please do come along and weigh in. DBD 18:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know

You have been mentioned at Misplaced Pages:Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Claxton-tower.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:59, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Millenium Hall.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Millenium Hall.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 16:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

How on earth could this possibly be unfree? The photographer uploaded it, gave it a public domain license, and has since left the project. The subject of the photograph is itself a public domain book. Antandrus (talk) 17:59, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
It couldn't possibly be unfree, but it was one of many files nominated for deletion today by Stefan2. It is clear that he has mixed up the concept of a photograph of a 3D work of art such as a statue, with a photograph of 3D object such as a book or a painting, where the artwork is 2D and inegible to generate a fresh copyright. This is hardly surprising considering the rate he is working - he nominated this file in the same minute as his previous nomination and could not possibly be doing due diligence in checking his nominations. This isn't the first time this has happened and I'm now sorely tempted to take this issue to WP:AN and ask for a topic ban on his nominating files for deletion. What do you think, Antandrus? --RexxS (talk) 20:50, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
This is a photograph of a 3D object (a book), not a photograph of a 2D object (a page of a book). If the 3D parts of the picture are removed, then the picture can be kept, otherwise it has to be deleted. Also, Antandrus, you claimed that the picture was uploaded by the photographer and that the photographer gave it a public domain licence, but I can't see any evidence for your claim. It doesn't say who the photographer is, and no licence was provided. The copyright tag which the uploader provided states that the author died more than 100 years ago and that the file therefore is in the public domain in countries with a copyright term of 100 years or less, and that the file also is in the public domain in the United States for an unstated reason. However, the copyright tag is not a licence since it doesn't contain any permission from a copyright holder but only provides information about limitations in copyright law. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
The work of art is 2D, just as it is when we take a photograph of a portrait. Are you going to go around nominating all the images we have of portraits because they are 3D objects? You'll be suggesting next that the thickness of the paint on the painting makes it 3D. --RexxS (talk) 00:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
The work of art is 2D, but this is not just a photograph of a 2D work of art. It is a photograph of a 3D object (a book on a table) which happens to contain a 2D artwork. Since the picture includes 3D stuff, it's non-free. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
The solid realisation of any 2D art is bound to exist as part of a 3D object, but that in itself does not invalidate Bridgeman v Corel as we all know. In this case, the table and the paper are such an insignificant part of the final image that de minimis non curat lex is bound to apply. If you don't understand that, then please consult: Webbink, Mark; Johnny, Omar; Miller, Marc (2010). "Copyright in Open Source Software - Understanding the Boundaries". International Free and Open Source Software Law Review. 2. doi:10.5033/ifosslr.v2i1.30. We are trying on this project to support and expand free content; we don't need your uninformed rhetoric whose only effect is to needlessly impede or block the progress of open knowledge. --RexxS (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Precious

sonnets of knowledge with passion

Thank you for quality articles on literature and religion such as Restoration literature, Oroonoko ("Wrote it. Fought over it. Rewrote it from scratch") and Parody, for the insight of your essay User:Geogre/Editwar "anyone who thinks that they can win a struggle against the voices of oppression on Misplaced Pages is misdirecting his or her energies grossly, if not criminally", for your user page as a piece of inspiring literature including critical commentary, for "The idea is not to be competing, but rather looking for elements of trust." - missed - repeating from 12 July 2007 ("I'm sick of words: they are so lightly spoken"): you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Awesome
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:John Arbuthnot.gif

Notice

The file File:John Arbuthnot.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

It's worth noting that a higher resolution version of the file is available at https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Arbuthnot so presumably Britannica finds the image useful. In any case, if the image is required here in future, it can always be sourced from the Britannica article as any image of a portrait by an 18th century artist is clearly in the public domain under US law. --RexxS (talk) 02:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Couldn't we simply use it in the person's article? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:08, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: We could, but I don't think it would improve the article; it would be merely decorative. It was actually in use as the lead image from 2006 to 2008 when it was changed for the present colour image by this edit. As that has remained in place for eleven years, I think that there's a consensus that the present image is superior to this one which is being considered for deletion. In other words, there's no information that I can see in this image that the one in the article doesn't already convey in a more pleasing fashion. --RexxS (talk) 13:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
I didn't think of using it instead of the lead image, but in addition, showing him at a different angle, and age as it seems. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
It was the idea of adding it that I meant would be "merely decorative". Nevertheless, it might work if you think it brings something extra to the article. The original caption for that image was "John Arbuthnot by Sir Godfrey Kneller shows him at the height of his literary output." So you could use that perhaps further down the article. If you do add the image, then decline the prod as "now in use". Cheers --RexxS (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
done --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

note

interesting page. thanks for posting your essays here!! --Sm8900 (talk) 23:13, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Alcuin Club

Notice

The article Alcuin Club has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Without sources for nine years. I don't see real indication of notability here. BEFORE completed in Google Books and News (I have no access to British newspapers). Deprod if you can cite significant coverage, but be sure to actually cite it, or it'll go to AfD.

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 22:54, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diamond -- Geogre has been gone for a while. I removed the prod, as this is a significant organization. Needs some references to bring it to 2020 standards, as in 2005 we usually did not include footnotes, only a general links/sources/references section at the end. (Any watchers on this page still?) Antandrus (talk) 23:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
I know of a couple. --RexxS (talk) 00:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
... count me in --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:12, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Featured article review for Restoration Spectacular

I have nominated Restoration Spectacular for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Beland (talk) 00:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Featured Article Review for The Country Wife

I have nominated The Country Wife for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Beland (talk) 20:04, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Pruning poem for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pruning poem is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Pruning poem until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Elli (talk | contribs) 08:03, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Categories: