Misplaced Pages

User talk:JzG: 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 20:32, 27 April 2008 editNealparr (talk | contribs)6,895 editsm →"Process": typo← Previous edit Latest revision as of 15:48, 5 January 2025 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,138,457 edits →Administrators' newsletter – January 2025: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{bots|deny=DPL bot}}
<center><br><div style="align: center; width: 60%; padding: 1em; border: solid 2px gold; background-color: black;">
{{User:MiszaBot/config
<span style="color:white;font-weight:bold"><s>R&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;E</s>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;T&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;R&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;E&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; D</font>'''</div><br></center>
| archiveheader = {{talkarchive}}
| algo = old(7d)
| archive = User talk:JzG/Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 218
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft = 1
| maxarchivesize = 32K
}}
{{Misplaced Pages:TPS/banner}}
{{collapse top|Discretionary sanctions}}
{{Ds/aware|9/11|a-a|a-i|ab|acu|aerc|ap|at|os|b|blp|cam|cc|cid|e|ecig|fg|gc|gg|ggtf|gap|gmo|ipa|lr|lw|muh-im|old|pa|pr|ps|r-i|saq|sen|sci|tm|tpm|tt|we}}
{{collapse bottom}}
]
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=User talk:JzG/Archive index|mask=User talk:JzG/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes
}}
{{Centralized discussion|width=30%}}
{{Archive box
| archivelist = <!-- /archivelist -->
| auto = yes
| index = Special:PrefixIndex/User_talk:JzG/Archive
| search = yes
| collapsible = yes
| collapsed = yes
| root = user talk:JzG
| bot = MiszaBot
| age = 7
}}
__TOC__


<center>'''This user is tired of silly drama on Misplaced Pages{{#if:{{{date|}}}|&nbsp;as of {{{date}}}|}}.'''</center>
{{User:Doc glasgow/BLP watch|right}}
<div style="float:right; border:1px solid #98B0F6; margin:1px;">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px; background:#96EAEE;"
| style="width:45px; height:45px; background:#98B0F6; text-align:center; font-size:14pt; color:black;" | ''']'''
| style="font-size:8pt; padding:4pt; line-height:1.25em; color:black; text-align:center;" | '''Smert' spamionem!'''<br />This user is a member of '''].'''
|}</div>]
]
]'''.]]

<div style="float:left; width:90px; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;border:1px solid #A9A9A9; background: #fff; text-align: center; padding:3px; font-size: smaller; line-height: 1.3; margin-right: 4px;">
<div style="width:100%; background:#808080">]</div>
<div style="width: 100%;">{{#time:F Y|0 hours}}</div>
<div style="font-size: x-large; width: 100%;"><span class="plainlinks" id="purgelink"></span></div>
<div style="width:100%">{{#time:l|0 hours}}</div>
<div style="background: #D3D3D3; color: #000;">'''{{#time:g|0 hours}}<span style="text-decoration:blink">:</span>{{#time:i a|0 hours}}''' ]</div>
</div><!-- clock nicked from ] who nicked it from Ryulong. -->
I check in most mornings and most evenings, and occasionally some days during the day. I am on UK time (I can see ] from my new office). If you post a reply at 8pm EST and get no reply by 10pm, it's likely because I'm asleep. My wiki interests at the moment are limited. I still handle some ] tickets.

I am under considerable personal stress at the moment; and I have a lot of other stuff going on in RL including a new job as senior engineer for enterprise storage and virtual infrastructure in a Fortune 500 company. Great job, lots of <span class="plainlinks"></span> ] ], big responsibility. But Misplaced Pages is still one of my top hobbies, and I come here to do what I can. I respond much better to polite requests than to demands. People who taunt me with "I dare you to block me" may have cause to regret it, as may I. Don't even think of trying to drag me into one of the many cesspits this project offers, I will likely choose only those disputes where I don't actually care too much. Not coming to your party? It's because I've decided it will make me unhappy. Sorry about that.

Above all, please do not try to provoke me to anger, it's not difficult to do, so it's not in the least bit clever, and experience indicates that some at least who deliberately make my life more miserable than it needs to be, have been banned and stayed that way. Make an effort to ] and let's see if we can't get along. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

* Please see ].
{{User:Lucasbfr/Admin open to trout slapping}}
{{quotation|the internets is populated by eggshells armed with hammers}}
---- ----
;Smelling pistakes
]</sup>]]
:In addition to bone-deep burn scars on my left hand I now also have ], so my typing is particularly erratic right now. I have a spellcheck plugin but it can't handle larger text blocks. You're welcome to fix spelling errors without pinging me, but please don't change British to American spelling or indeed vice-versa.
* Bored? Looking for something to do? Try ].
* See my '''''' - feel free to suggest more!
* '''My take on .'''
----
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo = old(2d)
|archive = User talk:JzG/Archives/%(monthname)s_%(year)d
}}
---- ----
{{wikibreak}}
== God Jul och Gott Nytt År! ==
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">
]
]
] is wishing you ]<br />Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's ] or ]<br />], ], ], ], ],<br />or the ],<br /> this is a special time of year for (almost) everyone.
<br />
{{clear}}
</div>


== ]! Are you still out there? ==
== Note to self ==
<!-- ] 09:57, 15 January 2032 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1957773473}}
Hi ]! I was going through some old ArbCom cases and ran into one where you had added some statements. I realized that I haven't spoken to you in quite some time, and I see that you haven't made any edits since May... That sucks! I don't want to see someone like you go! If anything, I hope that you're doing well and that you're happy and that you'll someday return here. I just wanted to leave you a message and let you know that I was thinking about you... Keep in touch. :-) ]<sup><small><b>] ]</b></small></sup> 23:05, 9 January 2022 (UTC)


:I hope it goes without saying, despite the fact that I'm saying it, that many of us feel the same way. Happy new year ]] 23:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Istria&diff=192329190&oldid=189359747


::We didn't cross paths very often lately, JzG, but we could really use you back. If you get the urge to return, please say "Yes!" <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
:::October JzG sighting at ]. Does my heart good. --] (]) 20:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
::::Lovely to hear from you! I have spent the past two-and-a-bit years working at incredibly high stress for a hospital. In that time I have retired around 80% of their legacy application and server estate, instituted architectural guidelines and piloted the process for demand review, reduced the measured risk burden by around 80%, instituted objective risk monitoring using ], and I've just proposed (and had accepted) a plan to remediate or mitigate most of the rest. I have, in short, been busy in that there real life of which you read, and that really wasn't going to fit in with having to be nice to people who sincerely believe that Ashlii Babbit was the real victim of the "legitimate political discourse" on Jan 6 2020.
::::I have a week's leave. I have 28 days to take before year end, having managed I think three days off this year so far (including weekends). And because I have an offshore team and an onshore customer, my working day can be 8am to 3am.
::::I thought I'd drop in :-) ''']''' <small>(] - ])</small> 18:44, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::Yikes, sounds like, umm..., a lot of responsibility. There will be plenty for you to do here when you are free! ] (]) 22:50, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::Glad you dropped by! ] (]) 02:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::Glad to hear you're OK - and busy, by the sounds of things! Hope you enjoy your break. ]] 11:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
::::::If Guy doesn't look at ] real soon now, where Eddy is being accused of plagiarism, I may be forced to contact him on bookfarce. That would mean giving Guy my real name. He always forgets me. - ]the ] 16:00, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::::I try never to remember people's RW names unless they are "out" on Misplaced Pages. Even when they out themselves, this has led to huge problems, e.g. with a user whose identity was revealed by accident off-wiki, showing him to be the source of fact-washing his own side in Misplaced Pages disputes via a journalist. That ended badly for everyone. ''']''' <small>(] - ])</small> 16:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
::::::::Very happy see the little JzG! ] ] ] 19:56, 27 October 2022 (UTC).
:::::Hah! Good to see you're still around! ] 20:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
::::::This is a few months late, but welcome back! Wishing you well. ''']] (])''' 09:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
:Welcome indeed! Just came across your signature ]. It's always great to run in to another 'old-timer'. Hope you're well, ]&nbsp;<sup><b>(])</b></sup> 11:21, 23 May 2023 (UTC)


`


== Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 ==
== User Hibernian ==


] from the past month (December 2024).
..is using the http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Technocracy_movement
Talk:Technocracy movement page like a personal attack blog. Example : ''Skip quote: "I am not involved in TechInc or NET.". Wow! somebody actually got Skip to admit that he was kicked out of Technocracy Inc.! It took him about 2 years to admit it and come to the realisation, but better late than never I guess!''
''What you didn't mention of-course, is that you were very embittered by that dismissal and have since attacked the organization in any way you can (including on Wiki) and even tried to setup a rival group. You've recently also attempted to insert the name of your "group" into Wiki articles. Hmmm no, no conflicts of interests there, I think Skips just a honest contributor with no hidden agenda at all (And if you can't guess, yes I’m being Sarcastic).'' --Hibernian end quote.


<div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap">
Could you do something? Could you edit that type of attack off the page ? ] (]) 15:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">


] '''Administrator changes'''
I made a report here as another editor advised.
:] ]
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Talk:Tomislav_II_of_Croatia.2C_4th_Duke_of_Aosta
:] {{hlist|class=inline
Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette alerts - ] (]) 18:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''CheckUser changes'''
== Edit summary ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]
:] ]


</div>
You're right. Responded my talk page. Basically, when told by parties that they don't need to include everything in the source, despite that being the only source they have, because it's "crufty", after seeing them in engage in similar insults to the previous editor who assessed the article, I lost my temper. If you see fit to indicate loss of admin status on that basis, say so and I will withdraw from that status. ] (]) 19:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
* Nah, you just got carried away. Happens to all of us. Feel free to delete the comments as read and understood, if you realise you did a silly thing then there's no need to rub anyone's nose in it. I only spotted it because I went to Geogre's page for something else, and I was probably overly aggressive myself due to the place I'd come from before ''that''. Bloody Misplaced Pages, full of loons, kooks and Chicken Littles - and that's just ''me''! <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:00, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
]
::And I'm a loon who claims to be from another planet and Chickenman at the same time. But, yeah, I did cross the line. No need to remove the comments though. Megalomaniac types like me need to be reminded to be humble once in a while. :) ] (]) 20:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


] '''Oversight changes'''
== ] ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]


</div>
Why did you fully protect the page? I can understand a semi-protect, but a full is absurd. Every other article about the Playboy "playmates" that I have seen here on Misplaced Pages includes the disputed information. While I disagree with the tactics employed by a certain editor, I agree with his basic point. Playboy is a reliable source for articles about the "playmates," unless someone can make a darn good argument as to why it's not, in my opinion.
</div>


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
I guess I'm not asking you to unprotect the page. I am asking you to restore the information that was being disputed because, in the end, it is accurate and it is standard information for articles of this nature. --] (]) 00:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
* Following ], ] was adopted as a ].
* A ] is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.
] '''Technical news'''
* The Nuke feature also now ] to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.


] '''Arbitration'''
* Following the ], the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: {{noping|CaptainEek}}, {{noping|Daniel}}, {{noping|Elli}}, {{noping|KrakatoaKatie}}, {{noping|Liz}}, {{noping|Primefac}}, {{noping|ScottishFinnishRadish}}, {{noping|Theleekycauldron}}, {{noping|Worm That Turned}}.


] '''Miscellaneous'''
== reference to issue ==
* A ] is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the ]. ]


----
I noticed that here...
{{center|{{flatlist|
http://en.wikipedia.org/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist#technocracynet.eu
* ]
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist - Misplaced Pages, the 💕 user Hibernian (Ross Murphy) is mentioning this site.. which is another blog/forum that is not connected to TechInc the actual group. http://www.technocracy.ca/modules.php?op=modload&name=Members_List&file=index&letter=I&sortby=uname&authid=b31ea5612f1f6ec34062fd85bc4cdb96
* ]
Hibernian/Icarus user page. Technocracy.ca
* ]

}}}}
I just wished to mention that he is a registered user/participant there.. and that site is a sponsor of the NET site http://www.technocracy.ca/modules.php?op=modload&name=Web_Links&file=index&req=viewlink&cid=1
<!--
NET promo.Technocracy.ca
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 15:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)</small>}}
Also... as has been mentioned he is a registered forum member below. http:DISABLE//en.technocracynet.eu/index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=85&Itemid=65
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1266956718 -->
Network of European Technocrats - Ross Murphy.

Another editor on wiki named Kolzene is the leader of the TechCa group. Isenhand, Hibernian & Kolzene have acted in unison to control these related articles. Plus other NET forum members.
If I could make a suggestion... ] would be another good choice in my opinion to put up for an article for deletion. It was purely an invention to support NET. ] (]) 02:37, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

== ] ==

Since I know you're capable of drastic action in cleaning this sort of thing up, I was wondering if you'd noticed ], which, judging by the one I removed, is full of gross overstatements and misrepresented citations. --<span style="font-family:Georgia">] (])</span> 08:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

== winter cycling ==

it is too late becuase it is summer <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 12:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
* Not in Australia :-) <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 13:09, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

== ] ==

Since this template is completely unused and it's purpose easily fulfilled by ], I was wondering if you would mind deleting it yourself and sparing me from filling out ].--<i><font color="#9966FF">]</font><font color="#CC99CC" size="2">SB</font></i> 16:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
* Which template is used for an article sourced solely from partisan sources? <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 17:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

== more need of vanished user replacement ==

See ], for the same username as in ]. I'd rather not do it myself for several reasons. --] (]) 19:02, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

== Incivility in edit summaries ==

Guy, would you please not be uncivil to me in edit summaries? Today you've told me and Thanks ——''']'''</span> ] Ψ ]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 19:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
* The solution is for you to stop being silly and, incidentally, stop POV-pushing. You are becoming tiresome. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

::It is not appropriate for you to respond to a request for basic civility with further insults. Please stop it. I had hoped that the RfC would do some good, but apparently it hasn't. Also, this edit summary is completely inappropriate because it is insulting to many who visit the article, and who might want to edit. ——''']'''</span> ] Ψ ]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 20:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
::: It is not appropriate for you to continue this line of baiting. You may now go away. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

::::I will go away after this if you say, because it is your talk page. However, I am in no way baiting you. I am asking you, nicely, to stop the inappropriate behaviors in which you continue to engage. ——''']'''</span> ] Ψ ]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 21:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
::::: And I am asking you, very firmly, to stop advancing your fringe POV in articles, because that (unlike my being impatient with you) actively degrades the encyclopaedia. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 21:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Just an observation - I'm entirely certain that Martinphi does not see himself as "being silly", "POV-pushing", or "baiting". If someone does not think they're being silly at all, then what good does it do to tell them, "stop being silly"? If he doesn't think he's advancing a fringe POV, then what good does it do to say "stop advancing your fringe POV"? <p> Reciprocally, Martin, if you're reading here, I'm pretty certain that Guy does not consider "stop being silly" or "stop POV-pushing" to be uncivil. I may be wrong about that, in which case Guy will probably correct me, but we might as well realize that nobody is intentionally doing the things that are being accused here. -]<sup>(])</sup> 21:20, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I really can't believe that 1) anyone could believe that calling another person silly in a non-joking way is civil. There is a point beyond which credulity cannot be stretched. However, just in case, we had the RfC, where Guy was told that, indeed, this kind of thing is uncivil. ——''']'''</span> ] Ψ ]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 03:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

:Are you seriously proposing that Martin is not intentionally "advancing fringe POV in articles"? ] (]) 22:09, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
::Of course. I'm seriously suggesting that he believes that he is making the articles neutral and correct. Why would anyone try to edit an article into a state that ''they think'' is incorrect or biased? He probably ''actually believes'' what he believes (like most of us), so he doesn't see it a a fringe POV. <p> What kind of person sees himself as a fringe POV pusher? "I'm off to push some fringe POV on Misplaced Pages!" What? -]<sup>(])</sup> 23:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

:::Thanks GTB. Actually, I would -and have- edited articles in whose subject I do not believe, with exactly the same principles as I apply to other articles. Examples include ], ], ], and others. As to Remote viewing, I tend to believe it has not been proven to the level of other scientific facts, which makes me more skeptical than Richard Wiseman, member of ] and debunker of paranormal claims. If editors here are to the right of senior CSI members, there is something very wrong. However, my belief or lace thereof makes no difference to my editing of the article. The same principles of ATT, the ArbComs on Pseudoscience and the Paranormal, and neutral tone apply. There is no article on WP which I would not be able to edit neutrally, because I have enough reserve to edit any of them in a neutral way. ——''']'''</span> ] Ψ ]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 03:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

== "Process" ==

Delusions, imagination, even fraud is a process. --''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 20:18, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
* Yes, but this was not a process for viewing remote object, sit was a process for extracting money form the government to bolster a fantasy. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
::Assuming that, it is still a process where someone ostensibly views a remote target. If you frame it as a con-job, that's the "trick". --''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 20:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
::: Don't really understand what you;re saying. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

::::It is certainly a proces for ''attempting to view by ESP.'' There shouldn't be any controversy about that. There are completely neutral ways to put it. ——''']'''</span> ] Ψ ]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 21:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
::::: I'm sure there are, I've just not seen any of the pro-parapsychology POV-pushers suggest anything even close yet. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 21:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
::::::] describing remote viewing: "2. ESP and Evidence of Mind. Here Chopra relies on psi research in remote viewing and telepathy, in which subjects locked in a room alone can apparently receive images from senders in another room without the use of the five senses." Understand me now? --''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 04:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
::::::: I don't understand anyone who asserts that something fundamentally unverifiable, is anything other than a belief system. I would not dream of saying that God exists in an article, because I can't prove it. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 15:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
::::::::Now it's I that don't understand what you're saying. It's verifiable as a ], a ], ostensibly referring to a remote target but probably just in the ]. If there's some "paranormal belief system" that one ends up subscribing to by calling it that, a lot of skeptics are going to be pissed because they describe it that way. --''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 18:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
::::::::Another example: You listed ''Did Adam and Eve Have Navels?: Debunking Pseudoscience'' as a source in the intro, so I decided to look up how they describe it. From page 61:
:::::::::"Most of the work of Puthoff and Targ at SRI was devoted to what they called 'remote viewing'--the ability of psychics to 'see' scenery at any distance away--perhaps even to remote-view the surfaces of other planets."
::::::::That's funny, because Martinphi had very similar words in the intro and you called it pov pushing. You were very adament about not calling it an "ability" but rather a "purported", "claimed", or "alleged" "ability". Bottom line, ] are exactly that, words to avoid. A sentence doesn't have to say "purported remote viewing--the alleged ability of alleged psychics to allegedly 'see' alleged scenery at any alleged distance away" for readers to understand it's bunk. Obviously ] was able to avoid using those words and still got his point across. --''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 20:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

== Vanished User's name still appears ==

. Needs another pass or so.--] (]) 20:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

== Abuse of admin tools: editing through protection ==

You are involved in the content dispute, have have tried to delete this article--in fact, you were the nom for the recently failed Afd, and now you blanking this long term section against consensus--through protection! This is clear abuse of the tools:. Protection is not an endorsement of a version, and its quite improper to use ones tools to get it locked in the version you want it in. I ask for this to be undone. I am making an official effort here to resolve this with you. Thanks.] (]) 21:50, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


:Guy, so you don't risk loss of your tools, please self-revert . The article's protected. <span style="font-variant:small-caps"><font color="#800080">] § ]/]</font></span> 23:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

:Didn't see someone was already discussing, I reported to AN/I. If this was an accident as it appears, please revert. Thank you. --] (]) 23:20, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

<s>== re ] ==

Hi. It appears that you edited while the above article was fully protected. Perhaps you may wish to self revert while the discussion plays out on WP:AN? Cheers. ] (]) 00:06, 27 April 2008 (UTC)</s><small> Already brought up above. ] (]) 00:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)</small>

I agree this is poor conduct. The section he took out was a good section, too. I also found it interesting that he took it out for POV reasons. Isn't that also against WP policies? We are supposed to leave our own POV out of it?] (]) 03:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
* (copied from WP:AN) I have reverted to the version in place when protection was imposed, on Guys behalf. A review of Guys contributions indicate that he has not edited since last night, and has likely not seen the various requests to self-revert. ] (]) 14:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
:* Do not ever claim to act on my behalf, please. Call it what you want, but acting on my behalf, it was not. Actually I should have stubbed the thing and we should start again, because it is one of the worst articles on Misplaced Pages. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 15:29, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

== Just wanted to say... ==

While I would be the first to admit that I do not know all the details about the many disputes you have apparently been involved in, and I do not even have enough of a background to comment on your RfC, I just wanted to say that when I do come across you on wikipedia I almost always agree with what you are doing. I'm sure you hear this a lot, but I hope that no matter what the outcome of everything is, you keep making valid contributions. <font color="#3B9C9C">]</font><font color="#F87217">]</font> 05:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

== Dropping Bombs ==

As a side issue I agree with those a couple of sections up that you obviously need to revert yourself on the state terrorism article since the page was protected (I'm sure there will be all kinds of boring drama surrounding that, but if you just undo it the whole thing goes away). But really I wanted to engage with you about the Japan section you removed, hopefully in a less antagonistic way than usually happens on the article talk page (I'm trying to avoid participating there for now anyway). I apologize in advance for the length but hope you can bear with me here.

I strongly feel that section should be in the article and will explain why, but let me first give you a little background on where I'm coming from with that which may be a bit different from how other folks feel. Morally speaking I'm deeply opposed to the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan (this belief has always posed something of an existential quandary for me...my paternal grandfather was to have been one of the first on the beach in the event of an invasion of Japan, and given that it is very likely he would have been killed, one or two years prior to my father's birth, I in some perverse sense might well owe my own life to those a-bombs...not a fun thought). Evaluating it as a historian, I find it utterly inconceivable that Truman would ''not'' have dropped the bomb (in no small part due to domestic political concerns - if it came out the bombs existed and he didn't use it no Democrat would have been elected dogcatcher until 2014 - which too often are undiscussed). Whether or not the action should be labeled "state terrorism" is utterly uninteresting to me. I have no problem calling it immoral, horrific, and politically necessary but beyond that and a few other scholarly judgments (e.g. a strong element of impressing/frightening the Soviets was clearly there) I don't particularly care. I think a focus on labeling the actions "terrorism" (state, war, etc.) or not is wholly misguided.

That said, it's obvious to me that the section is appropriate for the article. The article has survived yet another AfD, so it seems for awhile we will be discussing claims from notable people that certain things the United States government did constitute "state terrorism." It also seems apparent that notable people have described the atomic bombing of Japan as state terrorism. The real deal breaker for me is ], who might not be so well known in the UK but is a huge figure in left academic circles here in the States (and no slouch either, he's been at Princeton forever...I have no idea what he's been doing in recent years slumming with 9/11 conspiracy theorists). When he says "Undoubtedly the most extreme and permanently traumatizing instance of state terrorism, perhaps in the history of warfare, involved the use of atomic bombs against the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki," and when you combine that with a number of similar statements from other notable individuals, I think it's very difficult to deny that such a section is appropriate for the article in question.

Your objection to this section seems largely centered on your own argument that the bombings, even if immoral, are not state terrorism since there was a war going on. That's a very legitimate argument, and one with which I agree to an extent, but it isn't a relevant rebuttal to the fact that there are notable "allegations of state terrorism by the US" when it comes to this issue.

I worked on this section months ago and was actually able to bring some balance to it (balance which at some point was apparently removed). It was difficult to provide the "opposing view" because few scholars bother to respond to the question "was this state terrorism?" My solution was to have a paragraph at the end of the section citing a historiographical overview of recent literature on the bomb from the journal ''Diplomatic History''. In quoting from this article the concluding paragraph pointed out that basically ''none of the scholarly literature'' debates the question this way - i.e. it is a fringe viewpoint. The section then read as a series of allegations followed by a "mainstream-historians-don't-give-a-shit-about-this" (the wording was different) paragraph. I thought it was actually one of the better sections in the article as a result. At some point that last paragraph got eviscerated (I don't know when since I stopped editing there awhile ago) though in the version you removed there was still a watered down quote from the author, J. Samuel Walker.

I'm wondering if you might re-evaluate your objection to this material being included. We can probably trim it (there's been a tendency in this article to include ''every'' allegation from any notable person to guard against deletion, but that has bloated the article) and I'd like to see the old end paragraph I wrote come back (me write ''good''!). But I really think this Japan section meets the standards of the article, whatever you might think of those, and as some have been suggesting there really was consensus for it going back quite a long way (it was actually one of the more well-sourced sections). A lot of the recent general debate seems to be about the inclusion of this section, and if you were willing to drop your objection to keeping it in there it might allow for work to proceed on other aspects of the article. I know where you're coming from on this issue (i.e. the a-bomb question) and probably am in relative agreement with you in most respects, but am hoping you might re-consider the article content issue in light of this comment.

Again, my bad on the length, and I'll check back here for any reply if you're so inclined.--] <small>| ] | ]</small> 06:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
* These POV-pushing idiots have got to go. They insert all sorts of shit on the basis that any two people who agree with them is consensus and any number who disagree means nothing. They are monomaniacs, disruptive, the article is an embarrassment, and they have showed long-standing determination to make sure it remains that way. I want them topic-banned. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 14:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
::That reply is a bit of a non-sequitur. You're welcome to pursue topic bans of certain editors, but my previous comment was related to a very specific issue regarding the content of the article. I don't think a topic ban will be enacted against me anytime soon (not that you were saying it should be). Likewise I don't think I'm a POV-pushing idiot (again, I know you weren't saying that). If you're really committed to working on improving the article, you will have to engage with the arguments of good faith editors like myself who disagree with you. I'd still be interested in a reply to the specific points I bring up about the Japan section.--] <small>| ] | ]</small> 19:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

== State terrorism ==

Good on you. You've always been one of my favourite admins for Doing the Right Thing<sup>TM</sup>, and we need more admins willing to enforce Jimbo's November 2003 post. ''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 13:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

==Talk:Allegations of state terrorism by the United States‎ ==
Please don't do that again. - ] ] 15:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
* Oh, I might. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 15:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

== Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Living people ==

I notice you have transcluded ] to your user space. Given that the page has been deleted, I instead created ]. This works slightly differently, and should not be transcluded, but rather watched. But you all look to be old hands so I figure you'll get the hang of it. I hope you find it useful. All the best, ] <small>] </small> 16:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

== Appropriate use of edit summaries ==

Guy, please don't use edit summaries to insult people, like you did . Please use the edit summary to describe the edit you are making. See ]. ] (]) 17:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

== Take five ==

Guy, you're being provoked. It might be unintentional, but that is what I think is happening. I suggest that you not rise to the bait and just relax. If the article pisses you off that much just find something else to do for the moment. If you really would like to improve it then make sure you edit in a way that cannot be used against you. ] (]) 17:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

:For what it's worth I agree that topic bans need be handed out. ] (]) 17:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


== Dropping Bombs part 2 ==

I'm disappointed by your reaction to BigTimePeace's message above. You seem to have just completely ignored the material he was showing you, but maybe you did not carefully read what he was saying. I want to assume good faith with your recent over the top actions, and assume that your simply because your not familiar with the literature on State Terrorism so that is why you think it should be deleted. I won't repeat what BTP provided above, or what the rather well referenced section that you removed says (although I suggest you read them and look at the sources, which are all top of the line). However, I did want to provide more background material for this view of State Terrorism so that you see how your own personal POV, while a legitimate one, is not the only one. Let me see if I can explain this.

I think we can agree that one of the ways that "State terrorism" has been used is to refer to terrorist acts by governmental agents or forces. That is, use of state resources such as using the military. I point to Professor of Political Science, Michael Stohl who cites the examples that include war time acts such as Germany’s bombing of London and the U.S. atomic destruction of Hiroshima during World War II. Under this view of state terrorism, he writes, “the use of terror tactics is common in international relations and the state has been and remains a more likely employer of terrorism within the international system than insurgents." They also cite the the ] option as an example of the "terror of coercive dipolomacy" as a form of this, which holds the world "hostage,' with the implied threat of using nuclear weapons in "crisis management." They argue that the institutionalized form of terrorism has occurred as a result of changes that took place following World War ll. In this analysis, state terrorism exhibited as a form of foreign policy was "shaped by the presence and use of weapons of mass destruction, and that the legitimizing of such violent behavior led to an increasingly accepted form of this state behavior." See Michael Stohl, “The Superpowers and International Terror” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, Atlanta, March 27-April 1, 1984;"Terrible beyond Endurance? The Foreign Policy of State Terrorism." 1988; The State as Terrorist: The Dynamics of Governmental Violence and Repression, 1984 P49).

Now, you might disagree with these views, but they respected academics writing in their field of expertise; the books cited are on the subject of state terrorism and their view is a significant one. Since WP is not censored, and nor are we allowed to substituted our views for those of qualified academics, we should have an open mind about acknowledging this also is a legitimate POV. And, in the article its well placed.

Warfare by states and terrorism are of course distinct but there is a cross over between the two. Terrorism is a tactic that can be adopted in the course of war (or any other conflict)--and one can terrorize without actually having to pull the trigger either. Their view is basically that terrorism is an extension of warfare by other means. They speak of the "terror of coercive diplomacy"--the US reliance on the threat of nuclear weapons in "crisis management" interactions as well. They write, and I quote: "A no-first-use pronouncement would deprive the United States of a tactic that has been employed at least nineteen times in in the post-war period. This carries the explicit understanding of the implication of the threat of nuclear use."

Now, this is quite in opposition the to traditional view. The traditional approach views terrorism as a form of random behavior perpetrated by international criminals, treating it as a special type of deviant behavior (Helen Purkitt, "Dealing with Terrorism.," in Conflict in World Society, 1984, p. 162.) In contrast, a broader interpretation of the nature of terrorism has been increasingly discussed within the literature that establishes a meaning to account for the concept of state and state-sponsored terrorism. (Michael Stolhl, p. 14). The authors cite former US Secretary of State ] who elaborates on this conceptual framework shift:

{{quote |"What once may have seemed random, senseless, violent acts of a few crazed individuals has come into focus...We have learned that terrorism is, above all, a form of political violence. It is neither random nor without purpose...The overarching goal of all terrorists is the same: they are trying to impose their will by force." ("Terrorism and the Modern World," address in Current Policy 626, Oct. 25, 1984).}}

The term "Establishment" and "Structural terrorism" is sometimes used to describe state terrorism that posits the existence of 'a form of political violence" in the structure of contemporary international politics. This includes policies or actions by governments that encourage the use of fear and violence in pursuit of political ends. As such, state terrorism is conceived to have become an integral element of many state's foreign policies (Michael Stolhl, p. 15). Academic ] argument is cited, as an example:
{{quote |"Those who are described as terrorists...make the uncomfortable point that national armed forces, fully supported by democratic opinion, have in fact employed violence and terror on a far vaster scale...."("Liberty and Terrorism," International Security 2 (Fall 1988), pp. 56-57.)}}

In this view terrorism emanates from legitimate political institutions intent upon creating a state of fear for political ends, and therefore includes the activities of sovereign states themselves. Michael Stohl has argued:

{{quote |“The use of terror tactics is common in international relations and the state has been and remains a more likely employer of terrorism within the international system than insurgents. Examples that come readily to mind include Germany’s bombing of London and the U.S. atomic destruction of Hiroshima during World War II. (M. Stohl, “The Superpowers and International Terror,” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, Atlanta, March 27-April 1, 1984).}}

Prof. Stolhl and Lopez designate five particular forms of state terrorism exhibited in foreign policy behavior:
*1. Coercieve terrorist diplomacy
*2. Clandestine state terrorism
*3. State-sponsored terrorism
*4. Surrogate terrorism
*5. State acquiescence to terrorism

And, some scholars argue that a institutionalized form of terrorism carried out by states have occurred as a result of changes that took place following World War ll. In this analysis state terrorism as a form of foreign policy was shaped by the presence and use of weapons of mass destruction, and that the legitimizing of such violent behavior led to an increasingly accepted form of state behavior. The argument is discussed by Professor of Political Science ] and ], in their book "Terrible beyond Endurance? The Foreign Policy of State Terrorism." 1988.

I invite you to check out the above books I referenced, and their authors credentials. After reviewing the scholarly literature on the subject, I doubt you will continue to have the same problems with this POV being given a voice on an article the deals with state terrorism. Thanks.] (]) 18:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:48, 5 January 2025

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.
Discretionary sanctions
This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: He should not be given alerts for those areas.
Centralized discussion
Village pumps
policy
tech
proposals
idea lab
WMF
misc
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.
Archiving icon
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, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150
151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160
161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170
171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180
181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190
191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200
201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210
211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218


This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.
Smelling pistakes
In addition to bone-deep burn scars on my left hand I now also have C7 radiculopathy, so my typing is particularly erratic right now. I have a spellcheck plugin but it can't handle larger text blocks. You're welcome to fix spelling errors without pinging me, but please don't change British to American spelling or indeed vice-versa.
JzG is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.

God Jul och Gott Nytt År!

Gråbergs Gråa Sång is wishing you the season's greetings.
Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's solstice or Christmas,
Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus,
or the Saturnalia,
this is a special time of year for (almost) everyone.

JzG! Are you still out there?

Hi JzG! I was going through some old ArbCom cases and ran into one where you had added some statements. I realized that I haven't spoken to you in quite some time, and I see that you haven't made any edits since May... That sucks! I don't want to see someone like you go! If anything, I hope that you're doing well and that you're happy and that you'll someday return here. I just wanted to leave you a message and let you know that I was thinking about you... Keep in touch. :-) ~Oshwah~ 23:05, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

I hope it goes without saying, despite the fact that I'm saying it, that many of us feel the same way. Happy new year Girth Summit (blether) 23:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
We didn't cross paths very often lately, JzG, but we could really use you back. If you get the urge to return, please say "Yes!" Liz 01:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
October JzG sighting at WP:RSN. Does my heart good. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Lovely to hear from you! I have spent the past two-and-a-bit years working at incredibly high stress for a hospital. In that time I have retired around 80% of their legacy application and server estate, instituted architectural guidelines and piloted the process for demand review, reduced the measured risk burden by around 80%, instituted objective risk monitoring using Tenable, and I've just proposed (and had accepted) a plan to remediate or mitigate most of the rest. I have, in short, been busy in that there real life of which you read, and that really wasn't going to fit in with having to be nice to people who sincerely believe that Ashlii Babbit was the real victim of the "legitimate political discourse" on Jan 6 2020.
I have a week's leave. I have 28 days to take before year end, having managed I think three days off this year so far (including weekends). And because I have an offshore team and an onshore customer, my working day can be 8am to 3am.
I thought I'd drop in :-) Guy (help! - typo?) 18:44, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Yikes, sounds like, umm..., a lot of responsibility. There will be plenty for you to do here when you are free! Johnuniq (talk) 22:50, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Glad you dropped by! Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Glad to hear you're OK - and busy, by the sounds of things! Hope you enjoy your break. Girth Summit (blether) 11:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
If Guy doesn't look at Talk:Alexander technique real soon now, where Eddy is being accused of plagiarism, I may be forced to contact him on bookfarce. That would mean giving Guy my real name. He always forgets me. - Roxy the dog 16:00, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
I try never to remember people's RW names unless they are "out" on Misplaced Pages. Even when they out themselves, this has led to huge problems, e.g. with a user whose identity was revealed by accident off-wiki, showing him to be the source of fact-washing his own side in Misplaced Pages disputes via a journalist. That ended badly for everyone. Guy (help! - typo?) 16:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Very happy see the little JzG! bishzilla ROARR!! pocket 19:56, 27 October 2022 (UTC).
Hah! Good to see you're still around!  RasputinAXP  20:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
This is a few months late, but welcome back! Wishing you well. starship.paint (exalt) 09:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Welcome indeed! Just came across your signature here. It's always great to run in to another 'old-timer'. Hope you're well, Arbitrarily0  11:21, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

`

Administrators' newsletter – January 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2024).

Administrator changes

added Sennecaster
readded
removed

CheckUser changes

added
readded Worm That Turned
removed Ferret

Oversight changes

added
readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC) Category: