Misplaced Pages

User talk:Wikidemon: 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 21:58, 20 June 2008 editGoodvac (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers10,892 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:00, 27 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,431 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Wikidemon/Archive 12) (bot 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 100K |maxarchivesize = 150K
|counter = 5 |counter = 12
|algo = old(60d) |algo = old(40d)
|archive = User talk:Wikidemo/Archive %(counter)d |archive = User talk:Wikidemon/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}


== Wine Project Newsletter == == Proposal ==


{{talkback|Talk:List of Jewish actors}}
{|
| colspan="2" valign="middle" style="width: 40%; border: 1px blue solid; padding: .5em; background: gold" |
] <big>'''The ] Newsletter!'''</big><br/> Issue III - ], 2007 <br/>
|-
| valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 65%; " |


== Notice ==
]: <br>
*'''News & Notes''' ''New look for Wine Project Page; Wine Article assessment; Operation Stub-killer; New Template for Australian Wineries; New wine stub categories proposed.''


== craigslist ==
*'''Wiki-Winos''' This issue's feature ]


===Spam, harassment===
*'''Wine Improvement Drive''' - ] plus update on last WID article ]
Posters can choose to anonymize their email address to a temporary craigslist address, who will then relay any messages sent to that address to the poster's actual email address. Replying to a post, email address will be visible to the poster. The same Flagging group of individuals using sending addressing only once also send spam in mass to posters inundating there inbox with what look like blank responses These messages have the potential of having Javascript or embedded objects in there e-mails.57 Craigslist posters have also reported the tracking cookie (Ad.yieldmanager.com) and (207.net)in there browser history.
|-
| valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under ''Participants'' on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include '''Decline newsletter''' next to your name on the Participant list.<br>If you have any Misplaced Pages wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of ].
|}
== Wine Project Newsletter ==


http://www.craigslist.org/about/anonymize
{|
| colspan="2" valign="middle" style="width: 40%; border: 1px blue solid; padding: .5em; background: gold" |
] <big>'''The ] Newsletter!'''</big><br/> Issue IV - ], 2007 <br/>
|-
| valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 65%; " |


http://www.craigslist.org/about/help/replying_to_posts
]: <br>
*'''News & Notes''' ''New Grape Infobox; Standard Grape article format; Wine photos; New wine stub categories created; Wine related deletion notices; and more''


http://www.spywareremove.com/removeAdyieldmanagercom.html
*'''Sub Projects''' ''Updates on Operation Stub Killer''


unless you have been there you realy do not know
*'''Wiki-Winos''' This issue's feature ].


http://chicago.craigslist.org/wcl/zip/3291189601.html
*'''Wine Improvement Drive''' - ] plus update on last WID article ] and comments on the new ]
|-
| valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under ''Participants'' on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include '''Decline newsletter''' next to your name on the Participant list.<br>If you have any Misplaced Pages wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of ].
|}
== Wine Project Newsletter ==


Don't include html forms in emails. The Yahoo! Mail client warns users that submitting forms in email can be dangerous
{| style="border:2px blue solid; background: gold"
|-
| ]
| align="left" width="100%" | <big>'''The ] Newsletter!'''</big><br/> '''Issue V''' - ], 2007
|-
|}
{| style="border-bottom: 1px purple solid;border-left: 1px purple solid;border-right: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 100%; "
|
]: <br>
*'''News & Notes''' ''New wine product members, Wine GAs and DYKs and more''


Don't include Javascript in emails
*'''Sub Projects''' ''Updates on Operation Stub Killer''


Don't include embedded objects in emails (like flash or active-x).
*'''Wiki-Winos''' This issue's feature is one of our resident ]s - ].


== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
*'''Wine Improvement Drive''' - ] and splinter articles plus update on last WID article ]
<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 ].
{| valign="top" width="100%" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%;"
|This newsletter is sent to those listed under ''Participants'' on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include '''Decline newsletter''' next to your name on the Participant list.<br>If you have any Misplaced Pages wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of ].
|}


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.
== For a million random unrelated things, you deserve a... ==


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.
(barnstar is on holiday...moving to my user page)
<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div>
== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
== WP:TRIVIA ==
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Could you accompany your with a reply on the ]? I&nbsp;] I&nbsp;] I&nbsp;14:52,&nbsp;],&nbsp;2007


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
== ] newsletter ==


</div>
{| style="border:2px blue solid; background: gold"
</div>
|-
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1258243447 -->
| ]
| align="left" width="100%" | <big>'''The ]!'''</big><br/> '''Issue VII''' - ], 2007
|-
|}
{| style="border-bottom: 1px purple solid;border-left: 1px purple solid;border-right: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 100%; "
|
] <br>
*'''Back in black...or rather wine stain burgundy''' Yes, the newsletter is back and we catch up with the some of the great work being done by Wine Project members like ], ], ] and more!
*'''Updates on Operation Stubkiller, GAs, and DYKs''' As well as advice and links for finding photos and illustrations for our wine articles
|}
{| valign="top" width="100%" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%;"
|This newsletter is sent to those listed under ''Participants'' on the ] page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include '''Decline newsletter''' next to your name on the Participant list.<br>If you have any Misplaced Pages wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of ].
|}


== ] of ] ==
== ] newsletter ==
]


The article ] has been ]. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.
{| style="border:2px blue solid; background: gold"
|-
| ]
| align="left" width="100%" | <big>'''The ]!'''</big><br/> '''Issue VIII''' - December 22nd, 2007
|-
|}
{| style="border-bottom: 1px purple solid;border-left: 1px purple solid;border-right: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 100%; "
|
] <br>
*'''News & Notes''' - Could ] become the project's first ]? Great opportunities for wine related illustrations, a new 1855-Bordeaux template, Did you knows and MORE!
*'''Wiki-Winos''' - ] and the ''mysterious Woop Woop''
*'''Wine articles on the Web''' - Find out how our ], ], ] & other wine articles have been referenced on the web and what do outside folks think about the overall quality of our wine articles?


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
|}
{| valign="top" width="100%" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%;"
|This newsletter is sent to those listed under ''Participants'' on the ] page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include '''Decline newsletter''' next to your name on the Participant list.<br>If you have any Misplaced Pages wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of ].
|}
== ] newsletter ==


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
{| style="border:2px blue solid; background: gold"
|-
| ]
| align="left" width="100%" | <big>'''The ]!'''</big><br/> '''Issue IX''' - January 7th, 2008
|-
|}
{| style="border-bottom: 1px purple solid;border-left: 1px purple solid;border-right: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 100%; "
|
] <br>
*'''News & Notes''' - ] up for ], '''WANTED'''-GA Coordinator/liaison and wine region maps, and can you guess which wine-related article was viewed over 85,000 times in December?
*'''Wiki-Winos''' - ''']''' and his joke that may make you think twice about accepting an unknown glass of wine from a stranger
*'''Wine articles on the Web''' - Did the ] originate in Iran? Where did the Ah-so ] get its name? What is up with that petroleum smell in some ] wines? And what the heck is ] doing planting ] '''fin'''? These are the questions that people out on the web are asking. Find out what answers they get when they turn to our Misplaced Pages wine articles.
|}
{| valign="top" width="100%" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%;"
|This newsletter is sent to those listed under ''Participants'' on the ] page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include '''Decline newsletter''' next to your name on the Participant list.<br>If you have any Misplaced Pages wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of ].
|}


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 -->
== ] newsletter ==


This is an automated notification. Please refer to the ] for further information. ] (]) 00:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
{| style="border:2px blue solid; background: gold"
|-
| ]
| align="left" width="100%" | <big>'''The ]!'''</big><br/> '''Issue X''' - January 31st, 2008
|-
|}
{| style="border-bottom: 1px purple solid;border-left: 1px purple solid;border-right: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 100%; "
|
] <br>
*'''News & Notes''' - ''']''' is a now a Featured Portal! National WINE PRIDE will be on the line as we see which wine country articles got the most page views in the month of Jan-and you maybe surprised at which countries beat out the US & California. ''The ] it's not.''
*'''Wiki-Winos''' - ''']''' Meet our new GA liaison and find out what in the world is he doing with ]?
*'''Wiki wine articles on the Web''' - ''A ], ] and ] grape walk into a bar and meet ]''....find out how an expert proved a Misplaced Pages article wrong. Also, our ] article braves new frontiers in the annals of rock band naming games. Plus, find out how our ] article helped out , what makes red wine '']'' and whether ] ] is better than standard Brunello.
|}
{| valign="top" width="100%" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%;"
|This newsletter is sent to those listed under ''Participants'' on the ] page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include '''Decline newsletter''' next to your name on the Participant list.<br>If you have any Misplaced Pages wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of ].
|}

== ] newsletter ==

{| style="border:2px blue solid; background: gol d"
|-
| ]
| align="left" width="100%" | <big>'''The ]!'''</big><br/> '''Issue XI''' - February 21st, 2008
|-
|}
{| style="border-bottom: 1px purple solid;border-left: 1px purple solid;border-right: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 100%; "
|
] <br>
*'''News & Notes''' - Every ] now has an article! Keeping up with the B class wine articles and find out which start class article of top importance was viewed almost 43,000 times between Dec-Jan.
:Plus, find out which wine related '']'' helped to dispel the myths around the ]'s origins and which ] chateau was a last minute addition to the ]-not without some controversy.
:Also, what wine articles have the most potential to reach ]?
*'''Wiki-Winos''' - Meet ]! Evan who? Well let just say that another "wiki-wino" has come out the ] to say Hi and share what his project Vinismo can do to help Misplaced Pages's wine articles.
*'''Wiki wine articles on the Web''' - Guess which prominent wine personality thinks that Misplaced Pages is one of the best wine resources on the web? Also find out who thinks our ] article is lacking and how our ] article cleared up some confusion about the grape's relationship to ]. Plus, was ] really singing about ]s in the Stones' song '']''?
|}
{| valign="top" width="100%" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%;"
|This newsletter is sent to those listed under ''Participants'' on the ] page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include '''Decline newsletter''' next to your name on the Participant list.<br>If you have any Misplaced Pages wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of ].
|}

== Imagine being called a Facist ==

... even if only of the variety.

Did that upset you? Then imagine how a mainstream conservative feels about being smears as a jew-fearing conspiracy-propounding white supremacist.

The popular left-wing tactic of labeling conservatives as far right only works because most people who follow politics are completely ignorant of what the genuine far right is really like. There is nothing wrong with being ignorant of the racist right, but there is a lot wrong with not even attempting to understand why an established editor with a lot more expertise in the area recognizes that smear as a blatant violation of ]. If you want to educate yourself, you could start ]. If you want more pointers, ask me. In the meantime, stop reverting edits that are ''required by Misplaced Pages policy''.

] Please do not add unreferenced or ] information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Misplaced Pages about ]{{#if:|, as you did to ]}}. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-biog2 -->

BTW, you also violated ]. Stop. ] 08:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
:That's complete bonkers. Calling someone "far left" on a talk page isn't a BLP violation, whatever your idiosyncratic beliefs may be on the question. You're so far off base in understanding policy on the matter it's hard to know where to begin.] (]) 14:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

::So not EVERYTHING is a BLP violation after all!] (]) 19:46, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

== Expression of continued annoyance over continued vandalism of Bill Ayers article ==

Wikidemo, the Bill Ayers article is now semi protected. Will this reduce the vandalism? When I look at the history of the IP anonymous users and new wiki users, they seem to only be focused on the Bill Ayers article. It is quite annoying to keep making these changes, especially when I am not really at all interested in the subject matter. ] (]) 23:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
:I think semi-protection will tend to discourage random people from vandalizing and disturbing the article, and set the bar higher for people who are only interested in a single political issue rather than Misplaced Pages as a whole - also it discourages sockpuppets from creating multiple accounts to have their way with the article. There's a valid question about how much treatment to give the Obama link and how it could be described, and how much to describe Ayers and the Weathermen as terrorists versus simply a violent group. But you can't have that discussion if people keep assaulting the article to edit war over their point of view. ] (]) 23:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
::How can it be "a valid question" as to whether Ayers may be described as a "terrorist" when terrorism is clearly a serious crime?] (]) 19:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

== I found a phone number and address for a place of business listed in an article, is this something that should quickly be deleted ==

Do you know the policy about phone numbers and contact information on wiki articles? Sorry to bother you with this, just didn't know the answer. thanks ] (]) 19:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
:If it's nonpublished information, attempt to breach somebody's privacy, or something like that I would delete it without leaving a clue to call attention to it in the talk summary, and ask an administrator to delete the history. If it's something that anyone could just look up, I would delete it but not worry. It's a style thing mainly...It flows from ].] (]) 20:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

it is published number. thanks ] (]) 20:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

== Ayres ==

You guys should both take it to talk, seriously. ] (]) 18:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
:Please don't equate legitimate edits like mine with POV-pushing edits to include inappropriate material in the encyclopedia. There is almost no chance those edits would stand up to review, and they are in a BLP. The editor has been repeatedly uncivil, so I see very little to gain by engaging him or her yet again on the talk page. ] (]) 18:51, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
::So your edits are "legitimate" and mine are not? Where and when have I been "uncivil"? Where have I assumed bad faith about YOUR editing intentions? Have I ever dismissed your contentions as "unworthy of response"?
::If there is "no chance" my edits would stand up to review, then why not take it to review? I've noticed you advising other users that an "editorial" is not a RS. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman labels himself "Liberal" front and centre over his "editorials". Speaking for myself, I have <i>no problem at all<i> with having Misplaced Pages include facts cited to one of Krugman's columns</i>, since I have no reason to believe that facts Krugman asserts are made up or shoddy scholarship. He's a recognized scholar regardless of one's politics. More importantly, however, is the fact Wiki policies do not exclude such citations. Would you consider refering other users to Wiki's RS policy henceforth instead of your own contentions about what is a RS policy and what is not? If policies are unilaterally and not collaboratively determined then I stand corrected.] (]) 19:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
:::::::You don't understand, Bdell. Wikidemo ASSUMES that his edit are legit and edits that do not agree with his are not legit. It is simple as that. You do not argue with Wikidemo. If he/she states that something violates BLP then it violates BLP. According to Wikidemo it just fine that there are two articles on Mel Gibson's drunk driving conviction. But Wikidemo believes that there should little or NO mention of Sydney Blumenthal's drunk driving conviction, get it? Just get with the program. Wikidemo can call your logic senseless and its ok because Wikidemo SAYS it is. He's not being uncivil. He's just telling the truth, man, get with the program. Just to be clear: I'm making a joke with the above comments and I don't believe any of it.--] (]) 01:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Will you kindly raise such matters in the discussion area? I'm not going to engage in a side discussion on this. Thx, ] (]) 19:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
::::You didn't claim that my edits would have "no chance" in a review and call them illegitmate over there.] (]) 19:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

== Ayers listing of names ==

Is the listing of the names of there children necessary, the children are probably still living, although over 18. I can research if needed, but I am inclined to remove the names of adult children who were not involved, because they themselves, I feel are not notable. ] (]) 18:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

:it does appear the names have been mentioned for a while, I just their mentioned is unnecessary and not noteworthy. Mentioning, number of children, adopted/biological, male/female, is fine. ] (]) 18:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
::I tend to agree. Given the POV edit warring on the page you might want to wait for a quiet time. I don't know if there is a hard rule, but even in noncontroversial articles I would tend to leave childrens' names off unless they are public figures, have some notability, or are relevant to the article. Otherwise we're giving publicity to private people who may or may not want it, and cluttering the encyclopedia with facts that don't add to the article. It also makes the tone less serious because it's reminiscent of wedding announcements, obituaries, etc. In the case of a controversial figure like Ayers I think there's a stronger argument for omitting names of children unless it's common knowledge (which differs from simply being public information - we don't repeat everything just because it's out there). ] (]) 18:51, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

::On another article, I did mentioned the names of the persons to children and spouse, but all are deceased over 10 years ago, and the man was head of a company that was in the family for generations, and one son turned down the chairmanship and the other son succeeded his father (these two facts are not noteworthy and I do have great sources, so it is not mentioned in the article. Their names are simply cited as children. ] (]) 19:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

== CSPI ==

Good work on the ] page, but I think you corrupted it slightly. I've had a go at restoring it. ] (]) 18:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks. Those unclosed references will get you every time :) ] (]) 18:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

== TfD nomination of ] ==

] has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> — ] 20:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

== CSD edit back in September ==

Ah, good, you are online. :-) Would you have time to have a look at ] where I point out ambiguity introduced by an edit you made? I'd be grateful if you could comment there to say what the intent of the edit was and what you think "cleaning up redirects" was meant to mean - just a rephrasing of what was there before, or something new? Thanks. ] (]) 08:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi, Wikidemo - I'm trying to do some organization and cleanup of image namespace templates...is the above template being used for anything? I noticed that nothing links to it. ] <sup>]</sup> 01:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

''note - the below is by one of the many reactions I have to deal with when rooting out editing problems on Misplaced Pages. I would delete as harassment, but preserve as a matter of what one deals with on troll patrol. The editor, in the course of doing this, erased some of the old record as well.'' ] (]) 15:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
<small>

== Civility Warning ==

For your comments on the discussion page of Sydney Blumenthal about me, here: .--] (]) 19:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
:That's one of the most civil messages I've ever seen here. Your warning is completely unwarranted. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
:::::::No. You are incorrect, Kelly. Wikidemo has stated that opinions that I have given "don't make much sense." Sorry, but if Wikidemo is going walk about and point his/her finger at other editors for civility then the finger is going to pointed back at him/her. Wikidemo needs to follow the rules that Wikidemo is trying to enforce. That's just the way that it works and your comment does not change that fact.--] (]) 00:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::That's just tit-for-tat retribution from an editor I've warned about tendentious editing. It comes with the territory. ] (]) 21:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
::::As for your comment on my talk page, Wikidemo, I have a right to express my opinion about your uncivil behavior. Please all communication with me. Your untruthful and uncivil comments are unwelcome.--] (]) 13:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
:::::Once again, I have asked you not to communicate with me any longer. Why can't you respect that request. Is it because you are acting in an uncivil manner? Of course, it is. Please curtail your behavior.--] (]) 15:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::::::You did not make such a request, unless you are referring to the ungrammatical comment, above, which does not communicate that point. You are trolling, and I have a right to leave appropriate warnings on your talk page. You do not have a "right" to misbehave, and it is wrong to harass other users on their talk page whether or not they tell you to stop. That is the difference. At you request I will not attempt any other communication though.] (]) 15:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
</small>

== AfD nomination of 2008 United States presidential election controversies and attacks ==

I have nominated ], an article you created, for ]. I do not feel 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. <small>Do you want to ] of receiving this notice?</small><!-- Template:AFDWarning -->

Sorry to have left this step out; my bad. I almost never put up articles at AfD, so I'm not very good at it. I think I've notified everyone who edited the article more than once. ] (]) 19:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks much! ] (]) 19:41, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to say thanks for your 'Keep' comment - well put! ] (]) 19:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

== Second Life Spam ==

Hello Wikidemo,
I am not so good at doing this, but I have a distinct feeling that this page ] is spam. The user has no previous edits and appears to be a shill either for Amiee Webber, the designer or Second Life. Is there a way you could mark it Spam or non-notable? I am unsure how to do it. All your help has been really inspiring.
] (]) 23:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
:Hmmmm. Thanks. There are a few ways to go about it. It could be a sockpuppet account of someone who does other edits here. There are a few ways to do with ] such as the notice board, sniffing out the IP address, and so on. And then purely as an editorial matter, it seems unreasonable to give so much weight in an article about an important company to a single relatively minor advertising campaign. I was thinking of trimming that back myself. I'll take a look. If a new ] editor adds something and leaves you may never know if they had a hidden agenda. But if the editor starts edit warring over trying to include irrelevant material, chances are the community will just reject the edits and that will be the end of it. ] (]) 23:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
::I've edited the article to be less spammy and include only two mentions of the designer's name. That should be plenty. Having the name in there a dozen times didn't make her seem any more respectable, quite the opposite. Even if it was created as a conflict of interest and promotional piece, there is some well-written encyclopedic content in there, and other than promoting the designer it is a balanced piece that includes some of the positive and negative things. I think it's notable as demonstrated by all the major news magazines writing about it. It's kind of interesting, really. So I would just shape it into a proper article and leave it be.

== fyi ==

I on ] to a recent edit you made.

I really do believe that the talk page was the appropriate place for your concern, not an edit summary. ] (]) 11:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

== conspiracy theory ==

how so? cointelpro is a conspiracy theory?] (]) 11:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

== Please Stop Arbitrarily Moving All Peoples Temple Mentions to Other Articles ==

I couldn't believe this, and it's across a number of articles where the subject is a primary participant in the discussed events. The extensive Peoples Temple involvement in, for example, Moscone's election in 1975 and San Francisco's 9-11 (Jonestown) tragedy during his administration certainly belong in Moscone's article, for example. I can't believe anyone would consider cutting this out, given the huge amounts of literature on the subject and the massive scale of the tragedy. ] (]) 04:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

:I apologize for the harsh tone of this. After I was suprirsed to find that no such section existed in the articles for both Brown and Moscone (Jones two big supporters with which he was heavily involved), I spent a lot of time putting together the section going through some books and other info I have lying around. I was annoyed it was moved, which effectively deleted it in its entirety. ] (]) 04:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

:I since have substantially cut down the content and moved it to subsections in both articles. Hopefully, this alleviates the "weight" and "relevance" concerns. ] (]) 04:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

== about Bill Ayer articles editor ==

I've actually never been interested in politics when it comes to wikipedia. The reason I have been pushing to much against editors in some Obama related articles is because I've noticed that there are so many people that push POV for Obama. I'm just trying to balance things by calling out those that are being biased and pushing an agenda. ] (]) 17:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
:Misplaced Pages is a place to write good articles, not to engage in name-calling over some people's attempts to keep derogatory election-rleated material out of bio articles of people who have little or nothing to do with the candidates. ] (]) 17:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

== changing Power in international relations ==

I wanted to ask you about changing the ] article (see talk page) because i noticed you have been undoing my edits and I think the template should change. I'm unsure of what to do because you keep leaving notes saying you're undoing my edits. ] (]) 20:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
:Nothing wrong with editing an article and you don't need my approval (but thanks)...but you could take a little time to think through how things are going so far before you do something so rash as to re-nominate all of the articles about Obama's relatives for deletion only a couple months after people decided to keep them. Particularly if you're a new user it's sometimes best to go slow at first, making smaller edits here and there to improve things while you learn what kinds of things fly and what don't, and get your arms around all the different policies and guidelines. As you can imagine, getting into something of current interest that people disagree about is a lot more controversial than making improvements to uncontroversial things. ] (]) 21:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

== Hi ==

<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">]

] has smiled at you! Smiles promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing! .... Hope you have forgiven my immature behaviour during ] some time ago... Keep in touch -- <small> <span style="border:1px solid #6699FF;padding:1px;background:#6699FF">] <sup> ] </sup> </span> </small> - 07:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC) <br /> <small>''Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''</small>
</div><!-- Template:smile -->

== Frank Marshall Davis ==

I reverted the vandalism for this one article, but would you mind checking this guy out? Thx.
http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Guitarlord123
] (]) 20:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
:He seems to like pants. One of our more innocuous vandals, kind of funny actually (not to encourage this sort of behavior). People like that usually get blocked, or find something else to do, in a few minutes. I can't imagine he would add the word "pants" to Misplaced Pages very long before he gets tired of it. He doesn't seem to be acting like a sockpuppet or mental case so I wouldn't worry about it (As much as I fight trolls and scold people I'm not an admin so I can't block him...). HTH ] (]) 20:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
::I left a warning - don't know where the template is so I did it freestyle. I couldn't help myself but to be a little cheeky. ] (]) 21:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

== Arbitration report ==

Hi Wikidemo. Please go here and state your claims: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Statement_by_Dario_D.

Thanks. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 08:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Re: (a bit late) ==

I really meant
{{cquote|] omgbbqdramaz}}
because that's what characterizes the best most of the 542 edits and 209221 bytes of this page. Wikipedians are attracted to drama, not unlike a butterflies are drawn to the light or flees to a fresh cow dung. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 12:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
:Not sure about the entire acronym, but the bbq in the middle looks tasty. ] (]) 12:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
::I quite agree ;) -- ] <sup>]</sup> 15:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

== Orthomolecular medicine ==

Before dismissing orthomolecular medicine as "fringe" science, rather than as therapies rejected by the pharmaceutical-academic "mainstream," I urge you to look people up whose lives have been turned around from disability to paying taxes by this underacknowledged scientific discipline.--] (]) 12:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

== Alexander Stanhope St. George ==

I blanked a version that was universally agreed on the AfD page to be a blatant hoax article, being actively used for PR purposes for the benefit of the article creator. We should ] hoaxers the benefit of such free PR during the course of an AfD. Now, if you want to write an article about "Alexander Stanhope St. George" as a "fictional character", I think that is a strange idea, but it is not against policy to do so until the AfD is ended. When I blanked the version, there was no other previous version that was not a blatant hoax article, so there was nothing else to "revert" to. Thanks.--] (]) 17:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

== WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter June 2008 ==

]<br />
:--] (]) 17:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

== Request for comment ==

FWIW, Wikidemo, I've an identical discussion going on .] ] 06:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads-up. I've commented there too. ] (]) 06:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

== ] ==

You appear to be involved in an edit war at ]. Please slow down on the reverts and use the talk page and ] instead of repeatedly reverting. Edit-warring may result in the page being protected or in blocks for participants. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 19:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the notice but there's no edit warring on my part that I can see. I made a single revert, spread out over several edits, to restore sourced content fundamental to the article and remove a bunch of junk that had recently appeared, thanks to a single tendentious editor. I did not revert any single part of it more than once, but there were so many edits over a period of time that my reversion also took several edits over time. As far as I can see the other editor involved was doing the same. The article has been stable for some time, so a reasonable effort to counter the effects of an editor making a complete mess of it isn't really edit warring. ] (]) 19:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

== Obama vote ==

Hi would you mind simplifying your reason for your vote. Youve added a lot of stuff that isnt relevant to this specific issue. Dont worry though, you will be able to make your other thoughts when we come to those issues. --— ] (]) 01:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
:Sure. I'm not sure that the "divide and conquer" approach is really going to guarantee a smooth or legitimate outcome, but I'm game. ] (]) 02:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
::Cheers, i see your concerns, but i think this is the closest we have ever come to peace, i have faith in it. — ] (]) 02:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

== Weigh in? ==

Perhaps you can take a look at: ]. It's rightfully protected, but it seems like a clear editprotected matter (both of them). <font color="darkgreen">]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">]</font> 19:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

== Request for your opinion ==

{| style="border: 2px solid gold; background-color:
|rowspan="2" valign="top" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em; color: green" |'''Please Vote For Change We Can Believe In Or Even No Change at Obama Article'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray; color: black" | '''Requesting your final opinion on the ] language'''
* You previously !voted (]) on what language to use at the ] page. We're trying to get a consensus now. Please take another look at how the discussion has progressed (especially ]) and consider what option might make the best consensus, then !vote again at ]. Please keep in mind the discussion has been long, so if you can accept what seems to be a likely option, please do. This is one of Misplaced Pages's most prominent articles. Thank you. ] (]) 23:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
|}
:Ha! I feel like Mr. Obama has personally reached out to me here on my Misplaced Pages page. ] (]) 00:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

== Racists ==

If you perpetuate a racist ideology, you are a racist. Calling a racist "racist" is not a personal attack: it is an accurate description of his/her character. ] (]) 17:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
:Someday you may realize how misguided that is. Meanwhile, whatever you may believe in your heart do not call editors on Misplaced Pages racists for honoring the overwhelming majority of sources, including the candidate himself, that refer to mixed race people like Obama an "African American". ] (]) 17:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
::Unfortunately, the light has blinded me from seeing that most wretched day. So, I still stick by my claim that if you perpetuate the one-drop rule, you are indeed a racist. There is no denying it. Also, please don't live biased commentary under my post. ;) ] (]) 18:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the response. Nobody is going to stop you from believing what you want to believe. I think I understand, and might even agree wit you in an abstract sense. People who accept and use racist language are racist in that they're perpetuating racism, even if they don't have any active malice in their hearts. The classic example is people who fly the confederate flag, claiming it isn't about slavery. I personally don't think that's the case here because our job here is to report the mainstream of thought, not to make judgments about it. But even if it were, it's simply against the rules and upsets the cooperation we need to edit an encyclopedia, if you call people racist here. Certainly you've been in situations where you have to hold your tongue and others where you don't. You can't reasonably expect that you're going to convince people to stop using the term "African-American" on the Obama page, or in the campaign. The best you can do is make them aware, and plant some doubt in their minds. If enough people find the term offensive and speak up, for long enough, the language and awareness could change. I think you'll get to people faster if you don't ''personally'' call them racist. You could say the same thing, probably get to people faster, by simply saying that you find the term racist and wish people wouldn't use it.] (]) 18:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
::::I don't find the term African-American racist: I find people calling someone with just as much "white blood" as "black blood" solely African-American racist. I understand what you're saying about causing disruption in the already turbulent talk-page; however, approaching this acquiescently hasn't proven the least-bit useful in the past. Every time there has been something in the article's introduction explaining his biraciality (w?), it ends up getting removed by some editor. It's just frustrating. ] (]) 18:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
:::::Understood about the distinction. I think usefulness has to be judged in small increments. You're kicking a very heavy object if you want people to call Obama biracial, like playing soccer with a bowling ball. Practically, I doubt you could get that to replace "African American" in the first sentence of the lead, but you might find people agreeable to including the term somewhere in the lead, and more detail elsewhere. As with everything around here, the best support is to find good sources that describe it and make te distinction. I think America (and with it, those Americans on Misplaced Pages) are just coming to terms with race in the first place. Many aren't even aware that there are multi-racial issues as well. ] (]) 18:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

== Re edit ==

. While I experience disinclinations to specify what the business of Weatherman was and therefore the whys of notability as rendering text that's pretty leathery and colorless, I suppose others experience prose that pointedly summarizes controversial material as sensationalistically juicy and rare.] ] 22:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
:Point taken. It depends on the specific article and the word in question...dry prose is sometimes a good way to avoid dispute. On the other hand if writing about something noncontroversial like a cartoon rabbit one can be a little more evocative without anyone minding. Cheers, ] (]) 22:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

== Rezko ==

Please self-revert your edit. It is factually-inaccurate (media scrutiny came ''before'' conviction) and lacks a reference. Furthermore, the indictment and conviction of Rezko is not at all related to Obama. Mentioning these details in the biography implies wrongdoing on the part of Obama, and therefore is a pretty serious violation of ] ("do no harm", details should only be about the subject of the article). -- ] (]) 16:48, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
:If it's inaccurate I'll change the description. However, stating that the deal lead to scrutiny of the relationship seems to e misleading. The relationship and the deal were both scrutinized because of Rezko, not because they happened. No plausible BLP vio there, and the citation already there is the source. BLP does not exist to protect Obama against controversies arising over his Presidency, and as a convicted public figure Rezko doesn't have an interest in hiding his convictions. Note that I didn't add the material, I'm scaling back a bold removal of the material that seems to have happened without and perhaps against consensus.] (]) 16:59, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
::Okay, after reviewing the sources in the paragraph it's clear: (1) Rezko was under indictment at the time of the transaction; (2) the scrutiny (and Obama's view of it) goes both to dealing with a corrupt person as well as dealing with a campaign fundraiser; (3) I could find no way to word it that did not seem to implicate Obama so I re-added the part that Obama was never accused of wrongdoing; and (4) the scrutiny is not over a "relationship" but over the dealings and potential for quid-pro-quo that occurred in that relationship. I think the coverage as rewritten captures that. It was rather bold of you to condense that material in the first place. I would have done the same. Consider this a correction that may lead to consensus and stability, not an attempt to introduce anything new that is controversial. ] (]) 17:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
:::I am in agreement with your assessment, and I think your changes are appropriate. -- ] (]) 18:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
::::Well, moot point now - they've been reverted. ] (]) 18:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

== Please follow up ==

has been sitting around for a while. Please respond to it. ] (]) 19:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

== Thanks ==

I appreciate your comments. I think I've said this before, we may disagree on some things but I trust your sincerity, too, and every now and then I think you're going to convince me about something. All I'm doing is going through the articles I've found and adding whatever seems to fill a gap in the article, positive, negative or otherwise. The thing about Ayers is that there's a simplistic positive view and a simplistic negative view out there, and neither is correct. I think some criticisms of him are devastating, and some defenses are the same for the critics, but I'm going wherever the sources take me. ] (]) 02:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
:Well, believe it or not my personal opinion of him is not at all positive. But I do think that if the facts are presented in a neutral way people can come to that conclusion for themselves. Thanks again, ] (]) 02:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

== Obama Article ==

I'm sorry but i'm fed up of it as a 'mixed' race individual, and so is most of the mixed race population. We should determine how we label ouselves, not the media, not black or white people or even Obama himself. It is accurate to say he is of dual heritage whether others like it or not. There shouldn't even be an issue about this... <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Well, true. But Misplaced Pages is not at the forefront of social change - it brings up the rear. There's plenty of room in the article, and even the rest of the lead, to talk about his mixed heritage...if you can find some strong, reliable coverage of the issue. There must be some. There is no question of his immediate ancestry, but all the major media are reporting that he is the first AA major party presidential candidate and that seems to be how he publicly self-identifies. So I think it will be a hard case to make as a primary adjective to describe Obama in the first sentence. There's a longer term issue of changing the discourse and awareness in the United States and the world. More power to you if you can, just be careful...and please don't edit war. You might notice there's an edit war brewing on another issue, and I have a feeling a number of editors are going to be blocked or even banished over that. You probably don't want to be on the scene in your own dispute when that happens. ] (]) 04:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

== Huh? ==

*Also: ] - an odd sock puppet that could be another piece of this puzzle - ] (]) 04:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

**That report, you must know, was a puerile game by an actual sockpuppet. Whateeevar! <font color="darkgreen">]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">]</font> 04:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
:Read between the lines. If the SSP report is as baseless as you think, then the administrators at AN/I will figure that out for themselves. They hardly need me to tell them. So the word "odd" says all I felt like saying about it. The more I protest about what's going on at the Obama article the more I look like part of the problem. So I'm laying low and urging cooperation...a simple link is enough. Cheers, ] (]) 05:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

::Fair enough. <font color="darkgreen">]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">]</font> 16:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

== AN/I silliness ==

Have you seen yet? The funniest bit is when the single-purpose agenda account demands that we get slapped with a six-month ban. Anyway, I wanted to thank you for the comment you left on my talk page. I was going to take a three-day wikibreak this weekend, but I might just start it now. I'm tired of being accused of being biased, when all I want it to make sure the article follows Misplaced Pages's policies. I can't even ''vote'' in the election, so I'm at a loss as to why these editors should describe Bill Clinton as "my man". I'm a Thatcherite, for goodness sake. -- ] (]) 13:21, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
:You may wish to plead your case. By which I mean acknowledge that your reverts, which you intended in good faith, might be perceived as being part of the edit war and promise not to do it again. You might want to do that without lashing out against (but without validating either) some of the bizarre nonsense you mention. I think the administrators know that one group of editors has been a lot more belligerent and problematic, but as I noted in cautioning you last night, at the moment they decide to do something, anyone left fighting, or expressing hostility, at the moment is perceived as a problem and is going to get a time out. Think of it as being spotted in a fight the moment police arrive. They perceive their immediate role as breaking up the fight, not to figure out who started it or whose underlying grievance is legitimate. I would hope some of the administrators take the time to review the edit histories of the people involved for possible sock puppetry and long-term tendentious editing, problems that go beyond just getting people to stop a revert war. Sometimes that wider review happens; usually it does not. ] (]) 17:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

== Thanks. ==

I was about to write up the 3RR report, but I'll let you handle it. I'm noticing suspicious similarities between certain users' edit summaries, and may submit an RFCU in the interim. We've clearly got a large group of good-faith editors (so-called "inclusionsts" and "exclusionists" alike) willing to build the article, but there're a couple who've got no regard for the Talk page whatsoever. Don't worry too much, things'll be fine once they've been dealt with. ]<sup>]</sup> 18:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
:I re-opened the last 3RR report, if that is possible. At least I tried to. I'm very unclear on the procedure....I'll see what happens. I'm preparing to notify the AN/I and a courtesy notice to Workerbee74 about the 3RR report. ] (]) 18:17, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
::Probably best to re-file it separately down page, for the ease of the reading administrator. ]<sup>]</sup> 18:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Will do. ] (]) 18:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
::::Er... I filed a new report a little while ago. I didn't notice that you had reopened the old one. -- ] (]) 18:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

== Reliable sources ==

I find some of your remarks ("I imagine we would deride most popular music there as simplistic and uninspired...") on ] sufficiently off-base that I thought I'd come over here to discuss them rather than respond in such a public forum. To me, your remarks read as if you are just imagining what academic literature would be without ever reading any, and I figured I'd come over here so I could say this a bit more privately.

For example, in my experience, musicologists give death metal more respect than anyone other than metalheads, and an American Studies professor who focuses on the 20th century is going to have at least as much to say about ] as any music critic. Not to say there isn't a certain amount of bullshit on popular culture to be found in academia, but in my experience it is more likely that academics will "discover" non-existent depth in a piece of popular music than dismiss it as "simplistic and uninspired".

As for "discuss social problems in terms of oppression of the majority culture", it's hard to say much more that "huh"? Are you saying that academics tend to defend the status quo and view the mainstream as somehow oppressed? No doubt some do, as do some of any other group. I'm sure you can find some Indian academics among the ranks of the BJP, and so forth, but in the U.S. and many European countries far more critical questioning comes out of academia and academic presses than out of the newspapers or (certainly) television.

Causation, as Redheylin accurately said in responding to you, is an explanatory principle, not a natural phenomenon.

"Jesus will save the oppressed": I have no idea where this came from. Are you saying that academics have a bias in favor of some kind of quietist Christianity? This just strikes me as bizarre. - ] | ] 21:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
:I'm not an academic but I've read a fair amount of academic literature. Much is reasonable within its area of expertise, some is quite iconoclastic, biased, or nonauthoritative. Not academic literature but I recall a textbook my college classmate showed me on music appreciation that, as often happens, gave only a single chapter to 20th century classical and pop music. It concluded with a paragraph to the effect that most popular music is unsophisticated and of little interest, with the possible exception of the Beatles, who showed some degree of harmonic complexity in their works. I've found similar arrogance and bias in quite a few other fields - and in fact studied the issue a bit in academic pieces on history and philosophy of science. Perhaps a textbook is not a peer-reviewed journal piece, but the discussion in talk space was more broadly addressing the question of academic sources. The whole discussion over at WP:V is a bit arrogant and ivory tower. If you look at actual articles in article space, most of them are unsuitable for academic sourcing. It simply does not apply. I can understand the impatience with pseudoscience, fringe theories, etc., but most of the world does not look to academia as an unassailable source of knowledge. Our job as an encyclopedia is to present knowledge, not to favor one school or another. There are other regimes of understanding, e.g. law, news, and government records. As to you "huh" question the "of" is used in the sense of "by" - the majority culture oppresses minorities. That's dogma, and the predominant explanatory tool, in some circles of social science. Nothing wrong with that analysis, mind you, and perhaps true, but it's just one perceptual lens. It's a position, and not authoritative. And yes, much academic literature talks of causation as a natural law. It depends on the field. It's only when you get to philosophy of science, or metaphysics, some of those other things, that you actually get to a critique of causation. Of course in law, causation is something entirely different. I don't remember what I meant by the Jesus example, probably that in liberation theology that is the premise, something having to do with acceptance of Jesus or working of Jesus serving to liberate oppressed people throughout the world. You won't find that in most mainstream academia, but certain religious scholars for sure. ] (]) 21:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

== Your agreement at ] ==

I have just posted the following in response to your offered agreement at ].

I am eager to not only agree, but to defend the agreement. I will do my best to keep the inclusionists (my side) from breaking the agreement. ''(I point out that this will mean I'm going to try to deal with such hot-tempered folk as Fovean Author and, when they inevitably return from their blocks, WorkerBee and Andyvphil.)'' You must, in turn, do your best to keep the exclusionists (your side) from breaking the agreement. ''(That includes Life.temp, Scjessey and Lulu.)'' Do you agree, Wikidemo? ] (]) 23:07, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for the notice. I'll respond on the article talk page. ] (]) 23:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

== Barnstar of Peace ==

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Peace'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I am giving you this barnstar of peace after your proposal and push for peace in the ] page and article. I hope your actions lead to a better calm there. ] (]) 19:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
|}

== ] ==

I left a few notes on the article talk page. I'm finding myself interested in improving the overall quality of the article. ] ] 03:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

== The weight of worlds ==

I've returned from my brief wikibreak and re-watchlisted ]. After reading through the discussions on the talk page, I am concerned at the way things are developing. It is clear that several editors are still trying to use Misplaced Pages to inflate minor controversies as much as they possibly can, and the lack of neutral editors is placing a lot of burden on your shoulders.

As you know, I voluntarily decided to take a two-week break from editing Obama and McCain-related articles, but that was predicated on the notion that the editors responsible for adding BLP-violating text would receive some sort of sanction. Unfortunately, the ] has focused on matters of process, rather than matters of substance. Individuals responsible for tendentious and disruptive edits, like the single-purpose account WorkerBee74, have been allowed to continue their activities unchecked - perhaps even emboldened - by the absence of policy-driven editors like myself.

It disturbs me that a so-called "consensus" for the inclusion of contentious material is coming into being, opposed only by yourself and a couple of others. I note the frequent use of the word "compromise", but I think it is important to note that there can be no compromise when it comes to Misplaced Pages policy. ] must necessarily be strict because it involves people's lives, and how they are perceived by others. It is my opinion that specifically referring to Rezko's indictment and conviction of charges that are completely unrelated to Barack Obama is a clear violation of BLP policy.

I will continue to monitor the discussion from a back seat for the time being, but if I see things continuing to move in the wrong direction I may have to rethink that position. In the meantime, let me thank you for doing your best to maintain some level of sanity on the Obama BLP - it is ''much'' appreciated. -- ] (]) 00:24, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

:As you probably know, AN/I is all about process, not substance. They're trying to sort out behavior problems and edit warring, not what the policies and guidelines say the article should look like. At some point you might want to comment at the andyvphil page that you would like to rejoin the discussion page inasmuch as nobody seems to have been topic banned and you still have some things to say. I'd avoid making accusations or big characterizations, and simply argue your position on the content. I'm probably not as firm as you are on keeping material out. I think some things have their place, and my threshold is probably a bit higher. The relevance of Rezko's indictment to Obama is that the investigation was already in place as of the time of the land deal, and Obama went ahead anyway - saying he didn't know initially but trusted Rezko's assurances later. Although the specific counts is not relevant to Obama, nor is a list of all of a politician's friends and associates who have been convicted of crimes, what is relevant is that Obama as a politician (apparently) lacks or lacked the insight, steeliness, judgment, caution, or whatever, to distance himself from controversial associates to the degree that is expected of most politicians these days. I find that argument persuasive, and it certainly did get a non-trivial amount of press. You're welcome to your opinion about BLP and you're free to argue it, but I disagree and don't think the BLP argument will carry much weight. It hasn't with the crop of administrators and editors so far and I'm guessing it won't with other neutral people. The deal is that Rezko himself has very little BLP interest - he's already been convicted, and the conviction was widely publicized, so there is no protecting him from anything. Only a little bit, that we shouldn't drag him through the mud indefinitely to disparage other people. Obama has very little BLP interest because he is a public figure, and all of these scandals are well-reported. As you probably can see I think of it as more of a weight and relevance issue, with a dash of NPOV and avoiding forks / redundancy as a style matter. Those arguments have wider appeal. If you step back and look at the Rezko material, though, it doesn't make a heck of a lot of difference. If we're going to mention it at all, the difference between Workerbee's proposed version and mine, or what's already in the article, is not going to make a huge difference. It makes Obama look about 3% worse than he would otherwise. The POV problem and gaming is the cumulative effect of a lot of derogatory material - trying to add Ayers too, and each of the Trinity pastors, and perhaps every other controversy that rolls around. As a final note, I don't think the sockpuppet question has been fully sorted out. It's probably best not to keep mentioning it on the talk page, and I doubt that all of the people involved are sockpuppets, but they never really did a complete checkuser. Workerbee is indeed an SPA and so are others. It is legitimate, though, to start out one's Misplaced Pages career on a single important article like this if the editing is productive and in good faith. So unless any of these can be shown to be sockpuppets or meatpuppets, I think you just have to live with it. People with longer edit histories, less history of trouble, and who argue calmly and well DO carry more weight because they convince more people. I think we might just have to leave it at that. But it would be nice to close the sockpuppet accusations down, and to do that I think they have to take their course. Life.temp being a sock puppet threw me off guard, so I would say, run it on everyone accused on both sides. Cheers, ] (]) 01:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
::I just want to clear up a couple of things. Firstly, I haven't been one of those accusing anyone of using sockpuppets, apart from that I filed today. I do not believe that any of these regular edits are socks, or even meatpuppets. Secondly, I think that the whole "public figure" excuse for shoehorning titillating tangential tidbits (I should ''trademark'' that awesome phrase, shouldn't I?) is a wee bit overused. It indicates a slight relaxation of the rules for the public interest, but it shouldn't change the overall philosophy. Your argument about duplication was particularly well made - blue links, especially in an article written in ], should provide a reader with the opportunity to go deeper into biographical details of Obama's associates. Obviously ''some'' mention is essential, but it really should be restricted to the campaign section - if it weren't for the campaign, Rezko would not have been notable at all. -- ] (]) 02:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Sure. I haven't been keeping score of who did what but I tend to agree, there are different people editing (though it's possible that one or more are sockpuppets of someone else, you never know). I'm curious to see where the article would go if we had a whole bunch of fresh editors on it. I've caught a number of sockpuppets on the project so I'm pretty alert to the issue. You'll find that the BLP policy is already pretty strong, and many people don't support it as it is. I won't try to convince you, just consider it friendly advice that I don't think your BLP argument is gaining much acceptance so if you lead with that, a neutral editor/administrator may disagree and then compartmentalize your concern as answered/invalid. I think a parallel concern is that we don't want Misplaced Pages to be a scandal sheet. Even if not for Obama's own good (as a Presidential candidate he's expected to take all challenges), we simply don't want to be a conduit of the nasty political nonsense. Well, my proposal does restrict Rezko coverage to the campaign section but it discusses the uncontroversial aspects of his home purchase, and his work for the law firm, in their appropriate places. That's putting everything where it belongs, IMO. ] (]) 02:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

==Re: Barack Obama article==

Regarding my "]" edit to the ] article:

My 20:58, 19 June 2008 : ''(Revert mass reversion by ] done without any edit summary or discussion on Talk page to last version by HailFire)'' was to undo ]'s highly disruptive massive revert to by Scjessey of 00:12, 14 May 2008 from 5 weeks, 1 day, 18 hours and 14 minutes earlier, undoing 1,187 subsequent edits (including 23 of my edits), from which point editors could undo one or more of HailFire's edits and discuss them on the ] page.

Your 21:09, 19 June 2008 : ''(] revision 220433224 by ] (]) restoring what seems to be stable version of article - will caution user to not edit war)''
did not restore a "stable version of article," it restored ]'s highly disruptive massive revert to a revision from 36 days earlier which undid 1,187 subsequent edits.

Please be more careful with your edits. Thank you.
] (]) 15:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

:It was a complete mess. My comment about edit warring stands. Certainly you know of the discussion on the talk page.] (]) 15:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

It was indeed a complete mess. And your completely unwarranted lecture about "edit warring" to a regular editor of the article simply trying to undo ]'s highly disruptive edit -- that accompanied ''your'' careless restoration of ]'s highly disruptive edit -- was not appreciated and not conducive to maintaining a ] atmosphere.] (]) 17:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
:You're being needlessly confrontational here. I can understand the awkwardness of being cautioned about your edits, and I did try to keep up a courteous enough tone for that. I stand by mine. If Lulu had not jumped in to finish fixing things I would have. Sorry, ] (]) 17:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

== Sock wearing armies ==

I note that in addition to Forvean Author being blocked for sock puppetry (is there a link to anyplace where that action is explained?) there are two other new reports, ] and ]. That makes a total of four SSP reports and two confirmed sockpuppet operators on the Obama page in the past several days. It's only natural to wonder if some of these are related, and whether a narrowly focused checkuser might miss some of the connections. Maybe it's best to ask for guidance from a seasoned admin / checkuser operator. With two confirmed sockpuppets on one of the most important articles in the encyclopedia at the moment, I think there's a good case to be made for sorting it out once and for all in an orderly way. Wikidemo (talk) 08:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

:I quite concur that there's something much more going on than only those socks I listed in this latest report. I actually think that one of the IP's I copied over to the second K4T checkuser request was an Andyvphil sock, not a K4T one, but it's hard to sort out. I'm not really convinced by the negative check on FA/K4T, but we have to go with what the admin found. WB/K4T I'm pretty sure about though.

:Moreover, there is something ''very strange'' about the masses of "votes" on the Rezko language polls from IP addresses whose first contribution to the page are those votes. Even more so because they all vote the same way.

:I don't really know how to deal with this. If you can grab a seasoned admin/checkuser by the shirt collar, that would be great. It's hard to pin them down at times though. I appreciate any efforts you make. <font color="darkgreen">]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">]</font> 18:55, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

==Notability of ]==
]<!-- use ] for YELLOW flag --> A tag has been placed on ] requesting that it be ] from Misplaced Pages. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the ], articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please ]. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the ].

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding <code>{{tl|hangon}}</code> to the top of the article ('''just below''' the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on ''']''' explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Misplaced Pages guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria ], ], ], or ]. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.<!-- Template:Nn-warn --> ] <font color="Magenta">]</font> 21:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:00, 27 December 2024

Proposal

Hello, Wikidemon. You have new messages at Talk:List of Jewish actors.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Notice

craigslist

Spam, harassment

Posters can choose to anonymize their email address to a temporary craigslist address, who will then relay any messages sent to that address to the poster's actual email address. Replying to a post, email address will be visible to the poster. The same Flagging group of individuals using sending addressing only once also send spam in mass to posters inundating there inbox with what look like blank responses These messages have the potential of having Javascript or embedded objects in there e-mails.57 Craigslist posters have also reported the tracking cookie (Ad.yieldmanager.com) and (207.net)in there browser history.

http://www.craigslist.org/about/anonymize

http://www.craigslist.org/about/help/replying_to_posts

http://www.spywareremove.com/removeAdyieldmanagercom.html

unless you have been there you realy do not know

http://chicago.craigslist.org/wcl/zip/3291189601.html

Don't include html forms in emails. The Yahoo! Mail client warns users that submitting forms in email can be dangerous

Don't include Javascript in emails

Don't include embedded objects in emails (like flash or active-x).

Nomination of Francis Ford Coppola Presents for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Francis Ford Coppola Presents 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/Francis Ford Coppola Presents 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.

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michelle Matlock

Notice

The article Michelle Matlock has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC)