| Revision as of 08:42, 8 July 2008 editInetpup (talk | contribs)1,648 edits Undid revision 224156979 by Cumulus Clouds - though cryptic, I asked a question; please respond at your leisure; thanks!← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 14:30, 24 April 2018 edit undoRRabbit42 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users701 edits Updating dead link to point to the version preserved by the Internet Archive in 2014 |
| (227 intermediate revisions by 81 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{divbox|white||3=''Note - Cumulus Clouds had requested deletion of his user and talk pages on December 12, but on December 22, 2008. His pages are preserved here as they were prior to deletion.'' |
|
{{archive box collapsible|] ] ]}} |
|
|
|
<br /> |
|
|
''Please take a moment to remember him.'' |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{deceased}} |
|
<!--LEAVE MESSAGES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE!!--> |
|
|
<!--LEAVE MESSAGES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE!!--> |
|
|
<!--LEAVE MESSAGES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE!!--> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Request for mediation not accepted== |
|
|
{| class="messagebox" style="width:90%" |
|
|
|- |
|
|
|] |
|
|
|A ] to which you were are a party was ] and has been delisted.<br>You can find more information on the case subpage, ].</center><br> |
|
|
::''For the Mediation Committee,'' <font face="Verdana">]]</font> 21:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|} |
|
|
<small><center>This message delivered by ], an automated bot account ] by the ] to perform case management.<br>If you have questions about this bot, please ].</small></center> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Arbitration == |
|
|
Gen X is going to arbitration, and you my friend, are invited to attend. ] (]) 12:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==]== |
|
|
Yep , the article has problems. But speedy delete is only for the reasons in WP:CSD. (yu are right though that there was no point in prod if its going to be deleted). The only way to go for deletion on this is afd. I am uncertain about the result, & even uncertain about what I will say there myself. ''']''' (]) 03:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Sockpuppets== |
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for alerting me about this, I'll see what I can do. Strangely enough, ] has not edited in quite a while and even announced on the ] talk page that he would be leaving English Misplaced Pages indefinitely. This would be a lie if he's just trolling around under another account, but we'll see.--<strong>]</strong><sup>]</sup> 20:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Just as a point of reference, I believe LaGrandefr's IP address is 195.221.219.142. I say this because during our debate at ], it was this IP address that was pushing to have ] placed in the Ming Dynasty article in several other Wikipedias, . Hope this helps.--<strong>]</strong><sup>]</sup> 20:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Hahaha! Dude, I just read Foxhunt's comments at ], and I am almost certain that it is the same person as LaGrandefr. They have seemingly identical syntax errors in their sentences and similar use of adjectives.--<strong>]</strong><sup>]</sup> 21:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Also, ]'s bizarre one-sentence statement as his user page is strikingly similar to of LaGrandefr's user page and ].--<strong>]</strong><sup>]</sup> 21:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::If you're up for it, I would suggest that you make another request for checkuser and provide the IP address (i.e. 195.221.219.142) to moderators so that they can quickly verify whether or not LaGrandefr and Chenyangw come from the same source.--<strong>]</strong><sup>]</sup> 21:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I thought of LaGrandefr too, and wondered if the same person was cooking this new brew up. But I figured, if LGF wanted to sockpuppet, he would probably use his sockpuppets to attack ] again. What's more, I doubt LGF would be silly enough to think of me as a likely ally in support of keeping the Slavery/Serfdom article. ] (]) 02:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ESanchez013 == |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't really understand what's wrong. I placed the <nowiki>{{userpage}}</nowiki> template. What do you want me to change? I would've appreciated mention of your intention on my talk page. Thanks! <span style="cursor:help"><font color="#380355" face="Edwardian Script ITC">Mr. E. Sánchez</font></span> <sup>''']'''</sup>/ <sub>''']'''</sub> 01:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Removal of tags on ]== |
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for the message you left on my talk page. |
|
|
|
|
|
The reason I have previously removed the multipleissues box is given in the edit summary: |
|
|
|
|
|
''"removed unhelpful multipleissues box as there was nothing in the talk page to support it"'' |
|
|
|
|
|
It's good ] use the edit summary to explain your changes to other editors rather than to use it to demand that no-one else touches them. |
|
|
|
|
|
If you really think that such a garland of tags is helpful to this article then why not explain your reasoning to the rest of us on the article's talk page? As it stands I can see no benefit in having it there so I'll probably delete it again the next time I contribute to the article. |
|
|
|
|
|
Better still, why not have a go at improving the article yourself? |
|
|
|
|
|
The article is rated as B-Class on the assesessment scales of ], ] and ] so there is clearly an overwhelming consensus that it needs further work. |
|
|
|
|
|
So go ahead, think about what you can do to make the article better, and ] and help make ] the great article it deserves to be. |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 12:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Thanks for the revert == |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for reverting the edits to ] - with the fact the vandalism wasn't obvious, I was getting a bit worried about hitting the 3 revert rule (hence the edit where I left in the close-to-vandalism content and asked for a revert). Cheers --] (]) 23:37, 16 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Generation Z Article== |
|
|
The two sources listed are the NY Times and an Australian Newspaper. These are certainly notable sources and are not blogs as you incorrectly stated. I undid your incorrect undo of me. Please take it to the discussion page lest we get into a revert war. |
|
|
:*I've responded on your talk page but I don't appreciate the threat of an edit war. ] (]) 00:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Dihydrogen monoxide hoax == |
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to invite you to participate in a discussion on the talk page of the article ]. I, and at least one other editor, see no need for the tags at the top of the page. I submit that (1) there are multiple references in the article to reliable sources documenting that there is such a hoax, (2) the article does not appear to have been written in an essay-like tone (as one of your tags suggests), and (3) that the article does not contain original research. If you would like to help out, please post a more detailed response on the talk page rather than continuing to edit war on the page. I also ask that you familiarize yourself with the ], which you are now in violation of. Thank you, ] (]) 02:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:How about you help out with the citation style, rather than placing more templates at the top of the page? I find this rather infuriating. See ]. ] (]) 02:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: Edit warring and five tags at the top of a single article without accompanying talk-page discussion seems disruptive to me. I am going to address the issues as I see fit, and I am then going to remove all of the nag tags. If you want to add them back, then you are going to have to post something on the talk page. Otherwise your editing is clearly disruptive. ] (]) 02:52, 19 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::: I don't see how ] applies. We aren't talking about a deletion discussion here. We are talking about whether or not there are any references in the article. Clearly there are, so the template should go. The other templates should be accompanied by a section of the talk page. Please direct your browser to ] and use the ]. These are there for a reason you know. ] (]) 03:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, please, take it to the talk page of the article. That is what you should have done to begin with, rather than edit-warring. See ]. ] (]) 03:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I am just as guilty of edit warring as you? Interesting. From where I sit, I am the only one even trying to ''address'' the issues your template raises. Furthermore, the {{tl|unref}} template is not accurate. There are many references in the article, if you would care to scroll down to the '''References''' section. ] (]) 03:21, 19 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
The article is funny stuff, and appears to be the basis for a mock-serious presentation we had in our office recently. ] <sup>'']''</sup> 06:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:FWIW I found the article quite interesting and informative. I tried to write a similar article on ] (surgical removal of someone's head) but it got wiped due to lack of references. It is the actual term of course, but hey what can you do? It is good that Misplaced Pages can inform and be amusing sometimes. ] (]) 05:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::*Spectacular. Thanks for the heads up. ] (]) 06:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
I've started a discussion about Image:Michael Q. Schmidt at wrap party for Yesterday Was A Lie.jpg ]. Please join in the discussion there. Thanks. ] (]) 20:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Your reversion of the edit to ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Please see my response . Thank you. ] (]) 01:45, 30 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Request for input == |
|
|
|
|
|
Since you were the one who added them, I thought you should be informed that a discussion is ongoing at ] about whether maintainance tags are still necessary. If you're still interested, your input on the changes that have been made -- splitting the article especially -- would be welcome. Cheers, ] (]) 23:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== FYI == |
|
|
|
|
|
The prod statement was false. 300 users online at the same time is different to 300 users in total. I don't know if that influences your opinion or not, or the fact it had existed for over 4 years with dozens of contributors and had passed an AFD over 3 years earlier. Was deleted on a PROD that was based on false information, which you seemed to accept as fact. ] (]) 01:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==RfA thanks== |
|
|
<div class="NavFrame" style="width:50%;background-color:#eeffff"><div class="NavHead" |
|
|
style="background:cyan;color:blue;">]</div><div class="NavContent" |
|
|
style="display:none; text-align:left; background:240 248 255;"> |
|
|
] at ] play with me...|thumb|right|140px]] |
|
|
Thank you for your participation in ], which closed successfully. I felt the process was a thorough review of my contributions and my demeanor, and I was very gratified to see how many editors took the time to really see what I'm about and how I can be of help to the project. As a result, some editors changed their views during the discussion, and most expressed specific, detailed points to indicate their opinion (whether it was ], ], or ]). |
|
|
|
|
|
A number of editors were concerned about my level of experience. I was purposeful in not waiting until a particular benchmark occurred before requesting adminship, because I feel - as many do - that adminship is not a reward and that each case is individual. It is true that I am not the most experienced editor around here, but I appreciate that people dug into my contributions enough to reach the conclusion that I seem to have a ]. Also, the best thing about this particular concern is that experience is something an editor - or administrator - can always get more of, and I'll continue doing that, just as I've been doing. (If I seem a little slow at it, feel free to ].) |
|
|
|
|
|
I am a strong believer in the concept that this project is all about the content, and I'm looking forward to contributing wherever I can. Please ] if I can be of any help. In the meantime, I'm ]... |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks again! |
|
|
</div></div> |
|
|
|
|
|
== New editor help == |
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your help so far concerning ]. I noticed that it's marked for deletion and that you saw it as a purely promotional article. If you're willing, I'd appreciate some help in making this article meet the standard guidelines. This article and another are my first attempts at this sort of thing and were experiments in learning the process. Not to encroach on your time, but if possible, I would appreciate some help with the references. I'm not quite sure how to include archived video news coverage in the references section. Could you point me to another page that has this type of reference? |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 23:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:The fact that you frown upon composing articles based on one's personal knowledge of the subject is understandable. I was using subjects that I know well in an effort to begin learning the Misplaced Pages system and culture. It's quite overwhelming and the process of learning the code, the guidelines, the culture, and the format is difficult for those of us that wish to contribute. I hope you'll understand that although I used my personal knowledge of the Strange Occurrence and Rock and Roll Conservatory subjects to write articles, I did my best to compose them without bias. The composition of these articles were based on similar articles about similar subjects that somehow seemed to pass through the system even though these similar articles had either no references and/or carried much more commercial bias than those that I composed (] and ]). Nonetheless, I understand how the bias is even present in me merely attempting to write those articles, let alone what they contained, so I won't debate your reasoning, although I feel it is solidly flawed. That said, my edit to the Scott Hunter article was factually based and added to the accuracy of the article and reflected no bias in the slightest. You reverting the article to a vague and non-accurate state seemed to be more of a vendetta. I'm not sure what I've done to offend you, but you've chosen to take action based on your flawed assumption that I was self-promoting (I am not Joe Wiles) instead of taking action in good faith and asking me about my stance or even improving the article (read ] Alternatives to Deletion). Your bias against new users was made clear to me when you reverted my edits to the Scott Hunter article. I had made the article more accurate, more factually based, and instead of asking me why, you just went with your assumption. Please refrain from doing so again. ] (]) 05:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::Do you just want me off Misplaced Pages? I'll leave and never return again, if that's what you'd like. Cumulus, there are a whole ton of articles without references to specifics across Misplaced Pages. I can dig up evidence of the involvement of the members of Scott Hunter's last project if you'd like, but if you're going to hound me about them, revert them, and constantly be on my ass, then I'd rather not take part in the process. There are literally millions of articles on Misplaced Pages with no references to the specifics they claim to be authorities on. Since I don't see you reverting and editing those articles, I can only assume that you're aiming specifically at me and the edits that I make. Please prove me wrong. I'd love to find out that you're just a stickler for the cause and are, indeed, on a mission to clean up Misplaced Pages's millions of unreferenced claims. You know, as well as I do, that if every single claim, fact, or statement on any article had the necessity of being referenced to a secondary, unbiased, published work, then there would be very, very little information on Misplaced Pages. Get off my back, man. ] (]) 07:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Could you please take another look at this article? I have added a number of references and I think the article is in much better shape now. Thanks, ] (]) 03:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== WMA article == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi this is just a work in progress. I am getting ready to add references. Please don't delete, or please help with it... <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 09:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
Please help make Wiki more constructive, I'm not altering any articles, just adding info to it as I know. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 09:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Your reversion of my contributions to ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Please see my response . Thank you. ] (]) 19:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:Hi CC, Can you pin down exactly where MichaelQSchmidt has tried to "write into an article about a show appeared in"? I quite frankly don't see it. Thanks! ] (]) 01:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== XKCD & in popular culture == |
|
|
|
|
|
In light of the United Airlines in popular culture AFD discussion, I feel you might get a laugh out of . Cheers --] (]) 05:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:Randall says it like it's a bad thing. :( --]<font color="black">]</font><font color="green">]</font> 11:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Question == |
|
|
|
|
|
<math>\sqrt{(\mathfrak{v}\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{r}\mathfrak{i}\mathfrak{o}\mathfrak{u}\mathfrak{s} \curvearrowleft |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
\begin{Vmatrix} |
|
|
e & d \\ |
|
|
i & t & s |
|
|
\end{Vmatrix} |
|
|
|
|
|
)}</math> --] (]) 08:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
