Misplaced Pages

User talk:Equendil: 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 22:46, 16 September 2008 editEquendil (talk | contribs)Rollbackers6,267 edits Xidan: replying← Previous edit Latest revision as of 06:41, 19 November 2023 edit undoDonner60 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers235,997 edits not around since March 2011 
(129 intermediate revisions by 58 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{not around|3=11 March 2011}}
<div class="messagebox cleanup metadata">'''I reply to messages left on my talk page on the very same page, not your talk page. Please ] this page if you expect a reply.'''</div>
{{notice|'''I reply to messages left on my talk page on the very same page, not your talk page. Please ] this page if you expect a reply.'''}}
<table cellspacing="2" cellpadding="2" style="background: #FFFFFF;">
<tr><td valign="center"><div style="background: #FBFBFD; border: #000000 solid 1px; padding: 1em; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 100%; text-align: justify;">
{{Archive-box
|image=]
|box-width=150
|]}}


== AFD Predictive index ==
'''Welcome!'''


I have now listed the copyvio link on the AFD for this article ] ] (]) 03:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, {{PAGENAME}}, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or place <code>{&#123;helpme}}</code> on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!&nbsp; - <b>]</b><small> ]/]/]</small> 02:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


== ] ==
== Greetings to and from Paris, and welcome to Wiki ==


A tough one to fix... though I think I did okay for not being able to read Croatian. Can you suggest what else I might do to improve this thing? Thanks, ''']''' '']'' 08:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Did you just join today? You haven't even begun your user page yet : ) Anyhow, welcome to Wiki!


== Misinformed ==
You say that you are living in Paris? That is wonderful news - a few of us were just getting ready to begin work on the ] article to bring it up to "Featured" status - and that page could use your help! The 'French' English-Wiki pages are still relatively 'low-traffic' and lack knowledgable input - and first-hand knowledge is the best. I really hope you can help out. Never mind what you'll see in the Talk pages there - reams and reams of detail-filled banter - as our goal is to take what we've got and work forward. You may even find some of it amusing.


The articles for 'Surrender Monkey' and 'Cheese eating surrender monkies' do not exist to legitimise hating the French. Noting silliness is not the same as supporting it. In conclusion, I can understand saying the article is not noteable but to say it exists to hate the French is pointless and wrong. ] (]) 21:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Anyhow, hope you enjoy your stay, and thanks for your contribution earlier today.


== Xidan ==
Take care,


Thank you for reopening that non-neutral closure of the deletion debate. The editor in question was very belligerent in their reaction. Also could you point to any sources for the mall? I tried google but did not find anything ] and then google scholar turned up nothing.] (]) 22:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
--] 20:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
:Can't help there, I reverted for reasons explained in the Afd page. ] <small>]</small> 22:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
::How was I being belligerent? I am considering that as a violation of ]. ] (]) 22:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Woah, wrong talk page to discuss with ] ] <small>]</small> 22:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
::::Not only did Chuletadechancho violated NPA, he also made false claims on the deletion notice. In other words, he LIED. He claims to have searched for the place, and found nothing. However, I conducted a search that turned up multiple tourism articles about this place, including one from the Beijing Olympics official website. Chuletadechancho has nominated this page with malicious intent, and has lied profusely to other Wikipedians in a campaign on deception. Sanctions need to be taken! ] (]) 00:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


I would appreciate it if you could comment at ]] (]) 01:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
: Thanks for the welcome :) I created the account just a couple weeks ago, and haven't got around the idea of filling my user page yet, though I suppose I should.
:I'll have a look at the Paris page, and see if I can help somehow, but I'm not too sure I'm fit for the more popular entries and the never ending edit/talk wars usually going on. If anything, it seems very time consuming for little changes. But, as I said, I'll give it a try at least. ] 22:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


== ongoing vandalism at ] ==
:: I had the same impression when I first opened that article (and didn't think to touch it for more than a year), but the Paris page seems to be like that supermodel everyone assumes has a demi-god boyfriend/husband. The fact of it is, and most likely because of the same sort of general assumption in face of its 'big-city' title: she's been a loniler girl than you think. Would you believe that, for the time being, there are but two or three 'regular' contributors there? The arguments haven't helped to attract contributors, granted. it's taken a while to sort out the 'extent' of the article, but this done it will be clear sailing and changes frequent and constructive. For sure wait until the going gets easier - but I can't keep from fishing for input from anyone with first-hand knowledge of Paris. No matter, I won't push you : ) See you around! ] 23:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


Hi there, thanks for semi-protecting the page. These accidents occasionally do happen because the article is vandalized by 2 separate ip/user vandals in succession. Unfortunately Huggle doesn't have an option to restore to previous a reversion :( --''']]<sup>]</sup>''' 13:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
==Edit summaries==
:Ah yes, well, best go manual when massive vandalism is occuring on one article. ] <small>]</small> 13:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Please use them. They're extremely important, and save us wikipedians many clicks and much confusion. Thanks. - <b>]</b><small> ]/]/]</small> 02:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
:There you go! :) :) - <b>]</b><small> ]/]/]</small> 03:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
::Eh, sorry, I was editing on radar, time for bed me think :) ] 03:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


== ] ==
==Haha==
Damn that guy is dense as steel, and steel is pretty dense. Very weird individual....] 01:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:Let's make that as dense as ], the heaviest known element. He's like totally out of his mind, but pathological liars like him who think they are both smart and cunning but instead keep digging themselves a hole are entertaining in a twisted kind of way. Gonna have to clean the talk page when he's done making a fool of himself (move stuff to archives that is). ] 01:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


Just a note to remind you that per ], non-administrators shouldn't close deletion discussions unless they are nearly unanimous keep after a full listing period, or snowball closures. ] (]) 14:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. Until then, I will drive him to the ground with my legendary Albanian stubborness.] 01:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:Hi, I would like to point out that ultimately, what doesn't require admin tools doesn't require an admin, and WP:NAC is only an essay, the deletion process guideline (]) being phrased in a more equivocal manner. I'll admit this was some kind of experiment though, if you think this should have been closed with a different result, I am interested in hearing it. ] <small>]</small> 05:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:Hehe, I'll sit there and keep track of the score. So far he's jumping around on one leg and no arms claiming "just a flesh wound" ] 01:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


== Thanks for the revert ==
Lmao this was his latest comment: "Im going to have a shower, and I will think of you erotically." HAHAHAHAHAHA.........] 01:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:Ah well ...


Thanks for the revert on the ] article. I really appreciated it. ] (]) 15:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
:BLACK KNIGHT: The Black Knight always triumphs!
:You are welcome, vandals are all over the place sadly. ] <small>]</small> 05:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


== Your comment at AN ==
:
Perhaps you'd like to revisit the discussion? Both Guy and I have proposed solutions for the dilemma. I symapthize with the dilemmas RC patrollers face and there ought to be a way to relieve some of the pressure. Best, ]<sup>'']''</sup> 23:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
:Hi, that's an interesting discussion, I will keep an eye on it and comment :) ] <small>]</small> 05:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


== I admire you... ==
:(ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's other leg off)


...For having the to make "no consensus" AFD closes as a non admin. I'm still afraid of getting yelled at. (ZOMG yur not an admin) --] (]) 01:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:BLACK KNIGHT: All right; we'll call it a draw.
:] 01:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC) :Haha, I'm fearless! I got kind of yelled at though, as you can see above :) ] <small>]</small> 05:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


== Vandalism question ==
Dude what time is it in France right now? I'm in Eastern US, and I think you guys are five hours ahead. Soooo....about 3 am?] 01:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:Yep, that's right, 3.40am now in fact ] 01:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for the link to ''content dispute''. Since the user has continued making POV/uncited contributions to Misplaced Pages, despite many warnings, I had thought it might be sufficient evidence to stop "assuming good faith". At what point does the user cross that "good faith" line?--] (]) 14:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Ok nvm 6 hours ahead....it's about 9:45 here....yep...so what's happening on that side of the Atlantic?] 01:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:Well, editing in bad faith is not considered vandalism either. While blatant disrupting such as repeated/extreme ] may be brought up on ] for attention of admins, you are likely to get sent back to dispute resolution if that's not the case.
:Pretty dark out there, not much happening hehe, I should be sleeping, damn crazy anonymous users :)
:There doesn't seem to be an *active* dispute here anyway, edits to ] are months apart. Chances are you have not exhausted your first option yet, which is to discuss the problem calmly on the talk page of the article. ] <small>]</small> 14:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
:btw, you want to check your comments which he edited, for instance "I accept all of your concessions. Thank you for participating and winning the debate. I love you Byron.UberCryxic 01:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)". Might be others, I'm having a little trouble following, for some reason my web browser is eating up all the CPU on the edit history. ] 01:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


== Nice work... ==
god fucking dammit.....I am going to tear that bitch a new asshole. I just changed it. Thanks for bringing it up.] 01:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


someone did that. Cheers. --] (]) 22:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Btw Melissa comes on pretty soon.] 01:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
: Haha. I don't have cable TV, can't watch her :) ] 02:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


==Catholic Encyclopedia==
==Need a Favor==
Hey man what's going on? I need a big favor from you. When you have time, can you go through ] and translate some of the sections towards the end? I'd appreciate it a lot. Thanks.] 23:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)


Re some comments of yours at AfD, please note that '']'' material is not copyright, the book being from 1913. ] (]) 21:55, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
:Sure, I'll give it a go. ] 23:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks for bringing this up for my attention, I got fooled by the copyright claim at the bottom of the page unfortunately :/ ] <small>]</small> 22:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


==The ever growing list of stub templates==
==Wikify tags==
Hi, I've noticed you've been using the <nowiki>{{wiki}}</nowiki> template on a number of articles. That tag is useful, but from what I understand it's better to use the '''<nowiki>{{wikify-date}}</nowiki>''' template to help with organization. Using the template in the format <nowiki>{{wikify-date|May 2006}}</nowiki>, for instance, puts the article into ] which can help the people and/or bots doing maintenance (see ]). Thanks! -] '']'' 20:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


Hi. I wonder if you are thinking of abandoning your proposal ]? I'm in favour so I'd be interested to know your thoughts. --'']]'' 03:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
: As per that page: "''Add the tag {{tl|wikify}} to the top of the article. A bot will automatically change this to something like {{tlp|wikify-date|May 2006}} within 24 hours. Any articles you see listed near the bottom of this page have been tagged and are waiting to be automatically sorted into a monthly subcategory.''".
: Just {{tl|wiki}} seems alright to me, bots have picked those up alright. ] 20:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC) :Oh thanks, I've been quite busy lately and didn't realize it had received further replies, I will have a look of course. ] <small>]</small> 15:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks. I've added a short summary. Everybody except WP:SS are obviously in favour of your proposal. Where do we go from here, I wonder? --'']]'' 07:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
::Hey, you're right! Someone misled me at some point. My mistake. -] '']'' 21:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
:::It doesn't look like my proposal is going anywhere, I think partly because my intent was not understood and also because some people seem to be very protective over the whole stub thing. I'll just let it drop for now as it cannot be implemented with the current system anyway. I mostly wanted to test the water and see what kind of objections that would get. I'm a little worried we seem to have people who think it's a good idea to perform the same tasks multiple times. Not just categorization but rating articles too. It's even more worrying that people flat out fail to recognize the same tasks are being performed multiple times.


:::I'll make sure to revive this if we ever get better category queries, until then, I think the only way forward is to campaign for that to happen or get the work done, though given the main issue would be server load, an outsider is limited in what they can do.
==]==
Sorry to be a bore, but ] looks like a copyvio of . I have marked it up as a csd. ] 21:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
:Guess I should have let the pages get deleted for the wrong reason, I'll tag other pages I've saved earlier from speedy deletion, and that have similar content. ] 21:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
::Well, they might not have got deleted. You probably did the right thing. ] 22:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


:::There is also a separate and more fundamental problem with categories: they are hierachical in nature, a relationship that cannot be handled well in database queries. For instance someone categorized in "american people" (but not in "people") cannot be readily queried as "people" at the database level even though "american people" is a subcategory of "people". There are ways around that, but again server load would be an issue. ] <small>]</small> 02:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
== ] ==
Hello Equendil. I had to change it to {{tl|prod}} as ads are not speedyable. don't worry, I used to do this four months ago, see ] and I am now an admin. Keep up the good work.''']''' | ] 04:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
:Damn, thanks for the update, it was so blatently wrong it didn't even cross my mind that still doesn't qualify for speedy deletion. ] 04:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


== trusted computer system ==
==Stubs==


You redirected ] elsewhere, saying it is not a proper article. It <i>is</i> a proper article: the US government uses the term in a different way than the one you redirected it to, which I have not read them use yet (though maybe they do) and means something slightly different.--] (]) 06:21, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello Equendil,


== Help please? ==
I noticed that you've been marking a lot of the new articles as stubs. It is preferable to use a stub template from ] instead of using simply <code><nowiki>{{stub}}</nowiki></code>, if you can. That way, knowledgable people in specific fields can find the stubs and expand them. Thanks! --] 05:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks for the advice. I'll try to remember at least the more common of those tags. ] 05:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


Equendil, I/we need your help. I am the editor who began working on the article ] back in late September, attempting to replace copy lifted from the subject's website with some semblance of a proper article. The article has improved a great deal since then and I have been trying very hard to stay on top of it, but there seems to be an individual very motivated to protect Debicella's record who has constantly reverted the good faith edits I have made and was the same person doing that before I even came on the scene. Now they are accusing me of being someone I am not. I don't see this ever ending without some decisive third-party intervention. From what I remember, you were the first, or one of the first, people to realize what was going on. I'm not asking you to take my side or anything, just that you objectively take a look at the article and make any recommendations you see fit, or even just refer someone who could mediate this dispute. I'm getting really sick of it but I also don't want to give up because I know once I do the article will go back to the same crap it was in the first place. Any help at all is greatly appreciated. ] (]) 17:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
==Logan L==


== Your username ==
In regards to the article ], which you proposed for deletion, I have marked the article for ], as I feel that the article meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion. In cases where it applies, speedy deletion is preferable to ]. I have left the {{tl|prod}} tag in place, so that if speedy deletion is rejected, your proposed deletion will remain in place. Thanks! ]]<sup>]</sup> 13:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


Just saw your comment on the Reference Desk, "I'm out of the office", and was quite interested: what's the etymology of your username? Is it from ], one of ]'s invented languages? I ask because (aside from enjoying his writings a lot myself) I saw the "ndil" at the end of your username, but I don't remember reading about any of his characters that have anything like "eque" or "equen". ] (]) 03:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
== Scholl ==


== Salut ==
I moved your essay from ] to ]. I think that's what you meant to do the first time instead of creating an independant article; plus the / made a supbage of ]. Anywho, it's all fixed now- though I believe such an essay belongs on ]. ]]</font>] 00:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
:Doh, thanks for that. ] 01:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


Hello. I'm a Wikipedian living in Paris as well. If ever you want to meet for a cup of coffee, give me a shout! ] (]) 12:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
==] merge==


== Cinco de Mayo vandalism ==
i just went ahead and did this merge without discussion. Hope this is OK. ] ] 19:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
:It sure is ! I didn't feel very confident in doing it myself, as it's rather technical. ] 19:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
::Great, i thought it would be fine, just wanted to check. :) ] ] 19:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


On Jan 7, 2009 I accidently observed a vandal attack on ] and I rolled back the most recent changes but I did not pickup on the earlier more subtle vandalism. I didn't feel qualified to fine tune the article. I looked down the list of recent editors and could not find anyone who seemed to be a seasoned caretaker. On Jan 8, you reverted the article to a month old version.
==]==
You moved my article to the this name, however this is not exactly what tha article is about. This is a subpage for the article ] and includes all the links inside the Misplaced Pages. An I would prefer that this would be entitled as ]. If it is not acceptable, please help to find the appropriate title. I wrote the folloving introduction:


This raises the question: Who should the accidental Good Samaritan inform when an article is being repeatedly abused and needs attention by someone more qualified? (A quick ] didn't answer my question.)
"The following is a list of Russian opera articles. It provides the names of composers, librettists, opera patrones, directors, companies, theatres, singers as well as opera titles — everything that is connected to the topic Russian opera."


Thank you for your assistance, Yours, (] 14:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)) ] (]) 00:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
:There is a few things you can do:
: I was just reading the article again, and realized I moved it to not quite the right title, so I agree it needs moving again.
:*Revert and issue a warning on the talk page of the editor (anonymous or not). That will stop quite a few vandals from testing their luck further. Common practice is to use one of four level of templates ({{tltts|uw-vandalism1}} {{tltts|uw-vandalism2}} {{tltts|uw-vandalism3}} {{tltts|uw-vandalism4}}) to issue warnings, the fist level of warning is to be used when the editor can be assumed to have tested the edit feature of Misplaced Pages in good faith (in which case a templated welcome/help such as {{tltts|welcomeg}} might be useful as well), the second level when the intent to vandalize is obvious, the third and fourth level when the editor has already been warned by prior levels.
: I find ] to sound a little ambiguous still, what about ] ? ] <small>]</small> 14:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
:*Report the editor on ] if they have already been issued level 4 warnings recently. See for instance how ] was blocked from editing Misplaced Pages after vandalizing ] repeatedly last month.
::I don't think that your title is less ambigueus that mine. I still prefer my version ] because it begins with the word "List". Another suggestion would be just ] that I like even more.
:*If an article is the target of persistant vandalism from multiple editors (usually an anonymous user with a dynamic IP) in a short period of time, you can request page protection on ]
::Please advise. (] 14:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC))
:*Always check successive edits by different IPs before you revert, or you'll often revert to a version that was already vandalized (see below).
:::What about going for the long descriptive name ] ? No ambiguity, content matches the title. I really find "list of russian opera articles" to sound like what I've mistaken it for the first time, ie, a list of russian operas. If you don't like this last one, you have my approval for a title of your own chosing, I really only wanted to get rid of "The" in the title, which is against naming rules. Please make sure no redirect is broken after moving a second time ] <small>]</small> 14:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
:*Put articles you notice are frequently vandalized in your watch list to keep an eye on them.
:::: You probably right, but disadvantage of your title ] that it is too long. As you see I created a new entry ] and moved there all the content from the previous one. Now I need to eliminate the previous, but I afraid to do do something wrong. Could you help me? (] 14:59, 3 June 2006 (UTC))
::::: Sure,i'll check and redirect. ] <small>]</small> 15:05, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
::::: All redirects done and fine now ] <small>]</small> 15:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


:In this particular case, ] is a low traffic and relatively minor article, good faith edits occur occasionally, it is vandalized fairly frequently but not frequently enough to warrant page protection. Revert & warn is the standard procedure here, not much else can be done. "Recent change patrollers" (]) usually catch basic vandalism and do so within seconds with semi automated tools but they can't and don't catch everything.
==Listing Sub pages==
I cannot for the life of me find out how to list sub pages in a given namespace (starting with my user space) ... any help welcome ] <small>]</small> 07:08, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


:Finally, what I did was of a different nature, an editor (]) who was seemingly editing the article in good faith many months ago has apparently decided he didn't like any alteration to what he must think of "his" article, and is logging now and then reverting the article to "his" last version with a spurious edit summary regardless of what changes have been made. On November 10, he reverted to "his" version from August, and again a few days ago. It went under the radar in November and I only noticed in late December so I went back to a November version and reinserted a couple changes made since then. I simply reverted his January 7 edit (edit summary should read "Reverted EspanaViva's-reversal-to-a-months-old-version").
:Hi, see to list all pages in your userspace. Cheers, ]]] 07:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
::Damn, that was one of three links I had never clicked to see what it led to in "Special pages". Thanks a lot, I was reluctant to create sub pages knowing I would forgot what I called them pretty quick :) ] <small>]</small> 07:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


:Incidently, I reverted to a vandalized version that had not been correctly reverted (due to successive vandalism from different IPs) and someone else fixed that.
==Vestigial brain: NOR ==


Shame for ], or vestigial brain could be added to the list. ] <small>]</small> 21:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC) :That was quite a long answer. Short answer : Everyone is qualified, fix Misplaced Pages as you go or join the recent change patrol if you got too much time on your hands :) ] <small>]</small> 02:31, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


::''Amigo/amiga'' Equendil. ''Gracias por su ayuda'' and ''merci pour votre aide.'' However, my friend, you keep changing the ] article to an incorrect set of statements. If you read the very extensive citations (that you keep removing), you will see that Cinco de mayo is ''not'' a "national holiday" in the ordinary sense of that term. It ''is'' a regional holiday in Mexico, and a relatively minor one at that. For example, government offices, banks, and businesses all stay open. There are a few celebrations outside of the state of Puebla - and they are small. The language that you keep removing is factually correct, carefully worded, and has extensive citations.
Well, maybe not OR after all. Take a look at ] --] 22:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


::If you have persuasive citations that support the language that you are insisting on, please post those on my talk page, so that you and I can discuss them. If you do not have persuasive citations, then I'm going to ask you to accept the correct description of the day - that it is a regional holiday in Mexico, etc. ]] 05:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
:haha, thanks for that :) ] <small>]</small> 23:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


:::You make it sound like I have a content dispute with you, but I do not. What I object to is the article being reverted to a version that is many months old, dismissing in the process *every single edit* that has been made to the article on the ground that they are "unexplained". That's a pretty poor rationale for a revert in the first place, and totally unacceptable for a massive one, especially seeing as edits have been made that are in fact properly commented in the edit summaries or talk page (at the very least by me). Now it appears you are objecting to very specific changes that have been made - not by me shall I add - to the article, I have to point out that mass reverting *every* single alteration to the article since you last edited it, including correction of the spelling or phrasing, categories that may have been added, and any unrelated change (such as mine in the 'history' section), is simply not the way to go. I invite you to work on the *current* article and make changes to what you think is wrong with it, not simply assume that the whole article was better the last time you edited it and revert to that. In short, please do not revert good edits with bad ones, that's quite disrespectful of the people who volunteer their time to the project, however minor their contributions may be, and it does not help improving an article. ] <small>]</small> 20:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
== Notablility ==


::::Glad to hear we're on the same page. I've made corrections consistent with your suggestions. ]] 14:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I've just removed the notability tag you added to the article ] that I recently created. I can understand that the article's original form would raise some eyebrows since I left it with only a short sentence and no references, but I just added a reference as well as a long bibliography. I hope that clears up any confusion. ] 23:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
:That was indeed the reason, and yes, it clears up the confusion. ] <small>]</small> 23:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


== Re: French "out of office" on the language reference desk ==
== David Cantor ==
Hi. I changed the tag to just a "stub" tag. I'm not sure there is anything else about him on the 'net. He may have retired from theater around the time the internet was created. --] 03:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


Rest tranquil, my friend. Me, I took not the offense. Truly, I had fear of him giving. (Get it?) But, seriously, I think it was I who was too abrupt. Nice to meet you, mon ami. Your sightings are hilarious and so bad as to be hard to believe—"lighter", indeed. --] (]) 03:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
== Jo Kittinger Permission ==


== Debicella Again ==
You should forward the permission-granting e-mail and post the permission as directed here: ]. --] (]) 23:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
:Alright, I will do that, I was not aware of that procedure, thanks. ] <small>]</small> 23:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
::No prob - and thanks for the effort on getting permission. --] (]) 01:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
:::Was a little foolish of me seeing as it was merely an entry I saved from speedy deletion and just a little paragraph but oh well :) ] <small>]</small> 01:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


Equendil, would you be able to review the article ]? I have tried to mediate this article about a local politician unsuccessfully. There are two partisans who continue to edit the page-- one very pro-Debicella, and one very anti-Debicella. The pro-Debicella editor removes information that might be perceived as negative to Debicella, while the anti-Debicella editor misquotes cited sources and uses biased language to make Debicella look bad. I have tried to create a neutral version based on the best of both, but would be good to have a second set of eyes on it--and possibly lock the page or at least bar these two partisans from continuing their edit war. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Thanks Equendil ==


:Equendil, I have good reason to believe that TheBard2 is in fact Debicella himself. See the Talk page for ] for supporting evidence. The Senator himself is posing as a neutral editor. ] (]) 01:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


Equendil-- thank you for stepping in. As you can see, both pro-Debicella and anti-Debicella editors are a little out of hand. I would encourage you to give a neutral review to the content of the article (as I believe I did), rather than the accusations of both partisans. I would also encourage a long-term lock on the page or stopping these partisans from editing it. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Hey,


:Mr. Debicella, I suppose you ''would'' consider me exposing your true identity and intentions to be "out of hand". Equendil, my apologies, I realize this is not the appropriate venue for this to take place; this is the last comment I will leave on your talk page regarding the matter. ] (]) 03:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the info i might just do that in order to my everyones life easier. I will just wait to see what will the response from InShaneee.


== ] ==
Thanks again
:Hey, you're welcome :) ] <small>]</small> 04:25, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


'''Thanks''' It looks like between your input and a little tweaking on my end, this has become usable. I really appreciate it. —]❤]☮]☺]☯ 17:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
:: Well now i hope my first article will be published and then i will feel famous :)
:You are welcome, unfortunately, I was wrong, what broke the template was specifying "Image size =" without a value. Well, it's fixed anyhow but... ] <small>]</small> 18:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
] 04:35, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


==IGN site==
::: I just saw you removed that scary paragraph that appeared on the article, Thanks :) does this mean I get to keep my article, or do I need to go through another process to be sure this will stay up? Thanks for explaining all this, this info is very useful ] 04:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
It looks like the IGN has changed their site. I will no longer link to it. ] (]) 15:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Ksnow
:::: Well, now you need to remove any doubt that you're the owner of the copyrighted web pages, either by setting them free under GDFL licence, or using this page as someone pointed out to me earlier today : ], which would involve mailing the wikimedia foundation from an email address that marks you as the owner of the website. Either way, make sure to mention it on the talk page when you're done.
==Falcon 2==
:::: As for scary box, it's part of the ''speedy deletion'' procedure, which you can check at ]. There are other procedures, you can check the whole thing here : ]. Anyway, I don't think your article should be tagged for speedy deletion again. If it happens, just edit and remove the box and leave a message on the talk page of whoever put the tag, some of us wikipedians are a bit trigger happy with copyright violations :) The message on the talk page and history of the article should make it safe now however ] <small>]</small> 04:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
apologies for that.
I want to re-direct it but I have forgotten how.


I am under the wing of Rlandmann if you want bona fides <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:46, 11 April 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::::Well i did as you said although trying to send the email to permissions@wikimedia.org gave me an error i am not on one of the allowed domains so i just left a short message on the talk page of the article, so now i wait :)
] 05:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
::::::Better go back to plan A and mention on your website that the pages are under GFDL then, it really is the best way by far to ensure it won't go to deletion in the future. There's no central authority on wikipedia that will answer your message on the talk page anyway. ] <small>]</small> 05:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


== Reference desk ==
::::::: So all i would need to do is to simply put a footer on my pages similar to what is on the wiki pages? All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (see Copyrights for details). With the links as well ofcourse :) ] 05:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
:Yep, exactly. ] <small>]</small> 05:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
:I suggest linking to http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html rather than wikipedia however, and you can skip the 'see copyright' link unless you want to write a page detailing the licence in term of your website of course. ] <small>]</small> 05:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
::so life is easy after all :) will do that probably within a day or two :) no worries :)
] 06:12, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


Hello, Equendil. I noticed your contributions and took the liberty of adding your signature to ]. I hope that's alright. (Otherwise revert, of course). It's good to have native French speakers at the language desk! ---] ] 14:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
:::One last question i have is to know what sort of rights i have on an article i published on wiki , i mean with respect to various edits some people might make in the future.
:Oh yes, that's perfectly alright, I would most likely have added myself had I been aware of such a list, cheers. ] <small>]</small> 16:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I am really picking your brain for all this information :) Well i hope this info will be useful to other new article editors that might read this. One other question was to know if i do put on my site the "GNU Free Documentation License" link does this mean that every person can copy info from my site and post it here on wiki? (i guess this is the most important question...)
] 08:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
::::You don't have any 'right' on an article published on wiki, anybody can edit :)
::::As for the second question, yes, but you don't have to release your entire site under GDFL, just the pages you chose to feature on wikipedia (or other places). ] <small>]</small> 15:00, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


==RfD process==
::Again thanks for your ongoing help I think I am slowly starting to get the idea of how things work here. Hope it will come through because I do not see anything wrong with sharing information on a much global scale such as wiki, especially when no real explanation of this topic was made on wikipedia other then a small section on the ] article.
I've been tempted to submit an RfD request for an article which has been a source of frustration for me, but haven't done so because it would probably just make things worse. I noticed your response to an RfD problem on the help page, so maybe you won't mind my running it by you instead.
] 16:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


The article is Benzodiazepine Withdrawal Syndrome, and my concern is comes across as fanatacism. I certainly do not dispute the importance of benzo w/d, but my reading of the literature (and, I will admit, my own clinical experience such as it is, I assure you I'm not insisting on the value of original research but it is hard to ignore what is before your own eyes) indicates that the most serious manifestations have been limited to patients with a history of high doses, very long-term use, pre-existing seizure disorders--not the average benzo user. Average low-level users do notice psychological withdrawal symptoms but are not in medical danger and can be tapered fairly quickly. As you will see if you check it out, the Wiki article is alarmist and repetitive in insisting that there is in fact a very high level of danger for all users unless the drug is tapered at a glacially slow pace. In the real world this assumption can keep some people on benzos forever.


There are over a hundred references in the article and I have tried approaching them patiently one reference at a time, pointing out where a reference does not say what the author claims. The editor guarding the article is adamant, nothing changes. In a related article (alprozolam) I added a couple of good references of my own to the section on withdrawal and the same editor changed what I wrote to distort what the references said. Should I just give up? It would be easy to do if I could get over the idea that real people are hurt by propaganda like that. I have doubts that an RfD would help. It would likely attract only those who have already made up their minds. Any advice would be welcome.] (]) 12:33, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
::*I have put the link on my page, so i hope it will be enough to get this published here, i have a lot more articles i would like to publish and this is good for me to learn the correct process of conducting this in the best manner. Please have a look at the site to see the link addition.
:On the procedure to follow to resolve your dispute: First of all I have to point out there is no process known as "RfD" on Misplaced Pages (well there is but it's for deleting redirects, which is not relevant here), I expect you read what I wrote on the help page related to a process known as "AfD", which stands for "Articles for Deletion" where articles are proposed for deletion. This is not a course you can follow here, since the very existence of the article is not disputed. Misplaced Pages does have multiple processes for dispute resolution however (See ]).
] 16:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
:::*It's perfect as far as copyright issues go.
:::*Look like your article has been proposed by someone to deletion again, through a different mean and for different reasons (basically on the ground that the article is a game manual (]), you can take part in the discussion like everyone else, though it's best if you mention you're the original author of the article there. Click the links on the 'AfD' box on the article for more information. I'm sorry you're going through so much trouble here. That's some ultra quick course to Misplaced Pages you're taking here :) ] <small>]</small> 16:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


:I am not quite sure you have exhausted your first option however (discussing the problem on the talk page). I know it can be quite tedious to deal with an editor seemingly possessive about an article, but he doesn't strike me as blatantly unreasonable. What you might need most here is patience. Discuss every change you want to make on the talk page, try to find a common or middle ground where possible, particularly where there is no fundamental disagreement and altering / toning down the phrasing may work (as ). If you feel this is going nowhere, then request a third party (either ] or ]).
:* Hey do you mind having a look at some of the changes I have made to the article and if you think they are good can you make some comments on the . Thanks ] 07:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
::*Just added comments on the AfD page. ] <small>]</small> 12:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


:No issue of original research here, expertise about a subject is welcome, as long as reliable sources are cited. ] <small>]</small> 15:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
== Thanks Equendil, For killing my dreams ==
All Creed Reloaded wanted to do was give the world flowers and firm handshakes, but you had to go and use your magical engineering powers for purposes of evil. I'm so depressed that I want to spread fatal diseases to children. Baby killer. But seriously i love you. Praise Jesus. Amen. Creed Reloaded Brotherhood for life. Hugs and Kisses. {{unsigned|Superfish2490}}
:Come on, don't admit defeat so fast, ] is not closed yet, *maybe* another 20 or so users will advocate in favour of the article to balance all the negativity ! There's always hope ! ] <small>]</small> 20:34, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


::Thanks for the response and I see that I totally confused the issue by typing RfD when I meant RfC, and then repeating the same typo again. I think I really need to stay off Wiki if I can't get my fingers to cooperate any better than that! The "comment" process was the one I was thinking of, but I doubt that it would help even if I could type better. Again, I appreciate the reply.] (]) 00:55, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
==Thanks!==
Thanks! I tried to do my best, using pertinent informations. The principal thing that I have to do is to find the sources that were lost in the article ], which specify that there are 500,000 Romanians in France. Surely, over the time the article will be improved. Cheers, ''']''' 9 June 2006


== Trois ou quatre ==
==Thanks==
Thanks for wikifying my stubs on Indian butterflies. I'll just add the wikification to my off-line template I use to save us all some labour. Thanks once again. ] 03:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)


For someone who can't analyze the structure of his native language, you gave a clear and helpful analysis of all those variations on "j'en ai trois ici" at the Language Reference Desk. As a native speaker of English who's working on improving his mediocre French, I'm always happy to see examples and context. ''Merci.'' --- ] (]) 16:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
== Merci ==
:Thanks! I really get easily confused though, I can barely tell an adverb from an adjective, tenses give me headaches, and I tend to think of a substantive as a type of food :) ] <small>]</small> 16:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Pour la traduction de l'article ], je suis capable de comprendre l'anglais, donc je vais (dans la semaine) verifier si tu n'as pas fait des erreurs de sens (qui changeraient l'Histoire), et validé tout ca.


== Re:Your Help Desk request regarding Template:Country data Chechnya ==
Merci :] ] 22:24, 10 June 2006 (UTC)


Ca me rappelle qu'il faut que je termine la traduction :) ] <small>]</small> 02:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC) I didn't see the little flags in the section "Example usage", but now is ok. --] (]) 13:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
:Salut, je viens de continuer la vérification du sens de tes traductions sur ] ( ). J'ai fait une partie, mais je n'ai pas encore finit la vérification. En tout cas, je te remerci puisque tu as fait le principal (la traduction), donc cela deviendra bientôt un bel article anglais :] ] ] 10:40, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


== ] ==
== Nice meeting you==
I thank you for your attention and remarks. I apologize that I did not reply earlier. I am new to this and do not kow my way around very well. Sorry If I appeared to you as proselytizing in my own little world. I ususally deal with adventists only, as all davidians do, and rarely talk about the rod to people who know nothing about it. I am trying to be as objective as possible, but when I made this section I wanted to put something there temporarily till I make a better article. I am trying to work on something more detailed and with a more scientific format. The article wacokid added was better. It is false and unaccepable for both davidians and branch davidians to confuse thes two as part of one family. The doctrines are different to the extreme and the two structures have totally different motives, organization and objective. Please feel free to contact me if you feel I am messing up, which I am sure I will do often. THanks {{unsigned|Srodinfo}}


Can you please revisit this discussion and also try to drum up consensus on what to do about the lines? SELFREF doesn't seem to provide the prohibition against lines such as these as I thought it did and the mass TFD resulted in a keep result. At the very least the lines should be replaced with {{tl|Frenchtrans}}, imo... –] ] 20:01, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
== Where are you? ==
:Will do when I've got some time. ] <small>]</small> 08:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


==PastScape==
I do believe a rather good argument of mine is awaiting a responds on military history of france .
Equendil, since you promote Project Gutenberg on your page, why do you have a problem with people linking British Heritage's free online service?
] <small>''Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona'' </small> 16:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
] (]) 07:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
:Your last comment just before you wrote this on my talk page being "Oh UberCryxic, don't lie", I think I'll give it a miss. ] <small>]</small> 18:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
:For pretty much the same reason I would have a problem with people linking the Project Gutenberg frontpage on every article, where somewhat related content might or might not be found on the Project Gutenberg site. Coming from, say, the article on ], the PastScape frontpage is not offering further reading about that particular subject, just a search box to various data concerning English lankmarks. You might as well have linked to the same site from the article about ], ], ] etc on the basis that the site holds historical information if you search for it. It's not just me either, another user left a remark on your ] regarding that link (you might want to identify your alt. account by the way, using {{tl|User Alternate Acct}} or whatever). ] <small>]</small> 08:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


::Hi Equendil. re website, I see what you mean. However, it is probably useful on ''some'' pages.
::With regard to my "alternate account's talk page", I just took a look at it, and I assure you that I know nothing about it whatsoever. I don't find it necessary to have an alternate account.
::I ''do'' have two accounts on Wiki Commons, because I first started uploading pics under my real name, which is not Amanda J M. Recently I have found that this wasn't as convenient as having both wikipedia and Commons under the same name, so I formed an Amandajm account, but maintained the first as well, in order to maintain pics that I had already uploaded and check the relevant messages.
::The other account to which you have directed me has a name which is almost an anagram of mine (but not quite). I have absolutely no idea who it is. ] (]) 05:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


:::I see. I just checked out the edits of the editor who is inserting all the links, and understand why you thought that it was me, operating under a different name. Several of them are articles in which I have been the major editor, and it was ''me'' who questioned you about it, not the spammer. No, this isn't the way I work; I'm very upfront. And yes, I agree that adding that link to every vaguely related article is spam. ] (]) 05:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
'''''Oh, I don't think so ... You said:'''''
::::Oops, sorry for having assumed the user I reverted was you (for all the reasons you stated indeed). ] <small>]</small> 14:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


==Bruce Castle pics==
:*"Laying in repair" is anything but vital information, similar additions could be made for pretty much any battle, there are always reasons battles are lost: "outnumbered", "caught by surprise", "exhausted troops" etc, this belongs to detailed articles not short overviews.
Fixed. ] (]) 06:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
:*Replacing "several victories" with "one more early victory" is not accurate, UberCryxic cited the battles, you claimed they didn't happen, it's flat out wrong, what now ? ] <small>]</small> 20:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


== ] ==
'''''To which I said:'''''


Thanks for straightening out the page. ] (]) 23:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
>>:*"Laying in repair" is anything but vital information, similar additions could be made for pretty much any battle, there are always reasons battles are lost: "outnumbered", "caught by surprise", "exhausted troops" etc, this belongs to detailed articles not short overviews.<<


In that case you're hypocritical as these sentences weren't reverted;


==]==
''managing to '''resoundingly''' defeat a combined Spanish-Dutch fleet'' --> defeated a Spanish-Dutch fleet
'''''Financial difficulties''', however, allowed the English and the Dutch to regain the initiative at sea.
'' --> However the English and Dutch regained initiative.


Hi, I'm wondering why the article keeps being edited for the subject ] to be redirected to "]." This article is not more than five hours old as of right now. I accidentally clicked on save rather than preview thus publishing the article before I was ready. I am trying to get this article up to snuff as well as get used to wiki at the same time. I have not yet figured out how to trim the fat off of my references list and I have some other issues to work out as well. That being said, I am not engaging in vandalism to my own page. I for some reason thought that if the author of an article edits it, he or she does not need to comment. I guess I didn't read all the guidelines. More important though, is that ] and "]" are not the same. The ] article goes in to a bit more depth about ] specifically whereas the ] article covers PS I and PS II on a slightly more superficial level. I feel that the ] article has its place as a broad overview of photosynthetic processes and as a gateway to more information about ] and ], which has its own article. Any explanation would be helpful. Like I said, was not ready to publish yet, and new to wiki writing. Can you help me out?
''However, in '''a very impressive effort''', '''a more numerical French fleet''' under de Grasse managed '''to defeat''' an English fleet at the Battle of the Chesapeake which ended in a tactical draw'' --> However a French fleet under de Grasse managed to engage an English fleet at the Battle of the Chesapeake which ended in a tactical draw
Merci bien ] (]) 06:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
:In 2006, failing to understand redirects, an editor created four identical articles on Photosystem I, under different names (], ], ], ]. It was a mere paragraph not up to standards, while the ] article itself was relatively short, I informally suggested to merge the paragraph into ] since there was no real reason to have separate articles and I and other users created redirects. I expect you fell victim to a trigger happy vandal fighter who seeing a redirect being overwritten, reverted you without giving a thought and gave you a warning with an automated tool. There is definitively no ground for an accusation of vandalism here however. Your view here is perfectly in line with the way the encyclopedia is built, with "main" articles giving a broad overview of more specific subjects covered in sub articles. It is generally considered better not to split an article on a given subject into multiple pages until it grows significantly though (then again, ] was already a separate page).
:Anyway, you seem to have a proper page under work, I'll fix current redirects and I encourage you to keep working on it. I will move it to ] however, rather than ]. Ignore the warning entirely. ] <small>]</small> 17:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
:Please also note the existence of the pages ] and ]. ] <small>]</small> 17:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for your help. There is one other thing though. I need to use images that already exist in other wikipedia articles but I cannot find any way to cite these images as there are no references on the pages from which they come. How do I need to go about citing images that are already on wiki and under the GNU?
''Beyond that, and Suffren's '''impressive''' campaigns against the British in India'' --> Beyond that, and Suffren's campaigns against the British in India
Thanks for your help,
-] (]) 01:36, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
]
:I'm not entirely sure what you are asking here but clicking on any picture on Misplaced Pages leads to a description page of that picture, for instance if you click on the drawing in ], you'll get to the page ], you would include that picture in an article by inserting <code><nowiki>]</nowiki></code> where you want it to appear, though you would likely want to indicate how you want it to appear (size, which side of the text, caption and more). For instance, I used <code><nowiki>]</nowiki></code> to display the picture on the right side of my reply. See ] for details. ] <small>]</small> 01:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


==vos interventions==
''and '''obliterated''' the Chinese navy at the Battle of Foochow in 1884'' --> of 1838 and defeated the Chinese navy at the Battle of Foochow in 1884
Equentil, moi, je commence à vous trouver bien sympathique... ] (]) 04:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
:Merci! Je viens de passer un long moment à tracer et inverser les modifications de ce qui semble être une seule et même personne qui édite depuis son IP (]) et deux comptes (] et ]) et qui a apparement décidé d'ajouter sa section "Napoleon = Hitler" à un maximum d'articles, je vais continuer à surveiller et surement demander un ]. ] <small>]</small> 04:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


== Request ==


Can you please stop ]? He has only made disruptive edits to Misplaced Pages. When I reverted his vandalism and left a warning on his talk page he then decided to attack me. --] ] 08:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
>>:*Replacing "several victories" with "one more early victory" is not accurate, UberCryxic cited the battles, you claimed they didn't happen, it's flat out wrong, what now ? <<
:Hi, I'm not an admin myself, but I reported that user on ] for attention of an admin. ] <small>]</small> 08:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
:And he's gone. ] <small>]</small> 08:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


Thanks. --] ] 09:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Is it? Several '''early''' victories.Several means more than 1.But it doesn't quite cover just 2 early victories, that's flat out wrong, what now?


== On Niaps ==
'''''Where's that reply of yours? Surely you know what you 're talking about ...'''''] <small>''Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona'' </small> 19:22, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


Hi i am Willski72 and i have been trying to get Niaps to see sense just like you. How about forming an Entente Cordiale to get him to understand that he has to create his own articles if he is serious about this, and not change others that should either be left as they are or have one neutral sentence mentioning atrocities on both sides (both French Army AND Spanish Guerrillas.] (]) 12:02, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
:Feel free to alter the wording and remove subjective adjectives such as "impressive", I won't oppose that. However that doesn't include "obliterating" the chinese navy which can be substantiated. As for "one more early victory", it was factually wrong, period. Beyond that, I have no interest in getting dragged down into edit wars involving personal attacks and questionable intents. ] <small>]</small> 19:48, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


It also seems that , Niaps and Qqtacon are allied on this issue, they have all worked together to create an article on the murdered man.] (]) 12:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
'''''>>''''' Feel free to alter the wording and remove subjective adjectives such as "impressive", I won't oppose that. However that doesn't include "obliterating" the chinese navy which can be substantiated. As for "one more early victory", it was factually wrong, period. Beyond that, I have no interest in getting dragged down into edit wars involving personal attacks and questionable intents. '''''<<'''''
:The whole thing is currently under scrutiny at ], for a serie of articles around a ] who {{user|Qqtacon}} claims was killed as part of a massacre ordered by Marshal Ney. Articles under AfD ended up deleted after he himself tagged them for speedy deletion, he got himself blocked for a legal threat, and most likely would have for sockpuppetry otherwise. I'll just let the dust settle at this point. ] <small>]</small> 17:56, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
:Also at ] for his behaviour on the AfD discussions. ] <small>]</small> 18:02, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


Yes i read an article about the death of the Don and others which was very one sided to say the least. I think waiting to see what the administrators do is a good idea. I expect they will put up stiff resistance as they are very passionate on the issue, but they will have to be good to get out of this one.] (]) 18:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
] has a shorter version for that bit of text: '''''You were right.'''''


== SNUSP ==
But thanks anyway.
] <small>''Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona'' </small> 19:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


SNUSP a brainf**k derivative? What? Have you ever programmed in SNUSP? I wonder why you agreed in the deletion of the article, if you are not able to distinguish between brainf**k and SNUSP. By the way, C++ is a derivative of C. And ] exists still! --] (]) 17:35, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
:There's no need to quote what I just wrote if you're replying just below, and no, my english dictionary doesn't list "right" as a synonym for "wrong". ] <small>]</small> 20:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
:*No I have not "programmed" in SNUSP, the reason being esoteric programming languages such as this are merely designed to be amusing Turing-complete languages, not for actual development. That's not relevant to my delete !vote anyhow.
:*Stating something is a derivative of something else does not imply they are the same.
:*From Esolangs.org "''Core SNUSP is essentially Brainfuck with a two-dimensional control flow''"
:*Yes C++ is most definitively a derivative of C. A *notable* derivative.
:*I have never edited ] or otherwise taken part in its AfD's or DRV's as far as I remember.
:*The proper venue to get articles restored is at ] ] <small>]</small> 18:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
::Mentioned it above, but please note there is a perfectly fine "wiki" for esoteric languages out there: ] <small>]</small> 18:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
:::There should exist a wiki for every material rejected by this one; and at the end, for both material that is here, and the one taht was rejected... For any of the content of this wiki, it is possible to find another source (it is a requirements for articles, isn't it?), so what this wiki is for? Maybe for the lazy one who can't learn searching but in a unique index... sad future for the humanity I see. --] (]) 13:16, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


== ] ==
== Welcome to ] ==
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Equendil! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply ]. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other ], or you can post a message on ]. ]] 15:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


You commented on the talk page of this article. I can find the phrase in a late 19th century work by T Peet and something around 1950 by a Bruce Dickens. The reference just added about mother goddess is not only by someone who I'm dubious about, he doesn't actually use the phrase. I'm tempted to take it to AfD. What do you think? ] (]) 18:22, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
== Gemünden (Felda) ==


== Broken Coord ==
C'est un problème avec le système. Je l'ai mentionné chez le village pump, et j'espère que quelqu'un peut le régler. Je n'ai pas oublié les images. Elles sont là, comme tu peux constater si tu cliques sur les espaces vides. Ça se passe depuis hier, et je ne sais pas pourquoi. ] 22:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


Hi. In order to clean up ], would you mind if I changed an instance of {{tlx|coord}} in ]?
==The Topography of the Lungs==
There's an extra pipe in
<br/><code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>coord|48|51|38|N|2|21|30|E <font color="red">||</font>region:FR_type:landmark}}</code>; it needs to be
<br/><code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>coord|48|51|38|N|2|21|30|E <font color="red">|</font>region:FR_type:landmark}}</code>.


There's also a typo: <code>|format=dm<font color="red">g</font></code> for <code>|format=dm<font color="red">s</font></code>, but that one doesn't seem to matter!
Thanks for the comments on ] article, but i think you need to read it again. It is introduced, the genre is identified, and the players are listed and are internally linked. Stephen Dorian
<br/>] (]) 15:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
:Ultimately, the genre is Jazz but was not mentionned once and not obvious for someone unfamiliar with "Free Improvisation", "]" linked to a ], nationality was not mentionned, the "Inus Records" link was also broken ("Incus Records"), hence my observations. I attempted to address the issue. ] <small>]</small> 01:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
:Thank you! I fixed them. ] <small>]</small> 19:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


== Kapitop's message ==
Ultimately it is not Jazz, an only someone who never heard it would say that. No one intrested in this record would search for it first. They would find Derek Bailey first and then go to the Topography article.
: How do you make sure people do that ? Hell, the article was orphan before I added links. It's best not to make assumption and write proper introductions. I'm sorry to say that the first sentence: "The Topography of the Lungs was the first release on Incus Records, the record label founded partly by Derek Bailey." provides more information about a "Derek Bailey" than it does about the subject. But whatever, have it your way, I shouldn't waste my time on obscure entries in the first place. ] <small>]</small> 15:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)


EU
Considering it is actually a Derek Bailey solo album, despite the presence of the other musicians, it should provide info about Derek Bailey. You shouldn't waste your time on things you don't know anything about.


Hi stop quoting incorrect numbers from biased sources about religious minorities in France and EU. By doing that, you are the one that is vandalizing ! <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:Considering this is an encyclopedia, not a "Derek Bailey" fan site, an article should provide information about the *subject*. ] <small>]</small> 02:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
: I am not quoting anything, I'm reverting your edits. *You* are altering referenced material in contradiction with said references, with no justification whatsoever. ] <small>]</small> 02:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


Stop vandalizing wikipedia with your false lies. Go educate & get fact & then edit. STOP using dubious & your self invented "so-called" reference materials ! <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Block ==


==Speedy deletion of ]==
Can I request you block ] for yet another vandalism to the article ]? He has continually vandalised articles & I noticed your name on ]. If you are not an admin, would you be able to point me in the direction of one or tell them yourself? I'll give him a warning but I do not think it is getting through to him & I would like him blocked sufficently. Thanks, ] 02:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello Equendil, this is a message from an ] to inform you that the page you created, ], has been marked for ] by ]. This has been done because the page seems to be about a person, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant (see ]). If you think the tag was placed in error, please add "<code>{{tl|hangon}}</code>" to the page text, and edit the {{#if:Kaolin (band)|]|talk page}} to explain why the page should not be deleted. If you have a question about this bot, please ask it at ]. If you have a question for the user who tagged the article, see ]. Thanks, - ] (]) on behalf of {{user|Koavf}} 09:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
:I'm no admin I'm afraid, the ] page can be used to get vandals blocked if necessary. It's best to issue a warning first to draw attention of the vandal to the fact he's going to be stopped as he may not be the same person (shared IPs, school IPs ..) that received the other warnings (that were on different days), though you can shoot for ({{tl|test4}} straight if the IP has an history of vandalism and the new vandalism is blatant enough, then and only then report that IP if he does it again. ] <small>]</small> 14:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


== Maupiti Island == == Courtesy note ==
You are receiving this note because you participated in ]. Some of these have been re-nominated ], where you may wish to comment. Thanks, –]] 14:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


== Traduction ? ==
Thanks man. I waited long time for a good article on Maupiti Island, such a great game deserves an article. ] 23:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">] '''Hello Equendil''', Lebrouillard has smiled at you! Smiles promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the ] by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! <br /> <small>''Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''</small></div><!-- Template:Smile -->
Is there someone who can tell me how to download Maupiti Island, the full game ? im so tired of looking for it !!! please send me mail at ophelie_chiaraditofifi@hotmail.fr.
Thank u in advance and have a nice day !


Tu gères en anglais dis moi ! Tu ne voudrais pas traduire quelques articles avec le projet traduction ?! ] (]) 21:18, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
==Re: Melissa Theuriau Goes Mainstream==
Hey man what's up? Yeah I heard. I got back my day job of putting up pics of her on my former high school forum! Finally. Summer without Melissa is like a rose without petals. What kind of a rose is that? A rose that sucks, that's what. Haha.....I'm jealous man. You can see her regularly and I can only drool. <s>I was wondering, is she only on twice a month? And do you have any idea on her viewership this time?</s> Nevermind the site answers these questions lol......freaking awesome.] 22:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


== Science in the Middle Ages ==
== Re:] ==
Hello. You are invited to take part in the ]. The question is should we keep or remove the section on the Islamic world. Regards ] (]) 08:29, 21 August 2010 (UTC)


== List of current French Navy ships ==
Ok thanks for your help (] 12:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC))


Equendil you have done a great job on ''']'''. I have some queries on the classification of the '''Aviso's''' and also the matter of re-listing the Porte-hélicoptères '''Jeanne d'Arc (R 97)'''. Perhaps you could have a look at the articles discussion page as I have outlined it in full there. Thanks. ] (]) 04:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
== Thank you!!!!!!!!! ==
: I have inserted the text . I hope you find this appropriate.
: A more detailed response is on the talk page. Thanks ] (]) 20:45, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


There has been some section heading renaming going on recently at ] with frigates getting tagged destroyer and aviso's getting attention both as frigates and corvettes. I have returned the section headers to the earlier descriptions but it may need some monitoring and maybe some (Talk) discussions on the talk page if the problem does not go away. I found the Aviso's described as "Aviso (corvette) (light frigate)" earlier today. <nowiki>"==Guided missile frigates/destroyers==</nowiki> ...The French Navy has three ]s currently active in an ] role with a fourth currently on sea trials...." was the other instance I reverted today.
Thanks for the tips...much appreciated. KarateLady] 01:01, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
As we engaged in some degree of discussion on this matter on the Talk page we would have a reasonable argument to put forward that the matter has been discussed and consensus on the matter agreed to in regard to this article. Knowing the way these things can go I thought it best to seek your engagement sooner rather than later.


Regarding ] some recent citable info turned up on the net so the article on the ship has been updated to some effect. Have a look over it if you have the time. It could still use some decent documentation of the actual life of the ship but at least the end days have a bit more resoulution now. Felix 01:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
==Barnstar==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I ] award this barnstar to you for consistently helping newcomers and oldcomers alike ] (] • ] • <span class="plainlinks" style="color:#002bb8"></span>) 07:14, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
|}


==Grammar==
== Hi...explanation ==
It's either "hundreds of meters" or "a hundred meters", but not "a hundred of meters". Which are you trying to convey? ]<span style="background-color:white; color:#808080;">&amp;</span>] 20:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
:A hundred meters, fixed it, thanks. ] <small>]</small> 21:09, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


== Geo coordinates on Paris timeline ==
Thanks for the reply. What I mean is the way it appears now is like the man's first name is "Sri" instead of Harold. So if I do a search for Harold Klemp, which is the name most people would search for, it says "redirected from Harold Klemp."


Hi, Equendil. Just so you know, I went ahead and fixed a few minor errors with the geographic coordinate metadata. By the way, good work on that page. -]] 16:11, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Instead, I think it should be the other way around. Does that make sense? When I checked amazon.com and google searches I find that he uses the name Harold Klemp. The title Sri is a term of respect, but if he wanted it on his name he would add it to his books, therefore I think the Wiki article should conform to the way he lists his name on books, etc. Based on my research, he is referred to as "Sri" by other people, but he does not refer to himself that way and does not use it in the title of his books.
==Non-free rationale for File:Maupiti Island (game) Titlescreen .jpg==
]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to ''']'''. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under ], but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages is acceptable. Please go to ], and edit it to include a ].


If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on ]. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion --> If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no fair use rationale-notice --> ] (]) 18:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
A user did a redirect from the way it used to be and I think it should be restored to the original way it was listed, but somebody can add this title of respect in the text of the bio instead of in the main title. KarateLady] 16:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


== ] ==
== Thank you once again... ==


{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I will add the appropriate notes to the discussion section on there. Cheers to you! KarateLady] 16:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692013717 -->
==Orphaned non-free image File:Superskweek.gif==
] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]).


Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 18:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
== question ==

Hello Equendil,
Can you please look at the article Ambrose Burfoot. There seems to be a problem with the external link at the bottom. I have tried to fix it, but it doesn't want to respond. Perhaps I have done something wrong. KarateLady] 02:42, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

:Wow...that was fast! Thanks a million. KarateLady] 02:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

== Stick to the Facts ==

"Your request for investigation for sockpuppetry at ] was answered by a ], the case was checked, and the users you listed were deemed '''Unrelated'''. Please quit your disruptive behaviour, harassing wikipedians you disagree with will get you nowhere and is against the policies of Misplaced Pages. Consider this a warning before action is taken. Read ], ] and ] for further information. ] <small>]</small> 17:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)"

The CU investigation was merely one step. The evidence is overwhelming. The CU was for a combination of sock and meat puppet abuse and checking a 'representative sample' of users is not dispositive. As for disruptive behavior and harrassment - I have done neither, and UberCyrxic has attempted to get me banned by every avenue imaginable including contacting admins directly, which is forum selection and is strictly prohibited. I refuse to recognize your warning and I caution you in the strongest of terms not to threaten me again. ] 17:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


Please refer to the wikipedia talk page guidelines. "Don't threaten people: For example, threatening people with "admins you know" or having them banned for disagreeing with you." Thanks a bunch, ] 18:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

==New userpage==
Your old userpage was boring so I took the liberty to vandalize it and improve it. Obviously if you don't like it just revert. If you have a problem with the colors then just play around with them for a while until you find something that you like. Au revoir!] 21:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
:Oh, thanks a bunch, that's a definitive improvement, I'm going to have to add some content eventually, it's rather lacking right now, but at least it looks less boring now indeed :) ] <small>]</small> 21:28, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

== Well done! ==

]

I, KarateLady, award this Barnstar to Equendil for speedy, efficient and thorough work. Thank you for your ongoing help here in WikiLand. KarateLady] 16:13, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

==New portal==
What do you think of ]?] 00:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

:Damn you're getting a lot of barnstars. Congrats. Hey one of my articles, ] will be on the Main Page in about an hour and a half. Can you help me with vandalism and stuff like that? Normally I wouldn't ask someone living in France to do this at 8 pm US Eastern time, but realizing that you don't know what sleep is......hehe.] 22:34, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Hahahaha...thanks for the barnstar! I've always wanted it but for some reason nobody gave one to me. The Cryxic is touched. Haha...thank you again!] 23:22, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

:Thanks so much for your help!] 00:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Which will be War of the Fifth Coalition on October 14th. Should've been Jena-Auerstadt to celebrate the bicentennial, but I got lazy....I'm pretty sure I'll get ] for June 14th next year. If I miss that I will castrate myself.] 00:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

HAHA!!!! I wish I could say something to that, but that was way too funny.] 01:05, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

==Thank you==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Thank you so much in helping out of my (jade) hole. I will never make the same mistake again--] 16:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
|}

== Okay, thank you ==

Thanks Eq, just wanted to make sure it was correct. KarateLady] 16:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

== The amazing sock puppet show ==

Now I know that sock puppetry can be a serious pain in the arse but when it's this amateur and transparent in nature it's actually quite funny. --] 21:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
: Aye, in a twisted kind of way, it's pretty funny, but it gets dull after a while, I've been interacting with people online for like ten years now, and well, there's few variations to the plot. What never ceases to amazing me though is how those people think they can fool everyone by hiding behind nicknames and stacking lies upon lies, even long after they've been exposed. ] <small>]</small> 22:02, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

:: Sir I tip my hat to you, nice how everyone got a picture. --] 18:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

== question ==

Hi Eq, Can you please look at the article Ford Johnson. It looks like this article needs outside sources, but I'm not sure how to tag it. What would you recommend to improve this article? KarateLady] 23:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

== Thank you... ==

Eq, Thanks for the input. This man's book is used as a reference on a few other sites, so I wanted to make improvements to the article. I'm still learning things on here, and I appreciate the help. KarateLady] 23:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


==Thanks==
Thanks for answering my question. :) --]
==Thanks==
Thank you for ansering my question you are the best. --] 19:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

== Re:My RfA ==

I added this response to the oppose vote that ] posted on my RfA.

"I did calm down problems. What McGinnly quoted on his talk page was the first edit I made. I ended up changing that a bit after I had cooled down a bit. I even ''repeatedly apologized'' on McGinnly's talk page, and I went as far as re-answering his question. We have resolved our conflict. Apparently, people may not have seen this yet (and I would understand why), but if people had seen it, they would have seen how that I avoided a potentially huge conflict by eventually resolving it in due time. 6 of these oppose votes came as a result of the comment I left on McGinnly's talk page the first time, and people haven't checked to see how I tried to make amends for my behavior."

I just want to tell you that this was an anomaly in my behavior, and that McGinnly took my comment out of context. I had reformed my edit, and I even repeatedly apologized to McGinnly and I have gone as far as making amends for my behavior.

Although you may think negatively of me still, I would appreciate it if you re-consider your vote on my RfA (even though, it looks like it will close later today).

--] 20:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
:I had read the other edits already. That you reacted so negatively to criticism in the first place, and quite aggressively so as well, while you were being considered for adminship and knew you had your every move watched, doesn't make me trust you with admin tools. What will happen when nobody is watching ? Being quick-tempered is not compatible with adminship in my opinion. I expect the RfA is closed now, but I wouldn't have changed my "vote". Hopefully, you can take this in a constructive manner and remember to remain cool headed in all circumstances in the future, even when under fire. ] <small>]</small> 23:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

: I see you are now an admin, so my congratulations nonetheless. ] <small>]</small> 23:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks. I have definitely learned a lesson here, and you can be assured that I will follow your advice. --] 00:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
== Nishkid64's RfA thanks ==

{| style="background-color: #08E8DE; border: dashed 3px darkblue;"
| ]
| Thank you very much for participating in my ], which closed successfully earlier today with a result of '''(60/9/4)'''. Although, I encountered a few problems in my RfA, I have peacefully resolved my conflicts and made amends with the people involved. If you have any further questions or suggestions, feel free talk to ]. I hope I will live up to your expectations. --] 22:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
|}

== France portal subpages ==

Equendil- I noticed you got rid of the red borders of the frames... except on the lowest two frames. I'm not particularly attached to the red borders (I had put them in for bleu blanc rouge). Can you fix either the last frames or the upper ones for consistency? --] 23:32, 28 September 2006 (UTC) Oh, thanks, BTW, for doing it (i.e. the subpages/templates).
:Aye, I've just noticed that too, I'll make them all the same colour. ] <small>]</small> 23:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
:By the way, I didn't really get rid of the red borders, I just copy/pasted the templates from another portal, and haven't altered them yet, apart from the royal blue background in titles. ] <small>]</small> 23:36, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
::Oh, ok. Hey, as a token of my appreciation... maybe you'd like to chose the article of the month for Oct? --] 23:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
:::Thanks, I'll suggest something :) ] <small>]</small> 23:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

==Thank you==
Sincere thanks to you for your help yesterday. Your kindness is appreciated. —] 04:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

== Your edit to ] ==

Hello, Equendil! I was just curious about an you made a short time ago, and was specifically wondering why you removed a number of questions. Thanks, ]-] 18:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
:'''ouch!''' Thanks for bringing this up to my attention. I wanted to write an answer and went to click the 'edit' button for the section, only there was no such button, I reloaded the page, still no section 'edit' button, so I had to edit the whole page to insert my answer, which I did and saved. In retrospect, it looks like I have been editing a previous version of the page hence why I was missing the section edit buttons. Dumb mistake, sorry about that. ] <small>]</small> 18:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
::No worries! I know how frustrating a slow computer can be. I shall take the liberty of adding those questions back now. Cheers, ]-] 19:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
::Nevermind, you beat me to it. :) ]-] 19:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
::And thank you for letting me steal your messagebox format. ]-] 19:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

==Help wanted request==
Equendil, thanks for responding to my resquest for help. I started editing a ophan article called Lords reform. I've attracted a lot of criticism at a very early stage because I started with a paste from various sources which was obviously political.

If you could look at my user page, my question is there. Please beware that I'm struggling just to cope with the basics. ] 16:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

==Perfect==
Thanks for the table. I do appreciate it. ] 21:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

== wow ==

thanks for responding to my help request. by posting that picture on my talk page, you solved my problem! the fact that you responded by saying "here ya go" and then posting that picture baffles me. that was the most ridiculously assinine and unnecessary comment ever, moron. i still must ask what the fuck were you thinking? ] 04:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

:Right now, I think what you need is a longer block. ] <small>]</small> 10:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

::a personal attack?? because i called you a moron?! okay, your the sensitive type that does not take well to constructive criticism. by the way, i like the way you evaded my question. back to that, why did you post that picture instead of offer your assistance? please clarify that to me because i thought it was counterproductive and imbecilic; however, i do admire your audacity. i am very interested in your response. thanks. ] 22:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

::: I have no time or patience for trolls and vandals. ] <small>]</small> 22:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

== Photo in KP duty article ==

Well, heck if I can figure out what I was doing wrong yesterday, in fact I just copied and pasted the frustrating thing I had tried and failed to post yesterday and it worked today. Anyway, I got it up the size I wanted, and just wrote a caption underneath and it enhances the article. It's the first article I've created on Misplaced Pages, and I found a great Public Domain DoD photo to put in it, and managed to upload the photo myself, so I'm rather pleased. ].

So, maybe it's not the font of culture and the bastion of knowledge, but it's something folks might want to know. I'll work on the links tomorrow. Thanks for the help. ] 22:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

PS One of the other botany folks re-aligned the photo so it looks nicer on the page, in with the text, instead of just stuck on the bottom, and bolded the text so it's clearer. ] I keep thinking I'll figure it out one of these days, then someone just comes along and does it for me. I'm all for random-acts-of-editing that improve the content. ] 17:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

PPS I eventually figured out how to post images on Misplaced Pages. They usually require someone more competant for an attractive format, but I can routinely post them now, and can generally debug. I think there are ought to be a barnstar for "First time newbie tries something different without screaming at computer." ] 22:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

== I'm sry ==

'''THIS IP:170.177.254.60. is a '''SPAMMER''' IP,plz HELP'''-]

== Anon on open http proxy ==
(''section added by Eq'') ] <small>]</small> 17:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

i'd suggest you stop trolling my user talk page. your comments were both outrageous, rude and uncivil. you might wanna stop that. {{unsigned|201.248.204.176}}
: Unfortunately, everyone can check your contribs and mine. ] <small>]</small> 17:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

:: Well hello there, I just happened to be wandering-by and saw this very interesting discussion. Yes anyone can see the edit histories of Equendil and our friend at 201.248.204.176. As Gil Grissom says "follow the evidence" and the evidence says "shut you cakehole mystery IP with your pisspoor attempts to slander a editor in good standing".

Evening all

--] 18:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

== First level warning (here you go) ==

Thank you for experimenting with Misplaced Pages. Your test worked, and it has been ] or removed. Please use ] for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the ] if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.<!-- Template:Test (first level warning) -->

ok, ma friend. lemme tell you sumpin'. My block expired so i removed my unblock template as wikipedia policy says. Also, it is my right to delete any other comment on my talk page, except warnings isn't that so? you however:
*you restored the unblock template, a idiotic move i'd say (i am criticizing the edits, not the author in case you get any funny ideas) without a sane reason.
*you restored your idiotic comments about open proxy. You think this is a proxy, a stupid opinion of course, you go tell an admin not go trolling my page with crap.
*therefore, adding these nonsense to my page could and will be considered vandalism and i'd suggest you stop. {{unsigned|201.248.204.176}}

:: Unfortunately (again), I've just left a message on your talk page from your IP address which you claim is not a proxy. Everyone is invited to check, here's the , and . You can put as many warnings as you want on my talk page, this will get you blocked, not me. ] <small>]</small> 00:42, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

==WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request==
This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I may have found your page based on your contributions or your link repair user box on your user page. If you are not a member, please consider including your name on the project page. I recently left a ] and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. ] 22:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

== Second level warning (here you go again) ==

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages; it is considered ]. If you would like to experiment, use the ]. Thank you. <!-- Template:Test2 (second level warning) --> .

Yeah, i was just having a little fun and you took advantage of this. You proved nothing convincingly actually. Told you, think is an open proxy, you go tell an admin to block me, not go trolling my page. Or perhaps you do not know who is an admin? Anyway, i am within my rights given by ] to delete your comments and regard them as vandalism, so there you go: second level warning. {{unsigned|201.248.204.176}}
:You do not have any right, you were *blocked* from editing Misplaced Pages and circumventing it through a proxy. ] <small>]</small> 08:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
== Hi again ==
Hello it is I Seadog.M.S I wanted to say thanks for helping me in my time of need. But I have a question, How have I been since I got Blocked--]]] 20:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

==Request==
Hey, there is a dispute in the ] of the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier article. Can you take a look at this, especially the material towards the end of the talk page that discusses the sources, if you have time and offer your opinion on how to resolve the matter? Thank you.] 20:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

==HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO==
Hey dude are you still here? You haven't edited in a while. What's up man? Temporary Misplaced Pages boredom? Something else that's more serious?] 02:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

== AfD ==

Hi {{PAGENAME}}, this is a message I'm posting to everyone who participated in ]. I have nominated the same article for deletion again ] – you might be interested. Regards, ]] 09:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

== AFD Predictive index ==

I have now listed the copyvio link on the AFD for this article ] ] (]) 03:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

== ] ==

A tough one to fix... though I think I did okay for not being able to read Croatian. Can you suggest what else I might do to improve this thing? Thanks, ''']''' '']'' 08:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

== Misinformed ==

The articles for 'Surrender Monkey' and 'Cheese eating surrender monkies' do not exist to legitimise hating the French. Noting silliness is not the same as supporting it. In conclusion, I can understand saying the article is not noteable but to say it exists to hate the French is pointless and wrong. ] (]) 21:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

== Xidan ==

Thank you for reopening that non-neutral closure of the deletion debate. The editor in question was very belligerent in their reaction. Also could you point to any sources for the mall? I tried google but did not find anything ] and then google scholar turned up nothing.] (]) 22:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:Can't help there, I reverted for reasons explained in the Afd page. ] <small>]</small> 22:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 06:41, 19 November 2023

This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Equendil has not edited Misplaced Pages since 11 March 2011. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
I reply to messages left on my talk page on the very same page, not your talk page. Please watch this page if you expect a reply.

Archives

1


AFD Predictive index

I have now listed the copyvio link on the AFD for this article Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Predictive_Index Fallenfromthesky (talk) 03:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Predrag Bambic

A tough one to fix... though I think I did okay for not being able to read Croatian. Can you suggest what else I might do to improve this thing? Thanks, Schmidt, 08:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Misinformed

The articles for 'Surrender Monkey' and 'Cheese eating surrender monkies' do not exist to legitimise hating the French. Noting silliness is not the same as supporting it. In conclusion, I can understand saying the article is not noteable but to say it exists to hate the French is pointless and wrong. Lots42 (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Xidan

Thank you for reopening that non-neutral closure of the deletion debate. The editor in question was very belligerent in their reaction. Also could you point to any sources for the mall? I tried google but did not find anything reliable and then google scholar turned up nothing.Chuletadechancho (talk) 22:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Can't help there, I reverted for reasons explained in the Afd page. Equendil Talk 22:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
How was I being belligerent? I am considering that as a violation of WP:NPA. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 22:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Woah, wrong talk page to discuss with Chuletadechancho Equendil Talk 22:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Not only did Chuletadechancho violated NPA, he also made false claims on the deletion notice. In other words, he LIED. He claims to have searched for the place, and found nothing. However, I conducted a search that turned up multiple tourism articles about this place, including one from the Beijing Olympics official website. Chuletadechancho has nominated this page with malicious intent, and has lied profusely to other Wikipedians in a campaign on deception. Sanctions need to be taken! Arbiteroftruth (talk) 00:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you could comment at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive756#Personal attacks by User:Arbiteroftruth (AoT)Chuletadechancho (talk) 01:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

ongoing vandalism at Michel Platini

Hi there, thanks for semi-protecting the page. These accidents occasionally do happen because the article is vandalized by 2 separate ip/user vandals in succession. Unfortunately Huggle doesn't have an option to restore to previous a reversion :( --Superflewis 13:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, well, best go manual when massive vandalism is occuring on one article. Equendil Talk 13:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Michael Deibert

Just a note to remind you that per WP:NAC, non-administrators shouldn't close deletion discussions unless they are nearly unanimous keep after a full listing period, or snowball closures. Stifle (talk) 14:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to point out that ultimately, what doesn't require admin tools doesn't require an admin, and WP:NAC is only an essay, the deletion process guideline (WP:DPR#NAC) being phrased in a more equivocal manner. I'll admit this was some kind of experiment though, if you think this should have been closed with a different result, I am interested in hearing it. Equendil Talk 05:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for the revert on the Food packaging article. I really appreciated it. Chris (talk) 15:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome, vandals are all over the place sadly. Equendil Talk 05:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Your comment at AN

Perhaps you'd like to revisit the discussion? Both Guy and I have proposed solutions for the dilemma. I symapthize with the dilemmas RC patrollers face and there ought to be a way to relieve some of the pressure. Best, Durova 23:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, that's an interesting discussion, I will keep an eye on it and comment :) Equendil Talk 05:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I admire you...

...For having the brass ones to make "no consensus" AFD closes as a non admin. I'm still afraid of getting yelled at. (ZOMG yur not an admin) --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Haha, I'm fearless! I got kind of yelled at though, as you can see above :) Equendil Talk 05:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism question

Thanks for the link to content dispute. Since the user has continued making POV/uncited contributions to Misplaced Pages, despite many warnings, I had thought it might be sufficient evidence to stop "assuming good faith". At what point does the user cross that "good faith" line?--Rsl12 (talk) 14:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, editing in bad faith is not considered vandalism either. While blatant disrupting such as repeated/extreme uncivility may be brought up on WP:ANI for attention of admins, you are likely to get sent back to dispute resolution if that's not the case.
There doesn't seem to be an *active* dispute here anyway, edits to Al Gore's Penguin Army video are months apart. Chances are you have not exhausted your first option yet, which is to discuss the problem calmly on the talk page of the article. Equendil Talk 14:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Nice work...

About @#@&#^*&#^* time someone did that. Cheers. --Merbabu (talk) 22:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Catholic Encyclopedia

Re some comments of yours at AfD, please note that Catholic Encyclopedia material is not copyright, the book being from 1913. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:55, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up for my attention, I got fooled by the copyright claim at the bottom of the page unfortunately :/ Equendil Talk 22:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

The ever growing list of stub templates

Hi. I wonder if you are thinking of abandoning your proposal here? I'm in favour so I'd be interested to know your thoughts. --Kleinzach 03:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh thanks, I've been quite busy lately and didn't realize it had received further replies, I will have a look of course. Equendil Talk 15:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I've added a short summary. Everybody except WP:SS are obviously in favour of your proposal. Where do we go from here, I wonder? --Kleinzach 07:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't look like my proposal is going anywhere, I think partly because my intent was not understood and also because some people seem to be very protective over the whole stub thing. I'll just let it drop for now as it cannot be implemented with the current system anyway. I mostly wanted to test the water and see what kind of objections that would get. I'm a little worried we seem to have people who think it's a good idea to perform the same tasks multiple times. Not just categorization but rating articles too. It's even more worrying that people flat out fail to recognize the same tasks are being performed multiple times.
I'll make sure to revive this if we ever get better category queries, until then, I think the only way forward is to campaign for that to happen or get the work done, though given the main issue would be server load, an outsider is limited in what they can do.
There is also a separate and more fundamental problem with categories: they are hierachical in nature, a relationship that cannot be handled well in database queries. For instance someone categorized in "american people" (but not in "people") cannot be readily queried as "people" at the database level even though "american people" is a subcategory of "people". There are ways around that, but again server load would be an issue. Equendil Talk 02:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

trusted computer system

You redirected trusted computer system elsewhere, saying it is not a proper article. It is a proper article: the US government uses the term in a different way than the one you redirected it to, which I have not read them use yet (though maybe they do) and means something slightly different.--Dchmelik (talk) 06:21, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Help please?

Equendil, I/we need your help. I am the editor who began working on the article Dan Debicella back in late September, attempting to replace copy lifted from the subject's website with some semblance of a proper article. The article has improved a great deal since then and I have been trying very hard to stay on top of it, but there seems to be an individual very motivated to protect Debicella's record who has constantly reverted the good faith edits I have made and was the same person doing that before I even came on the scene. Now they are accusing me of being someone I am not. I don't see this ever ending without some decisive third-party intervention. From what I remember, you were the first, or one of the first, people to realize what was going on. I'm not asking you to take my side or anything, just that you objectively take a look at the article and make any recommendations you see fit, or even just refer someone who could mediate this dispute. I'm getting really sick of it but I also don't want to give up because I know once I do the article will go back to the same crap it was in the first place. Any help at all is greatly appreciated. 64.252.251.75 (talk) 17:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Your username

Just saw your comment on the Reference Desk, "I'm out of the office", and was quite interested: what's the etymology of your username? Is it from Quenya, one of J. R. R. Tolkien's invented languages? I ask because (aside from enjoying his writings a lot myself) I saw the "ndil" at the end of your username, but I don't remember reading about any of his characters that have anything like "eque" or "equen". Nyttend (talk) 03:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Salut

Hello. I'm a Wikipedian living in Paris as well. If ever you want to meet for a cup of coffee, give me a shout! Rhinoracer (talk) 12:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Cinco de Mayo vandalism

On Jan 7, 2009 I accidently observed a vandal attack on Cinco de Mayo and I rolled back the most recent changes but I did not pickup on the earlier more subtle vandalism. I didn't feel qualified to fine tune the article. I looked down the list of recent editors and could not find anyone who seemed to be a seasoned caretaker. On Jan 8, you reverted the article to a month old version.

This raises the question: Who should the accidental Good Samaritan inform when an article is being repeatedly abused and needs attention by someone more qualified? (A quick Misplaced Pages search didn't answer my question.)

jwalling (talk) 00:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a few things you can do:
  • Revert and issue a warning on the talk page of the editor (anonymous or not). That will stop quite a few vandals from testing their luck further. Common practice is to use one of four level of templates ({{subst:uw-vandalism1}} {{subst:uw-vandalism2}} {{subst:uw-vandalism3}} {{subst:uw-vandalism4}}) to issue warnings, the fist level of warning is to be used when the editor can be assumed to have tested the edit feature of Misplaced Pages in good faith (in which case a templated welcome/help such as {{subst:welcomeg}} might be useful as well), the second level when the intent to vandalize is obvious, the third and fourth level when the editor has already been warned by prior levels.
  • Report the editor on Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism if they have already been issued level 4 warnings recently. See for instance how User talk:168.169.37.143 was blocked from editing Misplaced Pages after vandalizing Cinco de Mayo repeatedly last month.
  • If an article is the target of persistant vandalism from multiple editors (usually an anonymous user with a dynamic IP) in a short period of time, you can request page protection on Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection
  • Always check successive edits by different IPs before you revert, or you'll often revert to a version that was already vandalized (see below).
  • Put articles you notice are frequently vandalized in your watch list to keep an eye on them.
In this particular case, Cinco de Mayo is a low traffic and relatively minor article, good faith edits occur occasionally, it is vandalized fairly frequently but not frequently enough to warrant page protection. Revert & warn is the standard procedure here, not much else can be done. "Recent change patrollers" (WP:RCP) usually catch basic vandalism and do so within seconds with semi automated tools but they can't and don't catch everything.
Finally, what I did was of a different nature, an editor (User:EspanaViva) who was seemingly editing the article in good faith many months ago has apparently decided he didn't like any alteration to what he must think of "his" article, and is logging now and then reverting the article to "his" last version with a spurious edit summary regardless of what changes have been made. On November 10, he reverted to "his" version from August, and again a few days ago. It went under the radar in November and I only noticed in late December so I went back to a November version and reinserted a couple changes made since then. I simply reverted his January 7 edit (edit summary should read "Reverted EspanaViva's-reversal-to-a-months-old-version").
Incidently, I reverted to a vandalized version that had not been correctly reverted (due to successive vandalism from different IPs) and someone else fixed that.
That was quite a long answer. Short answer : Everyone is qualified, fix Misplaced Pages as you go or join the recent change patrol if you got too much time on your hands :) Equendil Talk 02:31, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Amigo/amiga Equendil. Gracias por su ayuda and merci pour votre aide. However, my friend, you keep changing the Cinco de mayo article to an incorrect set of statements. If you read the very extensive citations (that you keep removing), you will see that Cinco de mayo is not a "national holiday" in the ordinary sense of that term. It is a regional holiday in Mexico, and a relatively minor one at that. For example, government offices, banks, and businesses all stay open. There are a few celebrations outside of the state of Puebla - and they are small. The language that you keep removing is factually correct, carefully worded, and has extensive citations.
If you have persuasive citations that support the language that you are insisting on, please post those on my talk page, so that you and I can discuss them. If you do not have persuasive citations, then I'm going to ask you to accept the correct description of the day - that it is a regional holiday in Mexico, etc. EspanaViva 05:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
You make it sound like I have a content dispute with you, but I do not. What I object to is the article being reverted to a version that is many months old, dismissing in the process *every single edit* that has been made to the article on the ground that they are "unexplained". That's a pretty poor rationale for a revert in the first place, and totally unacceptable for a massive one, especially seeing as edits have been made that are in fact properly commented in the edit summaries or talk page (at the very least by me). Now it appears you are objecting to very specific changes that have been made - not by me shall I add - to the article, I have to point out that mass reverting *every* single alteration to the article since you last edited it, including correction of the spelling or phrasing, categories that may have been added, and any unrelated change (such as mine in the 'history' section), is simply not the way to go. I invite you to work on the *current* article and make changes to what you think is wrong with it, not simply assume that the whole article was better the last time you edited it and revert to that. In short, please do not revert good edits with bad ones, that's quite disrespectful of the people who volunteer their time to the project, however minor their contributions may be, and it does not help improving an article. Equendil Talk 20:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Glad to hear we're on the same page. I've made corrections consistent with your suggestions. EspanaViva 14:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: French "out of office" on the language reference desk

Rest tranquil, my friend. Me, I took not the offense. Truly, I had fear of him giving. (Get it?) But, seriously, I think it was I who was too abrupt. Nice to meet you, mon ami. Your sightings are hilarious and so bad as to be hard to believe—"lighter", indeed. --Milkbreath (talk) 03:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Debicella Again

Equendil, would you be able to review the article Dan Debicella? I have tried to mediate this article about a local politician unsuccessfully. There are two partisans who continue to edit the page-- one very pro-Debicella, and one very anti-Debicella. The pro-Debicella editor removes information that might be perceived as negative to Debicella, while the anti-Debicella editor misquotes cited sources and uses biased language to make Debicella look bad. I have tried to create a neutral version based on the best of both, but would be good to have a second set of eyes on it--and possibly lock the page or at least bar these two partisans from continuing their edit war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBard2 (talkcontribs) 15:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Equendil, I have good reason to believe that TheBard2 is in fact Debicella himself. See the Talk page for Dan Debicella for supporting evidence. The Senator himself is posing as a neutral editor. 69.0.31.233 (talk) 01:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Equendil-- thank you for stepping in. As you can see, both pro-Debicella and anti-Debicella editors are a little out of hand. I would encourage you to give a neutral review to the content of the article (as I believe I did), rather than the accusations of both partisans. I would also encourage a long-term lock on the page or stopping these partisans from editing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBard2 (talkcontribs) 03:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Mr. Debicella, I suppose you would consider me exposing your true identity and intentions to be "out of hand". Equendil, my apologies, I realize this is not the appropriate venue for this to take place; this is the last comment I will leave on your talk page regarding the matter. 69.0.31.233 (talk) 03:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Bibliography

Thanks It looks like between your input and a little tweaking on my end, this has become usable. I really appreciate it. —Justin (koavf)TCM17:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome, unfortunately, I was wrong, what broke the template was specifying "Image size =" without a value. Well, it's fixed anyhow but... Equendil Talk 18:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

IGN site

It looks like the IGN has changed their site. I will no longer link to it. Ksnow (talk) 15:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Ksnow

Falcon 2

apologies for that. I want to re-direct it but I have forgotten how.

I am under the wing of Rlandmann if you want bona fides —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petebutt (talkcontribs) 15:46, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Reference desk

Hello, Equendil. I noticed your contributions and took the liberty of adding your signature to this list. I hope that's alright. (Otherwise revert, of course). It's good to have native French speakers at the language desk! ---Sluzzelin talk 14:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, that's perfectly alright, I would most likely have added myself had I been aware of such a list, cheers. Equendil Talk 16:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

RfD process

I've been tempted to submit an RfD request for an article which has been a source of frustration for me, but haven't done so because it would probably just make things worse. I noticed your response to an RfD problem on the help page, so maybe you won't mind my running it by you instead.

The article is Benzodiazepine Withdrawal Syndrome, and my concern is comes across as fanatacism. I certainly do not dispute the importance of benzo w/d, but my reading of the literature (and, I will admit, my own clinical experience such as it is, I assure you I'm not insisting on the value of original research but it is hard to ignore what is before your own eyes) indicates that the most serious manifestations have been limited to patients with a history of high doses, very long-term use, pre-existing seizure disorders--not the average benzo user. Average low-level users do notice psychological withdrawal symptoms but are not in medical danger and can be tapered fairly quickly. As you will see if you check it out, the Wiki article is alarmist and repetitive in insisting that there is in fact a very high level of danger for all users unless the drug is tapered at a glacially slow pace. In the real world this assumption can keep some people on benzos forever.

There are over a hundred references in the article and I have tried approaching them patiently one reference at a time, pointing out where a reference does not say what the author claims. The editor guarding the article is adamant, nothing changes. In a related article (alprozolam) I added a couple of good references of my own to the section on withdrawal and the same editor changed what I wrote to distort what the references said. Should I just give up? It would be easy to do if I could get over the idea that real people are hurt by propaganda like that. I have doubts that an RfD would help. It would likely attract only those who have already made up their minds. Any advice would be welcome.Rose bartram (talk) 12:33, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

On the procedure to follow to resolve your dispute: First of all I have to point out there is no process known as "RfD" on Misplaced Pages (well there is but it's for deleting redirects, which is not relevant here), I expect you read what I wrote on the help page related to a process known as "AfD", which stands for "Articles for Deletion" where articles are proposed for deletion. This is not a course you can follow here, since the very existence of the article is not disputed. Misplaced Pages does have multiple processes for dispute resolution however (See Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution).
I am not quite sure you have exhausted your first option however (discussing the problem on the talk page). I know it can be quite tedious to deal with an editor seemingly possessive about an article, but he doesn't strike me as blatantly unreasonable. What you might need most here is patience. Discuss every change you want to make on the talk page, try to find a common or middle ground where possible, particularly where there is no fundamental disagreement and altering / toning down the phrasing may work (as in this edit). If you feel this is going nowhere, then request a third party (either Misplaced Pages:Third opinion or Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment).
No issue of original research here, expertise about a subject is welcome, as long as reliable sources are cited. Equendil Talk 15:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the response and I see that I totally confused the issue by typing RfD when I meant RfC, and then repeating the same typo again. I think I really need to stay off Wiki if I can't get my fingers to cooperate any better than that! The "comment" process was the one I was thinking of, but I doubt that it would help even if I could type better. Again, I appreciate the reply.Rose bartram (talk) 00:55, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Trois ou quatre

For someone who can't analyze the structure of his native language, you gave a clear and helpful analysis of all those variations on "j'en ai trois ici" at the Language Reference Desk. As a native speaker of English who's working on improving his mediocre French, I'm always happy to see examples and context. Merci. --- OtherDave (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I really get easily confused though, I can barely tell an adverb from an adjective, tenses give me headaches, and I tend to think of a substantive as a type of food :) Equendil Talk 16:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Re:Your Help Desk request regarding Template:Country data Chechnya

I didn't see the little flags in the section "Example usage", but now is ok. --Aushulz (talk) 13:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject French communes#Problematic mass editing of french communes

Can you please revisit this discussion and also try to drum up consensus on what to do about the lines? SELFREF doesn't seem to provide the prohibition against lines such as these as I thought it did and the mass TFD resulted in a keep result. At the very least the lines should be replaced with {{Frenchtrans}}, imo... –xeno 20:01, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Will do when I've got some time. Equendil Talk 08:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

PastScape

Equendil, since you promote Project Gutenberg on your page, why do you have a problem with people linking British Heritage's free online service? Amandajm (talk) 07:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

For pretty much the same reason I would have a problem with people linking the Project Gutenberg frontpage on every article, where somewhat related content might or might not be found on the Project Gutenberg site. Coming from, say, the article on Architecture, the PastScape frontpage is not offering further reading about that particular subject, just a search box to various data concerning English lankmarks. You might as well have linked to the same site from the article about history, history of Europe, history of England etc on the basis that the site holds historical information if you search for it. It's not just me either, another user left a remark on your alternate account's talk page regarding that link (you might want to identify your alt. account by the way, using {{User Alternate Acct}} or whatever). Equendil Talk 08:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Equendil. re website, I see what you mean. However, it is probably useful on some pages.
With regard to my "alternate account's talk page", I just took a look at it, and I assure you that I know nothing about it whatsoever. I don't find it necessary to have an alternate account.
I do have two accounts on Wiki Commons, because I first started uploading pics under my real name, which is not Amanda J M. Recently I have found that this wasn't as convenient as having both wikipedia and Commons under the same name, so I formed an Amandajm account, but maintained the first as well, in order to maintain pics that I had already uploaded and check the relevant messages.
The other account to which you have directed me has a name which is almost an anagram of mine (but not quite). I have absolutely no idea who it is. Amandajm (talk) 05:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
I see. I just checked out the edits of the editor who is inserting all the links, and understand why you thought that it was me, operating under a different name. Several of them are articles in which I have been the major editor, and it was me who questioned you about it, not the spammer. No, this isn't the way I work; I'm very upfront. And yes, I agree that adding that link to every vaguely related article is spam. Amandajm (talk) 05:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Oops, sorry for having assumed the user I reverted was you (for all the reasons you stated indeed). Equendil Talk 14:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Bruce Castle pics

Fixed. Amandajm (talk) 06:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Figueira da Foz

Thanks for straightening out the page. Deep Atlantic Blue (talk) 23:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


Photosystem I

Hi, I'm wondering why the article keeps being edited for the subject Photosystem I to be redirected to "Photosystem." This article is not more than five hours old as of right now. I accidentally clicked on save rather than preview thus publishing the article before I was ready. I am trying to get this article up to snuff as well as get used to wiki at the same time. I have not yet figured out how to trim the fat off of my references list and I have some other issues to work out as well. That being said, I am not engaging in vandalism to my own page. I for some reason thought that if the author of an article edits it, he or she does not need to comment. I guess I didn't read all the guidelines. More important though, is that photosystem I and "photosystem" are not the same. The photosystem I article goes in to a bit more depth about photosystem I specifically whereas the photosystem article covers PS I and PS II on a slightly more superficial level. I feel that the photosystem article has its place as a broad overview of photosynthetic processes and as a gateway to more information about photosystem I and photosystem II, which has its own article. Any explanation would be helpful. Like I said, was not ready to publish yet, and new to wiki writing. Can you help me out? Merci bien Botanicleve (talk) 06:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

In 2006, failing to understand redirects, an editor created four identical articles on Photosystem I, under different names (P700, P 700, Photo system I, Photosystem 1. It was a mere paragraph not up to standards, while the Photosystem article itself was relatively short, I informally suggested to merge the paragraph into Photosystem since there was no real reason to have separate articles and I and other users created redirects. I expect you fell victim to a trigger happy vandal fighter who seeing a redirect being overwritten, reverted you without giving a thought and gave you a warning with an automated tool. There is definitively no ground for an accusation of vandalism here however. Your view here is perfectly in line with the way the encyclopedia is built, with "main" articles giving a broad overview of more specific subjects covered in sub articles. It is generally considered better not to split an article on a given subject into multiple pages until it grows significantly though (then again, Photosystem II was already a separate page).
Anyway, you seem to have a proper page under work, I'll fix current redirects and I encourage you to keep working on it. I will move it to Photosystem I however, rather than Photosystem 1. Ignore the warning entirely. Equendil Talk 17:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Please also note the existence of the pages P700 and P680. Equendil Talk 17:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. There is one other thing though. I need to use images that already exist in other wikipedia articles but I cannot find any way to cite these images as there are no references on the pages from which they come. How do I need to go about citing images that are already on wiki and under the GNU? Thanks for your help, -Botanicleve (talk) 01:36, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

File:P 700.jpg
example
I'm not entirely sure what you are asking here but clicking on any picture on Misplaced Pages leads to a description page of that picture, for instance if you click on the drawing in Photosystem, you'll get to the page Image:P 700.jpg, you would include that picture in an article by inserting ] where you want it to appear, though you would likely want to indicate how you want it to appear (size, which side of the text, caption and more). For instance, I used ] to display the picture on the right side of my reply. See Misplaced Pages:Extended image syntax for details. Equendil Talk 01:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

vos interventions

Equentil, moi, je commence à vous trouver bien sympathique... Frania W. (talk) 04:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Merci! Je viens de passer un long moment à tracer et inverser les modifications de ce qui semble être une seule et même personne qui édite depuis son IP (User:167.206.29.162) et deux comptes (User:Qqtacpn et User:Niaps) et qui a apparement décidé d'ajouter sa section "Napoleon = Hitler" à un maximum d'articles, je vais continuer à surveiller et surement demander un checkuser. Equendil Talk 04:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Request

Can you please stop ? He has only made disruptive edits to Misplaced Pages. When I reverted his vandalism and left a warning on his talk page he then decided to attack me. --The Legendary Sky Attacker 08:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not an admin myself, but I reported that user on Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism for attention of an admin. Equendil Talk 08:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
And he's gone. Equendil Talk 08:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --The Legendary Sky Attacker 09:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

On Niaps

Hi i am Willski72 and i have been trying to get Niaps to see sense just like you. How about forming an Entente Cordiale to get him to understand that he has to create his own articles if he is serious about this, and not change others that should either be left as they are or have one neutral sentence mentioning atrocities on both sides (both French Army AND Spanish Guerrillas.Willski72 (talk) 12:02, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

It also seems that , Niaps and Qqtacon are allied on this issue, they have all worked together to create an article on the murdered man.Willski72 (talk) 12:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

The whole thing is currently under scrutiny at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Series of possible hoaxes, for a serie of articles around a Don Manuel Joseph Martín López de Prado Rodríguez Díaz de Armesto y Varela, X Baron of Lemavia who Qqtacon (talk · contribs) claims was killed as part of a massacre ordered by Marshal Ney. Articles under AfD ended up deleted after he himself tagged them for speedy deletion, he got himself blocked for a legal threat, and most likely would have for sockpuppetry otherwise. I'll just let the dust settle at this point. Equendil Talk 17:56, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Also at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Qqtacpn for his behaviour on the AfD discussions. Equendil Talk 18:02, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes i read an article about the death of the Don and others which was very one sided to say the least. I think waiting to see what the administrators do is a good idea. I expect they will put up stiff resistance as they are very passionate on the issue, but they will have to be good to get out of this one.Willski72 (talk) 18:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

SNUSP

SNUSP a brainf**k derivative? What? Have you ever programmed in SNUSP? I wonder why you agreed in the deletion of the article, if you are not able to distinguish between brainf**k and SNUSP. By the way, C++ is a derivative of C. And LOLCODE exists still! --Ittakezou0 (talk) 17:35, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

  • No I have not "programmed" in SNUSP, the reason being esoteric programming languages such as this are merely designed to be amusing Turing-complete languages, not for actual development. That's not relevant to my delete !vote anyhow.
  • Stating something is a derivative of something else does not imply they are the same.
  • From Esolangs.org "Core SNUSP is essentially Brainfuck with a two-dimensional control flow"
  • Yes C++ is most definitively a derivative of C. A *notable* derivative.
  • I have never edited LOLCODE or otherwise taken part in its AfD's or DRV's as far as I remember.
  • The proper venue to get articles restored is at Misplaced Pages:Deletion Review Equendil Talk 18:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Mentioned it above, but please note there is a perfectly fine "wiki" for esoteric languages out there: Esolangs Equendil Talk 18:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
There should exist a wiki for every material rejected by this one; and at the end, for both material that is here, and the one taht was rejected... For any of the content of this wiki, it is possible to find another source (it is a requirements for articles, isn't it?), so what this wiki is for? Maybe for the lazy one who can't learn searching but in a unique index... sad future for the humanity I see. --Ittakezou0 (talk) 13:16, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Dolmen deity

You commented on the talk page of this article. I can find the phrase in a late 19th century work by T Peet and something around 1950 by a Bruce Dickens. The reference just added about mother goddess is not only by someone who I'm dubious about, he doesn't actually use the phrase. I'm tempted to take it to AfD. What do you think? Dougweller (talk) 18:22, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Broken Coord

Hi. In order to clean up Category:Coord template needing repair, would you mind if I changed an instance of {{coord}} in User:Equendil/Paris timeline? There's an extra pipe in
{{coord|48|51|38|N|2|21|30|E ||region:FR_type:landmark}}; it needs to be
{{coord|48|51|38|N|2|21|30|E |region:FR_type:landmark}}.

There's also a typo: |format=dmg for |format=dms, but that one doesn't seem to matter!
—WWoods (talk) 15:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! I fixed them. Equendil Talk 19:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Kapitop's message

EU

Hi stop quoting incorrect numbers from biased sources about religious minorities in France and EU. By doing that, you are the one that is vandalizing ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kapitop (talkcontribs)

I am not quoting anything, I'm reverting your edits. *You* are altering referenced material in contradiction with said references, with no justification whatsoever. Equendil Talk 02:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing wikipedia with your false lies. Go educate & get fact & then edit. STOP using dubious & your self invented "so-called" reference materials ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kapitop (talkcontribs) 00:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Kaolin (band)

Hello Equendil, this is a message from an automated bot to inform you that the page you created, Kaolin (band), has been marked for speedy deletion by User:Koavf. This has been done because the page seems to be about a person, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant (see CSD). If you think the tag was placed in error, please add "{{hangon}}" to the page text, and edit the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. If you have a question about this bot, please ask it at User talk:SDPatrolBot II. If you have a question for the user who tagged the article, see User talk:Koavf. Thanks, - SDPatrolBot II (talk) on behalf of Koavf (talk · contribs) 09:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note

You are receiving this note because you participated in this TFD. Some of these have been re-nominated here, where you may wish to comment. Thanks, –xeno 14:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Traduction ?

Hello Equendil, Lebrouillard has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove 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. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Tu gères en anglais dis moi ! Tu ne voudrais pas traduire quelques articles avec le projet traduction ?! Lebrouillard (talk) 21:18, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Science in the Middle Ages

Hello. You are invited to take part in the discussion on Science in the Middle Ages. The question is should we keep or remove the section on the Islamic world. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 08:29, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

List of current French Navy ships

Equendil you have done a great job on List of current French Navy ships. I have some queries on the classification of the Aviso's and also the matter of re-listing the Porte-hélicoptères Jeanne d'Arc (R 97). Perhaps you could have a look at the articles discussion page as I have outlined it in full there. Thanks. Felix505 (talk) 04:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I have inserted the text . I hope you find this appropriate.
A more detailed response is on the talk page. Thanks Felix505 (talk) 20:45, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

There has been some section heading renaming going on recently at List of current French Navy ships with frigates getting tagged destroyer and aviso's getting attention both as frigates and corvettes. I have returned the section headers to the earlier descriptions but it may need some monitoring and maybe some (Talk) discussions on the talk page if the problem does not go away. I found the Aviso's described as "Aviso (corvette) (light frigate)" earlier today. "==Guided missile frigates/destroyers== ...The French Navy has three frigates currently active in an anti-aircraft role with a fourth currently on sea trials...." was the other instance I reverted today. As we engaged in some degree of discussion on this matter on the Talk page we would have a reasonable argument to put forward that the matter has been discussed and consensus on the matter agreed to in regard to this article. Knowing the way these things can go I thought it best to seek your engagement sooner rather than later.

Regarding Jeanne d'Arc (R 97) some recent citable info turned up on the net so the article on the ship has been updated to some effect. Have a look over it if you have the time. It could still use some decent documentation of the actual life of the ship but at least the end days have a bit more resoulution now. Felix 01:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Grammar

It's either "hundreds of meters" or "a hundred meters", but not "a hundred of meters". Which are you trying to convey? Fences&Windows 20:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

A hundred meters, fixed it, thanks. Equendil Talk 21:09, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Geo coordinates on Paris timeline

Hi, Equendil. Just so you know, I went ahead and fixed a few minor errors with the geographic coordinate metadata. By the way, good work on that page. -happy5214 16:11, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Maupiti Island (game) Titlescreen .jpg

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

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 18:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Superskweek.gif

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Categories: