Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 10:05, 21 July 2024

Archives

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

Comment

Hey Grundle. I saw this article noted on another editor's page and thought it was interesting . I hope all is well with you. I mentioned you once on my talk page in a discussion about prairie dogs and whether they can recognize each other by their teeth or, as I speculated, it's a breath thing. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:58, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I commented on the relevant section of your talk page about the prairie dogs. Grundle2600 (talk) 01:05, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

It's a nice photo. There an even better one in Jenavecia's (sp?) userpage history. Seems like a very strange way to greet one's relatives. But having seen bird mating dances, nature has developed some very interesting behavior patterns. ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:03, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

• This meme is still going strong . ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:25, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks! That was great! Grundle2600 (talk) 08:40, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
• Given my current circumstances here at wikipedia, I can really relate to his predicament right now! Grundle2600 (talk) 09:41, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Vincent Who?

Not sure if there are enough sources for this but if you can find some I think you should create an article on it. Meanwhile I rearranged the sections a bit since documentaries shouldn't be in a "popular culture" section. If you do so I think there should be two subsections. "Documentaries" and "In popular culture".The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 04:10, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I just rearranged the section.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 04:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

PS: Please take a look at the talk page too.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 05:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Your changes are fine. I just wanted to make sure it was mentioned somewhere in the article. There are enough sources that I could at least create a decent stub, but I've just been really busy recently. I agree with you that it's not always easy to figure out how to arrange these things within the article, but I trust whatever method you believe is best. Grundle2600 (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I just rearranged a bit more. Anyways, if you could start a stub for the Vincent who? documentary (when you have the time) that would be great.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

This search at the Movie Review Query Engine does not cite even one single review of the film. I don't recall that ever happening with any other search that I have ever done at that website. Grundle2600 (talk) 23:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

The only evidence of notability is the entry at Internet Movie Database. Even this search at All Movie Guide does not yield any results. Grundle2600 (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Grundle, I was patrolling new pages when your stub popped up, and marked it patrolled in case someone else wanted to put a speedy on it. But in the long run, you're going to have to find more references than IMDB. I hope you do, because it's a really good misidentification story. Do you know the joke about the Jew and the Korean drinking at the bar? It's not offensive to either. PhGustaf (talk) 23:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank. I agree with you that the subject deserves an article, but also that it needs more references. Perhaps it will win some awards over the next few months, or at least receive a few nominations. Grundle2600 (talk) 23:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Mmh. Google news gave me this but I'm not sure if it would qualify as a RS. A general search gave me this and that and there might be (or maybe not) enough info for an article. What a bummer that there seems to be no news source about the documentary.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 23:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I just added the Philadelphia Enquirer article to it right before I read your message. Grundle2600 (talk) 23:37, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I just saw that you already created the article. "smile" The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 23:39, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind, but I saw that you were discussing the film. I've read about it, so I wanted to help. I added the official website, and I'll look for other sources. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 23:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. And of course I don't mind - the more the merrier! Grundle2600 (talk) 23:50, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

There we go. Another needed article created! BTW, this part of the judges reasoning, "These weren't the kind of men you send to jail.", really pissed me off (excuse my French).The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 00:37, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Interesting news

• ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

While I am very much in favor of laws to protect animals from abuse, I don't think they need their own lawyers! Grundle2600 (talk) 05:01, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Spoons

One good turn deserves another . ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:46, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Heh heh heh. That was great - thanks! Grundle2600 (talk) 21:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Clarification sought at WP:AN

Sorry bro, but I think you're crossing the topic ban line with this one. WP:AN#Grundle2600, topic ban inquiry. Tarc (talk) 02:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Geez, Grundle, you've got to be smart enough to just fucking stop this shit. Just fucking stop it. No fucking whining or wikilawyering. Keep it up, and you'll run out of people willing to help you pull your fucking self out of fucking fires you've fucking built your fucking self. PhGustaf (talk) 04:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought my request was polite, and completely non-political. But I guess the higher ups disagree. Oh well. Grundle2600 (talk) 09:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Blocked

• This is both a clear violation of your topic ban and evidence of a distressing failure to get the point. MastCell  05:12, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

A week? Wow! Given that my request was completely polite, and non-political, I think any block is unjustified - and a week is way too long. Oh well. I'll just have to deal with it. Grundle2600 (talk) 09:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I think that a moderately contrite unblock request might help. I see the block as a close call. PhGustaf (talk) 21:13, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. But I think I'll learn more and behave better in the future, if I actually take my punishment now. Grundle2600 (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Just a reminder: Blocks are not meant to punish editors. They're preventative. I think you should wait for the block to expire (as you wisely indicated yourself). Any granted unblock request would probably just get you a quite more extensive block in the future if you violate your probation again. So yes, I think you should leave it as is and meanwhile we try to entertain you a bit. Doesn't sound too bad, or does it? Best, The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 22:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree with you. And I appreciate your company. I'm trying to view this as a vacation/rest where I can think about things. Also, if a person never has to deal with the consequences of their mistakes, then they miss out on the best lessons that life has to offer. Grundle2600 (talk) 22:48, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Your last point is a very wise one. I live by that. Cheers,The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 22:52, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

...at least I try very hard ;) The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 22:54, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I have spoken with my union representative about my block.

She said that during my block, I still get to collect my full salary. Whoo hoo! Grundle2600 (talk) 09:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I see that ChildofMidnight is facing a possible block of one year.

I haven't followed the specifics of his case in great detail, but one year would be way too long. Come on, admins, you know he makes great contributions to the encyclopedia. Having him gone for a year is way beyond excessive. Grundle2600 (talk) 10:48, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed that certain editors seem to be spending all their of time at wikipedia either filing ANI complaints and/or erasing content from articles. Perhaps if these people tried spending some time actually adding content to articles, they wouldn't be so quick to clamp down on people who make a few mistakes every now and then, but are otherwise excellent contributors to the encyclopedia. If a person who contributes lots of legitimate content to the encyclopedia occasionally messes up, there should be some leeway for that. Grundle2600 (talk) 11:19, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

He's been in and out of arbcom before. I think the question is not whether to give someone a second chance, but when the chances end.

That said, I don't have an opinion one way or another about this. I'm not well-versed on the issues here, and my interactions with CoM have been minimal. --King Öomie 14:38, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Even those who favor blocking him admit that he is a great contributor. I don't think blocks for great contributors should ever exceed 48 hours. A year is way past excessive. Grundle2600 (talk) 14:40, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps topic bans or other sanctions (of which he already has at least one) would be more pertinent. I'm sure it will all be considered. --King Öomie 16:16, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you - that would be much better. Grundle2600 (talk) 17:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Whoa! I hadn't realized how bad daytime TV had become!

Before today's block, which has left me with plenty of time to watch weekday TV, I hadn't watched any weekday TV since I was a kid in the 1970s, when I watched reruns of Get Smart, Dick Van Dyke, Underdog, the Three Stooges, and Looney Tunes. But now today, all that's on - on every single channel - is reruns on Law & Order! You'd think that with 300 channels of cable today, compared to only 4 channels of non-cable when I was a kid, there'd be a bigger selection today than back then. But no - they had to put the same show on every single channel! What the heck is up with that? Grundle2600 (talk) 14:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Law & Order, or daytime gameshows, basically. Hope you're a fan of 'the wheel'. I'd say "I feel your pain", but I'm hardly ever home before 6. --King Öomie 14:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I remember Wheel of Fortune. I stopped watching it after they stopped making the contestants waste all of their winnings by going shopping for the most ridiculous prizes imaginable. Grundle2600 (talk) 14:39, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

When I was a kid I loved that one show where they let contestants loose in a store with a shopping cart and let them keep whatever they got. I always imagined what I'd do. --King Öomie 14:40, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I remember when they did that TV show in the supermarket - everyone always headed for the meat section. Grundle2600 (talk) 14:47, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Hah! Best way to win there would certainly be to run down the Vitamin aisle with your arm as a scoop on one of the shelves. Worth 3-4 times Prosciutto by weight. --King Öomie 16:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Update regarding the political status of Michelle Obama's arms.

According to today's newspaper, there is updated information regarding the political status of Michelle Obama's arms. The National Rifle Association scorecard has given a rating of 0% to Michelle's left arm, and a rating of 100% to her right arm. The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence scorecard has given the exact reverse ratings, with a score of 100% for her left arm, and 0% for her right arm. All of these ratings, from both organizations, are based on a single photograph - which was taken when Michelle was eight years old - which shows her using her right arm to shoot a squirt gun. These poll results are having a huge effect on the ability of Michelle's arms to get elected to Congress - it's been rumored that one of her arms is considering dropping out of the next election - although different sources are inconsistent about whether it's her left or right arm. Grundle2600 (talk) 14:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

That seems to be something you could add here ;) The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 15:23, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm the person who created that. My account there is "Drop Dead Fred." But you knew that, I guess. Grundle2600 (talk) 15:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

You had it posted here and I remembered.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 15:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

If we would have a "fun-section" on WP like they do over there you could profit from it as it would be less restrained. But unfortunately we don't and I doubt we'll ever have one.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 15:38, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Wrong, O penintent one: Misplaced Pages:Department of Fun. Some clods keep trying to delete it. Baptists, probably. PhGustaf (talk) 15:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Most of the DoF articles are meta-references to Misplaced Pages itself. I can't think of one that pokes fun at a political figure (or the ridiculous press coverage of them). --King Öomie 16:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

In resp. to PhGustaf: I didn't say that there are no fun related pages on WK, (BTW: thanks for the link), but it is not handled in a way Rationalwiki does. I added your link to my watchlist "to fight the damn censorship from Babtists" :D . Doh!The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Long live biological evolution, and rock music with dirty lyrics! Grundle2600 (talk) 17:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

LOL. (No further comment needed in response) :) The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 18:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Bend it. PhGustaf (talk) 21:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Grundle2600 (talk) 21:12, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

A 60s song, I think by The Troggs, that mimicked an orgasm. I can't seem to find the lyrics online. But the song started out in fast tempo with, "Bend it, bend it, show that you can do the..." and got gradually faster till the largo last line of "...when we're endin', you'll be bendin'". PhGustaf (talk) 21:20, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Grundle2600 (talk) 21:23, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

"Bend it". And I thought you where talking dirty... tsts... XD The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 22:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

"grundle's cool animal of the week"

Over at this other website, every week I choose an animal and start a discussion about it by posting its wikipedia article. I've been doing this for about three years now, and you can see my list of all the animals that I have chosen so far, along with links to all the discussions, here. Grundle2600 (talk) 23:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm just about to sit down and have dinner but if I could change and choose I guess I would go for the Humboldt Squid. *Yummy* :) . Have a good night.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 23:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

They are for learning - not eating!!! Grundle2600 (talk) 23:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Oops? But seriously, I was just to post the following:

PS: I realize that not all animals listed are meant to eat by humans. Just don't wont you to get the wrong impression about me and my food intake.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 23:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I have chicken breast tonight ;) The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 23:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

My "shocked" reaction to your comment was intended to be humorous. Please eat whatever you enjoy eating! Grundle2600 (talk) 00:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

That Strawberry Crab is wild--looks almost too good to eat. Drmies (talk) 00:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

It looks like a strawberry - but I bet it tastes like a crab. Grundle2600 (talk) 00:47, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

What's red, and smells like blue paint?

No fair googling or asking someone! Grundle2600 (talk) 00:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

• Eh, that bumper sticker about the incredibly small red dot in the overwhelmingly blue state! Drmies (talk) 00:39, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for trying - I appreciate your effort. But that's not the answer. Grundle2600 (talk) 00:45, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

• Well, I didn't phrase it very well anyway--I meant that the dot was red but the smell blue. So I didn't win anything? I'm being oppressed! I'm having my parents call the principal! Drmies (talk) 00:50, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

• Since I am the superintendent, I'm not worried about you calling the principal. Grundle2600 (talk) 01:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Red paint? ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes! Excellent job! Grundle2600 (talk) 03:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Wow! This is awesome. I don't think I've ever solved a riddle like this before. :) I feel like a genius. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it is indeed a very tough one to solve. I wasn't able to get it. Grundle2600 (talk) 03:22, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

<--I can't believe I'm being outsmarted by a bunch of conservatives. I'm going back to school. Drmies (talk) 05:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't able to figure it out. I heard it on the TV show Mythbusters, but they only gave us about two seconds to figure it out before they gave the answer. And I'm libertarian, not conservative. Grundle2600 (talk) 05:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

For a commie like me, that's all the same thing. ;) Drmies (talk) 05:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't use the word commie lightly - perhaps you mean you are a liberal who gets wrongly accused of being a commie? Grundle2600 (talk) 05:39, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm maybe not wrongly. I don't know. Things used to be easy, now they're not. The older I get, the more Socratic I get--the part about knowing I don't know a thing, that is. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 05:52, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Meh. I'm no communist, but I don't see it as an inherently evil force. Communism, as an ideal, is noble- the problem is that as human beings, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" doesn't sound enough like "GIMME GIMME" to our reptile brains- so communism is only instituted by force, upon a society that almost universally doesn't want it. THAT'S the evil. --King Öomie 15:39, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The Kibbutzim in Israel are voluntary, and they seem to be doing pretty well. Grundle2600 (talk) 17:18, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I said almost universal :P --King Öomie 17:26, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I started a blog.

link Grundle2600 (talk) 02:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Wow dude, you got some good taste in music! I fucking love the Velvet Underground & Nico CD. Lou Reed is a genius. So is John Cale. I first got that CD when I was 15 and still love it. Caden 22:02, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah - they are quite awesome! Grundle2600 (talk) 22:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

ChildofMidnight has been blocked for a year. That's about 364 days too long.

The result of Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ChildofMidnight is completely unfair. The encyclopedia will suffer greatly because of this. Grundle2600 (talk) 04:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Holy fuck that has to be a wikipedia record. John Asfukzenski (talk) 04:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

There are others who have been blocked for a year. Grundle2600 (talk) 05:05, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dan Brown (YouTube).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Dan Brown (YouTube).jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

• If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 08:48, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi bot! You can go ahead and delete the image. Grundle2600 (talk) 12:33, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Funny

"DYN"? :) Reminds me of what some say the "N" on the Cornhuskers helmet stands for. :) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 08:11, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Ha! Silly me! Thanks for pointing out my spelling error on ChildofMidnight's talk page. I fixed it. Heh heh. Yes, it is funny! Grundle2600 (talk) 11:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The punchline to that joke (which I heard from a Cornhuskers fan) is that it stands for "Nolledge". :) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 00:31, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The Usual Suspects

So you work for Keyser Söze, eh? It occurs to me that if you work for Keyser Söze, that probably opens a lot of doors. However, performance review time could be a little tense. With Keyser Söze, there's no sliding scale. It's strictly pass/fail. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 22:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Not only do I work for him - I created that userbox! I looooooove that movie! Grundle2600 (talk) 23:01, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Ha! I get it. OK. I just added the umlaut. Thanks! Grundle2600 (talk) 23:04, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Excellent movie. I didn't actually see it in theater, I saw it on a rental tape. When it finished, I immediately rewound to watch it again. Very cleverly done. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 00:32, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

When it came out in 1995, I was living just two blocks away from the only theater in my city that had it for the first two weeks of its release (it was later expanded to other theaters in the city). I saw it in the theater seven times. Grundle2600 (talk) 00:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Maybe one of those situations where you tell friends, "You gotta go see this," and you go with them just to see it again, to look for anything you missed before, and to watch their reactions to the ending. In my case, someone in the office (ca. 1998) said, "You've got to rent this." The Sting, which I did see in the theater, was kind of like that also. In both cases, I knew nothing ahead of time (deliberately), and they "got" me, which is the whole point, of course. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 00:49, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I did bring a few friends, but I was alone during most of the viewings. Grundle2600 (talk) 00:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

There's a great crime movie from 1996 called "Bound" that you might enjoy - but don't read about it because you might see spoilers. It was made by the same people who made "The Matrix." Grundle2600 (talk) 00:54, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm right there with Bugs. I watched "The Usual Suspects" on tape at home, finished it, said "holy &$#@," rewound it, and immediately watched it again. It's still one of my favorite movies ever. Knowing the ending makes the rest of it even better, when you consider what may or may not be true. And I'll agree with G2600, "Bound" is also very good. Dayewalker (talk) 00:57, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll see if I can find Bound in the rental stores, and I definitely will not read about it ahead of time. Typically I don't want to know too much about a movie before I see it. Maybe who's in it, and some really vague, high-level info about the story concept, but that's it. I don't understand the folks who want to find out whatever they can about a movie's storyline before it comes out. No wonder it can disappoint, if there's no surprises left. That's a big part of the magic of movies, don'cha know. Then if it's good, you watch it again. I think back to 1977, when Star Wars came out, a totally and unexpectedly huge hit - in part because kids kept going to see it, over and over. It played in my local theater for like 6 months. That's when you know a movie is good, when it's got "legs". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 01:08, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Baseball Bugs - That's great - I hope you find it! Grundle2600 (talk) 01:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Dayewalker, you have excellent taste in movies! Grundle2600 (talk) 01:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Donna Simpson (world's heaviest woman to give birth)

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

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ThemFromSpace 01:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I read what you wrote! Grundle2600 (talk) 01:19, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

• Grundle - that's an awesome article! I hope it is able to remain.--Milowent (talk) 14:00, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you! Grundle2600 (talk) 15:21, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Fedexia

On March 20, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fedexia, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Cirt (talk) 06:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Grundle2600 (talk) 06:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Nasty little fish

You might want to consider http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Inimicus_filamentosus as an animal of the day. PhGustaf (talk) 02:54, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Actually, I don't take requests or recommendations for that. My choices are my "artwork," so to say. Thanks anyway. Grundle2600 (talk) 09:12, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Tampa Bay monkey

Congrats on getting this article in the main page, albeit April Fool's Day. Enjoy! Grsz 13:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Grundle2600 (talk) 17:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Guam

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, you will be blocked from editing. HkCaGu (talk) 19:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Disruptive? I don't think so. My entry was well sourced. Grundle2600 (talk) 20:04, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

ANI

I have reported your most recent disruption of the encyclopedia to ANI. You can comment at ]. Hipocrite (talk) 20:14, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any sense of humor at all? Grundle2600 (talk) 20:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

"STFU"

My apologies. I saw someone called out on an extremely silly "joke" then trying to turn the discussion around to try and get a topic ban lifted, demonstrating IMO the height of foolishness. I tend to speak very forthrightly both online and off. But I see from your comment that you took offence where it wasn't really intended so I apologise for using that acronym. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I accept your apology. For the record, I was not offended. I was merely pointing out that I am more polite and civil on talk pages than some of the editors who want me punished. No harm done! Grundle2600 (talk) 21:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Being polite isn't all it's cracked up to be. Far to much emphasis is given to politeness here. It's what you do that matters really, not how you say it. Take my advice (if you want to) If you want to get your topic ban lifted, then correct what you were doing to get it put in place in the first place. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

OK. I won't made any more April Fool's edits in the article space. I do think that I have been behaving pretty well, since my last block was lifted. I do hope that one day, my topic ban will at least be lifted from the talk pages of political articles, as I have lots of great ideas on how to improve those articles. Thanks for your adivce. Grundle2600 (talk) 21:44, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

How did I miss all this? I thought the part about tipping over and falling into the ocean was funny, but I don't really want to go on record as encouraging it. Best, - Wikidemon (talk) 23:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I will never again add any April Fool's jokes in the article space. So you're not encouraging anything by saying it's funny. Grundle2600 (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

That's too bad because it was funny. In the real world April Fool's is a great thing to be a part of. Sadly, on wikipedia so many editors lack a sense of humor. BTW, good luck with having your topic ban lifted eventually. You deserve a second chance. Caden 20:41, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Grundle2600 (talk) 20:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked

As you have reneged on your promise that lead to your being conditionally unblocked ("please abide by this undertaking or I, or someone else will reimpose"), I have re-instated the indefinite block. –xeno 21:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

OK. Grundle2600 (talk) 21:15, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I understand why a message about me being blocked was added to my userpage. But I don't understand why all the other stuff on my userpage was removed. Would someone please put my stuff back on my userpage - and please make sure that the message about me being blocked is listed first? Thank you. Grundle2600 (talk) 21:18, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 21:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Grundle2600 (talk) 21:25, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Grundle, that was most likely your absolutely final chance. Have a good one. Grsz 21:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

You don't have to be sorry - you didn't do anything wrong. I am proud of my contributions to wikipedia - even the ones that some people considered to be controversial. I am happy with my actions. I don't regret a thing. Thank you for your kindness. Grundle2600 (talk) 21:25, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

What a shame. I'm very sorry to see you go. Political articles need more neutrality, and wikipedia shouldn't turn a blind eye to that but it does. Censorship is alive and well and as always, controlled and enforced by the mighty powerful left. Caden 23:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. That's how you and I and some others see it, but that's not how most of the administrators see it. I am an inclusionist who wants articles to include all points of view, but not everyone here is the same way. Well, I had a lot of fun writing articles here - and I can still have fun reading the articles. Grundle2600 (talk) 23:37, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Many, many editors see it but are terrified of speaking up due to retaliation. We all know who runs the show around here. Misplaced Pages continues to lose great editors who actually want to help build a neutral encyclopedia. Caden 23:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is very neutral on non-controversial subjects. Grundle2600 (talk) 00:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Awww, well, in case we don't chat again, it's been a pleasure to know you online. - Wikidemon (talk) 02:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've always enjoyed talking with you too. Grundle2600 (talk) 02:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Some comments by me

For anyone who is curious, here is a permanent link to the discussion of my indefinite ban. Note that it was me who started the discussion, with a request to modify my topic ban. That's an example of chaos theory - I was hoping for one outcome, and I ended up getting an entirely different outcome that I never would have anticipated. Kind of ironic, I suppose.

I have enjoyed my time here.

I see over at the ANI discussion, some people are claiming that I chose my user name with something other than the video game reference in mind. That is not true. I first played that game when I was eleven years old, and it has always been my favorite. To anyone who thinks my interest in choosing my username comes from anything other than my love of the video game, please see the userboxes on my userpage, as well as the list of articles that I started. Does that look like the userpage of a person who is interested in crude, vulgar language, or, does it look like the userpage of a child trapped in an adult's body?

I do admit that several months ago, as a joke to make my wikistalkers laugh, I did several consecutive edits to a bunch of articles about various bodily functions and such, but other than that, I do not think I've ever done anything here that wasn't G-rated. Perhaps I have made a few other such edits, but out of the many thousands of edits that I have made, it's statistically insignificant. My interests are in politics, science, animals, technology, pop culture, and food. A few crude jokes every now and then, sure, but never as a username that everyone sees every day.

And as one editor suggested, for those of you who think I chose my username to be crude and vulgar, how you do explain the 2600 part?

Well, "indef" is not for any fixed period of time. It could be forever, or it could be for two years, or it could be be for six months. We shall see.

Grundle2600 (talk) 17:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Bigtimepeace

Whoa! Bigtimepeace, your claim that I "took over" Talk:Presidency of Barack Obama is false. I never prevented anyone else from posting there. As further proof that I never "took over" the talk page, since I was topic banned from political talk pages more than five months ago, there have been almost no posts at all at Talk:Presidency of Barack Obama. Surely, if it really had been my fault that other people weren't posting there, then once I was banned from the talk page, more people would have posted there. But actually, since I was banned from the talk page, the number of posts on that talk page has approached zero. Hardly anything at all has been said there. Therefore, your claim that I "took over" the talk page is false.

Your claim that it's because of me that "article work largely ground to a halt" is also false. I never, ever erased any well sourced material that anyone added to the page. I never, ever prevented anyone from adding anything to the article. Therefore, I never caused "article work largely ground to a halt." Furthermore, during the more than five months since I have been banned from the article, hardly any new info has been added to the article. How do you explain that?

How do you explain that during the more than five months that I have been banned, hardly any new discussion has taken place at Talk:Presidency of Barack Obama, and hardly any new info has been added to Presidency of Barack Obama? How can you blame me for this, when I haven't edited either of those pages in over five months? How can it possibly be my fault that hardly any changes have been made to that article or talk page in over five months, when I haven't made any edits there at all?

How can you blame me for other people's lack of editing an article and talk page, when I have not edited them for over five months?

What exactly have I done during the past five months to prevent other editors from editing that article and talk page?

And even when I was allowed to edit those things, how did I ever prevent anyone else from adding content? I didn't. I never, ever erased any well sourced info that anyone added. And I never, ever erased anything from the talk page. So you accusations against me are false.

Grundle2600 (talk) 18:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Conservapedia

Someone at ANI suggested that I edit Conservapedia.

That's a horrible suggestion, because:

1) Conservapedia is only about presenting the conservative point of view. I prefer a wiki that presents all points of view.

2) I am a very strong believer in biological evolution, I know the universe is approximately 14 billion years old, and I think Creationism is fiction.

3) I'm a libertarian, not a conservative.

4) The info that I added about medical marijuana and benefits for partners of gay federal employees are not things that conservapedia supports.

Grundle2600 (talk) 18:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

People at ANI keep saying, "Grundle doesn't get it - he'll never learn"

But those very same people refuse to teach me the things that I wanted to learn about. That's very hypocritical of them.

I want to learn.

I very much want to learn.

But no one is willing to teach me the things that I want to learn.

When I asked important questions about wikipedia policy, instead of answering my questions and helping me learn, they banned me.

Therefore, for them to say "Grundle doesn't get it - he'll never learn" is completely hypocritical on their part.

I love to learn. I want to learn. I wish that someone was willing to teach me, and answer my questions.

Grundle2600 (talk) 19:33, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The easiest way to get out of these sanction is to grovel. Grovel and repent. Not saying I approve only that is usually what's required to et a unblock here. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I am always happy and willing to give a real apology when I believe that I have done something wrong. For example, I have apologized for violating Misplaced Pages:Synthesis, and I was sincere in that apology.

However, I will not apologize for obeying NPOV, which states, "All Misplaced Pages articles must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors."

For example, if a politician makes a promise, and then breaks that promise, then if the article mentions that the politician made that promise, then NPOV requires that the article also mention that the politician broke that promise. If the article only mentions that the politician made the promise, without simultaneously also mentioning that the politician broke the promise, then that violates NPOV. I will not apologize for obeying the NPOV policy.

Misplaced Pages:Apology states, "One should bear in mind that an apology is at its best an expression of sincere personal dislike for one's own actions." I really like that definition a lot - it reinforces my belief in never giving fake apologies.

I am sorry that I promised not to ask certain questions about wikipedia policy. That promise was a mistake on my part. But I am not sorry for asking those questions about wikipedia policy. I am a curious person, and I like to learn the rules about wikipedia policy. I am not sorry that I asked questions about wikipedia policy. They claim that they already answered my questions about wikipedia policy, but when I asked them to post a link to those alleged answers, they refused to do so. They are very good at finding every post that I ever made when they want to discipline me at ANI, but they cannot find the alleged answers that they claim they gave me - how interesting.

Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy states, "Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Misplaced Pages, not to punish users. Blocks sometimes are used as a deterrent, to discourage whatever behavior led to the block and encourage a productive editing environment." Perhaps at some point in the future, something can be worked out. My "indefinite" block is not for any specific fixed period of time - it could be forever, or it could be for a year, or six months, or some other amount of time.

Grundle2600 (talk) 14:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship looks like something that I could really get into. Grundle2600 (talk) 15:06, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Unblock request

Grundle2600 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

On December 10, 2009, I made this edit to a biography of a living person.

Afterward, people explained to me that by making that edit, I was in violation of Misplaced Pages:Synth. That means that I took two separate facts, from two separate sources, and I combined them into one sentence, to try to prove a point which was not stated in either separate source. By doing this, I was violating Misplaced Pages:Synth.

On December 11, 2009, I changed the article so that it no longer violated Misplaced Pages:Synth. Specifically, instead of joining the two facts (from two separate sources) together in the same sentence, I separated the two facts, and had three entire paragraphs in between those two facts. That proved that I understood the policy of Misplaced Pages:Synth. That proved that I had learned my lesson.

On December 13, 2009, despite that it had been two days since I had fixed the problem that I had created, and despite the fact that it had been two days since I had already learned my lesson, User:Rd232 blocked me.

Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy states, "Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Misplaced Pages, not to punish users. Blocks sometimes are used as a deterrent, to discourage whatever behavior led to the block and encourage a productive editing environment."

Given that I had proven on December 11, 2009, that I had already learned my lesson, and given that blocks are meant as a teaching tool and not as a punishment, it doesn't follow wikipedia policy that User:Rd232 blocked me on December 13, 2009, two days after I already proven that I had learned my lesson.

Therefore, the block was in violation of Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy, which states, "Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Misplaced Pages, not to punish users. Blocks sometimes are used as a deterrent, to discourage whatever behavior led to the block and encourage a productive editing environment." I had already learned my lesson before I was blocked. And blocks are about learning, not punishment. Therefore, the block was never justified in the first place.

On December 18, 2009, as a condition for being unblocked, I agreed to the following condition: "Grundle is to refrain from posting his list of seven questions or referring to them anywhere on Misplaced Pages." My unblock request was granted.

On April 5, 2010, I broke that promise, and my block was reinstated.

I broke my promise, and the block being lifted had been based on me making and keeping that promise, so the block was reinstated.

However, after thinking about this some more, I now consider that condition for lifting my block to have been unreasonable.

My seven questions were all questions about wikipedia policy. I am a curious person, and I like to know and understand the wikipedia rules, so that I may follow the wikipedia rules.

There is no wikipedia policy that says we are not allowed to ask questions about wikipedia policy.

Therefore, the requirement for me to avoid asking those seven questions about wikipedia policy as a condition for being unblocked was unreasonable.

I am not sorry that I asked those questions about wikipedia policy again. Instead, I am sorry that I promised not to ask them again. There is nothing wrong with an editor asking questions about wikipedia policy.

So yes, I broke the promise on which my being unblocked was conditional. However, that promise had nothing to do with my violation of Misplaced Pages:Synth, which is why I was blocked in the first place.

I will never violate Misplaced Pages:Synth again.

But I should be allowed to ask questions about wikipedia policy.

Given that blocks are about learning, and given that I have learned about the Misplaced Pages:Synth policy, my block should be lifted.

And no one should require that I stop asking questions about wikipedia policy as a condition for my block to be lifted.

I am asking for my block to be lifted for the following reasons:

1) Blocks are about learning, not punishment. I learned that Misplaced Pages:Synth is against wikipedia policy.

2) When I was blocked on December 13, 2009, it had already been two days since I had proven that I had learned my lesson about Misplaced Pages:Synth. Since blocks are about learning and not punishment, the block was never justified in the first place.

3) It was unreasonable for them to require, as a condition for my block being lifted, a condition which had nothing to do with the block in the first place. Since I was blocked for violating Misplaced Pages:Synth, it was unreasonable for them to require me to agree not to ask questions about wikipedia policy as a condition for my block being lifted.

4) No editor should ever be told not to ask questions about wikipedia policy.

5) There is no wikipedia policy that says that editors are not allowed to ask questions about wikipedia policy.

Grundle2600 (talk) 00:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Decline reason:

While you assert – correctly or not – that "blocks are about learning, not punishment", your continued insistence on raising and re-raising ad nauseam issues which you have been told are settled suggests that you have not learned from your past actions — nor from your previous blocks. The ultimate purpose of blocks is to protect the project from harm; and editors who persist in wasting the time of their colleagues are damaging to our work here. That you consider it appropriate to argue in this unblock request that you should not only be unblocked, but also be allowed to persist in the disruptive conduct which led to the original restrictions on your editing, is a compelling argument that you should remain blocked indefinitely. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You added much. You are way too smart for this group, something that saddens me.--75.4.16.15 (talk) 03:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Grundle2600 (talk) 05:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Indefinite community ban

Grundle2600, I'm sorry to tell you that you have been indefinitely banned by consensus of the Misplaced Pages community. Please see Misplaced Pages:Banning policy for further information. Given the discussion that led to the ban, I strongly recommend waiting at least one year before appealing it--and even then, I'm not sure an appeal would get you anywhere. I will not disable use of your talk page unless you give me a reason to, so please don't give me that reason.--Chaser (talk) 03:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

OK. Grundle2600 (talk) 05:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry this happened to you. Good luck in future endeavors. --William S. Saturn (talk) 05:30, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. It didn't just "happen" - I repeatedly did things that I was warned not to do. I do believe in personal responsibility. It's not as if I wasn't warned again and again and again. Grundle2600 (talk) 05:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tomy shooting gallery.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tomy shooting gallery.jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).