Misplaced Pages

User talk:Geogre: 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 02:40, 3 July 2009 editTarage (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,875 edits Talk:September 11 attacks← Previous edit Latest revision as of 02:36, 11 March 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(223 intermediate revisions by 80 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{not around|3=29 July 2009}}
'''Essays''' '''Essays'''


Line 45: Line 46:




'''Massages'''

== For the children ==

For the many readers, there is a new blog entry. (If this makes no sense to you, then ignore it.) ] (]) 10:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

== For the adult-ering ==

I would like input from the people who have seen my ideas for how to form a council to advise on the future. I've written some up, and I've sent them to a few people via e-mail. Should I post them here? ] (]) 18:52, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

:I'm interested too, Geogre -- please post here (or shoot me an e-mail). We seem to be coming unglued rather badly, at least in the matter of governance, and I fear the process is accelerating. ] ] 19:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Initially, I was concerned that my name is too "big." I don't mean that I am, but rather that there are people who will oppose anything simply if my name is near it. I had preferred the ideas to come out anonymously or from several directions, because I think they're good (well, I would) and should answer our needs without introducing new griefs. I'll post 'em here by tomorrow, I suppose, and, wiki-style, leave them for anyone to adapt as they see fit. ] (]) 21:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

:I've noticed, at least in the past three years or so, that popularity on Misplaced Pages negatively correlates with content contribution, and sometimes even with integrity. But don't quote me: I'm just a nasty old fool. And people skilled with words are not always popular, for we are after all writing an encyclopedia, where words are important, and envy is more implacable than hatred (La Rochefoucauld was right about everything). But I'll shut up now. ] ] 21:30, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, see below for the big kahuna idea. I really, really don't care who gets credit for it. Let Kelly Martin take credit for it, if she wants, so long as they do get a policy council and get it in something like what I've described. You know, I was reflecting, the other day, when I was explaining why I don't need Misplaced Pages and it doesn't need me anymore, that it's not the same thing as it was when I heard a call on National Public Radio for over-educated, under-employed people to add stuff. I remember hearing that, when I was working as a librarian in a closed library. I thought it was genius that they were taking advantage of all the ABD's and grad students in the world, but those people are now the ones Misplaced Pages doesn't want. -Bot operators with less personal skill than their creation are "mediators," and "cool" is a long comment. Theses are all original research. Footnotes dominate here, where they don't even exist in academia, and people expect a citation to "the Earth is the third planet from the sun." O tempore, O mores. (But John Gay said envy's a sharper spur than pay for wits; it's a cudgel for those without wit.) ] (]) 22:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

== How to ''get'' and structure an advisory council ==
''What you will need for this project'': One Misplaced Pages, an estimate of a representative sample of active editors, and several stewards. You will also need an Initiator. That's YOU, and hopefully you are plural, not singular.

1. Outline a set of criteria that would make a person qualified -- experience with all elements of Misplaced Pages, breadth of edits, calm, intelligence. Think about the criteria very, very carefully and word them even more carefully. This is the one place to be excruciatingly careful, to get a great deal of input, and to be sure that the end goal is always in mind. That goal is ''wise policy'', nothing else.

::''Why: Criteria keep people from wandering, and most people will be more honest, if they're given qualities to assess than if they're asked who they think is best. It's one of those paradoxes of evaluation that's pretty well known in business and education. This is why, for example, most employee and educational assessments are structured. ''

2. Ask editors to recommend '''someone other than themselves''' according to those criteria, rating the person on a 1-10 on each. The recommendations go to a group of coordinators or the stewards. They are not posted openly, and any person advocating or discussing voting or canvassing for members to the council will be in violation of ], including on IRC and e-mail. We will have to rely upon honor, but Misplaced Pages was founded on such principles.

::''Why: Obvious, really. The idea is not to be competing, but rather looking for elements of trust. This cuts down on some of the, "Oh, well, that person is evil" stuff. Obviously, it leaves big weaknesses, but step 3 can help forefend. Additionally, prior and future attempts stall because of politics and personalities and self-love and self-importance. Provided that alternate accounts are not involved, this should avoid that to some degree, and since these are simply ''sent in'' rather than posted publicly, it will help. We don't want cadres and factions and points of view trying to fight. We want wise policy and we want trust. Have people assess ''for'' someone, not against.''

3. Get a list of the top 60 finishers and then make them candidates for consideration listed on a namespace page by the stewards. '''There will be positively no statements by the candidates, and no oppose votes.''' Instead, there will be a two week assessment period, during which editors will, again using the criteria, give 1-10 scores on the various criteria for the sixty persons listed.

3a. Selection will not be a balance of oppose and support or anything so compromised. Instead, the stewards will have determined a '''representative sample of the editing population''' and divided that by ten. No candidate will be successful without an aggregate score above that mark (this functioning like ''quorum'').

3b. If a person sees a very serious reason for disqualification, he or she will inform the stewards and coordinators. ''Disqualification criteria are that the person will be likely to act in a private, national, or special interest rather than a wide, international, or community interest.'' Disqualification will have nothing to do with "conflict" or "drama" or even "policy violations" of the candidate, as it is not up to the stewards or coordinators to tell the project who it trusts. However, if a person has a vested interest or a conflict of interest or has evidence of a private desire that trumps the general, then that would be a reason for disqualification.

3c. The coordinators and stewards simply tabulate the scores. All parties are prohibited from revealing or discussing results on any medium until the final 60 are posted.

::''Why: This council will not have "power" to harm or help people, so the idea that a person on it will get to be important is silly. When matters are "tied" in the minds of the stewards and coordinators, the presumption should be for safety/disqualification, but the criteria must be solely oriented toward communal/private interest and wisdom/folly. A wise thought from an unpleasant person is worth a dozen banal platitudes. Secrecy is vital, because any hints about how things will going, especially on non-portable, non-transparent media like IRC and e-mail, will result in "votes" and hate fests.''


4. The result of the assessment will be a council of '''TWENTY''' people. Of the twenty, five will serve at a time for one month periods. Membership will rotate every month.

::''Why: This may be the most vital part of the plan. By having the groups rotate, it prevents personalities from dominating, so no one person can bully or dominate the rest. Additionally, it keeps one person or five people from becoming "important" or thinking they have power of any sort. All of the anxiety about the council being a "government" or being "power" or being a "revolution" should be put to bed instantly by the knowledge that it will be a continually shifting set of persons.''


5. '''Method:''' The council should appoint or seek representatives to speak for separate viewpoints on a given issue. These "champions" or representatives will present arguments for their position, arguments against alternative positions, along with careful rebuttals of claims against their position. They will not involve themselves in direct, interlined conversation with champions/representatives of other points of view on council pages. The council will review all cases, plus any volunteer cases ("amicus briefs"), and submit questions to champions. They will then fashion their own policy recommendation(s).

::''Why: Again, we've seen death by argument too many times to count, and we especially see the routine "forest for the trees" sort of argument that Misplaced Pages is famous for. No one gets anywhere when discussing policy because every single person needs to offer his opinion, even if it's almost identical to the twenty opinions just above. All of the "me too" and the "yeah but" stuff gets so thick that no one can support anyone or any thing. If the council wants to actually review and fashion policy recommendations (only recommendations), then it needs to basically '''research''' policy alternatives. They can find the passionate true believers of the sides and let them get all the best ideas from their side together and speak with one voice, and then they can also listen to anyone who walks by who happens to have thought about things. Additionally, many times our best thinking is ''not found'' among the advocates, because people have gone away from an issue in disgust. Open the issue of infoboxes, and you'll see hundreds of editors who hate them but gave up arguing. The point is that the "champion" method and the "amicus" system allows clear presentation and consideration for the council.''

6. When the council concludes its deliberations, it makes a '''policy recommendation to Misplaced Pages''' that Misplaced Pages must approve. It is not automatically policy, but it is also not for arguing about. It is an up or down vote, with a '''presumption of approval.''' This means that any proposal that garners quorum and an approval rate of 67% or more will be adopted.

::''Why: If this is a thing where the council makes a big RFC, the result will be "no consensus" to everything. Instead, the council should get a bit of a break, so that a council recommendation simply needs approval (say a 2/3rds majority, with quorum in place). If it goes to Village Pump where every person gets a brand new opinion, then we'll have every person trying to speak for the novelty of speaking, and then we'll get reiteration, and then....''

===What to do with these?===
Use 'em. Claim 'em as your idea, if you want. I don't care. I just think it's a good idea, and I think it's a damn sight better than ArbCom picking their favorite warriors or votes or some other rot. Tell me, honestly, if I haven't avoided the problems.

The point is, ''there are ways of doing these things, people,'' if we just stop thinking in terms of power and appointing ourselves demigods. ] (]) 21:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
:Thanks for that Geogre - I've pasted it to , on my way out.......--] (]) 17:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

::I hope it does some good. I don't care about the credit, but it seems to me that one of the reasons Misplaced Pages has been doomed is that the project is a good deal more socially adventurous than the people at it. While ''it'' does all kinds of interesting things to notions of authority and control, ''they'' keep looking for authority and control. It's as if they're here, but they don't believe in it.
::If we managed to get 100,000 articles and to move up to the top 20 in Alexa with just people and no freaking out about power, then I'm going to bet we can negotiate among ourselves to find the possible and impossible solutions for policy, too, so long as no one gets to be in charge. (There are two ways to win. One is a dictator. The other is a monastery. I've never heard of a monastery accidentally wiping out the population of a country before.) ] (]) 19:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Yeah. Of course all the people here exist in the real world within structures of power and authority - more acutely for the kids of course, so it's hardly a surprise that they bring shackles of the mind with them to this place. Look forward to your paper G - buzz me when it's published will you? --] (]) 19:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
::I guess I gave too much of a preview, there, but, of course, that's what it's all about. The historical moment. No one is to be blamed for being in a historical moment, but when the reason they never look above and beyond it is neediness and personal psychology, it can get really distasteful. I would ''love'' to have real surveys of Misplaced Pages administrators to make my case, but no one can get such surveys. Anyway, I'm writing, forever writing, and the thing is a monster. It's taking forever to get down, and then it will take a while to trim and dress up, and then I'll have to find the right outlet for it. I'll let you know, though. ] (]) 00:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Don't these paradigm shifts usually have some kind of Charismatic Leader, some agent of change? Or at least, some voices in the wind, from the same direction? Cometh the hour, cometh the man. Unfortunately ]. <small>up to Lexington......hmmm hmmm.</small> Your fundamental material for the historical moment though, is still pretty much the same homo sapien of 200,000 years ago. "'''Fred.F.Stone''' likes hunting, screwing, acceptance and problem solving for profit, will gladly bash neighbour in pursuance of these, but recently finds more profit in cooperation." Whatever the future holds, it would be surprising if it wasn't affected by some abstracts of those fundamentals. In short, to overcome neediness and personal psychology, aren't crowds usually invited to put them aside in favour of he 'lofty purpose'? WP might have the lofty purpose, but somehow it rewards the needy and sick - hardly Darwinian, but perhaps the societal aspects of this place do have a use after all. ] (]) 00:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
:As I told a friend, recently, I have ] dentures, but they're fitted on ] gums. The great man theory's problem is that, after ], he inevitably turns ] or nasty. The odd thing is that the Great Man is, interestingly, not at home in a real Darwinian model, and yet it seems to fit so well with our concepts of the "primitive" that we forget that every time, in history, that we see a great man arise, he is promising to lead us boldly to the future, to ] of the past and make the trains run on time (by changing the time tables to match their departure and arrivals).
:I'll have to go with e-mail on the rewards of neediness. I think Misplaced Pages is curiously designed for that. There is a particularity about this project that attracts and promotes particular sets of psychological profiles that are very ill suited to analysis. In essence, I think Misplaced Pages is a second life, and people who are looking for a chance to reconstruct and who are ''seeking recompense'' for the wounds and grievances of the first life are going to devote their energies toward the reconstruction and mirroring of the social orders that "went wrong" in reality. Unlike ], Misplaced Pages is an actual do-over for a good many people, and therefore one has varying degrees of attraction based on varying degrees of "wrong" suffered. ] (]) 10:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
::I'm not so sure about the 'great man' not being at home in the Darwinian model. Certainly it worked for Genghis Khan - what percentage of Asia now carries his genes? 1 in 12? . It certainly didn't do JFK's chances of finding a date any harm either :-) <small>An interesting question is, if Obama delivers on the promise invested in him, will that be a competitive advantage for his children?</small> I'm not so sure about the ''inevitable'' corruption of 'great leaders' either (where's Luther King, Gandhi or Mandela in that model - apart from 2/3rds of them having the sense of timing to die at the 'right' moment?). My Grandparents are still firmly of the opinion, that without Churchill to demonstrate the bulldog spirit, to remind us of our national traits and to buck us up with brilliant rhetoric, we'd be lost by now. It's speculative of course, maybe we could have done better than the bad-tempered depressive alcoholic with a boy's-own-adventure sense of military strategy (the nation certainly thought so in peacetime), but leadership is not to be dismissed so glibly I think - that generation is still marked by the tangible excitement of having experienced a nation truly pulling together. Maybe what's really missing at WP is an external threat - but now I'm sounding like Rumsfeld - lawsuits anyone? In any event, it's not cohesion we need, but values embedded in the system that serve our purpose better - an encyclopaedia is a strange place to find systemic anti-intellectualism.

::Really though, aren't we all fundamentally motivated by selfishness? Even if I devote my life to charity, I feel better, I'm rewarded in some way. I try to remember that about people's motives, it makes me generally less disappointed in people :-) The long term trouble with Marxism, in my v. humble and uniformed view, is it appeals to idealism. Idealism can sublimate these selfish desires in the short term, because the idea of being part of 'something new and consequential', works as a reward in itself, not to mention the reward of love/respect/acceptance from being part of the 'group'. But in the long term, we revert to more petty and prosaic behaviours. That doesn't deny though that lifting our heads once in a while and running after someone or some group with vision is an entirely ]. But, as you say Geogre, your essentially un-clubbable, so you'll probably see that differently to your ovine peers --] (]) 13:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

==Sauce for a gander==
There's a surprisingly interesting and cordial conversation going on about reliable academic sources, which you might be interested in bringing your laser scalpel to. --] (]) 18:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
:I've tried, but the problem is that, although they're all on the right track, they're falling victim to Misplaced Pages argument. One can find exceptions to everything. There are always going to be peer reviewed bits of horse hockey, and there are going to be eminent people who lose their minds. The ''general guideline'' is sound, but once we start trying to use general guidelines as if they were predictive laws without employing individual consideration, it's hopeless. The problem is that we are never going to shed ourselves of someone trying to say, "Oh, but there are books supporting my crank view, and they're from academic presses." To see where things get '''really''' hot, look at the nationalism wars. The fringe science stuff is tame in comparison. In those cases, you have the most prestigious presses of two nations offering up officially sanctioned accounts that say opposing things, and then, here at Misplaced Pages, we get bloody battles, with both trying to throw fecal matter at the other's press and universities and nation. The Russian/Polish "arguments" are crimes in progress, for example, and they are entirely insoluble without saying, "Well, we're Anglo-Americans, and so we're going to use ''our'' nationalist points of view." Shy of that, there's practically nothing to say to distinguish or quiet them. ] (]) 00:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

== Motion re alternate account ==

There is a motion at ] concerning your alternate account; you are invited to comment if you wish. --]&nbsp;(]) 13:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


== Fielding == == Fielding ==


Regardless of what happens, I would like to have your input on Fielding related stuff. There are a few pages that you were directly involved in, and some others that your opinion would be important. I plan on finishing the later plays coming up this fall and try to produce the bulk of his major works (including some poems and the rest). The one priority coming up will be '']''. When I have a chance, I will be adding some more information on the literary criticism and other notable aspects in order to prepare it for GA level. ] (]) 18:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
A while back, I noticed on a page that you said Henry Fielding's plays would take too much work to produce pages on. I felt that the effort would be worth while, as information on them is hard to access for the average person. I created new pages (not close to complete, but containing the basis of info) and they are on the DYK section of the mainpage:


:Could you please weigh in on the above discussion? I proposed adding some more about specific criticism and the such. AD cut it down and left some in. However, you may have some differing opinions from us on what would be effective or not. ] (]) 21:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
... that ]'s ''(pictured)'' ''']''' before the ''']''' include ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', ''''']''''', and ''''']'''''?


== ] ==
I could only put together the first half of his plays. I will wait until the summer to finish the second half. I know our choice of formatting styles differ, but I hope you wont mind that at all. :) ] (]) 17:00, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
A request for arbitration has been filed. You may wish to make a statement. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 02:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
::*Someone (I'm not sure who) once said "''Don't let the bastards get you down''" a motto I have always kept, so I recommend it. Unlike you, I only do poetry that I was compelled to learn in school, but I think many would do well to remember this "''IF you can keep your head when all about you - Are losing theirs and blaming it on you, - If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you - But make allowance for their doubting too''" and so on, I forget the rest, but I think the meaning is clear, and then my own favourite line "''Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch''" which is something you do very well! You see the other day, someone kindly fixed up this thing for me, which makes all the admins names on my watchlist appear blue, and do you know? - They are so in the majority, it has led me to the conclusion that not being an Admin is almost an affectation these days - rather like saying "look at me, I'm special" Funny how things turn out isn't it? ] (]) 21:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


== Arbitration motion: Geogre ==
:Oh, no. I think ''Author's Farce'' deserves major treatment. I've recently been reading ''Pasquin'' and ''Covent Garden Tragedy,'' but for other reasons. I'm researching ''Jonathan Wild'' for a project, so I've been crawling through the current literature -- of which there is not much. I'm under deadline with it, too, so I haven't had much time to volunteer information that I'm to be paid for. After that's over, of course, I'll build something on the novel itself. If I do, though, I know full well what'll happen. ] (]) 09:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


==AfD nomination of Rajiv Lather ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>An article that you have been involved in editing, ], has been listed for ]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at ]. Thank you.{{-}}Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.<!-- Template:Adw --> ] (]) 03:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


I have just added calling for your de-sysopping. It is in your best interests to respond on the arbitration pages urgently to this and the other interests raised. I am sending you a copy of this message by email. &nbsp;] <sup>]</sup> 08:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
:Also, you talk page took a long time to load. It then said, This page is 230 kilobytes long. It may be helpful to move older discussion into an archive subpage. ] (]) 03:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
::The problem is that once you have taken something from them (in this case - the tools) then they can threaten to take something away from you. Everyone who knows you, is 100% certain, beyond any possible doubt, that deceiving or building false concencus had never even crossed your too philosophical mind. In that respect, you are probably the mosy naively honest person on Misplaced Pages. The reasons you created Utgard were completely understandable and justified; they are also none of Durova and co's business. However, an ignorance of those facts has proven a source of long sought jubilation and glee to certain editors - and those whose most philosophical thoughts probably concern only their digestion and bowels. This is the crux of the problem, those who have their minds on higher things, seldom give sufficient thought to matters more base in appearance. Hence, you are in this predicament. It's not as though you use the tools - so if I were you, I would tell them where to stuff their bloody tools, but of course you are not me - which is why they are still whooping with such obscene joy as they seek to take from you and you remain silent. At least, this way, you have a dignity that others in this sorry case appear to lack. ] (]) 09:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
::*As silent types go, you are proving pretty affective. However, I and some others are having some problems here. Why has this very commonly known alternative account, known in the highest circles, suddenly become a problem, that needs such public and drastic attention? There seems to be a huge movement wanting you de-sysopped; you certainly seem to have attracted some once powerful people (a whole unprecedented platoon of ex-arbs, undermining the present ArbCom, anxious to see you disposed of) I am just wondering why they and so many others from a certain quarter of Misplaced Pages are demanding your downfall - As disciples of Machiavelli they are provincial and clumsy, but they are singing in unison almost like a heavenly choir - or at least an orchestrated body. Any ideas, you would like to share with us? ] (]) 21:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
:::*All I need to know is- did you use the "secondary" account to add to discussions/voting anyplace that your Geogre account was used. If not, then wheres the harm? If so... well that's a whole'nuther can o' worms. Good luck, because I've always appreciated your abilities/intellect. Best Regards, ] (]) 22:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


== Ego sum tristis ==
It did. I've been lazy. Actually, I've been not much here. I shall archive as soon as I get a Roundtoit. I've had one on order for a while, but it's overdue in the mail. I have a feeling that my involvement with Rajiv Lather had been in a negative capacity or something maintenance related. I'll look and opine. ] (]) 09:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
== Spectres, again ==
I've pointed to the writings of Geogres past yet again, this time at ]. You might have something to contribute to this discussion. ] (]) 10:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


I have really enjoyed reading your work here, especially that which you've done on the older literature articles. I discovered the troubles you're having when I checked in on a case in which user:Abd had listed my username in his evidence. As you've now not edited since the case began, I'm afraid we may have lost you, and that makes me very sad, if true. While I hope it's not true, I just wanted to post a note here to let you know that your contributions here are greatly appreciated, by more people than you'll probably every know. As the thread topic says, ''Ego sum tristis''. ] 05:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
== company page ==
*I ''do'' hope that those who clamored for his "administrative head" on a platter enjoy what they have wrought. ]] 18:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


==Sorry to hear ...==
Hi. Could I request the company page "idmodeling" be sent back to my work area? I worked really hard on this article and would like to continue to work on to be credible. The company has made significant advances in wastewater and sewerage treatment technology and I was going to add links from notable news and industry sources. My apologies I did not finish before making live. Thank you. - Jeb <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:30, 16 April 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


Of your troubles. You have been kind to me in the past and very fair, and I wish you the best. ] (]) 21:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
== Peterborough Chronicle ==


== Motion 4 ==
Geogre, ] has just been ] at FAR on criterion 1c; the only relevant part of which apppears to be the lack of inline citations. I know you have strong opinions about how referencing should be done; I don't recall whether you feel that the reference list at the end is adequate by itself, but currently 1c does ask for inline citations and there are none in the article. Some WikiProjects have been notified by evidently the notifier did not realize you were a primary contributor.


Hello,
It's the sort of article I'd love to help with, but I have none of the sources listed -- my books all cover the historical aspects of the chronicles, not the linguistic implications. However, I would be glad to help with anything I can. I'll watch the FAR, and please let me know what I can do, particularly since I gather you don't have your books with you at the moment. ] ] 10:50, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
:But it '''''has''''' "inline" citations. It doesn't have footnotes, but (Bennett 33) is an inline citation. It's MLA citation. I believe several other academic organizations use that format as well. In fact, I gather more and more are using it every day, with fewer and fewer and fewer having footnotes. Thus, it doesn't "violate" 1c. It conforms to 1c. It specifies work and page number for statements that even ''could be'' contested by the ignorant. It also, more importantly, provides sources for information that's not common knowledge and for information that it interpretive. That's what a good work does. Now, again, these are not footnotes, but footnotes are just a method, and a shaky one, for citation. Academic consensus is, these days, that they're a ''worse'' method, given the number of professional organizations adopting parenthetical citation over footnoting and end noting, but both of them are obviously citation. ] (]) 12:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
::I don't have strong opinions on this myself; so long as the information in the article is verifiable without unreasonable effort on the part of the reader I don't care how it's done. If it turns out that a consensus agrees that work on the article would be helpful, I'll be happy to help where I can. ] ] 12:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
:The books are cited, to their page numbers. I'm not sure what more anyone could want, except that the citations, which are fine, be changed in '''''format'''''. As I understand it, having a fit for one format over another is nothing to do with what makes a featured article, but I guess that I'm wrong. I suppose that bad information (websites) in footnotes is better than good information (the last great scholars of Middle English in book form) in an academic citation. If ''that'' is what it's about, I hope no one changes it over. It's easier for me, as just a reader, to know what a reference is by seeing the end of the line than by losing my place and going to the bottom of the article and going back up to find that it's the same as the previous sentence. ] (]) 17:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
*I was the primary contributor to ]. ] helped a great deal. However, the article contains complete citation. Therefore, there should not be any ''changing'' of the article. If you have additional material and would like to work with me to add new stuff and expand the article, that would be cool, but not in the context of pleasing someone who apparently can't tell that parenthetical citation is citation, and I feel that turning those parenthetical citations ''into'' footnotes would make the article 1) less readable 2) less verifiable 3) less respectable, academically 4) more fragile, 5) harder for future editors to work on, 6) less "reliable." I would much rather have no FA status than have good citations turned into citations that can be broken by someone accidentally making a stray mark in the edit field, or where readers have to take it on faith that the citations are to reputable sources if they don't want to stop reading, travel to the bottom of the page, and then come back up. Footnotes are a bad system. Citation has always been possible without them, and this article shows how very accurate citation can take place without them. If there is more material to discuss with the manuscript or its history, with the monastic parties, the hypothetical common source, it would be cool, but the citations are groovy as they are. If they're not, then let the star go. It's much better than seeing all that work turned into something that ''looks'' the same as ] and is as fragile as an early version of Windows ME. ] (]) 10:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
*:There was one fact I saw that seemed to be uncited -- the date on which Laud gave the Chronicle to the Bodleian. Per the original FAC it appears that that comes from a Bodleian library web page, and I would suggest a footnote for that -- unless you found the date in one of the other sources used? ] ] 11:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
:I think that came simply from a combination of 1) which donation (derived from elementary bibliographic information contained in every history of the Chronicle) + 2) someone looking at the article on Laud for the date of his donations. In a sense, it's "original research," in that it represents responding to a question by doing the brain work that anyone could do by clicking on links. Perhaps it had come from the Bod itself, though, as I'm sure they ''did'' have a catalog date. I'm not entirely sure. For me, the more interesting thing is the book as it was alive. For example, this mythical common source seems to me to be nothing but exhilarated localism at work. People wish their town had a separate identity ''then'' to support their dislike of their neighbors ''now.'' Those good old "Mercians" just keep running away from historians -- and good on them, I say. As a man with Marxist gums and New Historicist or hermeneuticist dentures, depending on the occasion, I regard all such folk movements as misdirection. ] (]) 12:36, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


I've moved your latest statement to the new motion I've posted to propose that ] be unblocked and available for your use as an alternate account, provided it is clearly identified as such. This is partly to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to read your statement given that the motions they were attached to will close shortly and it would have been archived along with them. &mdash;&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 21:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
==Help Dear Sir==
Dear Geogre, are you still with us? I need help with my memory and imagination. I've half remembered an anecdote and am sure you'll be able to fill me in with the full where, when's and who's. Scenario: August literary man (Betjamin?) goes to (girl's) public (UK - private US) school to lecture about brevity, suspense and drama in novel writing. Girl's one sentence written response is............ grrrr can't remember. Can you or any of your excellent talk page lurkers help - or was it a dream......?
Many thanks
--] (]) 20:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
PS the town and country mice are ageing.
::You have me, I'm afraid.
::You're right about the mice. I have all sorts of grand themes. I've 'written' at least two dozen in my head, but I've not managed to get them to the keyboard. For example, I have a very nice one about the hand sanitizers that everyone is hooked on. I have developed a Cunning Plan for them. It will amuse and inform. It will, if I write it. ] (]) 12:39, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
:]. (struggling to remember the exact story, so forgive me if I get it slightly wrong) His instruction to the girls was that a successful short story should have these elements: religion, high-ranking protagonists, sex, mystery, brevity and non-literary language (drama might be in there too). The next day the teacher set the girls the task of putting the advice into practise. After a couple of minutes (one if you prefer) one of the girls announced she had finished. The teacher, somewhat doubtful, asked her to read it aloud. The girl stood up and read: "'My God', said the duchess, "I'm pregnant! I wonder who done it?'" ]] 12:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
:Brilliant Yomangani, just the one! - thank you so much. --] (]) 09:02, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


== ] == == Motion Passed ==
Hey Geogre, unfortunately the ] has ] to desysop your account. You are free to re-apply through the usual channels. ''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' ''']''' '''<small>]</small>''' 00:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
:Please note that another motion is also close to passing. ] (]) 01:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


Hi Geogre == G'day Geogre ==


seems a bit trite to say 'hope you're well' - but I do, so there you go..... Anywhoo... I thought I'd come by here to let you know that I've put a note on Utgard's userpage mentioning the connection to this account - I felt that the template was a bit rude, so replaced it. The only place therefore that a 'geogre sock' template is in use is over at my userpage, where it's a sort of poor man's satire / comment on the whole situation - I'm thinking of being Spartacus on tuesdays, thursdays and saturdays, and Geogre on mondays, wednesdays and fridays. Sundays I'll pick a new and exciting 'master' account, and wear that label with pride, don't tell anyone, but I've always wanted to be SandyGeorgia ;-)
Hope you're well. There's been a lot of chat at BN and I've just read it at speed, so I might have missed something, especially because a ''lot'' of issues are being thrown up simultaneously, making it hard to unpick. I ''think'' you're saying that the RfA close was a bad call by the Crat at the time it was closed, is that right? If so, I ''think'' you're the first person to say as much - is that also correct? Just trying to get my head round this. --] (]) 11:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
:That was my argument, indeed. I know that it was hard to discern, with all of the people trying to get the verdict they wanted by citing process over reason, but the fact is that anyone going with "discretion" in an environment like ''that'' was asking for trouble. When something is hair thin, stepping forward to promote is a provocative act and an act that asserts some ''aggressive belief''. That belief is either that the opposition has no standing or that it's time for a show down.
:Let's just imagine any other situation in any other context: a vote at the line. What's the natural action? If "consensus" is our rule, and if "trust" is our standard, then "close" means no. To move against "close" means that there is something that makes it not close.
:Now, there ''are people,'' and very bad people, who claim that they can tell what the oppose voters are really thinking. In fact, they're so good at telling what the opposers are really thinking that they can ignore what the opposers actually ''say.'' Their amazing certainty goes so far, in fact, that they can dismiss the opinions of all of those who oppose. These are people who are, obviously, belligerent, people who are, obviously, party to the dispute, people who, obviously, could not decide matters. I cannot see how a person could use "discretion" without something paramount to discounting the words, the validity, and the motivations of the oppose voters, and that's not allowable.
:So, yes, it was a bad promotion. If in doubt, let the candidate run again. The rapidity of the run, re-run, and re-re-run of the candidate further made matters worse, as Peter Damian's investigation into the articles turned up copyright violation or at least a misguided sense of what is appropriate, but the '''''damned haste''''' of people wanting to hurry up and get that badge, and the people willing to promote, despite opposition, for some allegiance to some imaginary faction or other is just absurd. ] (]) 19:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


Doesn't really need saying, but you should obviously feel free to revert, edit, or whatever at Utgard's page - certainly if you feel my oar is getting in the way. Take care, and insert a genuine 'I hope you can rise above all this, because your contributions to the project, in various 'spaces', really are among the absolute finest' type statement here :-) ] (]) 02:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the detailed reply. I find your views interesting and thought provoking, yet I can't agree that that particular RfA close was a bad call by the Crat.


:I, too, wish to convey my sympathy to you—and my contempt to the rash, harsh punishment you've suffered, of course, without being afforded a chance to defend yourself. Orwellian process, from start to finish. ] 09:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
We all know that RfA closes can be tricky - that's why RfB is so damn hard to pass, and the questions fired can make candidates feel foolish (as I did at mine) but I wouldn't categorise this one with, say, the Giggy 3 one, where clearly a problem uncovered late in the process made all kinds of problems. At the time of close, the percentages were in line, the raw numbers of opposes weren't massive and then, looking at the detail, which is where the trickery really lies (and, I suspect, you feel most aggrieved by Crat interpretation) I would guess that the Crat would have taken on board that several opposes were extremely weak, some even by their own admission. (Mind you, I personally wouldn't have known what to make of ''support'' #83!)


::The AC is far too incompetent to do Orwellian. This was more like a ].--] (]) 21:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I suppose all of this is technically moot, given the turn that events have taken, but I'm more interested in getting under the skin of the issues you raised. You're a longstanding editor, whose work I've always respected. I think I'm reading you that you actually dislike the way that consensus (or common practice perhaps) has evolved that Crats should do their RfA closures. That's fine - it's clear that there's divergence of opinion over RfA. But I also suspect (sorry for mindreading - correct me if I'm wrong, that's why I'm "here") that you'd disapprove of Crats holding fast to raw percentages only, and that you like us using discretion. Just I'm not sure where you'd like it tinkered with, because I don't see an egregious misuse of discretion in this case. --] (]) 09:35, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
:::They're as full of promise and ultimate disappointment as ], we're clearly into the Brown phase. --] (]) 22:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


::I think everyone is mistaken about Orwell. Normally, people responding in such a manner to such a situation would say ]. ] (]) 22:17, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
:If we're going to be purely rational about this, we need to strip away the particulars and think about what it is that the actions are. I've said many times that we all agree that RFA is broken, but we all mean that in different ways and therefore have different breaks in mind.
:In this case, I ''really'' objected to the rationale offered of "why not" and "unless there is a reason not to promote, promote." That got to the heart of what RFA is. When it comes to AfD, for example, we have the principle in place: in the event of a tie, the article stays. The reason for that is the assumption that a dirty article ''might'' be improved "eventually" (or the people who wanted to delete it might be motivated to fix it, "actually"), whereas a deleted article is gone. In the case of deletion review, we have a principle that, unless there is a strong agreement, the article remains deleted. This is because overturning the decision of a big majority, even by a wise and focused minority, is unwise. Being an administrator is supposed to be an expression of "trust" by "the community." Well, "the community" has to be Misplaced Pages -- hence the suffrage requirements. Trust, though.... Trust.... Trust is not "why the heck not?" Trust is an action, not a passive thing. Trust is not the passive condition one has toward the other people on the bus, but rather the active quality one has toward the pilot of the airplane.
:So, I objected.
:First, I felt that a good many of the supports expressed rationales that had to be stricken. Second, I thought some of the ''arguments'' were contrary to Misplaced Pages principles. Third, I felt that trust couldn't be established by running and running again. I thought we did have a "tie." We had enough to suggest that there was not trust by the active community, and therefore that it was really a poor idea to promote, to either slavishly follow numbers or to advocate discretion against the numbers for promotion.
::I also thought that, for a process that's supposed to find out if a person "is trusted" (damned passives are everywhere at Misplaced Pages) by the community, the whole pack of jackal-like "we are allowed to argue and argue and argue on the vote page with anyone we want" attitude was quite nasty. I tried to give a dispassionate, non-hurtful position. I wanted to make it impersonal and ''not'' embarrass and impugn a person. I wanted to talk about positions and what it means to promote. However, a swarm of flies began stinging immediately, demanding that my position be ignored because it wasn't specific enough.
:Anyway, I agree that the question system is nuts. I also think, though, that the IRC problem sank RFA a long time ago. I wrote about this ''two years ago,'' now. This has nothing to do with this candidate or that, and, in fact, I remember a person that I liked quite a bit, who I trusted, who had virtually no edits, who passed RFA because of popularity on IRC. Trust by the community '''must''' mean this community, must mean Misplaced Pages, and must mean ''because of actions at Misplaced Pages.'' We're all different people when we chat -- or at least I am -- and chatting is a poor way to tell how a person will write in an article or act in a crisis.
:I apologize for going on so long, but I appreciate the opportunity to speak about the issues instead of the persons. ] (]) 12:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Oh indeed, this is purely about process, as the person issue is now dealt with. And I find no need here to defend the closing Crat, as the BN discussion made clear that AD's close was fine. I'm just trying to get under the skin of the systemic problems that you perceive.


== An offer ==
Allow me to try to enumerate - feel free to amend/strike/add, these are ''your'' feelings, after all!:
There is an offer for you at ]. Contact me if you wish to pursue it. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 14:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


:Why don't you just knit him a nice sweater instead...or maybe a scarf?--] (]) 21:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
#Support votes seem to be taken on face value, while opposes are weighed by Crats
::Or a noose. --] (]) 21:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
#IRC "I'm-with-the-gang" type supports can undermine a single RfA
:::Only if he accepts her nomination for RfA.--] (]) 22:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
#You disagree with the standard position being to promote unless there's a reason not to.
::(EC) Now, now, Joopers, I'm ] Durova didn't mean her essay to sound at all conditional or baiting. ]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 22:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
#Candidates running a second (or more) time for RfA need a higher barrier to establish community trust
:::Really? Because it sounded awfully to me like Durova has offered to cut her toenails if Geogre cuts his throat - now that's reciprocity folk! --] (]) 22:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
::::Well she should cut hers first, since they keep tearing holes in her favorite ].--] (]) 22:22, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
::Given the level of almost paranoid distrust displayed by some individuals on this page, I can well understand why you might like to avoid the politics of this place. And, yes, I'm fairly sure that you and some others might count me as one of the "enemy" as well. I did and do think that it might be a good idea for you to be subject to a confirmation vote, primarily for two reasons (1) the fact that the two names could be seen by those with no prior knowledge of the dual identity as being two individuals taking part in one discussion, and (2) far more importantly, as a form of, well, warning, to any admin in the future who might take recourse to multiple accounts, and, like NYB said, probably by accident have eventually wound up using them for a purpose for which they were never initially intended, but which could be seen as being to some level problematic. Having said all that, I would also be honored to second (or third or whatever) your nomination for reconfirmation should that situation develop. ] (]) 22:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


::Guys, Durova has to be allowed to disagree without being personally attacked. It was this vituperative atmosphere we've created around ourselves that caused Geogre to want another account in the first place. It would be great if we could learn from this that differences of opinion and criticism don't have to escalate into wikihounding and disrespect. We may be about to lose a really great contributor because of it. ] <small><sup>]]</sup></small> 23:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I've numbered for ease of referring to them, rather than as a hierarchy, or even in the order in which you've mentioned them. I have some opinions about the above, but I'll hang in there till I'm sure they're accurately listed.
:It would seem the offer is being viewed with the distain it deserves, as an attempt to wash blood from stained sheets. I wonder if Risker whould have been given the same 'opportunity' if Durova had managed to bring her down as collateral damage. This is high politics of the kind Durova has been so careful to distance herself from since !!; so the slate can be forgiven and wiped clean. I think all that effort is ruined here. Ouch, opps. The self interest and politics here are so naked and obvious here, I have to agree with Geogre in that 'ye all bore me'. ] (]) 15:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


== Stallo ==
Oh, and please, no apologies for "going on so long". Brevity can be the enemy of clarity. I think if Giano had posted more fulsomely at the RfA in the first place, it may not have passed. That's not to criticise Giano - merely a POV observation. --] (]) 12:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Given that the image was used on this very page, it seemed appropriate that we have an article about the things. So I've started off ] for you. ] (]) 01:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


== Motion Passed ==
:Let me do it propositionally.
Hello Geogre, just noting for the record that a new motion has passed relating to you at ] ''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 01:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
:#Administrators are trusted by the community
:#Trust is an active quality and not a passive one
:#A tie or a close call should result in no promotion, because promotion is a ''change from status quo'' and because there is nothing wrong with being an editor.
:#Trust must be by the Misplaced Pages community, and IRC communities that overlap with Misplaced Pages votership pollute and compromise the vote.
:That, anyway, would be it as an argument rather than as a set of discrete complaints. As a set of complaints, you're accurate, but I prefer to see them as I think they are: arising from a single understanding of what it means to change someone from "editor" to "administrator."
:And, while we're on the subject, I also found it hideous to see people acting like "editor" is something awful to be, while "administrator" is somehow "real people." I've seen that behind 95% of all the conversations ''about'' Giano (I would say with Giano, but people rarely seem to speak ''with'' him and rather speak ''to'' him, from great height or depth). Giano, the lowly editor, dares speak to X, the grand administrator... And then it might well be galling for someone then to claim vast article contributions that turn out to be...less than stellar...as a justification for becoming a grand administrator. To someone who does nothing but articles, that has to be quite aggravating, and I know it was to me, and all I am is an articles admin. Giano should have been dispassionate, perhaps, but that's to say that he should have written like someone else. <shrug> We each have our way, and my Athenian-Grove approach is as wrong betimes as his Carthaginian directness.
:By the way, I have to say it again to be perfectly clear: IRC invalidated (past tense) RFA. This is not a case here or there but a long running problem. Until there is a way to have each participant police her or his own conscience and possess utmost integrity, or until there is a way to police the voters ourselves, supports and opposes are going to be virtually meaningless, especially in mass numbers. (I passed 35:2:1, and that was a huge turnout. These days, 150:0:2 is normal. Odd, isn't it?) ] (]) 13:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
In terms of taking forward possible actions or proposals from this, I'd see that you might suggest:
:''Bureaucrats do not promote "close-call candidates"''
:''The community should try to find ways to monitor breaches of ] at RfA by IRC
Is that about it? --] (]) 13:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
::With the understanding that a person being a "regular editor" is, indeed, the regular state of affairs, and, therefore, that any promotion requires that active trust be exhibited, I would even advocate that lack of participation at an RFA mean lack of promotion. While I have advocated ] before, I also recognize that no one wants to specify. Let's just say that 20-0-0 indicates, these days, someone who doesn't have much trust -- doesn't have much of anything -- compared to someone who had 250-20-40.
::I do not believe that canvassing is really what it amounts to, because, while ''of course'' canvassing ''either way'' via IRC should make an RFA disqualified, in my view, and necessitate a re-run without prejudice (i.e. withdrawal on technical grounds), I'm concerned that those who endorse a candidate be able to point to belief in on-wiki skills. On-wiki acts would be nice, but I don't want anything like a ] (the "one FA" kind of thing) that people find hideous. I would, therefore, suggest that 'crats look carefully at arguments for and against for pertinence to ''Misplaced Pages only'' matters, since we can't be certain that every "voter" has done so.
::I also think people need to change the way they look at being an admin. Giano is a good example: the tools aren't necessary. I "needed" to be promoted because, back in the distant past, I was involved in deletion guideline materials and needed to speedy delete. I also needed to protect (before we needed to fill out a form, wait at the district office for 3 weeks for signatures, and then file them with the headquarters) when there were article naming disputes, and I needed to write to name space (used to be necessary).
::These days, there is very little one ''needs'' to be an admin for, and this is why candidates should recognize that it's hardly a badge, and admins who act like it makes them a big wheel should realize that it makes them one in two thousand or so. ] (]) 20:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


== An impotent rogue speaks... ==
== Shameless theft ==


Per your comment at the arbcom case "Little did I know that such a collection of impotent rogues would gather to express their grave displeasure and sober defense of the letter of the law. Each of them united solely by the fact that, in the past, I had been instrumental in exposing his misdeeds ..." I would be grateful to know what misdeeds you imagine I have committed or that you have exposed. ] (]) 15:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I have pinched part of your essay "When nothing is better than something" for my user page. It is attributed, but if you'd rather it were not there, please revert. <span style="border-left: 1px solid #c30; padding: 3px;">]</span><sub style="background-color: #ffc; color: #c30;">].</sub> 15:16, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

:You are welcome to it. It's a wiki, after all, and I wish more people thought like this. We are better off having our readers (and how many ''editors'' think about ''readers'' instead of themselves, I wonder?) go elsewhere and get information than having them be misinformed or write nasty reviews based on some one-liner tossed up by a fiend trying to claim "150 articles" written (I've only written 250 in 5 years, but I dare say they don't get rewritten very often), when what they mean is 150 facts gathered from dictionaries and put up as if they were discussions. ] (]) 19:53, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
== Sysop status ==

If you do seek to regain sysop status, as I have already said, I would be honored to be allowed to be one of your nominators. ] (]) 14:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

==This week's blog post==
Honey, that is so beautifully written!

And some great quotes: "Ignorance is the mother of admiration"! Ha! :-D I'd never heard that one.

What's a divot? ] | ] 21:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC).

'tis true. Reminded me of the much missed ]. (The beeb never did find a way to plug the gap he left and the ocean between us can only widen without it - How's your radio voice Geogre?). 'Replace your Divots' is parlance from that dreadful waste of a good walk, meaning clods of earth belted out with a driver. --] (]) 21:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
::Indeed! Are we sharing this, with a link, or keeping it for ourselves? ] (]) 21:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
::: --] (]) 21:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
::::Sorry to correct you Joopers, but a driver is usually swung at a teed ball, so no divots there. Nitpickingly yours, ] (]) 08:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::You've clearly not seen the rare occasions I've teed off. --] (]) 21:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

== Apologies ==

I hope it's Ok with you, but I have made this edit to your user page it was upsetting some people and causing concern that the ritual drumming out of the regiment had not been performed. It's funny isn't it, how on this case the honour was drummed out with you. ] (]) 18:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

==I miss you==
]

I miss you. :-( ] | ] 00:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC).

:I agree with the sentiment. At the risk of gushing, something I doubt Geogre appreciates much, I think he's the finest writer I've encountered in almost six years at this place. Geogre, be well; some of us do miss you more than you may ever know. ] ] 00:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

:Eh what? I popped up merely to point you to ]; can you really be gone? I hope it's merely a vacation. Come back rested and refreshed. -- ] (]) 06:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

== NowCommons: File:Hogarth-Southwark-Fair-1734.png ==
] is now available on ] as ]. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: <nowiki>]</nowiki>. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --] (]) 17:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
<!-- ncnotifier -->

== Invitation, if you're so inclined... ==

Hi Geogre.

I'm here to ask if you're interested in participating in a public discussion. I've been talking with some people about deletion processes around here, and we're talking about doing a moderated discussion for the next newsletter. The idea is that, although "inclusionist" and "deletionist" are clearly divisive terms when applied to people, they do represent certain archetypal Misplaced Pages philosophies.

We're thinking that it would be interesting, and perhaps bring out some good points for the community's rumination, if we have people meet in a discussion in order to articulate opposing perspectives on a number of questions. I know that you have written some meta-pages on the subject of deletion, and I wonder if you'd be interested in being a participant in such an event. I seem to have volunteered to be a mergist-minded moderator, and part of that gig involves looking for people who can eloquently express ideas about deleting and keeping articles. I thought of you.

Would you have any interest in participating in something like this? -]<sup>(])</sup> 20:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
:Wait... you're gone? Oh hell. -]<sup>(])</sup> 20:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

== FAR Notice ==

{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. -- ]&nbsp;(]&nbsp;'''·''' ]) 17:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

== Restoration spectacular ==

Please see ] as an informal FAR. ] (]) 19:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


== Over three months ==

It's been over three months since you left, you can't allow this shower to drive you off for good. <small><span style="border:1px solid Black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 19:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

== ] FAR ==

{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. ] (]) 03:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

== ] FAR ==

{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">] ]</span> 19:00, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

== Sockpuppetry Comment in '07 ==

I hate to dredge up the past, but I just wanted to make a comment on , where it was stated that is was almost assured that I was using sockpuppets. I just want to set the record straight that I wasn't -- the other user in question approached me while I was a developer and notified me --- that community is -very- hotheaded, but he wasn't a sockpuppet and I asked him repeatedly in private (which is against policy but I didn't want more trouble) to calm down as I did.

No hard feelings, just want to set the record straight.

<font size="1" face="Verdana">] -- ]</font> 10:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

== A delectation of a page called Fashcool ==

Dear Georgre ...
in 17:00, 12 June 2009, I put a contribution material on wikipedia called '''Fashcool''' but you, as an editor removed it, if you have any dubt that the information is incurrect, please visit the Fashcool Gallery in the folowing link.
http://www.facebook.com/fashcool#/pages/Fashcool/8241702429?ref=ts

If the deletation due that I cant write about my work as cartoonist hope you can help me in doing so .

Ramzy taweel <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 08:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== ] nomination of ] ==

<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>I have nominated ], an article that you created, for ]. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.{{-}}Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. <!-- Template:AFDWarning --> ] (]) 17:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
:This nomination is quite incredible. I suggest you withdraw it at once. <small><span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 18:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


== It's been a long time ==
It's been a long time since you turned your back on all the insults delivered to you - don't you think it's perhaps time to come back? - no need to forgive or forget (I certainly would not), but perhaps move on and do some writing - someone has to write some decent pages around the place, and I certainly see none from your attackers - so perhaps it's time for you to be the big man. <small><span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 20:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

:Thursday next, 29 July, will be the anniversary of the last time Geogre made a contribution to Misplaced Pages. Both you and your Norse alter-ego are very much missed. I just hope that you'll find the opportunity to let your fans and friends know you're ok, and allow us the possibility that one day you'll return. Best wishes --] (]) 23:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

::It was claimed by {{user|173.186.127.134}} on the ] of ] that this user had died. Hopefully that's not the case, but if it is that would perhaps explain his absence. ''']''' <small>''']'''</small> 18:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

:::No, Geogre hasn't died. I was chatting with him just now, and asked him if he had, and he definitely told me "no". ] | ] 19:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC).

:::(edit conflict, ... that itself is a chuckle, on this page) He appears to be very much alive, unless a ghost is doing the typing. I for one am happy to see one of my favorite editors returning, if but for a moment, as an anon. Giano, shall we dub this brief visitor the "] of Geogre"? ] ] 19:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
*Mr Antradus, how dare you mock the dead? I can assure you, young man (I assume you are a man, no woman would ever be so insensitive) that being dead is not a life-style choice! In fact, we are a discriminated against majority: we do not even have the luxury of "Proud to be dead" marches causing mayhem with traffic, such as are enjoyed by other discriminated against groups. Geogre is most certainly not dead, or he would be one of our leading campaigners for equal rights and recognition. Sometimes, I wish he were dead, then I could enjoy some more stimulating company; ] and ] bitching and fighting to be heard over the luncheon table with ] and her infernal megaphone is not my idea of heaven! Get a life! Young man and stop insulting the likes of myself! ] (]) 19:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I too would very much like to see Geogre return to editing. ] (]) 20:08, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
::A little late in the day to come here saying that - aweeping and awailing! You should have thought of that before the Arbcom drove him awf - with their stupid ill-conceived and ignorant sanctions playing to a dribbling and equally ignorant gallery or their peanutting supporters. Plus the fact, you have had months - a year to do something about it! Were I on that ridiculous Arbcom, things would be very different, of that you can be assured. ] (]) 20:53, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

== ]'s FAR ==

{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. ] (]) 21:55, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


== Pity you're not here anymore ==
This whole section reminds me of you . Didn't you go on strike once years ago - in the happy days before the '''Arbcom decided they could dispense with your services''' and drove you off. Never mind, who needs dull boring old serious English literature, when one can read a comic. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 08:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

:Just my opinion here -- I think Geogre ''is'' on strike, and that's exactly why we haven't heard from him. He just hasn't used the word. He kicked the dust off his shoes and left. That part that's desperately sad to me is that very few people seem to have noticed the departure of one of Misplaced Pages's finest-ever content contributors at all; indeed some of the worst non-contributors were likely happy to have him go. I suspect the same thing would happen on a larger, and more tragicomic scale, if content contributors did as you suggest.
:There's a story by C.M. Kornbluth called "The Marching Morons" in which a small group of intelligent people do all the work on a future Earth, while serving the billions of imbeciles bred by unnatural selection. These people go on strike, only to discover that they've but made the problems worse; the only thing to do, they learn, is to get rid of ''all'' the morons. ] ] 13:22, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

::I am normally in favour of the wikipedia model, but having just read the review process by which Geogre's work on ] was demoted from FA status, I have some sympathy with critics of wikipedia and with the impatience of people who don't like to see excellent work being denied due recognition. The rules were enforced in a situation where they clearly need not have been enforced. Nobody wanted to suggest that Geogre didn't have massive command of the sources, but a lot of people wanted to bring him down for being an arrogant so-and-so, which to be fair he is; proof enough that it's one thing to know what you're talking about on wikipedia, but you'd better not annoy people because, unfortunately for the encyclopedia itself, if you want to be a star contributor it's at least as important to be well-liked as it is to know what you're talking about. This, of course, is merely my personal opinion. My opinion of the people who voted to demote the article from FA status for reasons that had nothing to do with its intrinsic quality but everything to do with politics and personal antipathy, and of the process that allowed their opinion to count for anything and not to be disregarded for what it so obviously was, is not fit to be expressed in public.

::In the meantime, I am annoyed because I wanted to consult Geogre on a reference I found in an essay by ], who inferred the authorship of ''A Tale of a Tub'' from a coincidence of numbers in both that book and ''Gulliver's Travels''. But if he's not here, he can't confirm if he knew about it already.] (]) 23:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

==File source problem with File:Slaveship.JPG==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''' per Misplaced Pages's ], ]. If the image is ] and ], '''the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)''' per ] criterion ]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 14:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:The source is clearly stated as "British Library" within the image. I've added a template including that information to help the bots who can't read image text. It's a pity that ] doesn't seem to apply to images. *Sigh* --] (]) 16:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

==Better source request for File:Slaveship.JPG==

Thanks for uploading ''']'''. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the ] status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the ''exact'' source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following . If you have any questions please ask them at the ] or me at my talk page. Thank you. ] (]) 23:11, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

== Restoration literature FAR ==

{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. ] (] · ]) 09:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

== ] missing description details ==

<div style="padding:5px; background-color:#E1F1DE;">'''Dear uploader:''' The media file you uploaded as ] is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see ]. Thank you. ] (]) 14:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:Add-desc -->

:I don't think that it's a smart idea to place the notice on the page of a contributor who sadly has not edited for over a year. Despite the fact that the file actually had a description, I've added some extra information to try to keep the bot happy. --] (]) 01:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

::Most likely not. It is probably on the same level as placing notices on the talk page of editors who just happened to revert some vandalism on the image in question but otherwise has no clue as to the origin or circumstances of said image. --] (]) 01:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

::: Agreed, and please accept my apologies, as I wrote the snotty comments for the bot, before I realised you'd justifiably moved the bot notification from your page here. I admit I find these sort of bot notifications irksome, particularly as the apparent reason for the notice turned out to be inaccurate anyway. Still, a few minutes of googling found some extra information on the image, so it should keep the bot from causing you further nuisance. Thanks for your reversion of the vandalism anyway! --] (]) 02:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

==File copyright problem with File:Hutchenson-witch.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ]. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes ] very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the '''license''' and the '''source''' of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a ''']''' to the ].

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in .

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the ]. Thanks again for your cooperation.<!-- Template:Di-no license-notice --> ] (]) 22:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

== cool myth ==

Check out ]. Never even knew of it. What a deliciously wrong thing. And pushed forward by a new and young Wikipedian. Stop on by and edit. ] (]) 21:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
==]==
According to you , the name of the plot means ''"the treason '''at Maine'''"'' . Could you please cite the source for this information? Tks. ] (]) 18:15, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

==Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Red list==

''']''', which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ]] 12:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

== Two years is a long time ==

to be without your contributions. Friday next will be another year gone by and so I guess we ought to report on the last twelve months. It's felt a bit like the Dutch boy trying to plug the holes in the dyke – not yet a disaster, but seems awfully close to one.

Anyway, ] was saved, but at the cost of a vandal changing all the parenthetical references to harvard-style in a ''fait accompli'' – the upside was that we found {{User|Nikkimaria}}, who worked so hard to answer all the carping and verified many sources.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
|]
|]
|]
|}
The three image files above survived and had a few extra bits of info added to them to reduce the chances of being deleted. ] had an extra sentence added to cover the possibility that it was so named to fit with the ].

That's about it, as far as I'm aware. Ultimately, no measurable progress, but no obvious decay in your work, by and large. I just had a image of Dewey from the end of '']'' flash through my mind. --] (]) 00:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

== File:Geogre-1.png listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] (]) 00:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

== File:Geogre-7.png listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:24, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

== File:Geogre-5.png listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

== File:Geogre-6.png listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

== File:Geogre-4.png listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:27, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

== File:Geogre-3.png listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

==Non-free rationale for File:Red-Man2.png==
]
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 --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:55, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

==Orphaned non-free image File:Red-Man.png==
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> 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 the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 19:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

==File source problem with File:E-Montagu.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. 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 -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

<!-- License: Public domain, transcluded from Template:PD-old -->{{imbox
| type = license
| image = ]
| imageright =
| text = This file is in the ''']''' because its copyright has expired in the United States and those countries with a copyright term of no more than the life of the author plus '''100''' years.

}} --] (]) 20:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

==File source problem with File:Stephenblois.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. 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 -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

{{imbox|
|type=license
|image=none
|text=This image is in the public domain because under ], ] is necessary for copyright protection, and a mere photograph of an out-of-copyright two-dimensional work may not be protected under American copyright law. The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin (even in countries where ] is enough to make a reproduction eligible for protection).
|below={{imbox
| type = license
| image = ]
| imageright = ]
| text = This image is in the ''']''' in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see ] for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image '''might not''' be in the public domain outside the United States. See ] and ] for more details.}}
}} --] (]) 20:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

==File source problem with File:Matilda-coin.gif==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. 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 -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

==File source problem with File:R-Steele.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. 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 -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:03, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

{{imbox|
|type=license
|image=none
|text=This image is in the public domain because under ], ] is necessary for copyright protection, and a mere photograph of an out-of-copyright two-dimensional work may not be protected under American copyright law. The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin (even in countries where ] is enough to make a reproduction eligible for protection).
|below={{imbox
| type = license
| image = ]
| imageright = ]
| text = This image is in the ''']''' in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see ] for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image '''might not''' be in the public domain outside the United States. See ] and ] for more details.}}
}} --] (]) 20:42, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:Rupert-Salzburg.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. 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 -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:Davanent.gif==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. 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 -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:CharlesII.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. 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 -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:J-Dryden.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. 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 -->

Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
== File:Dorothea.gif listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 21:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

== ''Ichthus'': January 2012 ==

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
{| style="text-align:center; border:10px solid black; background-color:black; width:100%;"
|-
|]
|- padding:15em;padding-top:5em;"
|style="font-size: 350%; color:gold; "|<br>'''<big>I</big>CHTHUS''' <br><br>
|- padding:15em;padding-top:5em;"
|style="color:gold;"|'''January 2012'''
|}
<div style="background-color:#FFF;"><div style="font-size: 120%;">
'''''In this issue...''''' <br>
<big>'''
*]
*]
*]
*]
'''</big>
</div>
-----
<center><small>''Ichthus'' is the newsletter of Christianity on Misplaced Pages • It is published by ]<br>For submissions contact the ] • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list ]</small></center>
</div>
</div></div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0237 -->


== Douaihy ==
Hi George, you once deleted douaihy page. How I can give you consent from our site to let the article written <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 02:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: I'm sorry but Geogre hasn't edited for over two years, so he may not notice your request. Misplaced Pages articles are only appropriate for subjects that meet our standards for notability, so I'd suggest you read the page ]. That should give you an idea of what sources need to be found to write an article that won't be deleted. Hope that helps, --] (]) 15:54, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:Diagram of a slave ship.jpg==
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].


If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. 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 -->
== Hi==
Mr. Geogre sir you can teach me alot about this! How can I lnk pictures to this website? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:34, 26 May 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 04:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
== my apologies for incorrect templates ==


My apologies for making your job harder by using the wrong templates. ] (]) 14:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC) :Fixed. Obvious public domain image. University of Virginia had source info. ] ] 04:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)


::And fixed some more. All&nbsp;the&nbsp;best: '']&nbsp;]'',&nbsp;<small>22:48,&nbsp;26&nbsp;May&nbsp;2014&nbsp;(UTC).</small><br />
:this is an article thats needs deletion immediately. ] the rationale for using the hangon template that it is finals and we should let kids have their fun. ] (]) 15:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


==] navbox colour discussion==
==Modest suggestion==
Hullo, fellow WikiProject-er. We're having a discussion about the ]. Please do come along and weigh in. ''''']]]''''' 18:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


== Just to let you know ==
You're as ornery as I am about these odious tags. How about we find a bot and make it do something useful, like getting rid of them all? I want to take a flamethrower to all of those damned in-your-face whiny things. Aren't maintenance templates for ''editors'', not ''readers''? What do you say we start a Wikiproject Detaggify? (Feeling like I'm in a tiny minority here.) ] ] 15:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
:Weren't they supposed to be '''on the talk page''' if they're to alert other editors, rather than readers? I mean, if a person wants a mechanical alert system so that a specialist in boxing or unboxing or listas or listab or listac or whatever the heck, then why should Line #1 be, "This article says dubious things?" Additionally, if we ''wish'' there were references, that's a mile from "this article '''needs''' references." I hope no one is too deaf to hear the difference between those two verbs.
:Where the less controversial stuff shows up is, as above, with saints. Hagiographies are "common knowledge," in that most of them come from only a few sources and then get spun off through local legend. There is an official ''acta'' that is accepted when the given church canonizes the saint, and that story gets told and told and told and told, so asking for "references" is a bit silly. It's not silly because there aren't references, but because they're everywhere. Then there are the legendary saints who show up in ''The Golden Legend'' and one of a few ''Martyrologies.'' These then get told and reimagined by various local authors. Again, asking for "references" isn't going to be to the point, because there usually isn't going to be "verification" to be found of the person, just verification of the story, and the article should indicate which legend or which tradition is being referred to. Beyond that, giving text and page is a bit useless.
:So, the templates go wrong most of the time because "the article doesn't have footnotes" (I've seen the template used on articles that most assuredly had "references" and even some that had '''citations'''). This shows really a single, big mistake: the templateer's instinct to make the matter fit the mold.
:Yes, I'm getting irritable about it. I wish every one of the people pushing a template would remember the fate of ''''']'''''. ] (]) 17:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


You have been mentioned at ]. X] (]) 14:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
::Guess ], Geogre. Every article on Misplaced Pages will get its top "this article ''needs'' references/citations/sources" banner, after all, and there's nothing we can do about it. I have a feeling the bot-group will perceive my objection as impeding progress, and I suppressed an impulse to put that image of the lone protestor in front of the tank at Tiananmen alongside my objection (I can't -- this is Lilluputian stuff in the big view after all). ] ] 22:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


== Notification of automated file description generation ==
:I've objected there, and I think I did a fair job of giving in miniature my argument, but while I was objecting I noticed the way they were answering you, and it was astonishing.
Your upload of ] or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.
:It really was Kafkaesque. You had not filled out the proper form or taken it to the proper desk. This is the -bot approval desk, and the -bot looks shiny, so whether the -bot fires bullets into crowded schools or battlefields is no concern of theirs, as the -bot performs according to spec. The tag was there and justified as the proper extension of a programming need for those classifying and categorizing, and not for those ''reading'' and actually ''editing.'' Although one person spoke of "editors" who "may forget," that was an odd argument, because it seemed to me that the person didn't mean editors. What seemed implicit in all of it was more hierarchical shuffling so that mechanical or punch-card like alignment could take place.
:Instead of being a mild mannered litgeek, I take arms against that. They will destroy internal and linguistic organization in a heady rush toward codification, and then, because it's inherent in the generations, they'll change their codes. Suddenly, a person's article, which had loads of citations and perfect organization, ''looks'' like it was written by a child, and this is because it has been "regulated."
:I understand that one is not allowed to be irascible anymore these days, but, since one is not allowed to create anymore these days, either, it's fine. ] (]) 11:32, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions ]. Thanks!<!--Template:Un-botfill-null--> ''Message delivered by ] (])'' 14:59, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
==]==
I wasn't sure what you meant by: "practically a rip off from the archive entry". It seems to me a stubby article on a notable regional jounralist and author that needs to expanded. ] (]) 18:23, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
:It was practically a rip off from the archive. The "article" had listings of publications in archival format, with no more information than the archive entry had. I.e. the "article" was nearly a cut and paste from the U. s. Alabama archive. Hence there was a reason to speedy delete the article as empty. I could have, and possibly would have, deleted the thing as worthless. It was ''not a stub,'' as a stub is a basic overview that needs more detail. Instead, it was bordering on theft and so insufficient as to be empty. Anyone with minimal knowledge of the author (even me) could have done a better job in less than five minutes, and I make a point of ignoring local colorists. A person spending :30 doing research on the author could have done a far better job. I do not think we do anyone an honor by preserving half-assed input from IP's whose idea of contributing is cutting and pasting from other websites.
:Imagine, of all things, a '''reader.''' I know it's hard, but imagine that there is someone who actually wants to know about Virginia Greer. What is that person going to learn from "stubby" like that? I would venture to guess that the person has to know more than that to even search. Therefore, what is the purpose of preserving it -- other than advertising the U. s. Al. archive? Personally, I will not fix it, because I'm not contributing new material. I also did not hit the speedy delete button. However, it was a close call. ] (]) 20:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


*Another one of your uploads, ], has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks!<!--Template:Un-botfill--> ''Message delivered by ] (])'' 15:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
== You have been nominated for membership of the Established Editors Association ==


== Possibly unfree File:Millenium Hall.jpg ==
The Established editors association will be a kind of union of who have made substantial and enduring contributions to the encyclopedia for a period of time (say, two years or more). The proposed articles of association are - suggestions welcome.
] A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ] because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the ]. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at ] if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw-puf --> ] (]) 16:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


:How on earth could this possibly be unfree? The photographer uploaded it, gave it a public domain license, and has since left the project. The subject of the photograph is itself a public domain book. ] ] 17:59, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
If you wish to be elected, please notify me . If you know of someone else who may be eligible, please nominate them
::
:: It couldn't possibly be unfree, but it was one of many files nominated for deletion today by {{u|Stefan2}}. It is clear that he has mixed up the concept of a photograph of a ''3D work of art'' such as a statue, with a photograph of 3D object such as a book or a painting, where the artwork is 2D and inegible to generate a fresh copyright. This is hardly surprising considering the rate he is working - he and could not possibly be doing due diligence in checking his nominations. This isn't the first time this has happened and I'm now sorely tempted to take this issue to ] and ask for a topic ban on his nominating files for deletion. What do you think, {{u|Antandrus}}? --] (]) 20:50, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
::: This is a photograph of a 3D object (a book), not a photograph of a 2D object (a page of a book). If the 3D parts of the picture are removed, then the picture can be kept, otherwise it has to be deleted. Also, {{u|Antandrus}}, you claimed that the picture was uploaded by the photographer and that the photographer gave it a public domain licence, but I can't see any evidence for your claim. It doesn't say who the photographer is, and no licence was provided. The copyright tag which the uploader provided states that the author died more than 100 years ago and that the file therefore is in the public domain in countries with a copyright term of 100 years or less, and that the file also is in the public domain in the United States for an unstated reason. However, the copyright tag is not a ''licence'' since it doesn't contain any permission from a copyright holder but only provides information about limitations in copyright law. --] (]) 21:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
:::: The work of art is 2D, just as it is when we take a photograph of a portrait. Are you going to go around nominating all the images we have of portraits because they are 3D objects? You'll be suggesting next that the thickness of the paint on the painting makes it 3D. --] (]) 00:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
::::: The work of art is 2D, but this is not just a photograph of a 2D work of art. It is a photograph of a 3D object (a book on a table) which happens to contain a 2D artwork. Since the picture includes 3D stuff, it's non-free. --] (]) 10:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::: The solid realisation of any 2D art is bound to exist as part of a 3D object, but that in itself does not invalidate ''Bridgeman v Corel'' as we all know. In this case, the table and the paper are such an insignificant part of the final image that '']'' is bound to apply. If you don't understand that, then please consult: <samp>{{cite journal |last1=Webbink |first1=Mark |last2=Johnny |first2=Omar |last3=Miller |first3=Marc |title=Copyright in Open Source Software - Understanding the Boundaries |doi = 10.5033/ifosslr.v2i1.30 |journal = International Free and Open Source Software Law Review |volume=2 |year=2010}}</samp> We are trying on this project to support and expand free content; we don't need your uninformed rhetoric whose only effect is to needlessly impede or block the progress of open knowledge. --] (]) 18:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)


== Precious ==
Please put all discussion .] (]) 14:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
{{user precious|header=sonnets of knowledge with passion|thanks=for quality articles on literature and religion such as ], ] ("Wrote it. Fought over it. Rewrote it from scratch") and ], for the insight of your essay ] "anyone who thinks that they can win a struggle against the voices of oppression on Misplaced Pages is misdirecting his or her energies grossly, if not criminally", for your user page as a piece of inspiring literature including critical commentary, for "The idea is not to be competing, but rather looking for elements of trust." - missed - repeating from ] ("I'm sick of words: they are so lightly spoken"):}} --] (]) 12:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)


{{User QAIbox
== ''The Rock'' by TS Eliot ==
| title = Awesome
| image = Cscr-featured.svg
| image_upright = 0.35
| bold = ]
}}
--] (]) 06:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
Hi,
<blockquote>unused, low-res, no obvious use</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
I noticed that you commented on the Eliot talk page that he was experimenting in ''The Rock'' with a kind of Brechtian verse drama. You said that he never finished it. He did finish it, it was performed in 1934 and published by Faber & Faber the same year, and I have a copy of it. Eliot wrote it as a commission (I think) and since he felt that he wasn't the sole author of it (although he did write all the words), he never republished it in its entirety. The only parts of it he felt were entirely his own were the choruses, which is why they're in the Collected Poems. I agree, the choruses are wonderful. The whole play is less satisfying, but still fascinating. ] (]) 14:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
:Ah, that's great to know. ''Choruses'' are absolutely wonderful. I may love them best among Eliot's verse, in fact, even if they're not the greatest, deepest, etc. For me, they're the most concise, most telling, most controlled, and most powerfully engaged verse he wrote, because, even though he kept his pose as agent of the timeless, he speaks to the world directly.
:I knew that it was a commission, more or less. It was a celebration of a church's anniversary, and so it was "commissioned" in that respect, but it was not hireling poetry by any means. The verdict on Eliot's drama keeps changing, it seems to me. I remember when everyone thought ''Cocktail Party'' was great and ''Murder in the Cathedral'' was artificial, and now it seems that people are regarding the former as minimal and dated and the latter as powerful. For myself, I've never been happy with his drama, but those Chorus pieces are fantastic. The Unemployed complaining that their deaths go unmentioned in the ''Times''.... The worship of money theme is a bit heavy, but, there are so many other observations there....
:I'm glad you've fixed it up, and I hope you've done a full article on the play or will do. I thought I'd be a Modernist as an undergraduate, but I retreated to the safety of men and women in stockings, wigs, and lice infestations and now get to merely enjoy the Moderns as my cranky desires lead me. ] (]) 14:36, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
== Do we want change? ==


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify -->
I've started a ball rolling here ] all comments welcome - whatever their view! ] (]) 07:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


<span style="color:red;font-weight:bold;">This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual file for details.</span> Thanks, ] (]) 01:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
== Civility ==
:
: It's worth noting that a higher resolution version of the file is available at https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Arbuthnot so presumably Britannica finds the image useful. In any case, if the image is required here in future, it can always be sourced from the Britannica article as any image of a portrait by an 18th century artist is clearly in the public domain under US law. --] (]) 02:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
:: Couldn't we simply use it in the person's article? --] (]) 07:08, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
:::
::: {{re|Gerda Arendt}} We could, but I don't think it would improve the article; it would be merely decorative. It was actually in use as the lead image from 2006 to 2008 when it was changed for the present colour image by . As that has remained in place for eleven years, I think that there's a consensus that the present image is superior to this one which is being considered for deletion. In other words, there's no information that I can see in this image that the one in the article doesn't already convey in a more pleasing fashion. --] (]) 13:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
:::: I didn't think of using it instead of the lead image, but in addition, showing him at a different angle, and age as it seems. --] (]) 13:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
::::: It was the idea of adding it that I meant would be "merely decorative". Nevertheless, it might work if you think it brings something extra to the article. The original caption for that image was "John Arbuthnot by Sir Godfrey Kneller shows him at the height of his literary output." So you could use that perhaps further down the article. If you do add the image, then decline the prod as "now in use". Cheers --] (]) 14:05, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
:::::: done --] (]) 10:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)


== note ==
Hi, I noticed you have written material on and shown an interest in civility on wikipedia. I have created a poll page to gauge community feelings on how civility is managed in practice currently at ], so input from as many people as possible is welcomed. ] (] '''·''' ]) 00:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
::Not to complain before I've looked, but I do hope that one of the questions was, "What is the difference between civility and politeness?" I'd argue that most of the folken running amok seeking out "civility" ''mean'' "politeness." One should remember Goethe's ''Faust'': ] is described as extremely polite and polished. ] (]) 10:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
:::You are welcome to plant more questions at the end and see what is harvested in terms of responses later on. I wonder what an emoticon for a sardonic grin would be...] (] '''·''' ]) 11:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


interesting page. thanks for posting your essays here!! --] (]) 23:13, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
==Please reconsider==
== ] of ] ==
Per ], please consider reversing your action procedurally. It would be better to seek consensus than to pursue bold action in this instance. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 20:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
]
:I'm afraid I cannot, and let me explain why my ground is solid, here:
:#It's my feeling that the AN/I discussion showed ''no consensus.'' A failure to have consensus in the case of long standing users defaults to unblock.
:#The block was procedurally improper. The admin would need to warn, seek to defuse, and then block if necessary.
:#The block was ''additionally'' improper in that there was no blocked template placed on the user.
:#The block was ''additionally'' improper in that it was on the basis of off-Misplaced Pages words. One cannot be blocked for something said on 4Chan. That Peter Damian ''linked to it'' was some justification, but all that it gives us is "this user is voting to oppose RFA's without a valid reason." The last time I checked, that's not reason to block someone.
:The RfAR you refer to is categorically irrelevant. It referred to blocking and unblocking Giano. To my knowledge, Peter Damian is not Giano. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it with me. Otherwise, I will strike that for you or refactor it. I am under no prohibitions or restrictions in blocking or unblocking anyone. My unblock restriction pertained to Giano only, and it was for a year. This was, as you will see, a ''block'' of Peter Damian. I think he did something wrong. The administrator who blocked him was in conflict with him and went wildly overboard and made a complete hash of things. It won't stand. ] (]) 20:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
::There are two principles in tension here: the recognition that offsite actions remain offsite and irrelevant, versus the line of thinking that publishing objectionable material offsite and then deliberately linking to one's own offsite material constitutes an attempt at gaming the system. Previously, the latter has principally regarded privacy issues. Although that is not the specific problem here, this charts new territory. In light of your previous action almost exactly one year ago, it stands to reason that if bold action were to be taken it would be less controversial from an administrator whose slate on related matters is completely clean. This is, potentially, the convergence of several high tension issues. Repeating the request that you reverse your action (in the interest of drama reduction, if nothing else: if you are correct then surely your action will be vindicated by other parties). Alternatively, would you consider procedurally opening a conduct request for comment on this editor? His ability to generate useful content is unquestioned; if he modifies his approach in other namespaces he will be univerally respected and valued. Perhaps the input of the community can help chart the best course. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 20:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
:Why an RFC? I don't see drama at all. Seriously, this looks like a bicycle pump is being held by one group. They're inflating it.
:So Peter Damian says that he wants to vote "no" on all RFA's. Ok. That's one. Haven't we had that before? Haven't we, in fact, had that over and over and over and over and over and over and over again before? Didn't Everyking do it for a while? Don't we ''currently'' have about twelve people who automatically vote "yes" on all RFA's? We deal with ''that'' with words, not blocks.
:Otherwise, he thinks Misplaced Pages should be destroyed, and yet he's working to make Misplaced Pages better. That sounds like an estranged lover, not a terrorist. On the other hand, IRC junkies who have never written a byte of an article (unless their -bots did it for them) kind of ''are'' destroying things, only they believe otherwise. So, that's how it goes.
:My action wasn't so bold. Again, #1: the AN/I was no consensus. No consensus on a long time user is unblock. We block for disruption only with overwhelming consensus. We don't impose ''indefinite blocks, in particular'' when there is a big split among the admin corps. Secondly, the admin screwed it up all over the place. Third, he was in a dispute. Fourth.... I repeat myself. I don't consider my action here bold or controversial at all. I very, very rarely use the block button. When I do, I'm satisfied that the matter is extremely clear cut.
:It is my judgment, based on six years of work here, that this is a very clear cut matter.
:Should Peter comport himself in a way that will inflame his enemies less? Oh, we all should. Should we have to go through yet another RFC to hear how he was mean to this one or that one this time or that? Not to lift an indefinite block. Lift the block, and then let people do their RFC's if they want. I saw a horrendous and stupid block, so I lifted it. We can't be doing this. We can't be fishing for evidence, and we can't be blocking longtime users indefinitely for being grumpy. ] (]) 20:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


The article ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
*Thank you. <small>] &#x007C; ] &#x007C; ]</small> 20:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
<blockquote>Without sources for nine years. I don't see real indication of notability here. BEFORE completed in Google Books and News (I have no access to British newspapers). Deprod if you can cite significant coverage, but be sure to actually cite it, or it'll go to AfD.</blockquote>
*Second that thank you, glad to see some sense prevail here. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
I do not really understand the rational behind your unblock of Peter. At the very least keep an eye on him and reblock if he becomes disruptive again. ] 21:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
(ec's) A crude but generally effective measure of drama is the number of kilobytes expended. Both at RFA talk and at ANI, this demonstrated every sign of a high tension situation. A moderate, reasoned, and conciliatory approach usually yields the best results in these situations. We seem to be in agreement on one point: whenever feasible, it is better to leave a controveraial editor unblocked while their status is in discussion. Two years ago the majority went against that in policy discussion; perhaps when this is over it would be time to revisit the issue. Would gladly join hands with you on that point. Meanwhile, it would seem to be a good idea, in light of quantity of people who supported an indefinite block, to offer the opportunity in a structured setting for them to raise their concerns in a reasoned dialog. That is what conduct RfC is meant to be, at its best; under the present circumstances no one would be better suited to initiate it than yourself. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 21:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
:That's not Geogre's ax to grind; he was merely correcting a bad error by Law, as clearly evidenced by all that drama which you decry which resulted from his block. Now, you can lecture Law about the drama his block caused; and you can open an Rfc on Damien, or suggest that to those who are concerned about him, but why precisely are you here talking to Geogre about drama and Rfcs? I think you're talking to the wrong party here, Durova. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
:], and the Law blocked him without due procedure and went to bed. Silly stuff, unblock sensible. No moar dramaz plz. . ], ] 21:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 22:54, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
I have emailed 'Durova' suggesting she take a sense of humour check. I quite like her, actually. And you George. Thanks for the unblock. With best wishes to everyone here. ] (]) 21:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


:Hi Diamond -- Geogre has been gone for a while. I removed the prod, as this is a significant organization. Needs some references to bring it to 2020 standards, as in 2005 we usually did not include footnotes, only a general links/sources/references section at the end. (Any watchers on this page still?) ] ] 23:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
==]==
:: I know of a couple. {{smiley|wink}} --] (]) 00:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Dear Sir, I come seeking some help. There is an editor ] (an editor who wouldn't recognise ] if it bit him). He has a serious case of ] in relation to the talkpage (yes, TALK page) of the 9/11 article. His rudeness is indulged by a number of Admins while he himself and his defenders remove any perceived "rudeness" in response. His deletions are defended by several Admins. Etcetera. See the record for yourself is all I can say - it takes the breath away! Yet this is happening on the talk page of one of the most high-profile articles on Wiki. If you have some time, examine the edit history of this page for the past 10 days and tell me I'm imagining it. I am here because I have asked several Admins to deal with the deletions of Tarage but they appear to have no interest, other than defending and supporting him. ] (]) 21:21, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
:: ... count me in --] (]) 10:12, 9 May 2020 (UTC)


== Featured article review for Restoration Spectacular ==
:It would appear that ] is fishing for an Administrator to do this user's bidding. User ] has already supplied me with the boiler plate notification of the Arb Com decision that I have myself shown to other people, as well as support. While I do not wish to waste your time with this user's trivial complaints, if you wish, do look into Sarah777's edit history. I, along with two other administrators in good standing have continually warned this user to cease POV pushing and trolling, but sadly, it appears a block may be in order. Thank you for your time. --] (]) 01:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


I have nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. -- ] (]) 00:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
::What POV do you think I am pushing now Tarage? Could you support that charge with some diffs? Didn't think so. '''You''' are the problem here. A problem I accidentally stumbled on during the "terrorist" debate but one that I now realise is toxic, and needs cleaning up. ] (]) 07:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


== Featured Article Review for ''The Country Wife'' ==
:::I do love your personal attacks. Just adds to my ammunition against you when you or I am forced to go before the ANB. Thanks. --] (]) 02:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


I have nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. -- ] (]) 20:04, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
:::And to Geogre; ] (an Admin) has responded ''reasonably '' (as he did on my page during the "terrorism" debate) - so there is no need for you to intervene, the 9/11 talkpage seems to be in balanced hands again, as Tarage obviously isn't fit to be let wander around that page unsupervised. ] (]) 08:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ].


The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
::::Excuse me? Once again, the personal attacks. Amusing. And anyway, I'm all but positive ] agrees with me, as we have worked on this article together and prevented the removal of the term you have such a problem with. Then again, you WOULD know this if you had read the archives. But I guess when attacking me, there is little room for anything else. Let it be known that I have survived far worse being thrown at me. --] (]) 02:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
:I'm glad this is working out. There are two disadvantages to my involvement. The first is that I'm slow. The second is that I'm long winded. The first is intentional to some degree. People get crazy with wiki-time. In wiki-time, a person proposes a policy change at 4:00 AM, finds no response by 10:00 AM, and then declares that it's law by 10:15 AM -- never mind that .75 of the planet doesn't share the same time zone as the proposer. This is yet another area in which the IRC lensing effect makes things worse. The consequence is that people are more and more treating silence as assent, and that's a ''bad'' idea. Folks need to realize that the earth is round, the sun is far away, and that this is a volunteer hobby for most of us, and so time on Misplaced Pages ought to be Pony Express time, not Instant Messager time. (No criticism of anyone above. I'm just explaining why I'm "slow.")
<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> ] (] &#124; ]) 08:03, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
:Obviously, "emergency" cases are different, but ''most'' emergencies aren't emergencies. ''Most'' emergencies are merely exciting or excitable.
:Oh, and I, the person behind the screen, was there in Manhattan, working on 9/11/01. I was miles away (89th St.). ] (]) 10:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::That seems close enough to me! But then I wouldn't know 89th street from the ]. As ] sang, you guys come from a place ''']'''. ] (]) 00:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 02:36, 11 March 2022

This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Geogre has not edited Misplaced Pages since 29 July 2009. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Essays

It's new! It's exciting! It's an idea whose time came months ago: The Tags and Boxes Player's Guide Continuation: The Demotion Idea. If RFA is "broken," let's not make it FUBAR: The RFA Derby It's newer! It's not exciting! Essay on Wiki Cults of Personality My attempt at impersonating Marshal MacLuhan: IRC considered Blocklogz, A Wikiwebi Comix: My first attempt at hip artwerkx. Oh, more IRC bashing from an IRC hater, etc. You know -- just whining from a luzer.: People are still getting blocked by "unanimous" IRC consent. So You Wanna Be An Edit Warrior? An essay on how to tell if you may already have the qualifications to be an edit warrior and not even know it!

New: User:Kosebamse/IRC explains pretty well why Misplaced Pages lost three of its most serious content contributors to salve the egos of some few people and save the playtime of those same few people. The "IRC RfAr": An explanation of "What happened" during the IRC arbitration case, and why it cost Misplaced Pages far, far more than it gave. The long winded analysis of "civility," with a short and succinct page to follow

New Messages

Talk archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31


Massages

For the children

For the many readers, there is a new blog entry. (If this makes no sense to you, then ignore it.) Geogre (talk) 10:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

For the adult-ering

I would like input from the people who have seen my ideas for how to form a council to advise on the future. I've written some up, and I've sent them to a few people via e-mail. Should I post them here? Geogre (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm interested too, Geogre -- please post here (or shoot me an e-mail). We seem to be coming unglued rather badly, at least in the matter of governance, and I fear the process is accelerating. Antandrus (talk) 19:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Initially, I was concerned that my name is too "big." I don't mean that I am, but rather that there are people who will oppose anything simply if my name is near it. I had preferred the ideas to come out anonymously or from several directions, because I think they're good (well, I would) and should answer our needs without introducing new griefs. I'll post 'em here by tomorrow, I suppose, and, wiki-style, leave them for anyone to adapt as they see fit. Geogre (talk) 21:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed, at least in the past three years or so, that popularity on Misplaced Pages negatively correlates with content contribution, and sometimes even with integrity. But don't quote me: I'm just a nasty old fool. And people skilled with words are not always popular, for we are after all writing an encyclopedia, where words are important, and envy is more implacable than hatred (La Rochefoucauld was right about everything). But I'll shut up now. Antandrus (talk) 21:30, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, see below for the big kahuna idea. I really, really don't care who gets credit for it. Let Kelly Martin take credit for it, if she wants, so long as they do get a policy council and get it in something like what I've described. You know, I was reflecting, the other day, when I was explaining why I don't need Misplaced Pages and it doesn't need me anymore, that it's not the same thing as it was when I heard a call on National Public Radio for over-educated, under-employed people to add stuff. I remember hearing that, when I was working as a librarian in a closed library. I thought it was genius that they were taking advantage of all the ABD's and grad students in the world, but those people are now the ones Misplaced Pages doesn't want. -Bot operators with less personal skill than their creation are "mediators," and "cool" is a long comment. Theses are all original research. Footnotes dominate here, where they don't even exist in academia, and people expect a citation to "the Earth is the third planet from the sun." O tempore, O mores. (But John Gay said envy's a sharper spur than pay for wits; it's a cudgel for those without wit.) Geogre (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

How to get and structure an advisory council

What you will need for this project: One Misplaced Pages, an estimate of a representative sample of active editors, and several stewards. You will also need an Initiator. That's YOU, and hopefully you are plural, not singular.

1. Outline a set of criteria that would make a person qualified -- experience with all elements of Misplaced Pages, breadth of edits, calm, intelligence. Think about the criteria very, very carefully and word them even more carefully. This is the one place to be excruciatingly careful, to get a great deal of input, and to be sure that the end goal is always in mind. That goal is wise policy, nothing else.

Why: Criteria keep people from wandering, and most people will be more honest, if they're given qualities to assess than if they're asked who they think is best. It's one of those paradoxes of evaluation that's pretty well known in business and education. This is why, for example, most employee and educational assessments are structured.

2. Ask editors to recommend someone other than themselves according to those criteria, rating the person on a 1-10 on each. The recommendations go to a group of coordinators or the stewards. They are not posted openly, and any person advocating or discussing voting or canvassing for members to the council will be in violation of WP:CANVAS, including on IRC and e-mail. We will have to rely upon honor, but Misplaced Pages was founded on such principles.

Why: Obvious, really. The idea is not to be competing, but rather looking for elements of trust. This cuts down on some of the, "Oh, well, that person is evil" stuff. Obviously, it leaves big weaknesses, but step 3 can help forefend. Additionally, prior and future attempts stall because of politics and personalities and self-love and self-importance. Provided that alternate accounts are not involved, this should avoid that to some degree, and since these are simply sent in rather than posted publicly, it will help. We don't want cadres and factions and points of view trying to fight. We want wise policy and we want trust. Have people assess for someone, not against.

3. Get a list of the top 60 finishers and then make them candidates for consideration listed on a namespace page by the stewards. There will be positively no statements by the candidates, and no oppose votes. Instead, there will be a two week assessment period, during which editors will, again using the criteria, give 1-10 scores on the various criteria for the sixty persons listed.

3a. Selection will not be a balance of oppose and support or anything so compromised. Instead, the stewards will have determined a representative sample of the editing population and divided that by ten. No candidate will be successful without an aggregate score above that mark (this functioning like quorum).

3b. If a person sees a very serious reason for disqualification, he or she will inform the stewards and coordinators. Disqualification criteria are that the person will be likely to act in a private, national, or special interest rather than a wide, international, or community interest. Disqualification will have nothing to do with "conflict" or "drama" or even "policy violations" of the candidate, as it is not up to the stewards or coordinators to tell the project who it trusts. However, if a person has a vested interest or a conflict of interest or has evidence of a private desire that trumps the general, then that would be a reason for disqualification.

3c. The coordinators and stewards simply tabulate the scores. All parties are prohibited from revealing or discussing results on any medium until the final 60 are posted.

Why: This council will not have "power" to harm or help people, so the idea that a person on it will get to be important is silly. When matters are "tied" in the minds of the stewards and coordinators, the presumption should be for safety/disqualification, but the criteria must be solely oriented toward communal/private interest and wisdom/folly. A wise thought from an unpleasant person is worth a dozen banal platitudes. Secrecy is vital, because any hints about how things will going, especially on non-portable, non-transparent media like IRC and e-mail, will result in "votes" and hate fests.


4. The result of the assessment will be a council of TWENTY people. Of the twenty, five will serve at a time for one month periods. Membership will rotate every month.

Why: This may be the most vital part of the plan. By having the groups rotate, it prevents personalities from dominating, so no one person can bully or dominate the rest. Additionally, it keeps one person or five people from becoming "important" or thinking they have power of any sort. All of the anxiety about the council being a "government" or being "power" or being a "revolution" should be put to bed instantly by the knowledge that it will be a continually shifting set of persons.


5. Method: The council should appoint or seek representatives to speak for separate viewpoints on a given issue. These "champions" or representatives will present arguments for their position, arguments against alternative positions, along with careful rebuttals of claims against their position. They will not involve themselves in direct, interlined conversation with champions/representatives of other points of view on council pages. The council will review all cases, plus any volunteer cases ("amicus briefs"), and submit questions to champions. They will then fashion their own policy recommendation(s).

Why: Again, we've seen death by argument too many times to count, and we especially see the routine "forest for the trees" sort of argument that Misplaced Pages is famous for. No one gets anywhere when discussing policy because every single person needs to offer his opinion, even if it's almost identical to the twenty opinions just above. All of the "me too" and the "yeah but" stuff gets so thick that no one can support anyone or any thing. If the council wants to actually review and fashion policy recommendations (only recommendations), then it needs to basically research policy alternatives. They can find the passionate true believers of the sides and let them get all the best ideas from their side together and speak with one voice, and then they can also listen to anyone who walks by who happens to have thought about things. Additionally, many times our best thinking is not found among the advocates, because people have gone away from an issue in disgust. Open the issue of infoboxes, and you'll see hundreds of editors who hate them but gave up arguing. The point is that the "champion" method and the "amicus" system allows clear presentation and consideration for the council.

6. When the council concludes its deliberations, it makes a policy recommendation to Misplaced Pages that Misplaced Pages must approve. It is not automatically policy, but it is also not for arguing about. It is an up or down vote, with a presumption of approval. This means that any proposal that garners quorum and an approval rate of 67% or more will be adopted.

Why: If this is a thing where the council makes a big RFC, the result will be "no consensus" to everything. Instead, the council should get a bit of a break, so that a council recommendation simply needs approval (say a 2/3rds majority, with quorum in place). If it goes to Village Pump where every person gets a brand new opinion, then we'll have every person trying to speak for the novelty of speaking, and then we'll get reiteration, and then....

What to do with these?

Use 'em. Claim 'em as your idea, if you want. I don't care. I just think it's a good idea, and I think it's a damn sight better than ArbCom picking their favorite warriors or votes or some other rot. Tell me, honestly, if I haven't avoided the problems.

The point is, there are ways of doing these things, people, if we just stop thinking in terms of power and appointing ourselves demigods. Geogre (talk) 21:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that Geogre - I've pasted it to , on my way out.......--Joopercoopers (talk) 17:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I hope it does some good. I don't care about the credit, but it seems to me that one of the reasons Misplaced Pages has been doomed is that the project is a good deal more socially adventurous than the people at it. While it does all kinds of interesting things to notions of authority and control, they keep looking for authority and control. It's as if they're here, but they don't believe in it.
If we managed to get 100,000 articles and to move up to the top 20 in Alexa with just people and no freaking out about power, then I'm going to bet we can negotiate among ourselves to find the possible and impossible solutions for policy, too, so long as no one gets to be in charge. (There are two ways to win. One is a dictator. The other is a monastery. I've never heard of a monastery accidentally wiping out the population of a country before.) Geogre (talk) 19:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah. Of course all the people here exist in the real world within structures of power and authority - more acutely for the kids of course, so it's hardly a surprise that they bring shackles of the mind with them to this place. Look forward to your paper G - buzz me when it's published will you? --Joopercoopers (talk) 19:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I guess I gave too much of a preview, there, but, of course, that's what it's all about. The historical moment. No one is to be blamed for being in a historical moment, but when the reason they never look above and beyond it is neediness and personal psychology, it can get really distasteful. I would love to have real surveys of Misplaced Pages administrators to make my case, but no one can get such surveys. Anyway, I'm writing, forever writing, and the thing is a monster. It's taking forever to get down, and then it will take a while to trim and dress up, and then I'll have to find the right outlet for it. I'll let you know, though. Geogre (talk) 00:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't these paradigm shifts usually have some kind of Charismatic Leader, some agent of change? Or at least, some voices in the wind, from the same direction? Cometh the hour, cometh the man. Unfortunately we're still waiting for the man. up to Lexington......hmmm hmmm. Your fundamental material for the historical moment though, is still pretty much the same homo sapien of 200,000 years ago. "Fred.F.Stone likes hunting, screwing, acceptance and problem solving for profit, will gladly bash neighbour in pursuance of these, but recently finds more profit in cooperation." Whatever the future holds, it would be surprising if it wasn't affected by some abstracts of those fundamentals. In short, to overcome neediness and personal psychology, aren't crowds usually invited to put them aside in favour of he 'lofty purpose'? WP might have the lofty purpose, but somehow it rewards the needy and sick - hardly Darwinian, but perhaps the societal aspects of this place do have a use after all. Joopercoopers (talk) 00:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
As I told a friend, recently, I have reception aesthetics dentures, but they're fitted on Marxist gums. The great man theory's problem is that, after he chases all your women around, he inevitably turns insipid or nasty. The odd thing is that the Great Man is, interestingly, not at home in a real Darwinian model, and yet it seems to fit so well with our concepts of the "primitive" that we forget that every time, in history, that we see a great man arise, he is promising to lead us boldly to the future, to clear away the brush of the past and make the trains run on time (by changing the time tables to match their departure and arrivals).
I'll have to go with e-mail on the rewards of neediness. I think Misplaced Pages is curiously designed for that. There is a particularity about this project that attracts and promotes particular sets of psychological profiles that are very ill suited to analysis. In essence, I think Misplaced Pages is a second life, and people who are looking for a chance to reconstruct and who are seeking recompense for the wounds and grievances of the first life are going to devote their energies toward the reconstruction and mirroring of the social orders that "went wrong" in reality. Unlike Second Life, Misplaced Pages is an actual do-over for a good many people, and therefore one has varying degrees of attraction based on varying degrees of "wrong" suffered. Geogre (talk) 10:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not so sure about the 'great man' not being at home in the Darwinian model. Certainly it worked for Genghis Khan - what percentage of Asia now carries his genes? 1 in 12? . It certainly didn't do JFK's chances of finding a date any harm either :-) An interesting question is, if Obama delivers on the promise invested in him, will that be a competitive advantage for his children? I'm not so sure about the inevitable corruption of 'great leaders' either (where's Luther King, Gandhi or Mandela in that model - apart from 2/3rds of them having the sense of timing to die at the 'right' moment?). My Grandparents are still firmly of the opinion, that without Churchill to demonstrate the bulldog spirit, to remind us of our national traits and to buck us up with brilliant rhetoric, we'd be lost by now. It's speculative of course, maybe we could have done better than the bad-tempered depressive alcoholic with a boy's-own-adventure sense of military strategy (the nation certainly thought so in peacetime), but leadership is not to be dismissed so glibly I think - that generation is still marked by the tangible excitement of having experienced a nation truly pulling together. Maybe what's really missing at WP is an external threat - but now I'm sounding like Rumsfeld - lawsuits anyone? In any event, it's not cohesion we need, but values embedded in the system that serve our purpose better - an encyclopaedia is a strange place to find systemic anti-intellectualism.
Really though, aren't we all fundamentally motivated by selfishness? Even if I devote my life to charity, I feel better, I'm rewarded in some way. I try to remember that about people's motives, it makes me generally less disappointed in people :-) The long term trouble with Marxism, in my v. humble and uniformed view, is it appeals to idealism. Idealism can sublimate these selfish desires in the short term, because the idea of being part of 'something new and consequential', works as a reward in itself, not to mention the reward of love/respect/acceptance from being part of the 'group'. But in the long term, we revert to more petty and prosaic behaviours. That doesn't deny though that lifting our heads once in a while and running after someone or some group with vision is an entirely useless pursuit. But, as you say Geogre, your essentially un-clubbable, so you'll probably see that differently to your ovine peers --Joopercoopers (talk) 13:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Sauce for a gander

There's a surprisingly interesting and cordial conversation going on here about reliable academic sources, which you might be interested in bringing your laser scalpel to. --Joopercoopers (talk) 18:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I've tried, but the problem is that, although they're all on the right track, they're falling victim to Misplaced Pages argument. One can find exceptions to everything. There are always going to be peer reviewed bits of horse hockey, and there are going to be eminent people who lose their minds. The general guideline is sound, but once we start trying to use general guidelines as if they were predictive laws without employing individual consideration, it's hopeless. The problem is that we are never going to shed ourselves of someone trying to say, "Oh, but there are books supporting my crank view, and they're from academic presses." To see where things get really hot, look at the nationalism wars. The fringe science stuff is tame in comparison. In those cases, you have the most prestigious presses of two nations offering up officially sanctioned accounts that say opposing things, and then, here at Misplaced Pages, we get bloody battles, with both trying to throw fecal matter at the other's press and universities and nation. The Russian/Polish "arguments" are crimes in progress, for example, and they are entirely insoluble without saying, "Well, we're Anglo-Americans, and so we're going to use our nationalist points of view." Shy of that, there's practically nothing to say to distinguish or quiet them. Geogre (talk) 00:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Motion re alternate account

There is a motion at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Motions concerning your alternate account; you are invited to comment if you wish. --bainer (talk) 13:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Fielding

Regardless of what happens, I would like to have your input on Fielding related stuff. There are a few pages that you were directly involved in, and some others that your opinion would be important. I plan on finishing the later plays coming up this fall and try to produce the bulk of his major works (including some poems and the rest). The one priority coming up will be The Covent-Garden Journal‎. When I have a chance, I will be adding some more information on the literary criticism and other notable aspects in order to prepare it for GA level. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Could you please weigh in on the above discussion? I proposed adding some more about specific criticism and the such. AD cut it down and left some in. However, you may have some differing opinions from us on what would be effective or not. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Geogre_and_Risker

A request for arbitration has been filed. You may wish to make a statement. Durova 02:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Someone (I'm not sure who) once said "Don't let the bastards get you down" a motto I have always kept, so I recommend it. Unlike you, I only do poetry that I was compelled to learn in school, but I think many would do well to remember this "IF you can keep your head when all about you - Are losing theirs and blaming it on you, - If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you - But make allowance for their doubting too" and so on, I forget the rest, but I think the meaning is clear, and then my own favourite line "Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch" which is something you do very well! You see the other day, someone kindly fixed up this thing for me, which makes all the admins names on my watchlist appear blue, and do you know? - They are so in the majority, it has led me to the conclusion that not being an Admin is almost an affectation these days - rather like saying "look at me, I'm special" Funny how things turn out isn't it? Giano (talk) 21:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration motion: Geogre

I have just added Motion 3 calling for your de-sysopping. It is in your best interests to respond on the arbitration pages urgently to this and the other interests raised. I am sending you a copy of this message by email.  Roger Davies 08:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that once you have taken something from them (in this case - the tools) then they can threaten to take something away from you. Everyone who knows you, is 100% certain, beyond any possible doubt, that deceiving or building false concencus had never even crossed your too philosophical mind. In that respect, you are probably the mosy naively honest person on Misplaced Pages. The reasons you created Utgard were completely understandable and justified; they are also none of Durova and co's business. However, an ignorance of those facts has proven a source of long sought jubilation and glee to certain editors - and those whose most philosophical thoughts probably concern only their digestion and bowels. This is the crux of the problem, those who have their minds on higher things, seldom give sufficient thought to matters more base in appearance. Hence, you are in this predicament. It's not as though you use the tools - so if I were you, I would tell them where to stuff their bloody tools, but of course you are not me - which is why they are still whooping with such obscene joy as they seek to take from you and you remain silent. At least, this way, you have a dignity that others in this sorry case appear to lack. Giano (talk) 09:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
  • As silent types go, you are proving pretty affective. However, I and some others are having some problems here. Why has this very commonly known alternative account, known in the highest circles, suddenly become a problem, that needs such public and drastic attention? There seems to be a huge movement wanting you de-sysopped; you certainly seem to have attracted some once powerful people (a whole unprecedented platoon of ex-arbs, undermining the present ArbCom, anxious to see you disposed of) I am just wondering why they and so many others from a certain quarter of Misplaced Pages are demanding your downfall - As disciples of Machiavelli they are provincial and clumsy, but they are singing in unison almost like a heavenly choir - or at least an orchestrated body. Any ideas, you would like to share with us? Giano (talk) 21:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
  • All I need to know is- did you use the "secondary" account to add to discussions/voting anyplace that your Geogre account was used. If not, then wheres the harm? If so... well that's a whole'nuther can o' worms. Good luck, because I've always appreciated your abilities/intellect. Best Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 22:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Ego sum tristis

I have really enjoyed reading your work here, especially that which you've done on the older literature articles. I discovered the troubles you're having when I checked in on a case in which user:Abd had listed my username in his evidence. As you've now not edited since the case began, I'm afraid we may have lost you, and that makes me very sad, if true. While I hope it's not true, I just wanted to post a note here to let you know that your contributions here are greatly appreciated, by more people than you'll probably every know. As the thread topic says, Ego sum tristis. Unitanode 05:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to hear ...

Of your troubles. You have been kind to me in the past and very fair, and I wish you the best. Peter Damian (talk) 21:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Motion 4

Hello,

I've moved your latest statement to the new motion I've posted to propose that User:Utgard Loki be unblocked and available for your use as an alternate account, provided it is clearly identified as such. This is partly to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to read your statement given that the motions they were attached to will close shortly and it would have been archived along with them. — Coren  21:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Motion Passed

Hey Geogre, unfortunately the Arbitration Committee has passed a motion to desysop your account. You are free to re-apply through the usual channels. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 00:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Please note that another motion is also close to passing. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

G'day Geogre

seems a bit trite to say 'hope you're well' - but I do, so there you go..... Anywhoo... I thought I'd come by here to let you know that I've put a note on Utgard's userpage mentioning the connection to this account - I felt that the template was a bit rude, so replaced it. The only place therefore that a 'geogre sock' template is in use is over at my userpage, where it's a sort of poor man's satire / comment on the whole situation - I'm thinking of being Spartacus on tuesdays, thursdays and saturdays, and Geogre on mondays, wednesdays and fridays. Sundays I'll pick a new and exciting 'master' account, and wear that label with pride, don't tell anyone, but I've always wanted to be SandyGeorgia ;-)

Doesn't really need saying, but you should obviously feel free to revert, edit, or whatever at Utgard's page - certainly if you feel my oar is getting in the way. Take care, and insert a genuine 'I hope you can rise above all this, because your contributions to the project, in various 'spaces', really are among the absolute finest' type statement here :-) Privatemusings (talk) 02:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I, too, wish to convey my sympathy to you—and my contempt to the rash, harsh punishment you've suffered, of course, without being afforded a chance to defend yourself. Orwellian process, from start to finish. El_C 09:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
The AC is far too incompetent to do Orwellian. This was more like a Drumhead court-martial.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 21:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
They're as full of promise and ultimate disappointment as New Labour, we're clearly into the Brown phase. --Joopercoopers (talk) 22:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I think everyone is mistaken about Orwell. Normally, people responding in such a manner to such a situation would say Kafkaesque. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:17, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

An offer

There is an offer for you at Misplaced Pages:RFAR#Statement_from_Durova. Contact me if you wish to pursue it. Durova 14:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you just knit him a nice sweater instead...or maybe a scarf?--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 21:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Or a noose. --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Only if he accepts her nomination for RfA.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 22:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
(EC) Now, now, Joopers, I'm sure Durova didn't mean her essay to sound at all conditional or baiting. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 22:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Really? Because it sounded awfully to me like Durova has offered to cut her toenails if Geogre cuts his throat - now that's reciprocity folk! --Joopercoopers (talk) 22:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Well she should cut hers first, since they keep tearing holes in her favorite moccasins.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 22:22, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Given the level of almost paranoid distrust displayed by some individuals on this page, I can well understand why you might like to avoid the politics of this place. And, yes, I'm fairly sure that you and some others might count me as one of the "enemy" as well. I did and do think that it might be a good idea for you to be subject to a confirmation vote, primarily for two reasons (1) the fact that the two names could be seen by those with no prior knowledge of the dual identity as being two individuals taking part in one discussion, and (2) far more importantly, as a form of, well, warning, to any admin in the future who might take recourse to multiple accounts, and, like NYB said, probably by accident have eventually wound up using them for a purpose for which they were never initially intended, but which could be seen as being to some level problematic. Having said all that, I would also be honored to second (or third or whatever) your nomination for reconfirmation should that situation develop. John Carter (talk) 22:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Guys, Durova has to be allowed to disagree without being personally attacked. It was this vituperative atmosphere we've created around ourselves that caused Geogre to want another account in the first place. It would be great if we could learn from this that differences of opinion and criticism don't have to escalate into wikihounding and disrespect. We may be about to lose a really great contributor because of it. SlimVirgin 23:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
It would seem the offer is being viewed with the distain it deserves, as an attempt to wash blood from stained sheets. I wonder if Risker whould have been given the same 'opportunity' if Durova had managed to bring her down as collateral damage. This is high politics of the kind Durova has been so careful to distance herself from since !!; so the slate can be forgiven and wiped clean. I think all that effort is ruined here. Ouch, opps. The self interest and politics here are so naked and obvious here, I have to agree with Geogre in that 'ye all bore me'. Ceoil (talk) 15:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Stallo

Given that the image was used on this very page, it seemed appropriate that we have an article about the things. So I've started off Stallo for you. Uncle G (talk) 01:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Motion Passed

Hello Geogre, just noting for the record that a new motion has passed relating to you at WP:AC/N On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, MBisanz 01:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

An impotent rogue speaks...

Per your comment at the arbcom case "Little did I know that such a collection of impotent rogues would gather to express their grave displeasure and sober defense of the letter of the law. Each of them united solely by the fact that, in the past, I had been instrumental in exposing his misdeeds ..." I would be grateful to know what misdeeds you imagine I have committed or that you have exposed. DuncanHill (talk) 15:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Sysop status

If you do seek to regain sysop status, as I have already said, I would be honored to be allowed to be one of your nominators. John Carter (talk) 14:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

This week's blog post

Honey, that is so beautifully written!

And some great quotes: "Ignorance is the mother of admiration"! Ha! :-D I'd never heard that one.

What's a divot? Bishonen | talk 21:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC).

'tis true. Reminded me of the much missed Alistair Cooke. (The beeb never did find a way to plug the gap he left and the ocean between us can only widen without it - How's your radio voice Geogre?). 'Replace your Divots' is parlance from that dreadful waste of a good walk, meaning clods of earth belted out with a driver. --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed! Are we sharing this, with a link, or keeping it for ourselves? Giano (talk) 21:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Heel America Part One --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to correct you Joopers, but a driver is usually swung at a teed ball, so no divots there. Nitpickingly yours, Kosebamse (talk) 08:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
You've clearly not seen the rare occasions I've teed off. --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Apologies

I hope it's Ok with you, but I have made this edit to your user page it was upsetting some people and causing concern that the ritual drumming out of the regiment had not been performed. It's funny isn't it, how on this case the honour was drummed out with you. Giano (talk) 18:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I miss you

You are much missed.

I miss you. :-( Bishonen | talk 00:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC).

I agree with the sentiment. At the risk of gushing, something I doubt Geogre appreciates much, I think he's the finest writer I've encountered in almost six years at this place. Geogre, be well; some of us do miss you more than you may ever know. Antandrus (talk) 00:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Eh what? I popped up merely to point you to this sensible proposal; can you really be gone? I hope it's merely a vacation. Come back rested and refreshed. -- Hoary (talk) 06:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Hogarth-Southwark-Fair-1734.png

File:Hogarth-Southwark-Fair-1734.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Hogarth-Southwark-Fair-1734.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: ]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Invitation, if you're so inclined...

Hi Geogre.

I'm here to ask if you're interested in participating in a public discussion. I've been talking with some people about deletion processes around here, and we're talking about doing a moderated discussion for the next newsletter. The idea is that, although "inclusionist" and "deletionist" are clearly divisive terms when applied to people, they do represent certain archetypal Misplaced Pages philosophies.

We're thinking that it would be interesting, and perhaps bring out some good points for the community's rumination, if we have people meet in a discussion in order to articulate opposing perspectives on a number of questions. I know that you have written some meta-pages on the subject of deletion, and I wonder if you'd be interested in being a participant in such an event. I seem to have volunteered to be a mergist-minded moderator, and part of that gig involves looking for people who can eloquently express ideas about deleting and keeping articles. I thought of you.

Would you have any interest in participating in something like this? -GTBacchus 20:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Wait... you're gone? Oh hell. -GTBacchus 20:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

FAR Notice

I have nominated Oroonoko for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Restoration spectacular

Please see Talk:Restoration spectacular#4 years on as an informal FAR. Simply south (talk) 19:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


Over three months

It's been over three months since you left, you can't allow this shower to drive you off for good.  Giano  19:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Colley Cibber FAR

I have nominated Colley Cibber for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Mm40 (talk) 03:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Jonathan Wild FAR

I have nominated Jonathan Wild for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Parrot of Doom 19:00, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry Comment in '07

I hate to dredge up the past, but I just wanted to make a comment on , where it was stated that is was almost assured that I was using sockpuppets. I just want to set the record straight that I wasn't -- the other user in question approached me while I was a developer and notified me --- that community is -very- hotheaded, but he wasn't a sockpuppet and I asked him repeatedly in private (which is against policy but I didn't want more trouble) to calm down as I did.

No hard feelings, just want to set the record straight.

Antman -- chat 10:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

A delectation of a page called Fashcool

Dear Georgre ... in 17:00, 12 June 2009, I put a contribution material on wikipedia called Fashcool but you, as an editor removed it, if you have any dubt that the information is incurrect, please visit the Fashcool Gallery in the folowing link. http://www.facebook.com/fashcool#/pages/Fashcool/8241702429?ref=ts

If the deletation due that I cant write about my work as cartoonist hope you can help me in doing so .

Ramzy taweel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramzytaweel (talkcontribs) 08:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Afflatus

I have nominated Afflatus, 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/Afflatus. 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. Claritas (talk) 17:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

This nomination is quite incredible. I suggest you withdraw it at once.  Giacomo  18:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


It's been a long time

It's been a long time since you turned your back on all the insults delivered to you - don't you think it's perhaps time to come back? - no need to forgive or forget (I certainly would not), but perhaps move on and do some writing - someone has to write some decent pages around the place, and I certainly see none from your attackers - so perhaps it's time for you to be the big man.  Giacomo  20:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thursday next, 29 July, will be the anniversary of the last time Geogre made a contribution to Misplaced Pages. Both you and your Norse alter-ego are very much missed. I just hope that you'll find the opportunity to let your fans and friends know you're ok, and allow us the possibility that one day you'll return. Best wishes --RexxS (talk) 23:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
It was claimed by 173.186.127.134 (talk · contribs) on the talk page of Ormulum that this user had died. Hopefully that's not the case, but if it is that would perhaps explain his absence. Bob talk 18:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
No, Geogre hasn't died. I was chatting with him just now, and asked him if he had, and he definitely told me "no". Bishonen | talk 19:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC).
(edit conflict, ... that itself is a chuckle, on this page) He appears to be very much alive, unless a ghost is doing the typing. I for one am happy to see one of my favorite editors returning, if but for a moment, as an anon. Giano, shall we dub this brief visitor the "Ka of Geogre"? Antandrus (talk) 19:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Mr Antradus, how dare you mock the dead? I can assure you, young man (I assume you are a man, no woman would ever be so insensitive) that being dead is not a life-style choice! In fact, we are a discriminated against majority: we do not even have the luxury of "Proud to be dead" marches causing mayhem with traffic, such as are enjoyed by other discriminated against groups. Geogre is most certainly not dead, or he would be one of our leading campaigners for equal rights and recognition. Sometimes, I wish he were dead, then I could enjoy some more stimulating company; dearest Noel and warbling Ivor bitching and fighting to be heard over the luncheon table with dear poor Edie and her infernal megaphone is not my idea of heaven! Get a life! Young man and stop insulting the likes of myself! Lady Catherine de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 19:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I too would very much like to see Geogre return to editing. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:08, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

A little late in the day to come here saying that - aweeping and awailing! You should have thought of that before the Arbcom drove him awf - with their stupid ill-conceived and ignorant sanctions playing to a dribbling and equally ignorant gallery or their peanutting supporters. Plus the fact, you have had months - a year to do something about it! Were I on that ridiculous Arbcom, things would be very different, of that you can be assured. Lady Catherine de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 20:53, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Ormulum's FAR

I have nominated Ormulum for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. GamerPro64 (talk) 21:55, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


Pity you're not here anymore

This whole section reminds me of you . Didn't you go on strike once years ago - in the happy days before the Arbcom decided they could dispense with your services and drove you off. Never mind, who needs dull boring old serious English literature, when one can read a comic.  Giacomo  08:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Just my opinion here -- I think Geogre is on strike, and that's exactly why we haven't heard from him. He just hasn't used the word. He kicked the dust off his shoes and left. That part that's desperately sad to me is that very few people seem to have noticed the departure of one of Misplaced Pages's finest-ever content contributors at all; indeed some of the worst non-contributors were likely happy to have him go. I suspect the same thing would happen on a larger, and more tragicomic scale, if content contributors did as you suggest.
There's a story by C.M. Kornbluth called "The Marching Morons" in which a small group of intelligent people do all the work on a future Earth, while serving the billions of imbeciles bred by unnatural selection. These people go on strike, only to discover that they've but made the problems worse; the only thing to do, they learn, is to get rid of all the morons. Antandrus (talk) 13:22, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I am normally in favour of the wikipedia model, but having just read the review process by which Geogre's work on A Tale of a Tub was demoted from FA status, I have some sympathy with critics of wikipedia and with the impatience of people who don't like to see excellent work being denied due recognition. The rules were enforced in a situation where they clearly need not have been enforced. Nobody wanted to suggest that Geogre didn't have massive command of the sources, but a lot of people wanted to bring him down for being an arrogant so-and-so, which to be fair he is; proof enough that it's one thing to know what you're talking about on wikipedia, but you'd better not annoy people because, unfortunately for the encyclopedia itself, if you want to be a star contributor it's at least as important to be well-liked as it is to know what you're talking about. This, of course, is merely my personal opinion. My opinion of the people who voted to demote the article from FA status for reasons that had nothing to do with its intrinsic quality but everything to do with politics and personal antipathy, and of the process that allowed their opinion to count for anything and not to be disregarded for what it so obviously was, is not fit to be expressed in public.
In the meantime, I am annoyed because I wanted to consult Geogre on a reference I found in an essay by Richard Porson, who inferred the authorship of A Tale of a Tub from a coincidence of numbers in both that book and Gulliver's Travels. But if he's not here, he can't confirm if he knew about it already.Lexo (talk) 23:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Slaveship.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Slaveship.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Misplaced Pages's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

The source is clearly stated as "British Library" within the image. I've added a template including that information to help the bots who can't read image text. It's a pity that WP:BEFORE doesn't seem to apply to images. *Sigh* --RexxS (talk) 16:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Slaveship.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Slaveship.JPG. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:11, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Restoration literature FAR

I have nominated Restoration literature for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Maddog.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Maddog.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think that it's a smart idea to place the notice on the page of a contributor who sadly has not edited for over a year. Despite the fact that the file actually had a description, I've added some extra information to try to keep the bot happy. --RexxS (talk) 01:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Most likely not. It is probably on the same level as placing notices on the talk page of editors who just happened to revert some vandalism on the image in question but otherwise has no clue as to the origin or circumstances of said image. --Saddhiyama (talk) 01:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Agreed, and please accept my apologies, as I wrote the snotty comments for the bot, before I realised you'd justifiably moved the bot notification from your page here. I admit I find these sort of bot notifications irksome, particularly as the apparent reason for the notice turned out to be inaccurate anyway. Still, a few minutes of googling found some extra information on the image, so it should keep the bot from causing you further nuisance. Thanks for your reversion of the vandalism anyway! --RexxS (talk) 02:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Hutchenson-witch.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Hutchenson-witch.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

cool myth

Check out Myrrha. Never even knew of it. What a deliciously wrong thing. And pushed forward by a new and young Wikipedian. Stop on by and edit. TCO (talk) 21:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Main Plot

According to you , the name of the plot means "the treason at Maine" . Could you please cite the source for this information? Tks. Yone Fernandes (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Red list

Category:Red list, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. œ 12:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Two years is a long time

to be without your contributions. Friday next will be another year gone by and so I guess we ought to report on the last twelve months. It's felt a bit like the Dutch boy trying to plug the holes in the dyke – not yet a disaster, but seems awfully close to one.

Anyway, Ormulum was saved, but at the cost of a vandal changing all the parenthetical references to harvard-style in a fait accompli – the upside was that we found Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), who worked so hard to answer all the carping and verified many sources.

Slaveship
Mad dog in a coffee house
Hutchenson-witch

The three image files above survived and had a few extra bits of info added to them to reduce the chances of being deleted. Main Plot had an extra sentence added to cover the possibility that it was so named to fit with the Bye Plot.

That's about it, as far as I'm aware. Ultimately, no measurable progress, but no obvious decay in your work, by and large. I just had a image of Dewey from the end of Silent Running flash through my mind. --RexxS (talk) 00:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-1.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-1.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 00:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-7.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-7.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:24, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-5.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-5.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-6.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-6.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-4.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-4.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:27, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Geogre-3.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Geogre-3.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 19:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Red-Man2.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Red-Man2.png. 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. Kelly 19:55, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Red-Man.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Red-Man.png. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Kelly 19:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:E-Montagu.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:E-Montagu.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 20:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Public licenseThis file is in the public domain because its copyright has expired in the United States and those countries with a copyright term of no more than the life of the author plus 100 years.

--RexxS (talk) 20:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Stephenblois.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Stephenblois.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 20:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

This image is in the public domain because under United States copyright law, originality of expression is necessary for copyright protection, and a mere photograph of an out-of-copyright two-dimensional work may not be protected under American copyright law. The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin (even in countries where mere labor is enough to make a reproduction eligible for protection).
This image is in the public domain in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see the template documentation for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image might not be in the public domain outside the United States. See Misplaced Pages:Public domain and Misplaced Pages:Copyrights for more details.

--RexxS (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Matilda-coin.gif

Thank you for uploading File:Matilda-coin.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 20:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:R-Steele.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:R-Steele.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 20:03, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

This image is in the public domain because under United States copyright law, originality of expression is necessary for copyright protection, and a mere photograph of an out-of-copyright two-dimensional work may not be protected under American copyright law. The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin (even in countries where mere labor is enough to make a reproduction eligible for protection).
This image is in the public domain in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1923 (see the template documentation for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image might not be in the public domain outside the United States. See Misplaced Pages:Public domain and Misplaced Pages:Copyrights for more details.

--RexxS (talk) 20:42, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Rupert-Salzburg.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Rupert-Salzburg.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 21:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Davanent.gif

Thank you for uploading File:Davanent.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 21:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:CharlesII.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:CharlesII.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 21:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:J-Dryden.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:J-Dryden.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 21:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Dorothea.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dorothea.gif, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 21:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Ichthus: January 2012


ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...


Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Misplaced Pages • It is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here

Douaihy

Hi George, you once deleted douaihy page. How I can give you consent from our site to let the article written — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.141.62.41 (talk) 02:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry but Geogre hasn't edited for over two years, so he may not notice your request. Misplaced Pages articles are only appropriate for subjects that meet our standards for notability, so I'd suggest you read the page Misplaced Pages:Notability. That should give you an idea of what sources need to be found to write an article that won't be deleted. Hope that helps, --RexxS (talk) 15:54, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Diagram of a slave ship.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Diagram of a slave ship.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 04:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Obvious public domain image. University of Virginia had source info. Antandrus (talk) 04:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
And fixed some more. All the best: Rich Farmbrough22:48, 26 May 2014 (UTC).

WP:Anglican navbox colour discussion

Hullo, fellow WikiProject-er. We're having a discussion about the colours of Anglicanism navboxes. Please do come along and weigh in. DBD 18:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know

You have been mentioned at Misplaced Pages:Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Claxton-tower.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:59, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Millenium Hall.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Millenium Hall.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 16:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

How on earth could this possibly be unfree? The photographer uploaded it, gave it a public domain license, and has since left the project. The subject of the photograph is itself a public domain book. Antandrus (talk) 17:59, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
It couldn't possibly be unfree, but it was one of many files nominated for deletion today by Stefan2. It is clear that he has mixed up the concept of a photograph of a 3D work of art such as a statue, with a photograph of 3D object such as a book or a painting, where the artwork is 2D and inegible to generate a fresh copyright. This is hardly surprising considering the rate he is working - he nominated this file in the same minute as his previous nomination and could not possibly be doing due diligence in checking his nominations. This isn't the first time this has happened and I'm now sorely tempted to take this issue to WP:AN and ask for a topic ban on his nominating files for deletion. What do you think, Antandrus? --RexxS (talk) 20:50, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
This is a photograph of a 3D object (a book), not a photograph of a 2D object (a page of a book). If the 3D parts of the picture are removed, then the picture can be kept, otherwise it has to be deleted. Also, Antandrus, you claimed that the picture was uploaded by the photographer and that the photographer gave it a public domain licence, but I can't see any evidence for your claim. It doesn't say who the photographer is, and no licence was provided. The copyright tag which the uploader provided states that the author died more than 100 years ago and that the file therefore is in the public domain in countries with a copyright term of 100 years or less, and that the file also is in the public domain in the United States for an unstated reason. However, the copyright tag is not a licence since it doesn't contain any permission from a copyright holder but only provides information about limitations in copyright law. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
The work of art is 2D, just as it is when we take a photograph of a portrait. Are you going to go around nominating all the images we have of portraits because they are 3D objects? You'll be suggesting next that the thickness of the paint on the painting makes it 3D. --RexxS (talk) 00:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
The work of art is 2D, but this is not just a photograph of a 2D work of art. It is a photograph of a 3D object (a book on a table) which happens to contain a 2D artwork. Since the picture includes 3D stuff, it's non-free. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
The solid realisation of any 2D art is bound to exist as part of a 3D object, but that in itself does not invalidate Bridgeman v Corel as we all know. In this case, the table and the paper are such an insignificant part of the final image that de minimis non curat lex is bound to apply. If you don't understand that, then please consult: Webbink, Mark; Johnny, Omar; Miller, Marc (2010). "Copyright in Open Source Software - Understanding the Boundaries". International Free and Open Source Software Law Review. 2. doi:10.5033/ifosslr.v2i1.30. We are trying on this project to support and expand free content; we don't need your uninformed rhetoric whose only effect is to needlessly impede or block the progress of open knowledge. --RexxS (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Precious

sonnets of knowledge with passion

Thank you for quality articles on literature and religion such as Restoration literature, Oroonoko ("Wrote it. Fought over it. Rewrote it from scratch") and Parody, for the insight of your essay User:Geogre/Editwar "anyone who thinks that they can win a struggle against the voices of oppression on Misplaced Pages is misdirecting his or her energies grossly, if not criminally", for your user page as a piece of inspiring literature including critical commentary, for "The idea is not to be competing, but rather looking for elements of trust." - missed - repeating from 12 July 2007 ("I'm sick of words: they are so lightly spoken"): you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Awesome
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:John Arbuthnot.gif

Notice

The file File:John Arbuthnot.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

It's worth noting that a higher resolution version of the file is available at https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Arbuthnot so presumably Britannica finds the image useful. In any case, if the image is required here in future, it can always be sourced from the Britannica article as any image of a portrait by an 18th century artist is clearly in the public domain under US law. --RexxS (talk) 02:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Couldn't we simply use it in the person's article? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:08, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: We could, but I don't think it would improve the article; it would be merely decorative. It was actually in use as the lead image from 2006 to 2008 when it was changed for the present colour image by this edit. As that has remained in place for eleven years, I think that there's a consensus that the present image is superior to this one which is being considered for deletion. In other words, there's no information that I can see in this image that the one in the article doesn't already convey in a more pleasing fashion. --RexxS (talk) 13:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
I didn't think of using it instead of the lead image, but in addition, showing him at a different angle, and age as it seems. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
It was the idea of adding it that I meant would be "merely decorative". Nevertheless, it might work if you think it brings something extra to the article. The original caption for that image was "John Arbuthnot by Sir Godfrey Kneller shows him at the height of his literary output." So you could use that perhaps further down the article. If you do add the image, then decline the prod as "now in use". Cheers --RexxS (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
done --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

note

interesting page. thanks for posting your essays here!! --Sm8900 (talk) 23:13, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Alcuin Club

Notice

The article Alcuin Club has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Without sources for nine years. I don't see real indication of notability here. BEFORE completed in Google Books and News (I have no access to British newspapers). Deprod if you can cite significant coverage, but be sure to actually cite it, or it'll go to AfD.

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 22:54, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diamond -- Geogre has been gone for a while. I removed the prod, as this is a significant organization. Needs some references to bring it to 2020 standards, as in 2005 we usually did not include footnotes, only a general links/sources/references section at the end. (Any watchers on this page still?) Antandrus (talk) 23:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
I know of a couple. --RexxS (talk) 00:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
... count me in --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:12, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Featured article review for Restoration Spectacular

I have nominated Restoration Spectacular for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Beland (talk) 00:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Featured Article Review for The Country Wife

I have nominated The Country Wife for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Beland (talk) 20:04, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Pruning poem for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pruning poem is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Pruning poem until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Elli (talk | contribs) 08:03, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Categories: