Misplaced Pages

User talk:Anachronist: 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 12:43, 29 December 2009 editWeisheitSuchen (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers2,632 edits →Usage of word 'controversy: related discussion← Previous edit Latest revision as of 19:35, 31 December 2024 edit undoPerfectodefecto (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,148 edits removed unnecessary contentTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit 
(1,000 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<!--{{wikibreak
<div class="usermessage">If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there; I have it on my watch list. If you initiate contact here, I will respond here, so make sure you put this page on your watch list. No email unless we have had prior communication. Thanks!</div>
| Anachronist
| message = I am on vacation with sporadic access. I will likely get back to checking in regularly in August 2024.
| image = Cassini Saturn Orbit Insertion.jpg
}}-->
<!--{{busy|Anachronist| on weekends and some weekdays|reason=real life}}-->

<div class="usermessage">Please use my talk page rather than emailing me.<p>
If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there. If you initiate contact here, I will respond here.</p><p>
Put new messages at the bottom. I will not notice them at the top.</p></div>


<div style="border: 1px solid darkgreen; background: lightblue; padding: 0.5em">Before contacting me: '''Please don't assume I am an administrator.''' I am just another editor who spends too much time engaging in Misplaced Pages housekeeping activities.</div>
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo = old(365d) |algo = old(180d)
|archive = User talk:Amatulic/Archives/%(year)d |archive = User talk:Anachronist/Archives/%(year)d
}} }}
{{Archivebox| {{Archivebox|search=yes|
], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]
],
],
],
]
}} }}
{| style="display: table; float: right; background: #ddffee; border: 3px outset"
! <u>Helpful Information</u>
|-
|
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*
*
|-
| ] talk pages w/4 tildes (~&#126;~~)
|-
| Questions: Ask ] or<br>
use <code>{&#123;helpme}}</code> on this page.
|-
|}


== Pibgorn (Webcomic) == ==@ Racial views of trump==
Sorry. Not sure how that happened. I meant to comment only not erase. ]<small>]</small> (UTC) 12:58, 2 August 2024 (UTC)


:That's OK. It happens to me too, about once every couple of months or so. Just today, in fact, when my finger involuntarily twitched as my mouse pointer passed over the rollback link on a diff. ~] <small>(])</small> 13:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
You have made some excellent changes to this article, much appreciated - specifically in the reference area. I noticed you deleted the external link to the "unofficial" tribute page (subsequently restored by another fan). Even though it's an unofficial page, named such only because it was not created by the artist, it's the only one there is... and full of information that I would normally have liked to see here on Misplaced Pages. It was actually created in order to preserve much of the info that didn't survive Wiki's content guidelines. Brooke knows it's there, and appreciates its presence... If you have Wiki concerns - perhaps we could call it something else - please let me know... I'm open to solutions. ] (]) 02:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


== Help with page ==
:We not only have content guidelines, but also ]. The concern is that it's a fansite, which disqualifies it from external linking on Misplaced Pages. ~] <small>(])</small> 21:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for your input in resolving issues on page ].
== ] ==
I hadn't logged-in for awhile, so missed your request on talk page for identifying secondary sources. Apologies about that. I have now provided examples of secondary sources on talk page, plus a new citation (secondary source) has been added to a Guardian review of the artist's film Concrete Forms of Resistance.
Other citations (eg 1, 2, 3, 4, 8...) are secondary sources, independent of the subject or venue, such as reviews in professional contemporary art journals and film magazine publications etc.
Hope this answers your question and addresses notability requirements. If you have time to check the page for any other issue, such as neutrality, that would be much appreciated. I feel these templates are somewhat undermining the page's content and I'm anxious for it to be improved and all Wiki guidelines met. Many thanks again for any help in resolving this. ] (]) 10:32, 19 August 2024 (UTC)


== Thank You ==
Same old story at ]. Sock puppets are back in full force, now that the semi-protect has expired. I've made another RFP for the page. Please help in undoing the sock puppets' mischief. Thanks. ] (]) 16:06, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


Thank You so much for your unconditional support towards me, and unblocking this account.
== Somalia ==
I am extremely obliged to you. —](]) 14:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)


== What if someone copies me.? ==
Hi Amatulić. You offered a third opinion at ] stating that three editors were involved, but I wasn't involved in the dispute, so only two editors were involved. I noticed the dispute, and like you, offered an opinion. Having looked at your views I wonder if you are missing the main point of the issue. Ultimately it is not about whether CE or AD, or neither, is correct, but about whether the change from one notation to another is in breach of policy. In my view it is. Maybe you could comment also. ] (]) 09:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
:Hi again Amatulić. Just passing by and wondering if you have any view on the matter mentioned above. No worries if you haven't. ] (]) 12:26, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::Hi, I've been away for a few days. I left a comment to the effect that ] concerns and that the article is about a non-Christian country constitutes sufficient "substantive reason" to change the to BCE/CE format, therefore I believe this isn't a policy violation. ~] <small>(])</small> 18:47, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Hi Amatulić. Thanks for your additional comments on this matter. ] (]) 10:15, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


Hi,
== Mediation ==
I just want to clear this doubt. I have only two accounts, one being unusable now. What if someone else starts copying me just to put me into troubles, and I am unaware of it. What should I do then.? —](]) 15:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)


:We have a rule: ]. That is what I did in your case to get you unblocked. the scenario you describe is unlikely to happen.
A ] has been filed with the ] that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at ], and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Misplaced Pages, please refer to ]. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, ] (]) 02:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:We have administrators with checkuser privileges, which include a number of technical tools to determine which accounts are operated by the same person. You were open and transparent about having two accounts, so there was no need to involve a checkuser admin. If you weren't transparent about it, someone would have opened a ] and a checkuser would have determined that both accounts are operated by the same person. ~] <small>(])</small> 15:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
::Got it. So, even I can start a ] investigation if I found them. right.? —](]) 05:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
:::Yes, anyone can start a sockpuppet investigation. ~] <small>(])</small> 00:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)


==Page protection==
:There isn't any mediation case existent that I can see. Looks like the page has been deleted. What happened? ~] <small>(])</small> 18:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


You should put semi-protection on ] page. Your full protection expired thus disruption from non-autoconfirmed accounts has resumed. Thanks. ] (]) 05:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
== SUL ==


:I wish Misplaced Pages had a feature in which full-protection reverts back to the previous state once it expires. Thanks. Administrator Favonian already restored indef semi on it. ~] <small>(])</small> 00:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
See question at CHU/SUL. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 01:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


==Happy Adminship Anniversary!==
== WP:OPP ==
<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->
{{ombox
| name = Happy Adminship
| image = ]
| imageright = ]
| style = border: 2px solid SlateBlue; background: repeating-linear-gradient(300deg, MistyRose, AntiqueWhite, Ivory, Honeydew, Azure, GhostWhite, MistyRose 50%);
| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;
| plainlinks = yes
| text = <big>'''Happy adminship anniversary!'''</big><br />Hi Anachronist! On behalf of the ], I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your . Enjoy this special day! ] (]) 07:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
}}


== A Barnstar for you ==
OK, sorry for the delay. What other projects are you on (with OP work). I take it you've dealt with dozens of open proxies, tor, and zombies; are familiar with nmap and testing OP use; and know commonly exploited ports. Not much else too it, I just want to be able to see some the contribs somewhere. ''']''' 08:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

:And I apologize for my own delay. I've been swamped with other things.
:I have dealt with open proxies, tor, and zombies in my efforts to protect my home network, and am familiar with nmap. However, I have not done any OP work on other Wiki projects.
:If my work and home life demands keep up the way they have been, I may have to withdraw from Wiki activities altogether for a while, so for now you can disregard my request. ~] <small>(])</small> 02:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

== 3RR ==

] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]{{#if:Alignment (Dungeons & Dragons)|&#32; according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the ]. If you continue, '''you may be ] from editing'''. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. If necessary, pursue ]. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> {{unsigned|Axlq|2009-02-07}}

:Thanks, I lost track of how many times I reverted. ~] <small>(])</small> 20:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

== Third opinion request ==

Thanks for responding. At the time I made the request, the disagreement was between me and another editor over one issue, but it soon became more complex. I appreciate your taking a look. ] (]) 11:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

== What a pity..!!!!! ==

Pophet Muhammad PBUH, himself during in his life time has forbidden His and others images. So, wikipedia at this juncture isn't offending a persons, pesonal rights? Can some one upload my image without my consent? then how come the artist who drew image of Prophet and wikipedia join hands in depicting prophet? what logic is this? I feel in my personal view, wikipedia in the name of Neutrality is trying to westernize Islam by particularly publishing the comments from some selected muslim users.
Read the link which you sent, regarding talk. people have decided to westernize Islam. Byt for ever that can never happen. - Wasifwasif.
I am not going do add you in my watchlist. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Have you read the Qu'ran? If you did, you would discover that the Qu'ran does not forbid ]. Nobody is "westernizing" Islam. And yes, if someone had a public domain picture of you, they can upload it without your consent. ~] <small>(])</small> 18:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I see your point, but Can you refer to any source that ALLOWS depiction of Muhammad. If not prohibited, It's definitely not encouraged in Islam. I know those guidelines are for those following Islam, but it's always good to respect all religion (and the views about their preachers). In past there have been severe oppositions at different scenes about depicting image of Muhammad. I think if someone want to have neutral views, those incidences will itself convince you removing the images from this page. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 12:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:You might find enlightening. It happens that figurative art like those images were produced by Muslims. They have historical significance, and they add encyclopedic value to the article (which is a biography about Muhammad, not an article on Islam). Encyclopedia articles should be encyclopedic. The depictions are respectful. Eliminating encyclopedic content simply because it offends someone is definitely ''not'' neutral.

:It is a personal choice to be offended. Misplaced Pages isn't responsible for personal choices people make on a subject. There is plenty of other content on Misplaced Pages (listed at ]) that others would find offensive. Such material exists in Misplaced Pages for the same reasons that the images of Muhammad exist. ~] <small>(])</small> 03:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

== BE ==

You wrote "In conclusion, much as I consider British English to be archaic and outdated" on the discussuion page for ].
Now, in contrast to all else you wrote there, this seems fairly unreasonable. Would you care to elaborate? ] (]) 16:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== IIPM nonsense ==

]. I'm not going to protect the page for a little while, so that other socks will may identify themselves. ] (]) 19:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

:Good plan! I hadn't thought of that. Thanks for your vigilance.
:You know, some of the sockpuppet changes to the article would actually be OK by me, if it wasn't being done in such a wholesale fashion with other changes that are inappropriate. The way they do it makes it hard to respond in any way but reversion, however. I'd like to see ''some'' discussion, maybe not down to each individual word and punctuation mark like over in ], but it's frustrating never to see any proposals on the talk page for additions or deletions. ~] <small>(])</small> 20:44, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

== Typos ==

Incorrect spellings are to me typos; but I take your point and will try to keep them to pages relating to Europe, where European (English) English would be most appropriate. {{unsigned|Englishman in Provence|2009-03-26}}

== Touch Less Mouse ==

(diff) (hist) . . m Mouse (computing)‎; 17:10 . . (-510) . . Amatulic (talk | contribs) (Undid good faith edit by MorbiusStevens (talk) - see WP:CRYSTAL. '''Write on it when it exists'''.)

I am currently writing software for the device, and have a pre-production model to enable me to do so. I am under the impression that others have received the units. I am ''using one right now'' as I type.
When I first received it, I plugged it in the USB port and a message pops up expressing "New Device Found", then a message popped up with"Phase Space Motion Mate",the computer then prompted me to insert the driver disk.
The thing ''works.'' That was about a month ago. I can not reveal the detail about the software I am developing,but the unit exists and is identical to the pictures. I've been telling anyone who will listen about this thing because I see it as something truely revelutionary, so much so, that I took the time to update the Wiki.
Why not send them a note and see if they'll send one to you? I think they send them out for reviews and development. At any rate I meant no harm.
] (]) 23:03, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

:Sounds impressive. Thanks for the response. I reverted your edit because I felt it violated the ] policy in that it seemed to describe something still under development that might turn out to be vaporware. Given what you wrote above, go ahead and restore your edit, taking care not to make it sound promotional, and include a good reference. ~] <small>(])</small> 20:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

== Proposed Deletion of Captûre Wines Article ==

''Discussion moved to ].'' ~] <small>(])</small> 16:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

== Winery Notability ==

''Discussion moved to ] for comments from the Wine Project.'' ~] <small>(])</small> 17:58, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

== Award for being swell ==


{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" {| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ] |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | ]
|rowspan="2" | |rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar''' |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Guidance Barnstar'''
|- |-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I salute you for doing the best you can :) ] (]) 21:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC) |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | You've been a great advisor—](]) 09:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
|} |}
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Tireless Contributor Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Keep up the good work and keep smiling ] (]) 21:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
|}

:Thank you. It's gratifying to be appreciated. ~] <small>(])</small> 22:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

== Moneyvidya article deletion ==

Dear Amatulić,
I got your messages on my talk page. I do have some concerns though. Let me go point by point-

1)"paste text from other web sites"
ADX-The link I provided as a reference (http://www.moneyvidya.com/blog/technical-essentials-directional-indicators-and-the-average-directional-index-adx/) was from Moneyvidya.com's blog which is the author of the article. I added the reference on behalf of Moneyvidya.com so I don't think there should be a copyright issue involved here. Further the article was added as it went beyond the analysis already existing on the wiki page and I thought it would contribute. There are numerous locations where the article is posted on behalf on moneyvidya. Should I add the article from an official moneyvidya id to make it relevant ? I was using my personal id.

2) External Links- I take your point for adding external links. Henceforth will post the links on talk page before adding directly. What prompted me to add the links was the presence of several blog sites in external links such as http://niftyrsi.blogspot.com/2009/03/nifty-rsi-calculation-in-excel.html on http://en.wikipedia.org/Relative_strength_index. The intention was again to contribute and not to gain page hits as I know these links are not crawled by Google or other search engines.

3) Moneyvidya page-This one is the most important. I felt that I wrote the page about moneyvidya.com in a completely neutral and informative way.http://www.moneyvidya.com is a genuine stock picking community providing the users a chance to make stock picks and help others by their experience and knowledge.The company is definitely verifiable. Do let me know how to go about registering the name on wikipedia. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 09:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:To answer your points:

:1) Per the official policy ], pasting text from other sites is prohibited without appropriate copyright releases on that site. The warning I put on your talk page should have been clear enough. Other instances of text pasted from other web sites, especially non-authoritative ones, should be deleted accordingly.

:2) Blogs and community sites are not considered reliable sources per the official policy ] and should not be used or quoted. The exception is when a blog or forum is an "official" site of the article subject, such as a blog owned by a person who is the subject of a biography article, or an official forum for a video game. Otherwise, community sites are discouraged per ]. Thanks for pointing out the blog link on ]. I have deleted it.

:3) Moneyvidya fails all the criteria for inclusion: ], ], and ]. Furthermore, you seem to have a conflict of interest; please read ].

:In conclusion, I doubt there is any way for a non-authoritative, non-notable community site to meet the requirements for inclusion as an article, let alone an external link. ~] <small>(])</small> 17:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

== Inappropriate external link (Bill Whittle) ==

You recently added a note to my talk page regarding adding spurious links to the article ]. I was in fact reverting the unexplained removal of apparently referenced comments. On reflection, the source is pretty poor, being a blog. However, is Bill Whittle himself some sort of authority on the atomic bombings? He's little better than a blogger himself. ] (]) 21:45, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


== Qing dynasty page protection ==
:I placed that note because, as far as I could tell, you originally added that link in . While blogs are not useful as references, it's appropriate to link to Bill Whittle's blog, since he's the subject of the article.


Could I get you to reverse your decision to lower the protection level of ]? The sockpuppeteer who made that protection necessary is is Phạm Văn Rạng, who is still very active (see ]). Their most recent sock, ], was blocked less than two weeks ago, and posted to the article's talk page, so it seems likely that they will continue disrupting the article if given the chance. Thanks. ] (]) 23:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
:The question of whether Bill Whittle is an authority is something that a Misplaced Pages article should'nt express a viewpoint. It is enough to say that his writings on the subject have attracted attention.


:Nevertheless, I am skeptical that Bill Whittle even deserves an article here. He's a blogger on a barely-notable media outlet (]) that will soon discontinue supporting blogs. The article doesn't quite pass ]. I wouldn't object if it were nominated for deletion. ~] <small>(])</small> 21:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC) :I'd like to wait. The request was made by user {{contrib|Minecraft6532|Minecraft6532}}, who as far as I can tell isn't a sockpuppet. I don't feel that the article should be brought back to ECP pre-emptively, I'd rather wait to restore ECP in the event disruption resumes. The article is on my watchlist. ~] <small>(])</small> 00:51, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
::I'm sorry to push further on this, but I don't see "because someone asked" as being sufficient justification for reducing the protection level, when that request was based on a factual error (the presumption that the sockpuppetry had stopped), and especially not when there's clear evidence that protection was still necessary very recently. I'm assuming you were unaware BakaMH980's posts to the talk page. I'm not asking you to preemptively protect a page out of nowhere here, I'm asking that you recognize that you made decision without being aware of all of the relevant facts, and to reverse that decision accordingly. ] (]) 21:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
:::While I did not know the history of this sockmaster, I observed that the sockpuppets were blocked, the edit filter log showed nothing since protection was applied, and new sockpuppets would still be prevented from editing by semiprotection, and ECP should not be permanent in most cases ("indefinite" doesn't mean "infinite"). Those are the relevant facts. Therefore I felt it was worth trying semiprotection. I'd appreciate if you refrain from presuming to know the mind of another administrator that led to this decision to reduce protection, and instead assume good faith that the decision wasn't made in ignorance.
:::If you look at my history of protection, you will see that I err on the high side compared to other administrators, usually applying more protection than others would think necessary. Indef ECP did not seem necessary here. I could have applied an end date, but I figured we might as well try indef semi instead.
:::You have the ability to restore ECP and I won't object if you do, although I point out, again, that we don't protect pages pre-emptively. ~] <small>(])</small> 23:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)


== Trickle-down economics addition ==
:: I previously re-added that after it's previous deletion (a few weeks ago?), and tried to NPOV what was previously a bunch of POV comments referencing both sources. :shrug: Bit of a storm in a teacup really. I also have the IP editor who apparently called for your opinion making odd accusations on its talk page. Such is wikipedia. I think nominating for deletion would fail since there is probably a current spike in interest about what he said - so someone who cares more can fight that battle. Thanks for your comments though. ] (]) 22:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


I found a Thomas Sowell quote on trickle-down economics and added it to the article for context. You deleted it saying: "this article is about the term, and doesn't refer to a 'theory'. All Sowell says is that no economist ever advanced such a theory." However, the article clearly discusses the theory, not just the term. Nevertheless, I reposted a link to the Sowell quote, focusing only on his specific criticism of the term. Yet you deleted that, as well, and protected the article from further edits. None of this seems justified. ] (]) 15:13, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
== Third Opinion wrong move? ==


:You've been reverted by multiple editors. Make your case on the page ]. The word "theory" occurs only in quotations. Not only is Sowell making a straw-man argument (arguing with the Pope, who isn't an economist), but you also violated ] by putting the passage in the wrong place, and using ] terms in it. None of that is acceptable. The article was protected due to disruption from multiple IP addresses, not just yours. Please follow ] as a best practice in the future. ~] <small>(])</small> 17:30, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for helping with my case. But you mentioned that Third Opinion is for disputes between 2 editors. Can you let me know I should have taken this, for next time? Thanks! --] (]) 22:20, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
::Okay, I get what you're saying. However, your point about the Pope is unfounded; while the Pope's use of the term was the entrée to the conversation, the main thrust of Sowell's criticism (and what I quoted from) was of the term itself. As for the rest, I'll certainly take note and do better next time. ] (]) 18:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
:::I think economists recognize the concept as a political policy position and no economist has ever advanced it as a "theory". There's room for expanding on this point in the body of the article, and briefly mentioning it in the lead section. You just went about it in the wrong way. I suggest you propose such a change on the article talk page so others can review and discuss it. ~] <small>(])</small> 18:16, 31 August 2024 (UTC)


== Custer ==
:The purpose of a 3rd opinion is to invite someone to cast a tie-breaking vote in a dispute between 2 editors. If the dispute is broader than that, you can use ] to invite others to provide viewpoints in hope of seeing a consensus emerge. Other than that, see ] for more information. ~] <small>(])</small> 22:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


Can you explain why you changed my update since the reference from Ambrose is unsupported by fact and is, in fact, his sole opinion? Best… ] (]) 01:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
== my response ==


:You replaced text and removed a citation, leaving it completely uncited, while failing to explain each of your edits in an edit summary. That's why. ~] <small>(])</small> 02:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Hi
::Fair enough: However; after. 50 years of research on this topic, I have never seen a comment, of value, that GAC was “inept” - whereas my edit can be verified as fact .
::Nonetheless, I’ve ordered the Ambrose book and we’ll see where his source is from and if it has merit. I suspect this conversation is not over so do be prepared... :) ] (]) 02:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
:::I have no opinion or dispute about the content. I reverted you for the reasons I explained. Rewrite it while citing a reliable source and use an edit summary, and you won't be reverted. ~] <small>(])</small> 06:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)


== Violence against women during partition ==
I answered at the


Hello, I saw you undid my edit. The estimates of the abducted vary, you can see the violence and estimate section that some authors state that more women were abducted in Pakistan and some others say more women were abducted in India. So it's wrong to say that the no. of women abducted in East Punjab was twice the number of women abducted in West Punjab. ] (]) 18:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:West_Herzegovina_Canton#Third_opinion
--] (]) 05:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


:I have no opinion on the content. My edit summary explains clearly why you were reverted. ~] <small>(])</small> 19:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
== ArbCom ==


== Nick Jordan artist page ==
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at ] and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
* ];
* ].


Hello @Anachronist - just following up again as a new citation (secondary source) has been added, linking to a Guardian review of the film Concrete Forms of Resistance on ]. I've also answered your question on the article's talk page, explaining that many of the other citations (eg 1, 2, 3, 4, 8...) are secondary sources, independent of the subject or venue, such as reviews in professional contemporary art journals and film magazine publications etc. I believe these are all reliable, independent sources and meet the Misplaced Pages: Golden Rule. Please let me know if you think this is not the case.
Thanks,<!-- Template:Arbcom notice --> <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
There are also no specific, editable COI issues flagged, so please could you or an editor re-review and remove the templates, as per the guidelines. That would be much appreciated. Many thanks again for your help in improving the page. ] (]) 13:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)


== Situation == == Brianna Wu ==


Why did you delete the conversations on Brianna Wu's talk page. It discussed something she herself said very publicly. How can that be a BLP violation? ] (]) 19:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Where do we go from here? I'm losing patience for the symbol controversy, as Aradic is stubborn and continues to babble on incomprehensibly stalling the development of the article. ] (]) 16:02, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


:I did no such thing. ~] <small>(])</small> 19:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
:Regarding ]: I suggest developing the article further regardless of the presence of the symbols in the infobox. I'd like to see the symbols appear in the section that describes them, but the article text is so short right now that the graphics may mess up the flow.
:I also suggest ] to get other people to comment and form a consensus. The problem is that other editors will have to rely on you and Aradic to interpret non-English sources. Both of you have provided sources but I can't assess them because I can't read them, and it is unlikely that other editors on the English Misplaced Pages would be able to read them either. ~] <small>(])</small> 16:18, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


== Help ==
::Like I said, I'm fine with a section that describes them, the article is a mess and Aradic's pictures are certainly not helping, one is even obstructing the lead section. As for the translation , Google translates the entire page good enough for you to get the gist of things. ] (]) 16:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


Hello!
Can you help us protect page "]" due to vandalism reiterated by IP users?
Thank you very much. ] (]) 04:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)


:He lied. The IPs he slandered were the ones updated the article and added results, which he doesn't. What he said is rather a content dispute. He refused to discuss anything, either in talk page or even in edit summary. I said "refer to ]" but he reverted without comments or any reason to justify his version which contained piping Wikilinks. ] (]) 04:17, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
@PRODUCER:
:I don't see any vandalism, and honestly I don't see any revert warring. Why are you failing to discuss anything on the article talk page? Instead you both bring your dispute to '''my''' talk page? That isn't where it belongs. It seems you are both willing to communicate with me. I suggest you communicate with each other on the article talk page. Bear in mind that if the article is protected, neither of you would be able to edit it. ~] <small>(])</small> 05:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
*Before accusing me (or anybody else) read this article: ]
::For only auto-confirmed users please. That IP address is a user former blocked. Thank you. ] (]) 16:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
*there are other methods of work on wikipedia. No just reverting.
:::That is not how it works in a content dispute. I can protect the page so you cannot edit it along with an IP address, or I can block you both for warring. Again, '''go to the article talk page''' (which you haven't bothered to do yet) and start discussing your dispute rather than shopping for an administrator. ~] <small>(])</small> 17:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
--] (]) 07:20, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


== Article Sufism and spam cross wiki ==
Another example of PRODUCER's vandalims:
Hello @Anachronist ! I saw that you reverted some unsourced addition on the article ]. In the french wikipédia, the same user X998 (probably the same user as the different IPs who wrote the same unsourced edit) added an unsourced edit and has done the same additions in the french wiki. We revoked these additions but i saw that here it's last one has not yet been revoked. Thant's why i tell that as you were patrolling well on this article. Regards ] (]) 19:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=West_Herzegovina_Canton&diff=297356617&oldid=297339582


--] (]) 15:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC) :I believe I found it, and I removed it. ~] <small>(])</small> 21:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)


== Does the world know? ==
:It looks to me like that change is more accurate, according to this statement in ]: "After the 1990s, most of these people, around two million, mostly located in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the region of Sandžak, declare as ethnic Bosniaks."
:Please review the official guideline ]. Both of you are making good-faith edits to this article. Both of you need to keep that in mind, and stop making groundless accusations of vandalism. ~] <small>(])</small> 17:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
::Yes, but it does not change the fact that they did not declare themselves like that in 1991.--] (]) 15:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


In ]. you say "and by now the entire world knows that it cannot be used that way" (i.e. as a publicity platform).
Aradic is at it again ] (]) 15:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


I don't think this is true. I don't get a sense that most of the people coming here to publicise themselves or the affairs think they're breaking any rules: the internet is for promoting yourself, and Misplaced Pages is not only part of the internet, but one of the most prominent parts. Naturally, they suppose that getting yourself on Misplaced Pages is an important step in selling yourself. (Of course, they also often fail to recognise that they are engaged in promotion at all).
HI !


We understand what Misplaced Pages is not, but I don't believe that most people do - even people who at one level value Misplaced Pages's neutrality have likely never thought about what it takes to maintain that neutrality.
Could you take a look again at the talk page?? Especially the section verdict. PRODUCER keeps reverting everything including the sourced and not disputable --section "holidays"--] (]) 15:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


I know that when I see attempts to promote via Misplaced Pages I often get annoyed and want to shout at them, but I get that out of my system before replying, because I'm convinced that in most cases they have no reason to realise thay're doing anything wrong. ] (]) 16:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
LoL he's back to returning the symbols, there's not point in reasoning with him. ] (]) 17:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


:I agree with most of that. I was trying to explain why newcomers intending to promote something can be greeted in a non-friendly way. I should have said that it's my own ''hypothesis'' that the regulars here feel that being new is no excuse for ignorance because Misplaced Pages has been around for so long and the purpose of Misplaced Pages is so widely known. It doesn't help that there are hundreds of ] spreading the message that promotion is what Misplaced Pages is for. ~] <small>(])</small> 17:21, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
== Arbitration request rejected ==


== Get together ==
Hello, Amatulic. A recent request for Arbitration which you were listed as a party for, "IPod Touch Criticisms Section", has been rejected by the Arbitration Committee. The reasoning for the arbitrator's refusal to hear the case may be viewed at the archived version at . If this is still an issue requiring resolution, you are encouraged to seek out other forms of ] such as ] or ]. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. For the Committee, ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 16:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


What could be better than beer or coffee with a fellow Silicon Valley old dude? I work in Mountain View and live in Los Altos, and can meet anywhere, but one of my favorite go-to places in the Computer History Museum, where I'm meeting an old friend this afternoon. They have a couple of new displays this month that include some of my stuff. ] (]) 21:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
== Nice work ==


:Cool. What do you have on display?
It was very ambitious taking on the drafting of a cohesive notability proposal for wine topics. You really took the lead on this and it is shaping up nicely. Great job. ]]/] 21:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
:I've always wondered if the Computer History Museum could use my old Amiga 1000, complete with external memory and hard drive. I learned C, C++, and real-time programming on that machine. Last time I fired it up 20 years ago, it still worked. It's finicky though, need to let it get warm before inserting the boot disk, probably due to something loose on the daughterboard. It's been in a storage room.
:I can't do this afternoon, but if you plan to be there again, I'm happy to join you for a beer! ~] <small>(])</small> 22:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
::I don't know if they have beer there (but they do across the street), and I didn't mean you should join me this afternoon, but yes, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday are possible, or next week Wed or Thurs (AM) when they open again. You can search their collection, e.g. . I can introduce you to a docent if one is around, and you can see if there's any interest in more of that. October specials are ; I have some of my things in both the "Mice" and "Ears" displays. ] (]) 22:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)


== Invitation to participate in a research ==
:Thanks for your assistance in improving it. I couldn't have done it all alone, and I wouldn't have even attempted it without having the text you originally wrote in ]. Please, make further improvements as you see fit; I am not sure what more I can add beyond clarifications based on talk page comments.


Hello,
:In particular I think the Tourism section needs some discussion. What I put in there for now is nothing more than a boilerplate reference to the general notability guideline. Looking at the three wine trail articles you identified on ], I don't feel comfortable retaining ''any'' of them. The German one has the most detail but it is completely unreferenced and might fail the criteria for inclusion as I currently wrote it. ~] <small>(])</small> 22:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
::I think some outside "non-wine" opinion would be helpful re: notability of tourist routes. Why don't we nominate the three for AfD and see what consensus emerges. ]]/] 22:39, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this ''''''.
== see also this ==


You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:West_Herzegovina_Canton#verdict


The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] .
--] (]) 15:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
== ] ==


Kind Regards,
I am posting here as I have seen you edit the discussion page for this article (I am also posting a similar message to that page). An IP editor has blanked sections from this article that contain cited observations. I reverted the edits under the impression that the IP was possibly vandalizing the article. After messaging the IP they have contunued their blanking, but are including edit summaries. This implies a certain amount of good faith, so I am loathe to revert without some outside opinion. If you could check on this situation and offer an opinion it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time ]] 19:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


]
:Deleting well-sourced material isn't what I'd call good faith. Those edits attempt to push a point of view. ~] <small>(])</small> 05:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
== re: your message ==
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins&oldid=27650221 -->


== Issue One reverts ==
Hi Amatulić, I've left a reply to your message on ] -- ]<small>.</small>]] 21:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)


Hi - I see that you've undone all my reverts to the editor who removed all mention of ] from the articles of its members on the basis that the source fails verification, but the source is Issue One's own website. Could you please let me know what your reasoning is here? ] (]) 23:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
== Wine cats ==


:I was unable to find any mention of the names on the cited web page. Only after I reverted most of your edits, I noticed a button that displays the names. I started reverting myself at that point, but family matters got in the way and I was unable to complete it. I hope to get back to correcting all of this later tonight.
We've got a bit of a minefield going on currently with wine cats (mostly centered on ]). The heart of the issue is the singular/plural overlap categories of ]/], ]/], ]/], etc. As the CfD folks like to point out, the distinction exist for broad overview cats (like ]) versus list cats for individual specific examples (like ] is for individual specific operas). The ] is getting caught up in this mess because it has the plural usage, which technically means it should be for individual specific wines (something that could be solved with a ]). You may want to take a look at the CfD and your thoughts would greatly appreciated over at ] where we are trying to hammer out some project wide consensus on how best to tackle our messy category structure. ]]/] 05:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
:I suspect that the difficulty of verification was why the editor you originally reverted was removing the statements also. ~] <small>(])</small> 00:10, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
::@] Thanks for self-reverting. You may be right about them having difficulties, but do note that they wrongly marked all their edits as minor, and gave the misleading edit summary "Cleaned up opening to bio" for a bunch of them, so I think they knew they weren't supposed to be removing them. ] (]) 00:36, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Yeah, that's why I blocked that account.
:::I'm cleaning up my mess now. ~] <small>(])</small> 00:38, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Done! That went much quicker than I expec ted, because I could just roll back each of my edits without manually typing an edit summary each time. I believe I got them all. ~] <small>(])</small> 00:50, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Oh, and about "cleaned up opening bio", that would have been correct if removing the statement about Issue One from the lead. And the statement doesn't belong in the lead, and would be correctly removed, if it isn't mentioned in the article body. I didn't check all of the cases, I just reverted every one of my edits. ~] <small>(])</small> 00:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
== "]" listed at ] ==
]
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 1#Haskell Harr}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 10:37, 1 November 2024 (UTC)


== Undelete "Kilo G" ==
:Eh. I wasn't aware of that conflict. All that brouhaha over a silly 's'. Oh well, I guess if there's a convention to follow, we may as well follow it. I say, create/rename the categories as needed and be done with it, no point arguing. ~] <small>(])</small> 05:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
::I wish it was that easy. The Wine Project has unwittingly stepped on some toes of the category crowd. Tomas started the simple housekeeping by removing places where the plural cats were applied incorrectly to articles. Obviously as he removed the inappropriate cats, some of the plural categories were emptied and summarily deleted. That ] of the category crowd which brought us to the AfD. Despite being shown repeatedly where they are having difficulties identifying what is the difference between wine regions/producers and quality level designations, one editor in particular seems to think he personally knows best how to categorize wine articles despite where several wine project members have disagreed with him. I have to admit, I am shocked at how much drama innocent housekeeping has started. ]]/] 05:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


Hello, I wrote an article about rapper Kilo G, but when I went to contribute it, I was notified that the page was locked because it was previously deleted and if I'd like to contribute it, I should reach out to the deleting administrator (you). The deletion log said it was deleted for being a copy/paste from another website, and my version is different. I'm new to editing wikipedia hope this is the right place ot make this request ! ] (]) 18:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
== Date autoformatting ==


:No administrator would undelete a copyright infringement. So my answer to your section heading is "no".
I have just seen at the talk page of Ohconfucius. You say, ''inter alia'':
:It's possible you meant "unprotect". My answer is still "no" because this was deleted multiple times, including ].
:The path forward is for you to create a draft and submit it for review. See ] for instructions. I do not see any draft about Kilo G in your contribution history.
:By submitting a draft for review, the reviewer can verify that your version doesn't have any of the problems of the prior versions, and that the concerns in the deletion discussion have been addressed. ~] <small>(])</small> 20:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
:Also, if you want, you can notify me before you submit the draft for review and I'm happy to look it over and give you feedback before a reviewer sees it. ~] <small>(])</small> 20:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks, your comment was very helpful, after reading it I learned about the draft process and also creating drafts of pages on my user subpage which I wasn't aware of. Would love to get your feedback as I do not write very often and have never written for wikipedia. Here's my draft - ]. Thanks again ! ] (]) 16:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I looked it over, made a few minor changes, and added a link to Google Books for the first cited source, which establishes ] criterion #2. Good work overall, but it needs a bit more work. I didn't look closely at all the cited sources, but I tagged two of them that failed to verify the claims in the sentences that cite them. ~] <small>(])</small> 17:54, 11 November 2024 (UTC)


== Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research ==
<blockquote>In fact, autoformatting is ''implied'' as desirable in ].</blockquote>


Hello,
I believe the styleguides do the very opposite. More importantly, the community has voted against the use of autoformatting, and in a huge (500+) turnout earlier this year, voted against the ''concept'' of autoformatting. There are several serious technical issues in using your autoformatting date tag, and there is no consensus to do so. I must ask that you desist from adding it to articles unless you can demonstrate such consensus. ] ] 08:41, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ].
:I recall this argument from some months ago. Answer: There is no consensus. I saw the discussion about it. There was no consensus, for or against. I must ask that you desist from removing it (if you are) from articles unless you can demonstrate such a consensus.
:Look again at ] and explain how autoformatting isn't desirable. As I said, the only mention about it implies that it's undesirable only in the case of linking. ~] <small>(])</small> 18:20, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


Take the survey ''''''.
:{{Tl|date}} does not auto-format, it merely formats, which means we may as well use the output format in the first place. Is ] what you are looking for? '']&nbsp;]'', 06:05, 3 December 2009 (UTC).


Kind Regards,
::You are correct, I misunderstood the function of {{T|date}}. As to your question, I don't understand why you made a copy of the ] article in your userspace. ~] <small>(])</small> 21:56, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
:::It has the dates in the format you were putting them into. '']&nbsp;]'', 02:42, 5 December 2009 (UTC).


]
== Stanley Meyer's water fuel cell‎ ==


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
My addition of the the categories on ] was the the result of undoing two edit by a novice editor ]. Take a look at the page, these categories are appropriate even if my edit summary for their readdition was lacking.--] (]) 04:59, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 -->
:Thanks, I completed it when you first notified me. ~] <small>(])</small> 00:41, 13 November 2024 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
== Relative Strength Index ==


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
I would prefer it if you did a better job researching things before you acted. Go to http://onlinetradingconcepts.com/TechnicalAnalysis/RelativeStrengthIndex.html and notice the graphs, there are 4 of them. Notice how they all look similar to the graph on the Relative Strength Index wikipedia page. It looks like it did come from that site, but you removed it because it says it has no citation. This site would help users of wikipedia who are looking for more in depth coverage of the relative strength index, and for the link to be removed disallows the users from finding more in depth research. The link should be reinstituted. Thanks. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 05:20, 16 December 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
:Sorry, I was looking at the wrong picture when I deleted the link. Regardless, there is no need to put that link in the article. The link doesn't really add anything to what the article already says, it doesn't distinguish itself from many other articles about RSI. Also the link is given credit in the graphic, so you are incorrect in saying that removal of the link "disallows" users from finding more information. ~] <small>(])</small> 06:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
I was wondering why the Cardwell Techniques with the RSI link was still left? The fact that it was left and the others deleted questions your intellectual consistency. The onlinetradingconcepts link has been on this page for years and hasn't had any problems except for you. I'm curious about the arbitrary logic you use and why just your opinion matters? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 22:12, 17 December 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


</div>
:Do you have a ] regarding that site?
</div>
:Have you read the Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, particularly ], ], and (considering your aspersion above), ]?
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 -->
:Onlinetradingconcepts is no different from any number of similar sites, and is ad-supported. There is no compelling reason for Misplaced Pages to single out that site for exposure to an external link. It doesn't matter how long it's been there; we can't keep track of all the spam that makes its way into articles. When it's noticed, it goes. Note that I am not the only editor reverting you.
:Cardwell Techniques is mis-placed in that article as an external link. The article devotes some paragraphs to it, therefore it should be a cited reference. ~] <small>(])</small> 05:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


== Celebrating a milestone with you! ==
== Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Somerset Spectator (2nd nomination) ==


{{notice|image=Eichbaum Kellerbier 2007 just beer.jpg|—](]) has given you a wiki free beer of your choice to wiki drink. This user advises you to not get too wiki-drunk or you could get a wiki-hangover.
You may want to look at ] since you participated in the previous AfD. - ] (]) 00:16, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


'''Cheers! My 10th article has been published.'''
== Indian Institute of Planning and Management ==


<small>''See ] for more info or give some one a free wiki beer with {{tls|freebeer}}''</small>}} —](]) 12:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
wikipedia is a knowledge bank/open encyclopedia and it has nothing to do whether something is good or bad. It looks like you are trying to emphasize your ideology on the reader with your recent edit/reverts on ]. There is already a section for Accreditation in the article and every information is provided as per Misplaced Pages standards. ] (]) 23:48, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


{{clear}}
:I have no ideology, and I have no idea what edit you are referring to. Also, see ]. ~] <small>(])</small> 23:53, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
== Greetings of the season ==
<div class="center" style="background:darkgreen;border:no;padding:0.2em 0em;{{round corners}}"><br />] <span style="color:white;">~ ~ ~ Greetings of the season ~ ~ ~</span>{{pb}}


''<span style="color:lightyellow;">'''Hello Anachronist:''' Enjoy the ''']'''&#32;and ''']''' if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Misplaced Pages. Cheers, <span style="color:OliveDrab;><small>Spread the love; use {{]:]}} to send this message.</small></span> {{pb}}{{highlight|--] (]) 11:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)|OliveDrab}}</span>''</div>
== Use of 'likely' ==


== Greetings! ==
I checked in my (British-English ) dictionary after you reverted. 'It will likely rain' is definitely poor grammar in British-English, but is more accepted in the U.S., although still considered colloquial. I compromised by changing 'will likely' to 'is likely to' rather than my original 'probable'. Hope that is OK. I have not challenged 'projected' vs 'expected' as that involves a more difficult question. Regards ] (]) 07:58, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


{{User:RexRowan/Xmas}} —](]) 01:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:Your edits look fine to me. I agree, "is likely to" is better than "will likely". ~] <small>(])</small> 17:58, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


== Maon Kurosaki ==
==Usage of word 'controversy==


Hello. I would like to inquire if it would be a good idea to try unprotection of Maon Kurosaki, especially that it's been almost two years since her death and I imagine whoever was disrupting the article may have lost interest by now. I brought this up on ] but you rejected it as premature. Now that the election has passed, I wonder if it may be an appropriate time to at least try unprotection, if not pending changes protection, without prejudice against re-protection if disruption continues. If you cannot unprotect yourself, would it be fine to ask a second opinion from a different sysop, or would it be a bad idea to request it now? I understand that you said to wait another year, but that seems too long a wait and I feel like sufficient time has passed anyway. ] (] · ]) 01:09, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Amatulic, I have to disagree with your contention that the word 'controversy' is neutral. Please see links , and . If you do reply, it'll be nice if you can on my talk page as I'm not watching yours. Thanks] ] 16:47, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


:I am not the protecting administrator. The last one who applied protection to ] was {{U|Courcelles}}, who protected it as an arbitration enforcement action because COVID-19 is a contentious topic, and still is, regardless of whether an election has passed.
:I have replied on ].
:Give the guideline you reference, I see your point that the word is not considered a neutral one. However, even if it has a connotation of 'scandal', the word is still being used correctly in the context of the guideline. Controversies existed, plain and simple. ~] <small>(])</small> 00:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC) :{{ping|Courcelles}} What do you think? There aren't any edit requests on the ], so it's possible the article doesn't have anyone's attention. ~] <small>(])</small> 02:05, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
::Courcelles hasn't been very active lately (they hadn't edited since April at the time of my RFUP request, and as of today haven't edited since the 12th), hence why I approached you instead. ] (] · ]) 02:08, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I'm going to leave the protection in place for now. The disruption about her death being "caused" by a COVID-19 vaccination lasted a whole six months before the article was protected, and the disruption looks like it didn't come from just one editor. While the election is over, the transition is not, and there are still plenty of vocal vaccine-denialists in full force, especially now that Trump seems intent on nominating one of their ranks to lead the health department. ~] <small>(])</small> 16:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)


== Happy New Year, Anachronist! ==
::We're having a related discussion on ] if you'd like to chime in there as well. ] (]) 12:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">
]]
{{Paragraph break}}
{{Center|{{resize|179%|''''']!'''''}}}}
'''Anachronist''',<br />Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable ], and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages.
<br />—](]) 19:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)<br /><br />
</div>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;''{{resize|88%|Send New Year cheer by adding {{tls|Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.}}''
{{clear}}<!-- From template:Happy New Year fireworks --> —](]) 19:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:35, 31 December 2024


Please use my talk page rather than emailing me.

If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there. If you initiate contact here, I will respond here.

Put new messages at the bottom. I will not notice them at the top.

Archiving icon
Archives

2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025


This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

@ Racial views of trump

Sorry. Not sure how that happened. I meant to comment only not erase. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 12:58, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

That's OK. It happens to me too, about once every couple of months or so. Just today, in fact, I rolled back someone's 10 good edits when my finger involuntarily twitched as my mouse pointer passed over the rollback link on a diff. ~Anachronist (talk) 13:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Help with page

Thanks for your input in resolving issues on page https://en.wikipedia.org/Nick_Jordan_(artist). I hadn't logged-in for awhile, so missed your request on talk page for identifying secondary sources. Apologies about that. I have now provided examples of secondary sources on talk page, plus a new citation (secondary source) has been added to a Guardian review of the artist's film Concrete Forms of Resistance. Other citations (eg 1, 2, 3, 4, 8...) are secondary sources, independent of the subject or venue, such as reviews in professional contemporary art journals and film magazine publications etc. Hope this answers your question and addresses notability requirements. If you have time to check the page for any other issue, such as neutrality, that would be much appreciated. I feel these templates are somewhat undermining the page's content and I'm anxious for it to be improved and all Wiki guidelines met. Many thanks again for any help in resolving this. Jorbert30 (talk) 10:32, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank You so much for your unconditional support towards me, and unblocking this account. I am extremely obliged to you. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 14:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

What if someone copies me.?

Hi, I just want to clear this doubt. I have only two accounts, one being unusable now. What if someone else starts copying me just to put me into troubles, and I am unaware of it. What should I do then.? —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 15:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

We have a rule: Assume good faith. That is what I did in your case to get you unblocked. the scenario you describe is unlikely to happen.
We have administrators with checkuser privileges, which include a number of technical tools to determine which accounts are operated by the same person. You were open and transparent about having two accounts, so there was no need to involve a checkuser admin. If you weren't transparent about it, someone would have opened a sockpuppet investigation and a checkuser would have determined that both accounts are operated by the same person. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Got it. So, even I can start a Sockpuppet investigation if I found them. right.? —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 05:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
Yes, anyone can start a sockpuppet investigation. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Page protection

You should put semi-protection on Mahatma Gandhi page. Your full protection expired thus disruption from non-autoconfirmed accounts has resumed. Thanks. Azuredivay (talk) 05:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I wish Misplaced Pages had a feature in which full-protection reverts back to the previous state once it expires. Thanks. Administrator Favonian already restored indef semi on it. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Misplaced Pages globe and sysop mopHappy adminship anniversary!
Hi Anachronist! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC) 		Party popper emoji

A Barnstar for you

The Guidance Barnstar
You've been a great advisor—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 09:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Qing dynasty page protection

Could I get you to reverse your decision to lower the protection level of Qing dynasty? The sockpuppeteer who made that protection necessary is is Phạm Văn Rạng, who is still very active (see SPI). Their most recent sock, BakaMH980, was blocked less than two weeks ago, and posted to the article's talk page, so it seems likely that they will continue disrupting the article if given the chance. Thanks. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to wait. The request was made by user Minecraft6532, who as far as I can tell isn't a sockpuppet. I don't feel that the article should be brought back to ECP pre-emptively, I'd rather wait to restore ECP in the event disruption resumes. The article is on my watchlist. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:51, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry to push further on this, but I don't see "because someone asked" as being sufficient justification for reducing the protection level, when that request was based on a factual error (the presumption that the sockpuppetry had stopped), and especially not when there's clear evidence that protection was still necessary very recently. I'm assuming you were unaware BakaMH980's posts to the talk page. I'm not asking you to preemptively protect a page out of nowhere here, I'm asking that you recognize that you made decision without being aware of all of the relevant facts, and to reverse that decision accordingly. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
While I did not know the history of this sockmaster, I observed that the sockpuppets were blocked, the edit filter log showed nothing since protection was applied, and new sockpuppets would still be prevented from editing by semiprotection, and ECP should not be permanent in most cases ("indefinite" doesn't mean "infinite"). Those are the relevant facts. Therefore I felt it was worth trying semiprotection. I'd appreciate if you refrain from presuming to know the mind of another administrator that led to this decision to reduce protection, and instead assume good faith that the decision wasn't made in ignorance.
If you look at my history of protection, you will see that I err on the high side compared to other administrators, usually applying more protection than others would think necessary. Indef ECP did not seem necessary here. I could have applied an end date, but I figured we might as well try indef semi instead.
You have the ability to restore ECP and I won't object if you do, although I point out, again, that we don't protect pages pre-emptively. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Trickle-down economics addition

I found a Thomas Sowell quote on trickle-down economics and added it to the article for context. You deleted it saying: "this article is about the term, and doesn't refer to a 'theory'. All Sowell says is that no economist ever advanced such a theory." However, the article clearly discusses the theory, not just the term. Nevertheless, I reposted a link to the Sowell quote, focusing only on his specific criticism of the term. Yet you deleted that, as well, and protected the article from further edits. None of this seems justified. RCJournal902 (talk) 15:13, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

You've been reverted by multiple editors. Make your case on the page Talk:Trickle-down economics. The word "theory" occurs only in quotations. Not only is Sowell making a straw-man argument (arguing with the Pope, who isn't an economist), but you also violated WP:LEAD by putting the passage in the wrong place, and using WP:PEACOCK terms in it. None of that is acceptable. The article was protected due to disruption from multiple IP addresses, not just yours. Please follow WP:BRD as a best practice in the future. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I get what you're saying. However, your point about the Pope is unfounded; while the Pope's use of the term was the entrée to the conversation, the main thrust of Sowell's criticism (and what I quoted from) was of the term itself. As for the rest, I'll certainly take note and do better next time. RCJournal902 (talk) 18:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
I think economists recognize the concept as a political policy position and no economist has ever advanced it as a "theory". There's room for expanding on this point in the body of the article, and briefly mentioning it in the lead section. You just went about it in the wrong way. I suggest you propose such a change on the article talk page so others can review and discuss it. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:16, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Custer

Can you explain why you changed my update since the reference from Ambrose is unsupported by fact and is, in fact, his sole opinion? Best… 96.230.248.215 (talk) 01:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

You replaced text and removed a citation, leaving it completely uncited, while failing to explain each of your edits in an edit summary. That's why. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Fair enough: However; after. 50 years of research on this topic, I have never seen a comment, of value, that GAC was “inept” - whereas my edit can be verified as fact .
Nonetheless, I’ve ordered the Ambrose book and we’ll see where his source is from and if it has merit. I suspect this conversation is not over so do be prepared...  :) 96.230.248.215 (talk) 02:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
I have no opinion or dispute about the content. I reverted you for the reasons I explained. Rewrite it while citing a reliable source and use an edit summary, and you won't be reverted. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Violence against women during partition

Hello, I saw you undid my edit. The estimates of the abducted vary, you can see the violence and estimate section that some authors state that more women were abducted in Pakistan and some others say more women were abducted in India. So it's wrong to say that the no. of women abducted in East Punjab was twice the number of women abducted in West Punjab. Lalitadityaaa (talk) 18:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

I have no opinion on the content. My edit summary explains clearly why you were reverted. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Nick Jordan artist page

Hello @Anachronist - just following up again as a new citation (secondary source) has been added, linking to a Guardian review of the film Concrete Forms of Resistance on Nick Jordan (artist). I've also answered your question on the article's talk page, explaining that many of the other citations (eg 1, 2, 3, 4, 8...) are secondary sources, independent of the subject or venue, such as reviews in professional contemporary art journals and film magazine publications etc. I believe these are all reliable, independent sources and meet the Misplaced Pages: Golden Rule. Please let me know if you think this is not the case. There are also no specific, editable COI issues flagged, so please could you or an editor re-review and remove the templates, as per the guidelines. That would be much appreciated. Many thanks again for your help in improving the page. Jorbert30 (talk) 13:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Brianna Wu

Why did you delete the conversations on Brianna Wu's talk page. It discussed something she herself said very publicly. How can that be a BLP violation? 170.40.162.171 (talk) 19:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I did no such thing. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Help

Hello! Can you help us protect page "2024 FIFA U-20 Women's World Cup" due to vandalism reiterated by IP users? Thank you very much. Rey1996ss (talk) 04:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

He lied. The IPs he slandered were the ones updated the article and added results, which he doesn't. What he said is rather a content dispute. He refused to discuss anything, either in talk page or even in edit summary. I said "refer to 2006 FIFA World Cup" but he reverted without comments or any reason to justify his version which contained piping Wikilinks. 49.157.47.46 (talk) 04:17, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
I don't see any vandalism, and honestly I don't see any revert warring. Why are you failing to discuss anything on the article talk page? Instead you both bring your dispute to my talk page? That isn't where it belongs. It seems you are both willing to communicate with me. I suggest you communicate with each other on the article talk page. Bear in mind that if the article is protected, neither of you would be able to edit it. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
For only auto-confirmed users please. That IP address is a user former blocked. Thank you. Rey1996ss (talk) 16:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
That is not how it works in a content dispute. I can protect the page so you cannot edit it along with an IP address, or I can block you both for warring. Again, go to the article talk page (which you haven't bothered to do yet) and start discussing your dispute rather than shopping for an administrator. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Article Sufism and spam cross wiki

Hello @Anachronist ! I saw that you reverted some unsourced addition on the article Sufism. In the french wikipédia, the same user X998 (probably the same user as the different IPs who wrote the same unsourced edit) added an unsourced edit and has done the same additions in the french wiki. We revoked these additions but i saw that here it's last one has not yet been revoked. Thant's why i tell that as you were patrolling well on this article. Regards GF38storic (talk) 19:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I believe I found it, and I removed it. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Does the world know?

In WP:HD#Are the reviewers in general just not civil and welcoming?. you say "and by now the entire world knows that it cannot be used that way" (i.e. as a publicity platform).

I don't think this is true. I don't get a sense that most of the people coming here to publicise themselves or the affairs think they're breaking any rules: the internet is for promoting yourself, and Misplaced Pages is not only part of the internet, but one of the most prominent parts. Naturally, they suppose that getting yourself on Misplaced Pages is an important step in selling yourself. (Of course, they also often fail to recognise that they are engaged in promotion at all).

We understand what Misplaced Pages is not, but I don't believe that most people do - even people who at one level value Misplaced Pages's neutrality have likely never thought about what it takes to maintain that neutrality.

I know that when I see attempts to promote via Misplaced Pages I often get annoyed and want to shout at them, but I get that out of my system before replying, because I'm convinced that in most cases they have no reason to realise thay're doing anything wrong. ColinFine (talk) 16:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree with most of that. I was trying to explain why newcomers intending to promote something can be greeted in a non-friendly way. I should have said that it's my own hypothesis that the regulars here feel that being new is no excuse for ignorance because Misplaced Pages has been around for so long and the purpose of Misplaced Pages is so widely known. It doesn't help that there are hundreds of scammers spreading the message that promotion is what Misplaced Pages is for. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:21, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Get together

What could be better than beer or coffee with a fellow Silicon Valley old dude? I work in Mountain View and live in Los Altos, and can meet anywhere, but one of my favorite go-to places in the Computer History Museum, where I'm meeting an old friend this afternoon. They have a couple of new displays this month that include some of my stuff. Dicklyon (talk) 21:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Cool. What do you have on display?
I've always wondered if the Computer History Museum could use my old Amiga 1000, complete with external memory and hard drive. I learned C, C++, and real-time programming on that machine. Last time I fired it up 20 years ago, it still worked. It's finicky though, need to let it get warm before inserting the boot disk, probably due to something loose on the daughterboard. It's been in a storage room.
I can't do this afternoon, but if you plan to be there again, I'm happy to join you for a beer! ~Anachronist (talk) 22:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
I don't know if they have beer there (but they do across the street), and I didn't mean you should join me this afternoon, but yes, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday are possible, or next week Wed or Thurs (AM) when they open again. You can search their collection, e.g. for Amiga 1000. I can introduce you to a docent if one is around, and you can see if there's any interest in more of that. October specials are described here; I have some of my things in both the "Mice" and "Ears" displays. Dicklyon (talk) 22:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Issue One reverts

Hi - I see that you've undone all my reverts to the editor who removed all mention of Issue One from the articles of its members on the basis that the source fails verification, but the source is Issue One's own website. Could you please let me know what your reasoning is here? Theknightwho (talk) 23:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I was unable to find any mention of the names on the cited web page. Only after I reverted most of your edits, I noticed a button that displays the names. I started reverting myself at that point, but family matters got in the way and I was unable to complete it. I hope to get back to correcting all of this later tonight.
I suspect that the difficulty of verification was why the editor you originally reverted was removing the statements also. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:10, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
@Anachronist Thanks for self-reverting. You may be right about them having difficulties, but do note that they wrongly marked all their edits as minor, and gave the misleading edit summary "Cleaned up opening to bio" for a bunch of them, so I think they knew they weren't supposed to be removing them. Theknightwho (talk) 00:36, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, that's why I blocked that account.
I'm cleaning up my mess now. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:38, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Done! That went much quicker than I expec ted, because I could just roll back each of my edits without manually typing an edit summary each time. I believe I got them all. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:50, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Oh, and about "cleaned up opening bio", that would have been correct if removing the statement about Issue One from the lead. And the statement doesn't belong in the lead, and would be correctly removed, if it isn't mentioned in the article body. I didn't check all of the cases, I just reverted every one of my edits. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

"Haskell Harr" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Haskell Harr has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 1 § Haskell Harr until a consensus is reached. Why? I Ask (talk) 10:37, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Undelete "Kilo G"

Hello, I wrote an article about rapper Kilo G, but when I went to contribute it, I was notified that the page was locked because it was previously deleted and if I'd like to contribute it, I should reach out to the deleting administrator (you). The deletion log said it was deleted for being a copy/paste from another website, and my version is different. I'm new to editing wikipedia hope this is the right place ot make this request ! Ts4ts4ever (talk) 18:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

No administrator would undelete a copyright infringement. So my answer to your section heading is "no".
It's possible you meant "unprotect". My answer is still "no" because this was deleted multiple times, including Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Kilo G.
The path forward is for you to create a draft and submit it for review. See Misplaced Pages:Articles for creation for instructions. I do not see any draft about Kilo G in your contribution history.
By submitting a draft for review, the reviewer can verify that your version doesn't have any of the problems of the prior versions, and that the concerns in the deletion discussion have been addressed. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Also, if you want, you can notify me before you submit the draft for review and I'm happy to look it over and give you feedback before a reviewer sees it. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, your comment was very helpful, after reading it I learned about the draft process and also creating drafts of pages on my user subpage which I wasn't aware of. Would love to get your feedback as I do not write very often and have never written for wikipedia. Here's my draft - User:Ts4ts4ever/kilog. Thanks again ! Ts4ts4ever (talk) 16:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
I looked it over, made a few minor changes, and added a link to Google Books for the first cited source, which establishes WP:MUSICBIO criterion #2. Good work overall, but it needs a bit more work. I didn't look closely at all the cited sources, but I tagged two of them that failed to verify the claims in the sentences that cite them. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:54, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I completed it when you first notified me. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:41, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Celebrating a milestone with you!

—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) has given you a wiki free beer of your choice to wiki drink. This user advises you to not get too wiki-drunk or you could get a wiki-hangover.

Cheers! My 10th article has been published.

See Misplaced Pages:Free beer for more info or give some one a free wiki beer with {{subst:freebeer}}

—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 12:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Greetings of the season


A Merry Christmas. (Sled with holly)
~ ~ ~ Greetings of the season ~ ~ ~ Hello Anachronist: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Misplaced Pages. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas3}} to send this message. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 11:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Greetings!


Merry Christmas!



—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 01:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Maon Kurosaki

Hello. I would like to inquire if it would be a good idea to try unprotection of Maon Kurosaki, especially that it's been almost two years since her death and I imagine whoever was disrupting the article may have lost interest by now. I brought this up on WP:RFUP but you rejected it as premature. Now that the election has passed, I wonder if it may be an appropriate time to at least try unprotection, if not pending changes protection, without prejudice against re-protection if disruption continues. If you cannot unprotect yourself, would it be fine to ask a second opinion from a different sysop, or would it be a bad idea to request it now? I understand that you said to wait another year, but that seems too long a wait and I feel like sufficient time has passed anyway. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:09, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

I am not the protecting administrator. The last one who applied protection to Maon Kurosaki was Courcelles, who protected it as an arbitration enforcement action because COVID-19 is a contentious topic, and still is, regardless of whether an election has passed.
@Courcelles: What do you think? There aren't any edit requests on the Talk:Maon Kurosaki, so it's possible the article doesn't have anyone's attention. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:05, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Courcelles hasn't been very active lately (they hadn't edited since April at the time of my RFUP request, and as of today haven't edited since the 12th), hence why I approached you instead. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:08, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm going to leave the protection in place for now. The disruption about her death being "caused" by a COVID-19 vaccination lasted a whole six months before the article was protected, and the disruption looks like it didn't come from just one editor. While the election is over, the transition is not, and there are still plenty of vocal vaccine-denialists in full force, especially now that Trump seems intent on nominating one of their ranks to lead the health department. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Anachronist!

Happy New Year!

Anachronist,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages.
—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 19:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

—𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 19:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)