Misplaced Pages

User talk:TFOWR: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] 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 09:37, 15 October 2010 editTFOWR (talk | contribs)27,123 edits →Adding a BISE template: Owning up to lack of clue...!← Previous edit Latest revision as of 03:10, 24 September 2024 edit undoCFA (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers44,864 editsm Reverted 1 edit by Floppy disks are cool (talk) to last revision by AirshipJungleman29Tags: Twinkle Undo 
(574 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{not around|1 = is presumably retired|3=November 5, 2010}}
{{User:TFOWR/Talkheader}} {{User:TFOWR/Talkheader}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 200K |maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 10 |counter = 11
|minthreadsleft = 20
|algo = old(3d) |algo = old(3d)
|archive = User talk:TFOWR/Archive %(counter)d |archive = User talk:TFOWR/Archive %(counter)d
}}
| minthreadsleft = 10
{{void|User:SuggestBot/config
|frequency = twice a month
}}{{clear right}} }}{{clear right}}
{{Signpost-subscription|right|width=19em}} {{Signpost-subscription|right|width=19em}}


== Dude ==
== Indonesia vandal again... ==


Hi TFOWR - "sporadically"..? - its nearly a year dude....I was reminded of you tonight and I am sending you good vibes, best wishes - ] (]) 19:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Yesterday, the Indonesia misinformation vandal silently did it again. He used another "proxy": {{ipvandal|12.50.249.160}}. He vandalized two articles that day, but I might inspect the programs he tried to add to the said two articles as he may have vandalized them too. - ] | <small>] | ]</small> 13:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
:I've semi-protected both articles for a month. Let me know if you find any other "targets". I've not blocked the IP, but if there's evidence that they're continuing to use that IP I will block it. ] 13:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
::I've investigated that he tried to add ] and ] into the Televisa and TV Azteca lists and it's pretty obvious the guy ain't Mexican. Wheel of Fortune has a Mexican version, but not on the two channels I mentioned and it's impossible Jeopardy would have a version there as well. The articles for the two shows are untouched, but it seems this guy is sure pretty desperate. Just stating my opinions since action has been done somewhat. - ] | <small>] | ]</small> 13:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
:::I suppose as we lock down more and more articles the desperation will worsen. It'll be interesting to see what happens when the first batch of one-month semi ends... I suspect I'll need to re-protect. Hopefully sooner or later the message will sink in and "our friend" will go off and find another "game" :-) ] 14:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
::::Well, he's doing it again. The address now: a New York based address {{ipvandal|155.212.21.5}}. - ] | <small>] | ]</small> 14:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
:::::IP blocked, pages protected. For what it's worth, the attacks do seem to be slowing down - I suspect the change from Indonesian IPs to international proxies have caused our friend problems. ] 14:54, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


:Yeh, I miss him too! {{=)|sad}} - ] ]<sup>]</sup> 12:15, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
== Feedback ==


== Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity ==
Hiya,


]
I know you help out on the helpdesk (great stuff), and wondered if, perhaps, you can also help some users on ]? It is quite similar; mostly newly-created articles looking for some basic info on how to improve the article. If you have a quick look over recent feedback given, you'll get the idea; anyway - it was just a thought; if you ever can help out there, please do, because it quite often gets backlogged. Cheers! <small><span style="border:1px solid;background:#00008B">]]</span></small> 05:06, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Following a ] in June 2011, consensus was reached to ] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return&nbsp;if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the ] and the userright will be restored per the ] (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->
:...just had a quick look, it's not somewhere I've been before. It looks like new-page patrol, but with more interaction? Aye, I'll give it a whirl! I'll wait until my caffeine levels have reached a sensible point... ] 09:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
::Oh, and now that my coffee-levels have approached normal levels - where did my ] post get to, eh? Eh?! I waited in all day, so I could retort with ("Birthday boy Clark Walker can't wait to be ten on 10/10/10"). Very shoddy, Chzz, very shoddy! I expect better news delivery come 11/11/11 ;-) ] 12:46, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


<small>Delivered by ] on behalf of ] (]) at 12:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC).</small>
== BISE ==
<!-- Delivery approved by ]. -->


==Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity==
Just seen your instructions for new sections at BISE but haven't yet added templates to the articles. Will do so later unless anyone beats me to it. BTW, a couple of other points; Sanctions on civility imposed on Triton and LevenBoy, so what tone of writing can I use that they can't? Also I see I was blocked. It doesn't matter now, but the reasons given were outrageous. I was merely expressing an opinion. I wasn't being uncivil. There seems to be a group of admins who have nothing better to do than search out block targets. Shame on them (and I don't include you). ] ] 16:53, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
]
:] and ] apply to all editors, but it's safe to say that extra scrutiny will be applied to LevenBoy (and Triton Rocker when their block ends). Additionally, there are guidelines like ] which editors are ''expected'' to follow, but which LevenBoy and Triton Rocker ''must'' follow.
Following a ] in June 2011, consensus was reached to ] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return&nbsp;if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated&nbsp;should this occur, please post to the ] and the userright will be restored per the ] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->–]] 14:03, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
:Regarding your block, you'd need to take it up with the blocking admin, or raise it at ] - though the latter option obviously will draw additional scrutiny.
:Incidentally, the two issues you've raised at ], I've left a note about references - it'll be far easier to make the case for your proposed changes if you can demonstrate that there's a valid case for British Isles. ] 16:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
::I think all statements I've referred to are currently unreferenced anyway, but we can interpret the usage is various ways without a reference in some cases. Reference hunting is a debilitating sport and honestly, it's not needed. ] ] 17:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
:::Well, it's up to you but I'd have thought it's easier to change from the status quote if you make a good case to do so. ] 17:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


== Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity ==
===Polls===
It is here. You state, "A snow close, with everyone agreeing with the bleeding obvious. TFOWR 17:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)"
The bottomline is, everyone did not get to agree. You agreed for them. You shut the poll after a few hours. Looking at the first poll, we have no idea what they might say until they do, and a few surprised arose in that. Individuals appreciated having the poll.
My reading of WP:SNOW is "If an issue does not have a snowball's chance in hell of being accepted by a certain process, there's no need to run it through the entire process."
In this case, the complete opposite was more likely to be true. There would/should/could have been an easy unanimous agreement. A clear consensus. But we dont know now until we run it.
I am logging off for today at this point. If you would like to re-establish good faith, just allow the polls to run without disruption wherever on the BISE pages you feel they they belong but get fair attention. Thank you. --] (]) 18:11, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


]
== Wikibreak ==
Following a ] in June 2011, consensus was reached to ] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated , please post to the ] and the userright will be restored per the ] (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin --> –]] 15:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


== 14 September 2010 ==
Just wanted you to know that I'll be gone indefinitely. Thanks for the help. ] (]) 09:05, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
:No worries, and thanks for the heads-up. Email me if you need anything - and all the best! ] 09:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


Re: "Unprotected Template:CompactTOC8: Unprotection, Consensus at ANI appears to be that original protection level should be restored." &ndash; Thanks, and good work. The level of hysterical paranoia at ] is getting to be a bit much. About 1000 other templates should be unprotected, so non-admin template coders like me can continue being productive without having to wait 2.5 weeks average for editprotected requests to be addressed. — <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">''']''' &nbsp; <span style="white-space:nowrap;">]〈°⌊°〉</span> <small>].</small></span> 13:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
== Cowbells! ==


== User talk:75.57.241.57 ==
Made me laugh - thanks for the link! ] ] 10:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
:No worries! It's the first thing I think of whenever someone says "more..." And that article has ''everything'' - Saturday Night Live, Christopher Walken, Rawk music...! ] 10:04, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


There are a number of orphan pages in the ] (See
== BISE civility ==
) As you seem to have been involved in editing them
to help in the completion of a specific project, I suggest that it would be appropriate to move them into your user space. -- ] (]) 15:39, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


==Notice of change==
As much as I appreciate the reasons behind the recent..."accusation"... by RA of somebody being a SPA, I reckon such talk should be kept to a minimum. If they aren't, it's slightly rude at best. If they are, such accusations would probably just bring more trolling and clutter to the discussion anyway. If an editor really feels this, they could probably bring it up at noticeboard-I-haven't-memorized-yet. Of course, I'm not in any way suggesting RA was doing something in bad faith and this is not a criticism on their actions at all. ] (]) 10:47, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a to the ] that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the ]. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through ]. Thank you. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
:I'd agree. I haven't seen RA's comment yet, I'll find it and raise it with RA as needed. Thanks. ] 10:49, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
::Found it, and {{diff2|390478768|done}}. RA doesn't post at BISE that often, and I doubt they associated their comment (which would be normal for, say, an AFD) with the issues we're trying to avoid at BISE. ] 11:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Fmph's comment was also offbase, and I feel slightly more derogatory. I also think it's wrong, as the page is meant to discuss all these issues, but that may be besides the point. ] (]) 12:31, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
:If you think I'm offbase, why not tell me? I certainly don't think we should be filling up the ] with '''every''' usage of (Great?) Britain and Ireland and asking if it needs to be changed, especially without references to indicate that it should! ] (]) 12:54, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
::Sorry Fmph, I was just continuing the previous conversation, didn't think of it. ] (]) 13:20, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
:I didn't think the comment was that bad, but Fmph, while you're here, do avoid general, non-specific comments. In this case I'd already raised the issue of references with Lemon Monday, both at BISE and ]. Specific examples can be raised at BISE for any reason, though obviously making a decent case for a change is going to be more effective. If participants don't feel an adequate case has been made for a change they can simply note that and move on: my preference (the lazy option) will be for the status quo unless a decent case is made for change. ] 13:44, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
:::Sure. I wasn't really pissed with Chipmunkdavis. Just passin' by here and kicked up some dust on the way. Sorry. ] (]) 14:05, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


== Merry Christmas ==
{{Talkback|Rannpháirtí anaithnid}}


<div class="center">
x2 --RA (]) 16:10, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
]
]
]
<!-- ] -->
<br><br><br>
'''<big><big>Merry Christmas<br><br>and<br><br>A Happy New Year to All</big></big>'''
<br><br> ]


== BISE Conkers summary comment ==


<sub>I am {{purple|'''220 of Borg'''}}. I partake in this human seasonal celebratory event in order to more successfully infiltrate the Misplaced Pages collective, facilitating the addition of it's technological distinctiveness to our own. '''''Resistance is futile!'''.'' Oh, and Merry Christmas.</sub></div>
I was surprised. But you said ''Far too much wikilawyering on both sides. It's discussions like this one that give BISE a bad reputation.'' Please clarify where there was wikilawyering. --] (]) 20:08, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
<br>
:Both sides, instead of stating their arguments neatly and coherently, chose to pick at others' comments. I mentioned this to you and BW at a recent SPI, but the other participants as well should be aware by now that what's needed is brief statements for or against, not endless nested threads. Comparisons with hurling, if needed at all, need to be made in the first - and only - statement. There is rarely, if ever, a need for a second statement. ] 20:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
:Hope you see this TFOWR, we miss you here! {{P|sad}} --] ] <sup>]</sup> 23:41, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
::In future, can I suggest that we avoid neatly stacking editors into "sides", and then tarring each editor in each side with the same brush. I know you need to be (seen as) fair and evenhanded and balanced. And sometimes that means you can't be seen to be always coming down on just one side - even if one side is causing most/all the problems. But you can over compensate and it then becomes unfair to to dole out smacks and punishments to "both" sides in an attempt to seem impartial. --] (]) 12:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:::Certainly. However, in this case I saw both "sides" wikilawyering, both sides engaging in the multi-threaded arguments I'd been trying to discourage. When closing a discussion one side will typically "lose". I view that in the same way as protecting a page at "The Wrong Version" - it's largely inevitable. In this case both sides argued poorly, and one side appeared to be rewarded for that. That's unfortunate, but unavoidable. I'm not going to use closing statements to "punish" bad behaviour - there are sanctions for that - but I will use closing statements to point out bad behaviour. The close in this case was done based on the evidence available when the discussion was closed, and I believe my statement reflected that evidence as fairly as possible. That new evidence was brought up after the discussion was closed is a separate issue, and one that also concerns me. I need to discuss this (privately) with "counsel" and the other admins to work out how best to deal with this. Clearly the best interests of the project dictate that articles reflect, accurately, all available evidence but there does need to be a way to enforce arguments being made during discussions and not right after closing. ] 12:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
::::I responded to the conkers close at the BISE page to keep it separate. As to the "wikilawyering", perhaps I misunderstood. I wasn't considering the behavior of threaded responses to be wikilawyering, but it seems that it's precisely what you're referring to. In that case, yeah, there was tons of it, but, to my eyes, there was four main protagonists (not counting the sock) for this behaviour, and naming and shaming would be better than lumping everyone into the same boat. Briefly, as to the conkers close, it's impossible to present evidence (so that it's available at the time of close) if you're going to materially change the article and introduce new facts in your resolution. If I break out your resolutions I find that you've essentially ruled in favour of the argument that conkers is not traditionally played in Ireland and the colonies. Fine. But then you've created a new fact to discuss the areas of distribution where we can find conkers being played. Outside the scope of BISE. Unless your position is that this is an alternative reading of the existing text (fine), in which case nobody has had the opportunity to discuss it (not fine). --] (]) 13:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:::::No, the wikilawyering was about more than the multithreaded discussions, though the claim/counter-claim is a large part of it. There was too much focus on opinion, and not enough on sound arguments backed by policy or precedent. You made four comments, for example - only the first had any real value (an opinion backed by several references): the rest repeated your opinion or made redundant analogies to challenge other editors' opinions. In one case you discounted the Lonely Planet guide, despite using it yourself as a ref. ''That'' is what I mean by wikilawyering. Anyway, as I've said at BISE - if you're unhappy with the close, I've already stated how to challenge it: take it to Black Kite or Cailil. ] 14:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
::::::''In one case you discounted the Lonely Planet guide, despite using it yourself as a ref. That is what I mean by wikilawyering''. That is simply untrue and extremely disingenuous of you. Lonely planet is a publisher of many different books. I referenced from a book called "British language and culture" which discusses many examples of British language and culture, and it has a section on conkers. I dismissed the "Ireland" guide because it was using an event listing to list the "Irish Conker Championships" as proof that conkers is a '''traditional''' Irish game. My comment was clear on that. --] (]) 16:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:::::::HighKing, look, I'm sorry you don't agree with the one example I gave of you wikilawyering. And I'm sorry you disagree with how I closed the discussion. But I stand by my admonition that you - and all other participants - need to start making better, more coherent arguments. And I stand by my position that if you want this re-opened you're going to have to take it to Black Kite or Cailil. I'm not prepared to set a precedent for "hector TFOWR until they re-open a closed discussion". If you do want this discussion re-opened, I'd be grateful if you could move forward with it promptly - there are (tangentially) related issues which I'd like to discuss with Black Kite and Cailil, and I want to wait until you're spoken to them so I don't prejudice their decision. ] 16:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
::::::::TFOWR, apologies. Let's draw a line under conkers and move on. --] (]) 17:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:::::::::No worries, apology accepted, similar apology extended from me! This has raised an interesting procedural issue, however, so all the pain has had some value ;-) ] 17:58, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


==]==
== A favour ==
You are invited to the first ever ] which will take place at ''The Sir John Moore'', 260-292 Argyle Street, City of Glasgow G2 8QW on '''Sunday 12 May 2013''' from 1.00 pm. If you have never been to one, this is an opportunity to meet other Wikipedians in an informal atmosphere for Wiki and non-Wiki related chat and for beer or food if you like. Experienced and new contributors are all welcome. This event is definitely not restricted just to discussion of Scottish topics. Bring your laptop if you like and use the free Wifi or just bring yourself. Even better, bring a friend! Click the link for full details. Looking forward to seeing you. ] (]) 10:09, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


==Wikipedian in Residence at the National Library of Scotland==
I'm likely to be much less active than normal for a little while and thus not able to get to my talk page in a timely manner. Any chance you could keep an eye on it and the alternate talk page and handle any concerns over admin actions, especially the "why did you delete my blatant copyvio" threads. How you handle it I'll leave up to you. I trust you, so, as ever, I won't consider it wheel-warring if you decide to reverse my actions. I'll try to look in on ITN when I can, but my connection is dodgy so I probably won't be on as often as I'd like. Much appreciated, ] &#124; ] 01:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm just dropping you a quick note about a new ] job that's opened up at the National Library of Scotland. There're more details at ]. ] (]) 14:53, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
:Sure, that's no problem. You've plenty of TPSs to keep me straight, so I don't think I can do too much damage! Hope the connection issues sort themselves out soon - I know from experience they're a right pain. ] 07:31, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
==Orphaned non-free image File:Norsefire-flag-comic.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 --> --] (]) 17:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
== BISE resolving and action taking, template question ==


== ] ==
When an editor has made the change and marked as done (which I just did with a couple of the resolved discussions) do they change the template or is it you who does that after reviewing their edits? Sorry if you've said this somewhere else already. ] (]) 13:20, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:I don't know if I have said it elsewhere. I've been doing it, but I've no objection in principle with having other editors do it, so long as the "conclusion" parameter is accurate. Personally, I'd love to get other editors to do it ;-) I'd imagine there will be discussions, though, where the "conclusion" is lengthy and doesn't easily lend itself to a neat paraphrase, but "other editor" can always leave those ones, or ask me what the paraphrased conclusion would be. (Oh, and thanks for "done-ing{{sic}}" the ones you "done-ed{{sic}}" ;-) ) ] 17:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


Hi,<br>
== WP:OVERLINK and WT:BISE ==
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current ]. The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages ]. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to ] and submit your choices on ]. For the Election committee, ] (]) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692203726 -->


== Deleted Misplaced Pages page? ==
I haven't used ] recently. Can you raise the issue with the editor that is using it? ] (]) 13:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:Will do (in fact, I think I have already - I'll need to check). Apologies for blaming this on you, I had already worked out that you weren't to blame! ] 13:38, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


Dear TFWOR, I am a new Misplaced Pages-user. I wanted to create a Misplaced Pages-page for my favorite Finnish TV show Pyjama Party. Now Misplaced Pages tells me it is deleted by you. Is that right? Can you help me to fix the page so it is not deleted in the near future again?
No worries. Thanks. ] (]) 13:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


BR,
== Horse Cat. Vandal ==
WikiMiia <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 13:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)</span></small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== A kitten for you! ==
Can you nab dude for me? ] (]) 15:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:Probably not! I'm not sure what I'm looking at, or why? Regardless, ] is your best bet - unless I'm familiar with an editor (usually a serial sock-puppeteer) you'll get a far quicker and better-informed response from the relevant board - AIV in this case. ] 15:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
::Sorry about that. I had something else going on and didn't have time to type out a longer message. I filed a report at AIV, and the was blocked. It just got annoying to sit there and warn him four times, then revert every edit he made AQAP. ]] 18:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


]
== Another question ==
I left you a message but I think it went on your Misplaced Pages-wall. I'm sorry for that! I am just a new user in here.


] (]) 13:04, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Can someone be blocked for removing speedy templates multiple times? ] created an ] and I tagged it as spam shortly afterwards. He has since removed the template four times, and I have no idea where to go with it. What's the proper place? ]] 18:50, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
<br style="clear: both;"/>
:], let along four times. Warn them - I think there's probably a standard template for removing speedy tags though I can't say for sure - and if they persist take it to ANI. In this case I'll have a word with them... ] 18:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
== \Nursing Home Residents' Rights listed at ] ==
::...or, seeing as they'd been warned multiple times, up to and even ''beyond'' a final warning, I blocked them for edit warring. ] 18:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
]
:::Thanks. ]] 19:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ]. Since you had some involvement with the ''\Nursing Home Residents' Rights'' redirect, you might want to participate in ] if you have not already done so. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 04:30, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
*{{tps}} {{tlx|uw-speedy1}} {{tlx|uw-speedy2}} {{tlx|uw-speedy3}} {{tlx|uw-speedy4}} ]. <span id="sig" style="background:#FFFFC0">''']''' </font>]]</span> 20:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
**I note that Nolelover and other editors appear to have used these warning templates though. <span id="sig" style="background:#FFFFC0">''']''' </font>]]</span> 20:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
***They are on Twinkle. Should I go to AIV or ANI though? ]] 20:38, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
***: AIV. So long as they've been given a final warning you should be fine. ] 20:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
*: {{ec}} {{=)|blush}} I really ought to check my tools more often - I see them all now in Twinkle... Oops! ] 20:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


== Good article reassessment for ] ==
== ] ==
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 14:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Why You deleted post about Korean Martial Art WonHwaDo? --] (]) 20:05, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:It was ] back on 15 June, and no one objected within seven days. If you want, I can restore the article, however I'd strongly recommend you work on the article - it has very few sources, and would quite likely be sent for ] if it wasn't improved. ] 20:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

==Troll==

{{user5|Westconnector}}

{{la|Charles Karel Bouley}}

User ] is vandalizing the ] page. Would you please make them go away? Could be a sockpuppet, again! or just another troll. I bow to your judgement ;-) Namaste...] (]) 22:21, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:Looking into it. ] 22:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
::Left a message. I'm not seeing anything too troubling at this point, but I'm absolutely unfamiliar with Bouley. The "homosexual activist" claim seemed incorrect, but not unduly troubling. I couldn't see anything to back up the claim that Bouley's partner had AIDS, and I feel a claim like that really should be backed by by a decent reference. The article used as a source (for the cardiac arrest claim) made no mention of it, which tends to suggest the claim isn't true. I'll keep an eye on things... ] 22:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
::: Thank you. Andrew was HIV positive, he did not have aids, it was the subject of the malpractice suit. Karel is the opposite of the "Gay activist" he is not accepted generally by the gay community. Karel has said many times he is NOT a gay activist.We have already fought this battle several times on WIKI. Also this could be a sockpuppet of SRQ. If you want more history, I have a ton of it. Take care. xoxo ] (]) 23:16, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
::::GREAT message :-D ] (]) 23:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

== RFC ==

] allows me to make more than one edit to the article per day, even when it is subject to a 1RR limitation - - yes, no, maybe? There is no actual action required or requested just a comment for future reference. ] (]) 22:26, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:] is only an essay. a 1RR restriction on an article only applies to ''reverts'' - you can edit the article normally (but be careful - an edit that reverses a previous edit - in whole or in part - counts as a revert). Disclaimer: I've not yet looked at discussion. Will do in a second. ] 22:32, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
::OK, read the discussion. BRD isn't an exception to 1RR - am "R" between a "B" and a "D" would still be an "R" - you can't evade 1RR simply by discussing your second revert. I don't know what edits are behind the conversation, so I can't comment in detail, but reversing any part of another editor's edit can count as a revert: ] I'd be reluctant to argue that at ANI or ANEW without having more detail, however. ] 22:51, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

== Adding a BISE template ==
Sorry to be dense TFOWR and thanks for your helpful explanation and for adding the discussion bands under Kurt Jackson. To fulfill my duties I need to add the BISE template to the ] now - what exactly do I put on it please? Thanks for your help and apols - still a bit unused to some of the technical issues around here! ] (]) 09:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
:OK, this is going to sound bad because I don't actually know the answer! There are a couple of templates: {{tlx|BID}} and {{tlx|BID2}}, and I'm not sure which one to use. Leave it for now, and I'll check with Codf1977. I ''think'' it's BID2... but I'll check. ] 09:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 03:10, 24 September 2024

This user is presumably retired. TFOWR has not edited Misplaced Pages since November 5, 2010. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
TFOWR · talkpage · dashboard · sandbox · monobook.js · monobook.css · sub-pages WP:AIV · WP:RFPP · WP:SPI · WP:AN · WP:ANI


Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10Archive 11

This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 20 sections are present.

enThis user is a native speaker of the English language.

sco-1This brouker can contreibute wi a laich level o Scots.

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

If you are unable to post here follow this link to post at my unprotected talkpage.

I will do my best to speak clearly and avoid "bad language" unless you let me know that you are happy for me to do otherwise.

Unless you request otherwise, if you post here, I'll reply here (I'd suggest you watchlist this page to make sure you see my reply). If I post on your talkpage, I'll watchlist your talkpage to look for replies there.


“ Admins, if you see that I've made a mistake, please fix it. I will not consider it wheel-warring if you reverse my admin actions as long as you leave me a civil note telling me what you've done and why and as long as you're open to discussion with me should I disagree. ”
— Moonriddengirl et al


I'm currently:
  • overwhelmed with real-life issues.
I'll be dropping by sporadically, real-life permitting.

Click here to leave a new message.

The Signpost
15 January 2025

Dude

Hi TFOWR - "sporadically"..? - its nearly a year dude....I was reminded of you tonight and I am sending you good vibes, best wishes - Off2riorob (talk) 19:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeh, I miss him too! - 220.101 talk 12:15, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Xeno (talk) at 12:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC).

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. –xeno 14:03, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated , please post to the Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. –xeno 15:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

14 September 2010

Re: "Unprotected Template:CompactTOC8: Unprotection, Consensus at ANI appears to be that original protection level should be restored." – Thanks, and good work. The level of hysterical paranoia at WP:HRT is getting to be a bit much. About 1000 other templates should be unprotected, so non-admin template coders like me can continue being productive without having to wait 2.5 weeks average for editprotected requests to be addressed. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 13:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

User talk:75.57.241.57

There are a number of orphan pages in the User talk:75.57.241.57 (See Special:PrefixIndex/User talk:75.57.241.57) As you seem to have been involved in editing them to help in the completion of a specific project, I suggest that it would be appropriate to move them into your user space. -- PBS (talk) 15:39, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of change

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas




Merry Christmas

and

A Happy New Year to All



Please Click!


I am 220 of Borg. I partake in this human seasonal celebratory event in order to more successfully infiltrate the Misplaced Pages collective, facilitating the addition of it's technological distinctiveness to our own. Resistance is futile!. Oh, and Merry Christmas.


Hope you see this TFOWR, we miss you here! --220 of 23:41, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

First Glasgow Wiki Meetup

You are invited to the first ever Glasgow Wiki Meetup which will take place at The Sir John Moore, 260-292 Argyle Street, City of Glasgow G2 8QW on Sunday 12 May 2013 from 1.00 pm. If you have never been to one, this is an opportunity to meet other Wikipedians in an informal atmosphere for Wiki and non-Wiki related chat and for beer or food if you like. Experienced and new contributors are all welcome. This event is definitely not restricted just to discussion of Scottish topics. Bring your laptop if you like and use the free Wifi or just bring yourself. Even better, bring a friend! Click the link for full details. Looking forward to seeing you. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:09, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedian in Residence at the National Library of Scotland

I'm just dropping you a quick note about a new Wikipedian in Residence job that's opened up at the National Library of Scotland. There're more details at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Scotland#Wikimedian in Residence at the National Library of Scotland. Richard Symonds (WMUK) (talk) 14:53, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Norsefire-flag-comic.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Norsefire-flag-comic.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. --B-bot (talk) 17:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Deleted Misplaced Pages page?

Dear TFWOR, I am a new Misplaced Pages-user. I wanted to create a Misplaced Pages-page for my favorite Finnish TV show Pyjama Party. Now Misplaced Pages tells me it is deleted by you. Is that right? Can you help me to fix the page so it is not deleted in the near future again?

BR, WikiMiia — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiMiia (talk • contribs) 13:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I left you a message but I think it went on your Misplaced Pages-wall. I'm sorry for that! I am just a new user in here.

WikiMiia (talk) 13:04, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

\Nursing Home Residents' Rights listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect \Nursing Home Residents' Rights. Since you had some involvement with the \Nursing Home Residents' Rights redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 04:30, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Mario Kart: Double Dash

Mario Kart: Double Dash has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Categories:
User talk:TFOWR: Difference between revisions Add topic