| Revision as of 23:28, 11 August 2012 editViriiK (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,246 edits Reverted 2 edits by Still-24-45-42-125 (talk): You know to stay off my talk page. (TW)← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 08:24, 25 May 2019 edit undoDaveCinSL (talk | contribs)2 edits →Hello regarding your edit USS Guadalcanal LPH7: new section | ||
| (137 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| '''Archives''': ] | '''Archives''': ] ] | ||
| =="banned"== | |||
| We can pick it up here then. | |||
| ''You are banned from this talk page for a period of 30 days. If you violate the ban I will report you, and I assure you that the admins take these sorts of userpage bans very seriously. After the 30 days has expired the ban will automatically expire. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 00:47, 27 April 2018 (UTC)'' | |||
| A news article you say? Are you sure? So her statement which appears to contradict the byline doesn't seem to faze you at all and that being corroborated by Tapper? It's also a big issue when he states "Guess it's hard to turn off the gaslighting switch". That's editorializing. This editorializing article came on the 23rd right after Jake Tapper's confirmation which was on the 22nd which they completely disregarded Jake Tapper, the person who wanted to ensure safety of everyone involved. Why skip over Tapper then? Right, because you can easily find articles that attacks the Loesch. Twitchy unfortunately highlights the tweets from Jake Tapper in question but we know you are not going to accept that as a source. ] (]) 00:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| == Our mutual friend == | |||
| :{{u|DrFleischman}} By the way, I find it highly amusing that you decided to jump the shark to banning from your user page despite ] suggesting nothing that backs you up on this. For example you misrepresented what I said and when you made an insinuation that I supposedly thought you were a Loesch hater when I said nothing of the sort. Since I can find no policy that backs you up on banning me from your talk page, I'm going to comment here on my own talk page and link you to send you a notification to discuss the contentious material in question. {{u|Mikist4}}, {{u|TheTBirdusThoracis}} are free to join to discuss this. ] (]) 01:05, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| Wait, where did he ban you? The conversation in the talk section? ] (]) 01:48, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| Guy like that are just the cost of doing business at Misplaced Pages. Once his talkpage fills up with enough warnings and blocks someone will take him to ANI. He'll get a second chance, then a mentor, then another chance, then some kind of voluntary sanctions, then a topic ban, and when he finally realizes he won't be able to push his POV he'll disappear. Going by his edit frequency, this process will take a couple months. Just be patient, always warn him on his talk when he's disruptive, and never never edit war with him. That only engenders sympathy for him.– ] <sup>(])</sup> 07:32, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :He banned me from his own talk page although Misplaced Pages says that's generally not a good idea if one was not abusive. So I respect his "ban" and pinged him here which obviously he's ignoring. ] (]) 02:38, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| :Also on his talk page, he made snide remarks about my caps lock supposedly being broken although it was obvious I was emphasizing specific words and he also interjected things I didn't say. ] (]) 02:39, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ==Dana Loesch edit war article under DS== | |||
| ::Ah, Lionel, I'm glad you're here. You guys will both appreciate the irony to be found in this . Note what he says he is ''not'' interested in. I think the lady doth protest too much. ]-] 07:34, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::I've seen that before and it made me laugh as well when I checked out his entire history. I try to be open to everything on Misplaced Pages just as you both have been. Right now, keeping these edits in check is just a big headache but I'm still motivated anyways. ] (]) 07:39, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::: The both of you might be interested in this which he's removed his warnings as with our discussion as the reason for blanking out his talk page. He's aware of this conversation now. Hello Still! ] (]) 09:03, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Please leave his talk page alone. His is the first place admins will look for red flags. – ] <sup>(])</sup> 09:06, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::This comment didn't go in. I realized that when I found the Misplaced Pages discussing the blanking of warnings where they said that his warnings will be archived anyways. ] (]) 09:20, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I saw that. Found it quite humorous. Lionel explains how he's going to screw himself, by himself, and he thinks it's a nefarious conspiracy to "get rid of him". You can't make stuff like this up. Lionel's absolutely correct, we should template him when it's called for, ignore his B.S., and go about our business, but avoid going out of our way to interact with him. ]-] 09:12, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| You have been mentioned at AN/I. – ]<sup>(])</sup> 02:09, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Sure, to any future admin that notices this page, these discussions took place after warnings were implemented against the user. I merely opened the conversations regarding the problem with this user given his declination to work with other users to push POV issues. Thank you. ] (]) 09:10, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::I'm absolutely certain that Misplaced Pages administrators can see for themselves that you were actively encouraging people to fill my talk page with warnings as the first step to getting me kicked off. Thanks for being so blatant; I'd hate to have any ambiguity about this. ] (]) 09:13, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | ::: |
||
| ::::::I realized that when I looked up the policy of blanking warnings which pointed out those warnings are archived anyways. ] (]) 09:08, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Re Dana Loesch you have been reported to WP:ANEW== | |||
| ==A sammie for you== | |||
| ⚫ | Re Dana Loesch you have been reported to ]. – ]<sup>(])</sup> 02:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | ||
| {| style="width:100%; height:125px; border:1px solid black; background-color:#efefef; text-align:left; padding:8px;" | |||
| :{{u|Lionelt}}, it's been a while since I've come across this. Do I do anything or just watch the entire thing passively? ] (]) 02:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| |- | |||
| ::You're good. Nothing to worry about. – ]<sup>(])</sup> 04:18, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| | rowspan=2 style="width:125px;" | ] | |||
| :::While that post-1932 thing was posted on my timeline, I thought it was a joke that he would use it especially when he threatened me with getting me banned so I took it with a grain of salt especially which I thought given my past experiences with Misplaced Pages that made it very unlikely. Now that I read more into it, previously I thought that ] would give me leeway on this. ] (]) 04:21, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| | Hello ViriiK, ] has given you a delicious ] sammie, for for your commitment to a WP:UNDUE and WP:NPOV encyclopedia! You see, these things promote ] and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a delicious ] sammie! Enjoy! | |||
| ::::, I've been following the ANEW conversation. Does this mean that he inappropriately applied the DS against me? With this , I feel that he's trying to shutdown any debate and let his edit go unopposed by trying to scare me into thinking I may get banned. ] (]) 04:35, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| |- | |||
| :{{u|Lionelt}}, do you have any input into the RfC ? ] (]) 00:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| | style="font-size:8pt;" | | |||
| |- | |||
| |} | |||
| == ] == | |||
| NICE! I'll bet Pass a Method would like one of those. ]-] 07:45, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| I'm not following what you are trying to say here: . Did you compare what happened to Dana to the Holocaust? Please help me understand. --] (]) 02:42, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| == Heh == | |||
| :{{u|K.e.coffman}} God no, of course not. The document documenting the discussion is how we know about the Wannsee Conference. ] (]) 02:43, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| :The point I'm trying to make is that one single article that supposedly accuses her of making up the whole thing although we know that the primary sources dispute that entirely. And Misplaced Pages's standard for sources is high that we can't consider other sources that obvious debunks that claim. It's a really stupid comparison I was making to Wannsee, I know. It's just something I couldn't really compare to anything else. ] (]) 02:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you for the clarification. You might want to consider removing the reference to the ] from the Talk page. It's confusing and comes across as rather odd. --] (]) 02:47, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | :::Done thank you. I was a moron bringing that up. ] (]) 02:50, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | ||
| == I have a question! == | |||
| What's the over/under on how many more times we'll see drive-by's try to plop the dog thing into the Romney articles without bothering to check the Talk archives? It's not like they have hot new information to share. And by the way, have you looked at any of the Obama articles lately? I was in ] last night, and it's like a ghost town. Full of stuff from 2007-2010, but very little at all has been done to it since the election season started. It's almost like... like... he's not very popular any more. ]-] 23:27, 28 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {{u|DrFleischman}} | |||
| :I've avoided that side because it's not exactly new information to keep up on since it's the same old same old again whereas the current BLP is a lot more active and fairly new. Anyways should we close the haicut conversation brought up by you-know-who using the archive templates? It's a dumb topic to dredge up again and without any basis. The idea that BRD should be used in this case was absurd. ] (]) 00:32, 29 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Since you deployed a DS on me for an article that was not under DS by an admin, does that mean you were not exercising ]? Especially when you threatened to get me banned from Misplaced Pages if I talked further on your talk page? ] (]) 05:36, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ::You bring up an interesting idea. I was just looking at the dog guy's discussion attempt on a different article, and I noticed that somebody shut him down pretty quickly. That seems to be an under-utilized tool in many of the articles I've been frequenting, and it deserves a look. I would fully expect some push-back, though. By the way, if you want to reach me privately, take my full name from ] and put Gmail behind it. ]-] 00:46, 29 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Please do not ping me again. --] (]) 06:22, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
| :::Well, I hope I wasn't going too far in representing the other users on that topic since there is an obvious consensus based on previous discussion not to include it particularly the homosexual part which had no bearing on the story whatsoever. It was just a untasteful tactic by the writers of that WAPO story to imply some kind of connection between the two when the writers knew that wasn't the case at all. I assume without the space by the way? Let me know if it worked. ] (]) 00:55, 29 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | ::So I was correct then. You were not exercising ] then. Got it. ] (]) 07:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC) | ||
| ::::At ]? No, your last change appears to be just a comment. ]-] 01:04, 29 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Hi ViriiK! Questions about the “”? I wrote a quick & dirty FAQ—check it out ]. If you have any questions about policies or editing or anything else just ask me on ] :-) – ]<sup>(])</sup> 06:46, 3 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Your email == | ||
| Hello ViriiK, | |||
| Could you please explain , which reverted ? | |||
| There is no need to be concerned. We operate by consensus not by the wishes of an individual editor. ] ] 23:05, 14 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| Before answering, you might want to refer to:<br /> | |||
| :{{u|Cullen328}} Now he's being flippant about moving section away because he's intentionally ignoring me despite the fact that I have been consistently truthful in every one of the edits. ] (]) 23:09, 14 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ]<br /> | |||
| ::I recommend that you stay calm. ] ] 00:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
| ]<br /> | |||
| ⚫ | :::Goosfraba. ] (]) 01:21, 15 May 2018 (UTC) | ||
| ]<br /> | |||
| ]<br /> | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| == ArbCom 2018 election voter message == | |||
| :I already took the advice of another user to leave it alone after the first revert. However he was properly warned unlike his 3RR warning against me. Can you take a look at my page history? I was warned for edit-warring despite the fact I was at 1RR. He's already lied to me twice now accusing me of requesting page protection and accusing me of edit-warring. ] (]) 08:13, 31 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {{Ivmbox|Hello, ViriiK. Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. | |||
| :::(ec-Still's post removed) Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you are wrong Still. You have a right to 3RR to remove unsourced content from a BLP. So when you said "nobody does" you were wrong. Editors enforcing BLP have the "right." Can I help you with anything else, Still?– ] <sup>(])</sup> 08:39, 31 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
| 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. | |||
| ::::Note that the above refers to a removed post, not the post directly above it. For the record, ViriiK's answer was The Right Thing, essentially saying "I didn't know that policy then, I know it now, and I will follow it in the future" I wish more Misplaced Pages editors had that good attitude. --] (]) 16:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. ] (]) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) | |||
| == Not everyone... == | |||
| |Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2018/Coordination/MMS/11&oldid=866998401 --> | |||
| == Hello regarding your edit USS Guadalcanal LPH7 == | |||
| .... ] (]) 06:45, 1 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Bold edit! == | |||
| Hello Several years ago I made an entry on the page at Misplaced Pages for The USS Guadalcanal LPH7. I was a crew member aboard the ship when the incident with the generator switchboard and losing electrical loads happened. I was actually a first aid man on a stretcher bearer crew that was involved in the rescue of several of the ship's engineering department from the area below deck where the generator switchboards had overheated. I was also, earlier in the day on the bridge of The Guadalcanal as we set the record for the fastest speed that ship had ever traveled which was 28 knots. I know you're not going to find a reference of the speed record or the switchboard problem but it all happened and it was an incident and The GUAD did set a RECORD that day. I KNOW because I was THERE. It's too bad that a former Navy Vateran can't post what happened on the ship he was on just to have it removed because some "official" site doesn't reference it. ] (]) 08:24, 25 May 2019 (UTC) | |||
| Hiya! I made a , I assumed you wouldn't mind. ] (]) 09:03, 1 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | : |
||
| ::Would you be so kind to voice your opinion about whether or not the opinion of the president of PETA is a notable POV? We can easily get a consensus on the talkpage. 108 agrees with me. ] (]) 09:16, 1 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Templates == | |||
| ] | |||
| I've noticed there's a dispute going on between ] and you on ], which is on my watchlist. Personally, I support your reversion because I'm against adding pictures in navboxes, especially without discussion or consensus. It clutters up the template and is unnecessary for navigation. But I'm wondering if you can clue me in on the dispute? I've noticed similar edits by the IP on other templates.--''']''' ] 07:06, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :So V you're against pics in templates? Just when I was becoming fond of you. Have you tried a pic in a template? Once you start, you can't stop, hahahaha! If you haven't noticed, I put pics everywhere... – ] <sup>(])</sup> 07:20, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Amusing but it depends to me honestly. Steve Jobs template is pretty small and the focus at least to me should be on the categories within. Whereas Barack Obama (his picture is too huge in it and holy crap so many articles), George W. Bush, etc have pictures mostly because the picture isn't distracting away from the content and they're quite notable. I'm not saying Steve Jobs isn't notable but honestly I don't know what though. Maybe it has to do with my mood? ] (]) 07:26, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the quick response! If the user isn't responding, then that's problematic. The consensus is that, as per ], editors must explain their edits, especially if disputed or controversial. I'd recommend bringing the issue to the attention of administrators and editors. I would advise against following another user's edits. It's against ], and policy warns against it. If the user is unresponsive and disruptive, discuss him directly on the noticeboards. Have you tried ] yet? --''']''' ] 07:31, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Well, I'm aware that it isn't polite to follow him around since it's a form of hounding. I've found a lot of questionable edits by him which I've had to revert although I'm sure other users would have reverted his actions anyways. I've added a lot of pages to my watch list so sometimes I see him once in a while and I dig through his contribution history which a lot were just bad. I honestly didn't think to discuss him at ANI because I don't really have a good reason to make a report at least in my opinion. Most of his contributions centers around categorizing so it's hard to suggest users to submit an explanation on that basis in the edit summaries. However he has the habit of modifying or submitting political templates such as Nazism which did not help. He would also modify templates such as the Libertarian template to add people who didn't contribute to the theory. ] (]) 07:36, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::If the user is persistently unresponsive, while continuing to make controversial edits, concern likely is warranted. I hope you manage to find a way to resolve the issue. Cheers, and good luck!--''']''' ] 07:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | |||
Latest revision as of 08:24, 25 May 2019
"banned"
We can pick it up here then. You are banned from this talk page for a period of 30 days. If you violate the ban I will report you, and I assure you that the admins take these sorts of userpage bans very seriously. After the 30 days has expired the ban will automatically expire. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 00:47, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
A news article you say? Are you sure? So her statement which appears to contradict the byline doesn't seem to faze you at all and that being corroborated by Tapper? It's also a big issue when he states "Guess it's hard to turn off the gaslighting switch". That's editorializing. This editorializing article came on the 23rd right after Jake Tapper's confirmation which was on the 22nd which they completely disregarded Jake Tapper, the person who wanted to ensure safety of everyone involved. Why skip over Tapper then? Right, because you can easily find articles that attacks the Loesch. Twitchy unfortunately highlights the tweets from Jake Tapper in question but we know you are not going to accept that as a source. ViriiK (talk) 00:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- DrFleischman By the way, I find it highly amusing that you decided to jump the shark to banning from your user page despite WP:TPG suggesting nothing that backs you up on this. For example you misrepresented what I said and when you made an insinuation that I supposedly thought you were a Loesch hater when I said nothing of the sort. Since I can find no policy that backs you up on banning me from your talk page, I'm going to comment here on my own talk page and link you to send you a notification to discuss the contentious material in question. Mikist4, TheTBirdusThoracis are free to join to discuss this. ViriiK (talk) 01:05, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Wait, where did he ban you? The conversation in the talk section? TheTBirdusThoracis (talk) 01:48, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- He banned me from his own talk page although Misplaced Pages says that's generally not a good idea if one was not abusive. So I respect his "ban" and pinged him here which obviously he's ignoring. ViriiK (talk) 02:38, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Also on his talk page, he made snide remarks about my caps lock supposedly being broken although it was obvious I was emphasizing specific words and he also interjected things I didn't say. ViriiK (talk) 02:39, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Dana Loesch edit war article under DS
You have been mentioned at AN/I. – Lionel 02:09, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Re Dana Loesch you have been reported to WP:ANEW
Re Dana Loesch you have been reported to WP:ANEW. – Lionel 02:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Lionelt, it's been a while since I've come across this. Do I do anything or just watch the entire thing passively? ViriiK (talk) 02:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- You're good. Nothing to worry about. – Lionel 04:18, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- While that post-1932 thing was posted on my timeline, I thought it was a joke that he would use it especially when he threatened me with getting me banned so I took it with a grain of salt especially which I thought given my past experiences with Misplaced Pages that made it very unlikely. Now that I read more into it, previously I thought that WP:BLP would give me leeway on this. ViriiK (talk) 04:21, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- , I've been following the ANEW conversation. Does this mean that he inappropriately applied the DS against me? With this , I feel that he's trying to shutdown any debate and let his edit go unopposed by trying to scare me into thinking I may get banned. ViriiK (talk) 04:35, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- While that post-1932 thing was posted on my timeline, I thought it was a joke that he would use it especially when he threatened me with getting me banned so I took it with a grain of salt especially which I thought given my past experiences with Misplaced Pages that made it very unlikely. Now that I read more into it, previously I thought that WP:BLP would give me leeway on this. ViriiK (talk) 04:21, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- You're good. Nothing to worry about. – Lionel 04:18, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Lionelt, do you have any input into the RfC here? ViriiK (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Dana Loesch
I'm not following what you are trying to say here: . Did you compare what happened to Dana to the Holocaust? Please help me understand. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:42, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- K.e.coffman God no, of course not. The document documenting the discussion is how we know about the Wannsee Conference. ViriiK (talk) 02:43, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- The point I'm trying to make is that one single article that supposedly accuses her of making up the whole thing although we know that the primary sources dispute that entirely. And Misplaced Pages's standard for sources is high that we can't consider other sources that obvious debunks that claim. It's a really stupid comparison I was making to Wannsee, I know. It's just something I couldn't really compare to anything else. ViriiK (talk) 02:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification. You might want to consider removing the reference to the Wannsee Conference from the Talk page. It's confusing and comes across as rather odd. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:47, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Done thank you. I was a moron bringing that up. ViriiK (talk) 02:50, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification. You might want to consider removing the reference to the Wannsee Conference from the Talk page. It's confusing and comes across as rather odd. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:47, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
I have a question!
DrFleischman Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. Since you deployed a DS on me for an article that was not under DS by an admin, does that mean you were not exercising WP:AGF? Especially when you threatened to get me banned from Misplaced Pages if I talked further on your talk page? ViriiK (talk) 05:36, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Please do not ping me again. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 06:22, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- So I was correct then. You were not exercising WP:AGF then. Got it. ViriiK (talk) 07:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Hi ViriiK! Questions about the “Ds Alert”? I wrote a quick & dirty FAQ—check it out here. If you have any questions about policies or editing or anything else just ask me on my talk page :-) – Lionel 06:46, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- So I was correct then. You were not exercising WP:AGF then. Got it. ViriiK (talk) 07:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Your email
Hello ViriiK,
There is no need to be concerned. We operate by consensus not by the wishes of an individual editor. Cullen Let's discuss it 23:05, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- Cullen328 Now he's being flippant about moving section away because he's intentionally ignoring me despite the fact that I have been consistently truthful in every one of the edits. ViriiK (talk) 23:09, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- I recommend that you stay calm. Cullen Let's discuss it 00:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
- Goosfraba. ViriiK (talk) 01:21, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
- I recommend that you stay calm. Cullen Let's discuss it 00:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, ViriiK. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello regarding your edit USS Guadalcanal LPH7
Hello Several years ago I made an entry on the page at Misplaced Pages for The USS Guadalcanal LPH7. I was a crew member aboard the ship when the incident with the generator switchboard and losing electrical loads happened. I was actually a first aid man on a stretcher bearer crew that was involved in the rescue of several of the ship's engineering department from the area below deck where the generator switchboards had overheated. I was also, earlier in the day on the bridge of The Guadalcanal as we set the record for the fastest speed that ship had ever traveled which was 28 knots. I know you're not going to find a reference of the speed record or the switchboard problem but it all happened and it was an incident and The GUAD did set a RECORD that day. I KNOW because I was THERE. It's too bad that a former Navy Vateran can't post what happened on the ship he was on just to have it removed because some "official" site doesn't reference it. DaveCinSL (talk) 08:24, 25 May 2019 (UTC)