| Revision as of 02:54, 9 September 2012 view sourceDrmies (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators407,266 editsm Reverted edits by 174.252.8.86 (talk) to last version by Kww← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 02:43, 14 January 2025 view source The Banner (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers125,556 edits →Banned cease-and-desist photographer | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{pp-semi-indef|small=yes}} | |||
| <!--New comments at the bottom, please.--> | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |||
| |maxarchivesize = 200K | |||
| |counter = 151 | |||
| |minthreadsleft = 10 | |||
| |minthreadstoarchive = 5 | |||
| |algo = old(15d) | |||
| |archive = User talk:Drmies/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| }} | |||
| {{archives|auto=yes|search=yes}} | {{archives|auto=yes|search=yes}} | ||
| == |
==Mail== | ||
| {{ygm}} | |||
| I'm taking a little break. Don't break the wiki while I'm not watching. ] (]) 03:15, 29 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| * ] (]) | |||
| ==DYK for Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae== | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| |style = notice | |||
| |small = | |||
| |image = {{#switch: {{Currentdaymonth}} | 31 October = ] | ]}} | |||
| |text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ''... that Hermann Peter's ''''']''''' (1870–1914) was the authoritative edition of Roman historical fragments until it was supplanted by Martine Chassignet's ''''']''''' (1996–2004)?'' {{#if: |The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].|{{#ifexist:Template:Did you know nominations/Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].|{{#ifexist:Template talk:Did you know/Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].}} }} }} You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and it will be added to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
| }} ] (]) 08:03, 29 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==DYK for L'Annalistique romaine== | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| |style = notice | |||
| |small = | |||
| |image = {{#switch: {{Currentdaymonth}} | 31 October = ] | ]}} | |||
| |text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ''... that Hermann Peter's ''''']''''' (1870–1914) was the authoritative edition of Roman historical fragments until it was supplanted by Martine Chassignet's ''''']''''' (1996–2004)?'' {{#if: |The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].|{{#ifexist:Template:Did you know nominations/L'Annalistique romaine|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].|{{#ifexist:Template talk:Did you know/L'Annalistique romaine|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].}} }} }} You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and it will be added to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
| }} ] (]) 08:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==DYK for Qormusata Tngri== | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| |style = notice | |||
| |small = | |||
| |image = {{#switch: {{Currentdaymonth}} | 31 October = ] | ]}} | |||
| |text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ''... that among the ], ''']''' ranks higher than ''']''', though the latter is often identified with ]?'' {{#if: |The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].|{{#ifexist:Template:Did you know nominations/Qormusata Tngri|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].|{{#ifexist:Template talk:Did you know/Qormusata Tngri|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].}} }} }} You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and it will be added to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
| }} ] (]) 16:03, 29 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==DYK for Sülde Tngri== | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| |style = notice | |||
| |small = | |||
| |image = {{#switch: {{Currentdaymonth}} | 31 October = ] | ]}} | |||
| |text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ''... that among the ], ''']''' ranks higher than ''']''', though the latter is often identified with ]?'' {{#if: |The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].|{{#ifexist:Template:Did you know nominations/Sülde Tngri|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].|{{#ifexist:Template talk:Did you know/Sülde Tngri|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ].}} }} }} You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and it will be added to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
| }} ] (]) 16:03, 29 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Pets == | |||
| ] | |||
| I noticed the "tit", "boobies", and "ass" on your user page, so ..... — ]] 16:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Nice. Not what I was thinking, but nice still. ] (]) 04:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {{-}} | {{-}} | ||
| == DCAU page == | |||
| Hi! I'm currently engaged in an edit war with a user who believes that two films released in 2017 and 2019 are canon to an animated universe of TV shows from 1992-2006. I've provided multiple clear as day sources from the people who worked on these that show this isn't the case. | |||
| == FYI == | |||
| ] (]) 23:24, 29 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| You can read it here. | |||
| == AfD for Georgetown University Lecture Fund == | |||
| https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:DC_Animated_Universe#Article_Cleanup ] (]) 23:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *I tried to read that: it's clear as mud. But yes you are in the middle of an edit war, and you really need to stop. If you want that talk page discussion, and your editing career, to go anywhere, you might could try making smaller edits and explaining them on the talk page--briefly, with sources. ] (]) 23:31, 27 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *Blanking your talk page is not a good idea. ] (]) 23:32, 27 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *], is this your only account? ] (]) 23:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *:Yes. I had a previous account a while back that I lost my password too. | |||
| *:The person who I'm having an edit war with literally went and removed my sources, while his sources are non-existent or incredibly flimsy. ] (]) 20:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == With respect to Bai Jingting == | |||
| Hello. There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you.] (]) 06:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Sorry about this. It's getting a little heated in the AfD thread and I just decided it'd be best to bring it up on the admin board. Since you launched the AfD, I thought I'd give you a head's up on this.] (]) 06:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Hi, I seen few deletion, need clarity to improve. | |||
| == Final push == | |||
| 1. For Philanthropic activity the source 8th line mentions artist name, need to understand why the source is doubtful. | |||
| 2. If "features" is wrong vocabulary could it be replaced with other word? As new writer I observed many articles already accepted those details from years. Need to understand how to represent here with proper writing. ] (]) 20:00, 28 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *Not every time someone is mentioned in some competition they're "featured". If someone is featured it means they get a special placement, and there is no evidence at all that this is what is happening here. Yes, it's a buzzword now used for every guest performance and appearance, and we need to fight back, like linguistic warriors. I don't really know what you mean with "source 8th line", but if you're talking about , it's pretty obvious to me that that gossipy glossy website is NOT an acceptable, neutral, independent source for BLPs. Thanks, ] (]) 16:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| **Thanks for the reply. For Philanthropic activity link <ref>{{Cite web |title=持续更新！汪峰章子怡林志玲黄晓明等为河南暴雨捐款 |url=https://ent.ifeng.com/c/883OdhBmV5C |access-date=2024-12-17 |website=ent.ifeng.com |language=zh}}</ref> was used. 8th line suggest artist donation towards natural disaster. It was removed stating doubtful. If we mention actual ranks of few listings, instead of "feature" I hope it's fine provided link attached is not from gossip site and provides enough evidence. ] (]) 23:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ***What 8th line? I see five lines, and then some weird image that took me 26 clicks on "Page Down" to get through--and then there's comments. Anyway, I see his name is mentioned, along with dozens of others, on a website that at best looks like a gossipy site for fans of entertainers. Whatever that site is, it's not publishing journalism; please see ]. How much did he even give? Or did the record company give a few bucks in his name, to add to his resume? Who knows? ] (]) 02:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ***Oh you mean the seventh line of that picture with a list of donors--who knows what that picture is, and what its authority is. Again, that's not how we operate here. It's too easy to manipulate pictures, and there's no source or context--"according to incomplete statistics" actually expresses part of the problem well. ] (]) 02:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{reflist-talk}} | |||
| The ] CCI is down to its final 25 articles. If we can tackle one a day each we can get it done in a week, and two a day will get it closed by the end of the weekend. Let's see if we can get this done and cut down a bit on the CCI backlog, we've been doing great so far. ] <sub>]</sub> 18:29, 31 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :No problem; there's nothing wrong with keeping the diffs in, I just remove them to make it more clear that the article was checked. I'll close that section and check another one or two; at this rate we might be done tonight! ] <sub>]</sub> 02:51, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::No, not tonight. It's not much fun and I'm tired. ] (]) 02:59, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == You are being discussed here == | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| | image = ] | |||
| | text = ] is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this ]. | |||
| }} | |||
| Nice to finally see another one closed. :) --] <sub>]</sub> 04:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Come on--this is my merit badge? Looks like a spoof to me. I'm going to ask the expert if it's legit. ] (]) 04:36, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ] ] ] 16:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| *Very exciting, Doug--thanks! ] (]) 19:54, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ** {{tpw}} ] ]!!! ] | <sup> ]</sup> 20:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *** A tremendous amount of truly reprehensible stuff does happen on this talk page. However, in my opinion, none thus far had been quite so egregious as using the word "revenant". That said, I myself understood the word immediately by way of it being the true and accurate translation from the Danish of the title of Ibsen's '']''. -- ] (]) 05:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ****Hey I just learned a new word. ] (]) 16:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| **** Well, {{yo|Softlavender}}, a joke explained is not much of a joke. But what I meant by using the word was precisely a reference to the Danish sense in that the ghost of the quite dead argument had been revived by a (now blocked) user who started the (now closed) discussion. Let us hope for the new year that the argument inappropriately raised from the dead remains in the grave to which it was returned and that no further sticks are raised. Heaven forfend that I should post reprehensible stuff on this hallowed site. ] | <sup> ]</sup> 14:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *****Let the dead bury their dead. ] (]) 15:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == ]/] and others == | |||
| The user didn't write you directly after making some fixes, so I thought I'd drop you a note here. If you're on an extended break, I'll probably end up adding this to one of my lists of noms needing action for the DYK talk page. ] (]) 18:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *BlueMoonset, I guess I'm back, some. Listen, I've looked over that article again, and I think it's best if you call on an expert--it's pretty big, and pretty technical, and it's not my field. Copyedits is the best I can do there. ] (]) 03:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Thanks. I'll add it to the appropriate list at the next opportunity. ] (]) 03:09, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*Sorry BlueMoonset, I wish I could be more helpful. Maybe I'm tired. ] (]) 04:38, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::*That's fine. Thanks for doing all that you did. I've added it to my latest ] list of older articles needing attention. So far no takers, but it's early days yet (and a holiday weekend for many). BTW, any chance you'll be able to take another look at June 16's Orgastic potency article at some point? Yngvadottir seems to think it's ready for another look. ] (]) 16:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I should add that if you do want to look at Orgastic potency, you should certainly first take a look at the Talk page discussion; Bali ultimate has some strong disagreements, and has also done a few edits to the article, removing a couple of sentences and their sources, which are characterized as starting a depuff process... ] (]) 18:57, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Drmies, never mind. Someone just came along and "boldly" closed the Orgastic potency nomination, rejecting it for DYK. Looks like it ran out of time. ] (]) 05:13, 3 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::*Thanks for the note, BlueMoonset. I appreciate the effort you're putting in to get the more difficult articles accepted as well. ] (]) 13:36, 3 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Thought they had given up and taken a new hobby, but nope... Here is this IP (https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/2001:8A0:67D4:8700:461:2CED:6508:F5E3), for instance continuing with the transfer speculation at ] (and reinserting their ref that "supported" ] winning the title last season by mentioning a ] match!!), duly reverted! Ah, with a completely polite and encyclopedical edit summary, so let's see what their reply will be (because they WILL reinstate their version again!)... | |||
| == Dutch language == | |||
| Happy 2025, take care ] (]) 16:37, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Could you help out at ]? See ] too. ] ] 22:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *OK, I saw that odd conversation, but is there anything that needs translating there? ] (]) 02:58, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Not sure, just thought you may be interested. ] ] 02:59, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Hmmm yes; I thought that article on ''Metro'' had already been written--I've used it as a reference in some of the Dutch media articles I've written (at least, I think I did). I'd never heard of that Turkish Dutch columnist, but then van Gogh was shot a decade after I left. My friend, though, rode by on his bicycle minutes after it happened. This happened in my old neighborhood. ] (]) 03:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Edit warring started already, please intervene (you or somebody) ASAP! --] (]) 17:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Remember these == | |||
| *], ], can you please have a look, given your experience with ]? Thanks, ] (]) 19:53, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *], I found another one (User:Lazaric12), and removed some of that awful content. Take care old friend! ] (]) 16:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == A barnstar for you! == | |||
| Hi Drmies, remember this ]? IPs are at it again on both articles, any chance of re-protection of a month (two month for Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2012 if possible)? Olympics where good by the way, now doing Paralympic duties; but feeling sad knowing I only have 4 shifts left to do. Got my name down for ] already. Hope all is well with you! <b style="background:black">] ]</b> 11:15, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Hey, nice to see you again. Well, here's the word--I don't see enough disruption in ], but I saw plenty in 2013, and of course you wanted it the other way around. You can ask at RFPP, or maybe someone who sees this may have a different opinion. Sorry. But I'm glad to hear you're doing well--take it easy, ] (]) 14:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Does that article ''really'' need a history of the city? Aren't you putting this up for GA? ] (]) 14:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| :*Thank you Drmies for looking into these for me, I appreciate and value your help so much. And thanks for sorting out the Dutch map on the Junior article. We went through a massive RfC on the project talk page not so long ago, and there was support for including a location map of the host city on these articles - hence why they are slowly being rolled out across the annual pages. Including them seem to have been proven helpful to the general reader, and adding insight into the host city seems to be logical too. The same format was used on ] article and help that get to GA. But personally I think the maps benefit the adult contests better than the junior ones. Although I am open to suggestions. <b style="background:black">] ]</b> 14:21, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar''' | |||
| :*Just noticed that you also removed the flag icon for the host broadcaster from the infobox (which personally I agree with your reason for removing them). Is there a standard practice for flagicons next to a host broadcaster? Only reason I ask is because all the ESC and JESC articles have them included, and I don't think they are appropriate for the purpose they are being used. In my opinion a national flag is for a country not a national broadcaster. I could do with clearing this one up better, as it would come in handy for improving all the articles. ] seems to state that a flagicon is mandatory practice. <b style="background:black">] ]</b> 14:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*See ]. The AVRO doesn't represent the country, just like ITV doesn't represent the UK (but the BBC might). In general, there should be no flags in infoboxes (except for things like military conflicts), and flags in general should only be used when countries are represented (boxing in Olympics, yes--MMA fights, no; cycling in Olympics, yes--cycling in Tour de France, no). I saw that that template includes a flag icon; you can take that up with Thumperward, who's been here long enough to know better. Good luck Wesley, ] (]) 17:53, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Diligence and Teamwork == | |||
| {| 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 Barnstar of Diligence''' | |||
| |- | |- | ||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Happy New Year, Drmies! In 2024, other editors thanked you using the ] on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the '''#11 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024'''. Congratulations and, well, ''thank you'' for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! ] (]) 19:39, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | You helped in so many ways on these two CCIs, I can't begin to reiterate them; and CCI work is super boring, to most users, and thankless. Well, on this occasion here's a huge THANK YOU for you. Many helped out and this was a great example of wiki teamwork, especially this last several weeks where many got together to wrap this up. ] ] 11:26, 1 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| |}<!--Template:The Barnstar of Diligence--> | |||
| *Haha thanks, {{U|Mz7}}--and I just hit you with a +2! ] (]) 15:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| *{{U|Bbb23}}, happy new year, and how is it that you are thanked more than me??? I thought I was the good cop! ] (]) 15:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| **It's a conspiratorial ploy by the perps to cozy up to the bad cop.--] (]) 16:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ***Shoot I just thanked ] for an edit, and she was already ahead of me. ] (]) 17:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| {{User QAIbox | |||
| | image = Ehrenbach icicles.jpg | |||
| | image_upright = 0.8 | |||
| | bold = ] · ] · ] | |||
| }} | |||
| :::* As explained on my talk, I hope I do more real thank-you than lazy click-thanks ;) - Happy new year 2025, opened with ] that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page has). --] (]) 18:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::* ], my ] 300 years after the first performance, is up for GAN. ] will be my story tomorrow. --] (]) 21:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::* My ] is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. Did you watch Masilo talk and dance? --] (]) 09:54, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == "]" listed at ] == | |||
| == Inch == | |||
| ] | |||
| 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/2025 January 1#Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Traditional monarchy (2nd nomination)}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 01:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Mail == | |||
| I suggest you try and talk civily to new editors, without reverting to . The comment you referred to had been removed from the article 3 hours beforehand. I can see no evidence the editor is being deliberately disruptive, it looks more like they simply do not understand the etiquette of Misplaced Pages. Maybe you should try explaining, rather than laying down the law. ] (]) 17:14, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Huh? I referred to their commentary. Whether it had been removed or not is beside the point. And now supposedly the subject wasn't even a parish anymore? I think the old sources refer to it as a parish because it was a parish-- seems indicative enough. I'm getting tired of dealing with this topic and this editor. ] (]) 18:57, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {{You've got mail}} ] (]) 07:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Lionel Messi Page - Awards == | |||
| == Edits to Columbia High School (New Jersey) == | |||
| Hello Drmies, | |||
| I just wanted to notify you that someone has vandalised the ] page. Under the awards external links at the bottom of the page (below the "Footballer of the Year of Argentina" and above the "UEFA Club Footballer of the Year" links), someone has written "Messi es muy feo y juega pesimo" but I'm not sure how to remove that from the page, so I was wondering if you could take a look at it. | |||
| Thanks. | |||
| ] (]) 19:28, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Sorry Messi, but I don't see it--do you still see it? It's not in the text, you haven't removed it in your edits as far as I can see, so the only option I can think of is that it was in one of the individual templates that are transcluded in the article. I checked one of them but didn't see anything there. ] (]) 19:34, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your contributed article, ]== | |||
| ] | |||
| {{Quote box|quote=<p>If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read ].</p><p>You may want to consider using the ] to help you create articles.</p>|width=20%|align=right}} | |||
| Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, ''']'''. First, thank you for your contribution; Misplaced Pages relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – ''']'''. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for ]. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Misplaced Pages. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at ] – you might like to discuss new information at ]. | |||
| The article for ] definitely needs additional sources and has to some issues of tone addressed. There are sources about the school available to update many of the issues you highlighted. ] (]) 23:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit ''']''' to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with ]. If the page is deleted, you can contact ] to request that the administrator ] the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the ] and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Misplaced Pages looks forward to your future contributions.<!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 19:55, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| * |
*Happy New Year, {{U|Alansohn}}. I hope there are, and I hope they're grrrreat. That article was a bit excessive. ] (]) 00:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
| **I've declined the speedy. Please see my comments on the article talkpage. ] (]) 20:06, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ***I saw them--thanks. I hope that this can be settled in a normal fashion. ] (]) 20:06, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Sockpuppet == | ||
| Got someone editing as an IP to escape a block and complain at the Teahouse. ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 00:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Could somebody delete ] as ] was created at the same time and are duplicates. ] (]) 20:15, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Nevermind, they got globally blocked literally ''the'' minute I sent this lol. ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 00:12, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::Oh, it's that one again. So boring. I wonder what their New Year's resolutions include. Haha, "this year I'm going to look for North Korean proxies". Good luck! ] (]) 00:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::"Resolution 1: Complain about being banned on a website for almost 7 hours" ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 00:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I actually forgot how long it's been. Has it been a year? Ah--I blocked User:MidAtlanticBaby indefinitely on June 18. I see they're now actually banned by the Foundation: I don't know if you know this, but you have to go REALLY crazy to get banned by the Foundation. ] (]) 00:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Oh yeah, definitely didn't know that...{{pb}}Also, this has been going on for MONTHS? ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 00:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Yes. When I say "childish" I mean it. This is likely a somewhat grown person with a driver license and the right to vote, who could be watching Georgia play football and make soup for their family and walk the dog. Instead, they're harassing a bunch of people including one who had nothing to do with them getting their dumb ass blocked. But they know some shit about proxies and whatnot and now they're just being cute, hoping to get caught and get attention. ] (]) 00:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Well, now whenever I feel down I'll just remember I'm way happier with my life than MidAtlanticBaby! Thanks for this Misplaced Pages lore Drmies. ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 00:36, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == 120.21.0.0/16 == | |||
| :{{done}}. {{tl|db-a10}} could be used in the future. ] (]) 20:29, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Hi, would you consider unblocking this IP range? I don't want to, both because I'm unsure of the situation, and because I'm a little bit involved — it includes the address I'm using for the wireless network at my local public library. I don't understand the reason for the block, since you blocked it almost a month after the latest edit appearing at ], and there are no deleted contributions. ] (]) 05:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Inch == | |||
| *Hey {{U|Nyttend}}--I blocked the range because of one particular sock, who by now has created 215 accounts that we blocked and tagged, in a little over a year. There were two from that range that, looking at the block, were my immediate reason for the block, and since then it's been much quieter. Let me email you, lest I drop BEANS all over the place. ] (]) 14:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| **Thanks for the response. This response makes sense, and the email was great; thank you. ] (]) 19:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Advice needed == | |||
| Butting in, but I don't understand your position here at all. Parishes in Scotland were a type of local authority and Inch wouldn't be "part of today's Wigtown parish" as parishes were ]. Are you confusing its use here with ] in the religious sense? – ] 20:24, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *"A parish in Wigtownshire until 1975. It was sometimes known as Inch and Saulseat parish. The parish of Saulseat was incorporated into Inch during the mid-seventeenth century. A medieval parish and a parish for both civil and religious purposes from the sixteenth century until 1975." From http://www.scotlandsplaces.gov.uk/search/index.php?action=do_search&id=890&p_name=INCH&p_type=PARISH&p_county1=Wigtownshire. Iridescent, you are free to clear this up one way or another. No one has yet said anything like this, and the text above, from what appears to be a very authoritative site, doesn't completely support it since it talks, possibly, about parishes in both senses: at the very least it supports a religious parish. Moreover, the magic year, for all the parishes similar to this one, is 1975, not 1929. But if you manage to make hay out of the article, and if you want to change content and title accordingly, ''please'' go ahead. ] (]) 20:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Tell you what: tag, you're it. ] (]) 21:00, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| **1975 was when the district councils—which replaced the parishes—were themselves abolished; there's a summary of the parish-district-region progression on ]. (On a skim of the As and Bs, we have no articles specifically on a parish, so the obvious thing would be to delete the Parish article and just keep the town.)<p>I assure you, if I were "it" that link would be a nice shiny shade of red; except in a very limited number of cases like ] or ] where there's genuine historic significance, I don't think British civil parishes nor Irish townlands have any place on Misplaced Pages other than as entries in a list. I can certainly see the need for ]; I can see legitimate reasons to keep ]; I can see no reason anyone would ever have an interest in ], nor any reason the content there wouldn't be considerably more useful as a paragraph in the parent article, where it could be compared-and-contrasted with its fellows. (If it weren't for the inevitable swarm of "keep, it exists" ARS-ers, I'd be tempted to merge that right now if I were still active.) – ] 21:17, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Typing "parish Scotland" into the Misplaced Pages search function yields several articles beginning "X is a parish and a village in Scotland" or the like, but also a couple of articles saying "X is a parish in Scotland" or the like (] and ] are the first two I noted). Since I know nothing about local government in Scotland this is the sum total of my contributions to this thread, beyond observing in passing that maybe we need some standarization, and again deploring Iridescent's being inactive. ] (]) 21:26, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Hmm. NYBrad, that inactivity might be a good occasion for an RfMC ("Moral Comment"). Should I ask Jimbo for a raise for iridescent? Well, Iridescent, I'll tell you what. I moved that article from AfC on the assumption that it was the "other" kind of parish (and it seems more than likely that formerly the two were, to some extent, the same). Since we're talking about nothing but a former administrative division, it is indeed appropriate to remove it as a separate article and to merge whatever notable content there is to Wigtownshire, where it belongs. I will do so, and place a link to this discussion and to the summary in ]. As before, I reserve the right to be wrong and will try to do better next time. Iridescent, given your inactivity I thank you all the more for dropping by here. You might be pleased to know that I have made a delicious dry vodka martini, and since I'm out of olives I used capers, and I'm drinking to your health *clink* right now. ] (]) 23:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I've been burned by this one before, and you will too. The "everything that's an identifiable geographic location must have its own article" brigade were responsible for ] being split into pointless segments, resulting in the ] article which so irked TCO and pals. Arguing with the provisional wing of the ARS and their fellow-travellers is never worth the effort. – ] 19:42, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Hmmm I hope you're wrong. I used to get along fine with them, except for maybe one recent addition to the team. Hey, you're here again--thanks for dropping by. I get burned all the time, haha--but all too often by overzealous NPPers, rarely by the squad. ] (]) 05:04, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| How can I convince user:Sky258 that, per ], airport connections need independent sources? Nearly all his/her are unsourced and reverted. Warnings did not help but blocking seems over the top. Do you have any ideas? <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 17:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == If you have time ... == | |||
| *Hmm I disagree: they were warned by multiple editors, and the content is unsourced. I was going to ask about talk page consensus, but there is project-wide consensus... ] (]) 22:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| *:Okay. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 23:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Football sock == | |||
| Can I ask a favor? I have been helping a new editor with a ship article, and noticed that he had started another ship article at ] . . . and cut and paste moved it to ], then made the original into a redirect. The version at the later title has since been edited by others, and I've dropped a correct version of the "translated article" template onto its talkpage; he had attempted to add it to the talkpage of what's now the redirect. Textbook case of needing a histmerge; but I looked at the instructions, and I looked again, and I asked a friend on Skype if he could explain it to me, and he said "Get another admin to do it," and I have to agree. It's utterly beyond me :-( Could you possibly whip it into shape when you have time? No great urgency, and I apologize, but this computer stuff is hard :-( ] (]) 20:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Not college football, but still... See ]. I agree with GS and don't know why others are defending the user (casting aspersions indeed). Creating an RfA...doing so many moves it makes me dizzy...leaving trolling messages for other users... I'm on the edge of blocking myself for disruption, but a check would be helpful. Thanks.--] (]) 21:35, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| *OK, this really only works here because it concerns a recent, uncomplicated article. Always check first to see if there are already deleted edits (in step 2) that you need to remove after all of this. | |||
| :The ANI discussion has derailed into a discussion about whether Footballnerd2007 is using LLM, which they clearly are, but the user is choosing, unwisely, to wikilawyer, and GS, also unwisely, is trying to "nail" them. I thought about hatting it, but it's so rapid and I'm not sure where exactly I'd hat it. Oh, btw, another on my list above - read the user's Talk page - it's a cornucopia of warnings.--] (]) 22:10, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :# Move ] to ]--"Yes, delete the page". | |||
| ::What a mess. That got out of hand quickly--I'm also not happy with the alien's response. A check was run on the user, and I guess it showed nothing... ] (]) 15:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :# Go to USNS etc. and restore the entire history. | |||
| :::Thanks. They are now being "mentored".--] (]) 18:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :# Restore the most recent version of the "real" article. | |||
| :::Drmies, alien was obviously not trying to defend the user (you can tell through certain, subtle signs, such as the use of a face palm emoji and the phrase "You're not helping your case right now"), they were trying to de-escalate things. Is this really how you want to treat them? ] (]) 20:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :Finally, ask {{user|LadyofShalott}} if you did it correctly. Lady? ;) ] (]) 21:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Sorry, but I don't know what prompted this, and I certainly don't understand that last, loaded question. Did I say that they were trying to "defend" the user? Where? What you could to is ask what I meant, if you're really interested in me and what I think. ] (]) 03:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ==Mail call== | |||
| ::Thank you very much for doing that. I think it is quite beyond my ability without someone physically standing behind me calling out instructions. I was nerving myself to try, since it needed doing, but I would probably have made a huge and expensive mess. ] (]) 20:41, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {{ygm}} I stopped e-mailing you long ago, since it always bounced, but perhaps it may be worth trying again? ] | ] 09:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC). | |||
| *YES. I've been so lonely! ] (]) 15:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 == | |||
| == Edit-warring report == | |||
| ] from the past month (December 2024). | |||
| I was just reviewing your report when I got derailed by the Miliband vandalism, but you were taken care of by De728631. I particularly didn't like the combination of edit-warring and infringement. Nor did his edit summary make much sense, although your ES response was entertaining.--] (]) 21:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Ah, I've been involved with BLP vandalism, I think, in that article. Very exciting. Thanks for the note, Bbb--wasn't it obvious? ] (]) 21:55, 3 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| <div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap"> | |||
| ==Hey, teach!== | |||
| <div style="flex: 1 0 20em"> | |||
| Question for you, if you're willing. In American English, in this sentence: | |||
| ] '''Administrator changes''' | |||
| :When the flood waters hit, thousands of board feet of timber caught fire from leaking gas, and was swept downstream. | |||
| :] ] | |||
| :] {{hlist|class=inline | |||
| |] | |||
| |] | |||
| }} | |||
| :] {{hlist|class=inline | |||
| |] | |||
| |] | |||
| |] | |||
| |] | |||
| |] | |||
| |] | |||
| |] | |||
| }} | |||
| ] '''CheckUser changes''' | |||
| is "was" the correct form of "to be", or is "were" proper? ] (]) 00:45, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :] {{hlist|class=inline | |||
| *I don't think anything is correct there, except for some fire. ] (]) 01:02, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |] | |||
| *And "were" is correct. Thousands of board feet is countable and plural. ] (]) 01:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |] | |||
| :{{ec}} I'll be bold. Were because the subject is thousands. Also, the second comma should go. Now I'll wait for my grade.--] (]) 01:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |] | |||
| ::No, the second comma may stay. It is neither forbidden (per pseudo-Malleus) nor mandatory (per US usage). ] (]) 01:07, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |] | |||
| :::OK, "were" is what I thought. Could someone please tell , who changed it to "was" and then reverted me when I changed it back. (I've had several back-and-forths with him about English usage, and his certainty about his understanding is a bit less than it probably should be.) Thanks. ] (]) 01:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |] | |||
| ::::{{ec}} What is it, one of those "pause" commas that some comma-happy writers sprinkle everywhere?--] (]) 01:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| }} | |||
| ::::(ec) I hadn't thought about the second comma, but now that I look at it I'd prefer to get rid of it, since it's all one continuous thought after the first comma. ] (]) 01:17, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :] ] | |||
| *US usage pretty much dictates such commas ("introductory material before the subject"). Malleus taught me that such commas are not necessary and a matter of taste, convention. BMK, that editor commented about the commas in the article; I haven't looked at that yet but it's worth checking out. ] (]) 01:20, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :] ] | |||
| **I'll take a look. Check , though, and the use of the strange expression "Reclamation ebonics" . ] (]) 01:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*(persisting) Yeah, but we were talking about the second comma. The first comma is after the "introductory material before the subject".--] (]) 01:29, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*Oops, my apologies. But something similar applies: it's a matter of taste. Most tastes, though, dictate that it should go, I think, including mine. ] (]) 01:46, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::The editor just reverted you. ] (]) 01:55, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Thanks, I'll go away now; BMK is no doubt sick of me interfering in his conversation.--] (]) 02:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::(ec) Absolutely not! Please don't go on my account! I wouldn't have noticed the second comma if it wasn't for you! ] (]) 02:09, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::That editor is an idiot, then. ] (]) 02:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::That's . ] (]) 02:09, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Similarly, in "", shouldn't that "are" be "is"? ] <span style="color:blue">•</span> ] 04:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *. ] (]) 04:41, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| **I think it either needs to be re-written in the manner of the text in Drmies' link, or it should say "is", since it's described as a collection, and the singular form is used throughout the article. ] (]) 04:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ***Also . If I was inconsistent, I apologize: the plural should have it, if only because all the scholarships are British. ] (]) 04:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ****Got them. ] (]) 05:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| </div> | |||
| == R. == | |||
| <div style="flex: 1 0 20em"> | |||
| ] | |||
| ] '''Oversight changes''' | |||
| Oh, but you're an admin, you are different from all the other simple and stupid editors. You're more, you're best on every conceivable topic and, thanks to your ideology, you have the perfect discernment on what are reliable sources or not. You should have told me earlier, you wouldn't have wasted my time. --] (]) 18:24, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :] {{hlist|class=inline | |||
| *I learned that "personal attacks and IP trolling" in Italian is "attacchi personali e trolling da IP". Please tell me what my ideology is; my psychoanalist is a structuralist and does not agree that I have an ideology. ] (]) 18:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |] | |||
| |] | |||
| == '''The Olive Branch''': A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1) == | |||
| |] | |||
| |] | |||
| Welcome to the first edition of ''The Olive Branch''. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in ] (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are ], but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to ]. | |||
| |] | |||
| ] | |||
| }} | |||
| In this issue: | |||
| :] ] | |||
| * '''Background''': A brief overview of the DR ecosystem. | |||
| * '''Research''': The most recent DR data | |||
| * '''Survey results''': Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey | |||
| * '''Activity analysis''': Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums | |||
| * '''DR Noticeboard comparison''': How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August | |||
| * '''Discussion update''': Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate | |||
| * '''Proposal''': It's time to close the ]. Agree or disagree? | |||
| <big><center>]</center></big> | |||
| --''The Olive Branch'' 18:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- EdwardsBot 0345 --> | |||
| == MAfestival Brugge == | |||
| Latest creation ] - not from de but from nl, not a language I speak - I picked some "raisins" - please have a look if I misunderstood or left things out that should be there, --] (]) 21:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Hmm I can't easily access JSTOR from home, so I'll have a look tomorrow. I don't know what the main source is for your text so I can't compare. I would, if I were you, tweak the "Mission" section, which is a bit close to whatever the original was. Brugge--it must be a lovely town. ] (]) 22:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Deletion == | |||
| Oh, but we don't have enough on theatre! — ] (]) 05:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Right. Well, I ticked it off anyway. Did you read ''Kwasi Boachi'' yet? ] (]) 05:11, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Haven't found it (at a reasonable price). Starting university next week, so I have a couple other things to focus on. That and the Mrs wants me to watch '']'' with her every night (3 to 6 episodes) — ] (]) 05:13, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*I took care of your nom for the The brothers film and left you a suggestion. ] (]) 04:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::*Yep, saw that. Having the devil's own time looking for sources online though — ] (]) 04:26, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::*Well, I got you started on ], haha. It's also a great novel. ] (]) 04:39, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::*, and for background. But it's not much. ] (]) 04:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::*I opted for ], based on the source. ] (]) 04:57, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::*I'll have a look later tonight. — ] (]) 05:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::*Well, done one. Can't use my review of your nom for it though. That would look suspicious hehe. — ] (]) 14:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Disambiguation link notification for September 5== | |||
| Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
| It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 12:15, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Email == | |||
| {{you've got mail}} | |||
| </div> | |||
| == WMF changing the edit window == | |||
| </div> | |||
| ] '''Guideline and policy news''' | |||
| For page stalkers (i.e. Mandarax) | |||
| * Following ], ] was adopted as a ]. | |||
| * A ] is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space. | |||
| ] '''Technical news''' | |||
| * The Nuke feature also now ] to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions. | |||
| ] '''Arbitration''' | |||
| In two weeks, WMF will be changing the edit window. Read about it ]. ] (]) 22:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| * Following the ], the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: {{noping|CaptainEek}}, {{noping|Daniel}}, {{noping|Elli}}, {{noping|KrakatoaKatie}}, {{noping|Liz}}, {{noping|Primefac}}, {{noping|ScottishFinnishRadish}}, {{noping|Theleekycauldron}}, {{noping|Worm That Turned}}. | |||
| :Thanks. Your notifications are appreciated. In this case, however, it shouldn't affect me, since I'm not a Vectorian. Good thing too, as the "edit tools" toolbar which they're removing is something which I use all the time (although what I use is an "enhanced" version; maybe they're only removing the unenhanced version). I didn't read it too closely since it's not ''supposed'' to affect me, but I think some of what they're removing is stuff I've already removed for myself.<p>In other news, since this is ''the'' Wikiplace to discuss ''Dr. Who'' and specifically Amy Pond, there's an ] which may interest you. ] <span style="color:blue">•</span> ] 23:41, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::You should probably leave the comment on the edit tools toolbar anyways, to help people like me who would hate to see it go. ] ] 23:48, 5 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::I have no idea what any of you are talking about. Amy Pond is left on your toolbar? Wait--wasn't she dead? ] (]) 01:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Apparently, she has . Dr. Who? Dr. No? Dr. Blofeld? Drmies? ] (]) 02:21, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::The real question is: was she a Browncoat? <span style="font-family: Lucida Calligraphy">]<span style="color: #008888">of</span>]</span> 02:29, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Ah, I always thought Lady had some River Tam in her. ] (]) 04:18, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I also have no idea what anyone's talking about, including myself.<p>I have a tidbit which some may find shocking. Until a few weeks ago, when I learned about it on ''Jeopardy!'', I didn't know who ] was – not a clue that he had anything to do with James Bond. Drmies, I've seen you refer to Dr. Blofeld as "Ernst", and I guess I assumed this meant that you knew the user in Real Life and were calling him by his Real Name or something.<p>Is Dr. Mies also some famous person/character whom everyone but me knows about? ] <span style="color:blue">•</span> ] 08:17, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Yes, Dr. Mies was the lab assistant of ], the epidemiologist who traced the source of a ] outbreak in the ] district of London. Mies would assist Snow in the application of ] and ] in Snow's primary occupation as one of the first ] in London, but also helped him in the record keeping that was essential to tracing the locus of the ]. Mies' contribution is not well known, because his presence is London was, let us say, unofficial, but it's been well-known to choleraistas for some time. ] (]) 08:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::Is that really true? ] (] 08:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::::No, of course not. ] (]) 08:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::Great story, and I love the ] interaction. ] <span style="color:blue">•</span> ] 17:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::::::Me too! ] (]) 17:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::::Hi, I'm Drmies. ] (]) 17:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::::::Wait: ceci n'est pas Drmies. ] (]) 17:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::::"The Treachery of Drmies"? ] ]] 18:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {{od}}I think you all need to read ]. ] 18:07.5, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :I'd rather not talk about my time at the Academy... <span style="font-family: Lucida Calligraphy">]<span style="color: #008888">of</span>]</span> 18:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::What, you also went to a doctor of philosophy? With a poster of Rasputin and a beard down to his knees? ] (]) 18:56, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::There's more than one answer to these questions. <span style="font-family: Lucida Calligraphy">]<span style="color: #008888">of</span>]</span> 16:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ] '''Miscellaneous''' | |||
| == Signature format changing in two weeks == | |||
| * A ] is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the ]. ] | |||
| ---- | |||
| Another announcement for the crowd. WMF is turning on HTML5 in two weeks. This will cause the <nowiki><font></nowiki> tag to disappear. This may affect your signature if you do something fancy. If you need help to change to the different format, leave your name and Mandarax or I will help. Now back to my crying after Mandarax's Amy Pond statement above. Why are the Gods taking Amy away from me? ] (]) 00:14, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {{center|{{flatlist| | |||
| *So I'm safe, with my totally pedestrian signature. Bg, I'm sorry for your loss. ] (]) 18:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| }}}} | |||
| <!-- | |||
| -->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 15:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)</small>}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1266956718 --> | |||
| ==WP is not a Multilingual dictionary== | |||
| == Punt == | |||
| Please take a look at ] and comment. Though this may be implied by other policies, I think it's worthwhile making it explicit. Thanks, --] (]) 19:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == FORDROCKEFELLER1974 == | |||
| * Hi, Wat moet ik zeggen, goede nacht of goede morgen. Alleen voor jouw blik review, heb ik een willekeurig punt in dit ] (]) 01:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Ja Justice, goeienavond hier--half tien. Ik heb die discussie gezien, vorige week, en ik heb naar dat Merinews gekeken. Ik vind het moeilijk: het is meer dan een website, dat wel, maar citizen journalism blijft citizen journalism, zelfs met een editorial board (die niet zo groot is, eerlijk gezegd). Een essay in ''Studies in Women Writers'' (en een in ''Indian Women's Short Fiction'') is op zichzelf ook niet zo behulpzaam: voor WP:PROF moet je niet gepubliceerd hebben maar moet er ook over je gepubliceerd zijn. Wat betreft die AfD, ik zou zelf neutraal gebleven zijn; ik hou er niet van om schrijvers te verwijderen, maar er valt niet echt aan de consensus te tornen. Als je verder wilt, dan zul je Deletion review moeten overwegen; de administrator zal zijn mening niet meer veranderen, denk ik. Het allerbeste, ] (]) 02:32, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| See {{UTRS|98810}}. The claim is that Bishonen allowed a new account to be created, in comments over at ]. What are your thoughts? Note that I have ''not'' looked at the checkuser technical data and... am dubious... --] (]) 23:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| * Ik begrijp, misschien ga ik naar de verwijdering beoordeling. een mooie dag verder, en bedankt.] (]) 08:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| * |
*Ha, yes, but Bish said that before I had a looked and confirmed that Looney had logged in (and I just checked again, to make sure). I can't read the VRT (I still can't log in) so I don't know what the "compromised" thing was, but this is socking going back to 2021. ] (]) 02:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
| ***What does "Afd" mean in Dutch?--] (]) 14:57, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| == Manuscripts and redirects == | |||
| Perhaps you could take a look at this - a new but prolific ip with all the jargon. Possible returning sock? Greatly concerned about the reputation of Philip II of Spain. Cheers, ] (]) 01:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Earlier I redirected <s>]</s> ] to ]: is that correct, or does the MS whatever contain more than just the LH? Would it be appropriate to redirect ] or just ] to ]? <span style="font-family: Lucida Calligraphy">]<span style="color: #008888">of</span>]</span> 02:14, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *{{U|Johnbod}}, there is a copious amount of logged-out editing there, though I don't see direct evidence of them using IPs to circumvent policy--but that the same person is editing without logging in is indisputable (and I warned them), so that leaves the actual IPs. In many cases the logged-out editing is from VPNs that have been blocked before, by ]--who I see is retired? What is this world coming to... So I'm not exactly sure what to do, since that's not really my cup of tea, and ] isn't very insightful. I see ] is running that but they are not a CU, and it's at least three or four different ranges. ], if you know how to handle them, can you have a look and do what's right on those ranges? Yes, Philip II is certainly well worth our time. Thanks, ] (]) 04:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| *Hey Lady, thanks for that; I was actually going to do that yesterday. (BTW, I'm watching Bill Clinton speak, and that's always a pleasure--it's like watching some craftsman ply his trade when he's really good at it.) Anyway, yes and no: those MSS usually contain more, though Trinity doesn't, , and neither does --but then again, both contain '']'', so they both do contain more, if only a little bit. As far as I'm concerned, those redirects are appropriate. Think about it: those manuscripts are really known for those collections of homilies, not for containing the ''Poema''. Hey, thanks for all your help--there's a lot that goes into it. I'm not even sure about the categories, the overlap between Homiletics and Sermons. Along the way I felt I had to make ]. And I'm wondering if we shouldn't have a set of categories for Medieval prose, in the different languages (maybe ] is watching...). ] (]) 02:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Oh, I think 335 is an older numbering. The B numbering apparently is on the binding, both seem to be in use. ] (]) 02:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *And one more thing: different sources give different numbers for how many sermons, etc. Very confusing. ] (]) 02:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Ha, I was wondering where those brackets came from--I've expanded ], since septenary is really just a specific kind of heptameter. ] (]) 03:43, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Do you have a second? == | ||
| Could you walk me through reassigning user rights? I've discovered some PGAME at ] and I blocked them while I redo the user rights. Sorry, I've not done much of this. I've got Special:UserRights/54rt678 open. ] (]) 04:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Maybe you can make sense of . (Full disclosure: I don't like articles about common English words.)--] (]) 14:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :The user has 509 edits, and 250 of them were done three days ago on the linked sandbox. ] (]) 04:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Re added delete tag == | |||
| ::Do I merely uncheck, leave a reason and save (and watch)? Just something I haven't seen done recently. ] (]) 04:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::It was so simple I figured it out myself, but I needed another editor to reassure me. Don't mind doing the job, but am sometimes nervous about affecting someone unduly. ] (]) 05:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Sure thing. That editor is headed for an indef: incompetence mixed with promotional editing. ] (]) 14:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Not a very mature approach, granted. Hey, this morning I welcomed (after I reverted) a user who'd in Caleb Williams's article. It will get weirder than that... ] (]) 14:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::At least they apologized. I really loathe those kinds of edits, though not as much as the "daddy" variation. ] (]) 14:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Among their last 4 edits, two were adding commas to TP's post. Looking at that I'm not sure why we would trust them to edit any longer. ] ] 14:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Maybe, ], but I found nothing--I was thinking of various returning nuisances but saw no evidence. Wait and see, I think. ] (]) 15:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::I tried to make it as plain as I could to the PGAMER that all their edits would be under close observation henceforth. If they can't ''hold themselves'' accountable, how can we? ] (]) 16:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::Ha, is that a rhetorical question? ] (]) 17:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == CS1 error on ] == | |||
| ] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that ] performed by you, on the page ], may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: | |||
| * A ] error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | ) | |||
| Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can . | |||
| Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->] (]) 23:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == CS1 error on ] == | |||
| ] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that ] performed by you, on the page ], may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: | |||
| * A ] error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | ) | |||
| Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can . | |||
| Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->] (]) 23:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == ]/] == | |||
| Sorry, That the only way I know how to make delete request(Re-added delete tag), and have done clear by admin to be notable in Misplaced Pages & you have to understand my English --] (]) 05:14, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Returned to ] AGAIN, with that nonsensical ref about a BENFICA match for a SPORTING championship win (reverted it on the spot)! I guess the rest can stay (should you see that the sources are appropriate, if not remove it), will duly compose it (i.e. Style of play section) when i get home. | |||
| == Troubang == | |||
| Attentively ] (]) 19:44, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks. Have you seen ] and my comments there? And I'm reminded I must fix ], mentioning this and citing uses of the word 'troubang' to describe it. ] (]) 06:17, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *I've made a few more related edits. Somewhere along the way I removed a very reliable reference (because it verified some totally irrelevant info), ] (]) 05:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Books & Bytes – Issue 66 == | ||
| <div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> | |||
| So am I getting the sources wrong, or is a naked woman taking a shower to wash blood off her par for the course for Dutch teens? Did you watch '']'' and can maybe tell me if my OR (which is not going in the article) is correct, that actually happened? . — ] (]) 06:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| <div style="font-size: 1.5em; margin: 0 100px;"> | |||
| *Okay, '']'' confirms it (to be added later) although the blood is actually attacking(?) her. BTW, ] needs some figurative lovin' from a Dutch speaker. I'm at a brick wall — ] (]) 10:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ]</div> | |||
| **Well, that DVD article says it was shocking. But par for the course, maybe--in those days TV ads for shampoo showed breasticles, at least partly, and such imagery (of secondary sexual characteristics) was not unusual or shocking in its own right. I thought Pleuni Touw was pretty hot, though I never liked her first or her last name. Gotta go to a meeting; I'll get back to this later. Hey, thanks again for putting this on the map. ] (]) 14:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| <div style="line-height: 1.2;"> | |||
| ***Well, coming from a North American background such imagery is rather shocking, especially for the 1970s (on network TV!). Snuck a peek at the scene online, and I'm surprised they didn't use a ]. That would have been really effective. — ] (]) 15:07, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| <span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">'''The Misplaced Pages Library''': ''Books & Bytes''</span><br /> | |||
| ****Where's the peek sneaking taking place? ] (]) 17:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Issue 66, November – December 2024 | |||
| *****Found it on YouTube, as I can't pay to access a licensed website. — ] (]) 23:15, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| </div> | |||
| <div style="margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em;"> | |||
| * Les Jours and East View Press join the library | |||
| * Tech tip: Newspapers.com | |||
| <big>''']'''</big> | |||
| </div> | |||
| </div> | |||
| <small>Sent by ] on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --17:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)</small> | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9 (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=28051347 --> | |||
| == Banned cease-and-desist photographer == | |||
| == Alcatraz gang == | |||
| This will be lead DYK tomorrow, starting at 9am US Eastern time. ] ] 23:17, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Excellent, Pumpkin! Thank you so much for picking up on that. ] (]) 23:19, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *I see you put Coker back--thanks for that as well. ] (]) 23:20, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::No problem and thanks! ] ] 23:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::OOPS I goofed in reading the table, it's Sunday, 9 Sep at noon it should appear. ] ] 10:55, 8 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| I am really frazzled now. Someone is . I can not find any trace of that. You should expect some traces of that on ENWP, Meta or Commons, but no. | |||
| ==Hey Papa Bear== | |||
| Getting any sleep yet? If you say yes, then we know you are dumping all the parental duties on Mrs. Drmies, btw. ] - ] ] <small><b>]</b></small> 13:03, 8 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Yeah, I suck at lactating, that's a fact... ] (]) 01:46, 9 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Do you (or your stalkers) know anything about this? It sounds a bit fishy to me right now. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 14:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Kingdom of Sine renamed == | |||
| *No clue. I'll add to your note. Thanks, ] (]) 16:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| **Thanks, seeing the edits of this account, the editor did this wiki-wide. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 16:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :(stalker comment) I don't really have anything conclusive to add, but from what I see, the user who uploaded the images is not banned or even warned from either enwiki or Commons. He appears to be a professional photographer who uploads many of his images to commons, and then Misplaced Pages, replacing lower-quality existing ones if necessary (I guess there is a small chance its all a big copyright misuse but you'd have thought that would have been picked up upon, particularly as his work involves famous buildings and peopel so probably gets a lot of views). You can see on his talk page there is a message from an IP user in 2019 (who stopped editing in the same year) regarding 'excessive use of own images'. I'm unsure if any such rule actually exists, but in my opinion it was not applicable anyway as the use of the images improved the site, were not self-promotional in terms of including watermarks or anything to overtly identify the contributor, and was not excessive proliferation of photos within individual articles. The reverting user has only made 92 edits, half of which were reverting the photographer today. Not sure why they would even take this course of action, expect perhaps they noticed an image (one of their own?) replaced by the photographer editor, read their talk page, decided the 2019 message was something official and unilaterally decided it justified reverting all recent additions (in the same style as the 2019 user, which is suspicious too). ] (]) 17:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| I'm trying to figure out what to do about these claims. Found this source but don't know what it says about renaming. What I do know is that it gives some odd dates, eg "Maissa Waly Dione Mané, 44 ans de règne, 1185-1229" which doesn't coincide in date or length of reign with Tamsier's article ]. And of course if this is a source for the renaming of the Kingdom of Sine, that doesn't make sense either. The other source is the Saar article we both have and I don't see where page 239 (at least this time Tamsier used the real page number instead of a pdf number) backs any renaming. Comments? ] (]) 13:10, 8 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :], thank you for doing some of that leg work--I had looked at various things but managed to miss that IP comment. And that IP comment: well, "excessive" use is a thing frowned upon but you laid out the (common sense) practices pretty neatly; thank you for that as well. ] (]) 18:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :{{tl|tps}} That photographer's license terms seem to take a strict position on the exact way credit must be given in off-wiki uses of their work. I'm not sure if they have pursued settlements against good-faith reusers or in other ways headed into license-trolling. I, like others, cannot find discussion about it on enwiki or commons.{{pb}}There was a previous case (long ago, different license-holder) where consensus formed that the ''effect'' of mass use of a certain creator's content on-wiki was to induce innocent/good-faith but not "strictly by the not-quite-expected license terms" use off-wiki, enabling forced legal settlements. There was thought that the creator themself was actually intentional about using wiki in this way, and that all of this exceeded the community's tolerance and good-faith. ] (]) 18:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| *Oh, I see now what you mean. I'll look at it. What I can tell you is that the article (which is fairly interesting) gives a list of kings and their history provided by a member of the royal family. The second part is commentary on that list and on a number of other lists of names compiled over the last century and more. I'll look for a naming issue there and in other places. And I've done some cleaning on ] and ] is now a proper redirect. ] (]) 02:17, 9 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::], yes, thanks--I remember a case too and I think it played out on Commons, that guy who posted videos of himself ejaculating and stuff, and there was a guy who sucked his own ****. But more to the point, I also remember a case of a photographer who, it was judged, was basically here to promote their own business and I think an ANI post led to removal of some of those images. But I can't see what practical guidelines ] is supposed to have broken. ] (]) 18:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::I have no idea if there is off-wiki evidence of actual legal actions against re-users, or claims that WP sites are inducement. But I also assume anything I'd find by googling I couldn't mention here for OUTING anyway. ] (]) 18:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Yep, and any kind of case should be either discussed on-wiki or submitted privately if there's some privacy concern, rather than signaled (if that's even the word) with a boilerplate and vague edit summary. ] (]) 18:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :], I have reverted those edits. Thanks for bringing it up. ] (]) 18:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::Your welcome. I hope the editor just made a mistake. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 02:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :For every one who's interested, please see ]. ] (]) 21:42, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Just to clarify posts on Miijumaaru talk page == | |||
| ==Please help== | |||
| ] has a personal vendetta against me. As you can see form his history that he has abused his administrative powers by giving people excessive blocks. As you can see from my edits that Much of my edits have been of good faith. User:KWW has no sense of professionalism. Please go through my edits and you will see that I have contributed with good faith, User:KWW has abused his powers. Please take this up with the Arbitraion committee and look into my case, as well as User: KWW. He is in deep violation of his powers. Personal vendetta has no place in wikipedia and especially Admin abuse/trolling. | |||
| The conversation I pinged you in at was a continuation of the post right above at . The editor broke it into two parts for some reason and I wasn't about to correct the nesting issue since the conversation turned turbulent. Since they did multiple changes to articles I thought it would be good to let them know that <nowiki>{{main}}</nowiki> is never used in the lead per the template itself. This was made aware to Tennis Project awhile back and several of us have been slowly fixing tennis articles to comply. A daunting task. I hope this helps you understand the situation I encountered. ] (]) 20:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Please, my block has been excessive, because of User:KWW. Can you help me by monitoring me and taking my case to the Arbitration committee, as well as User:KWW? Thank you (] (]) 01:00, 9 September 2012 (UTC)) | |||
| :Dewan357 has already been turned down by BASC.—](]) 01:17, 9 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :I have no interest in helping someone with a sock record like yours. Some of your edits may be fine, but you go about it the wrong way. ] (]) 01:43, 9 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == On a side note to above template talk == | |||
| == Restoring blocked editors edits == | |||
| While template "main" should not be used in the lead, the template "further" is less clear on placement. I just looked and the template "see also" also says not to use in the lead and is used only at the top of sections. "Further" says nothing about placement and I can't help but wonder if that should also say not to use in the lead. Where best to bring that up? On the narrow Template:Further talk page? Or is there a more general template talk page that it should be talked about? Thanks. ] (]) 20:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| I consider going through a list of reversions and restoring edits by a blocked editor to be a violation of ] and ]. Please do not restore any of his edits. It's only pointless to revert a banned editor's edits if other editors undermine the attempt by restoring the edits.—](]) 02:40, 9 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *That's a good question, and I don't have an answer for that--but I think ] is the first place I would go to. I don't know that that page gets a lot of traffic, though... But if, as you say, there is a consensus for the other one, you might could ping some of the editors who discussed that. ] (]) 21:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| *:I posted at Manual of Style/Layout first to see if anyone knows the answer. Thanks. ] (]) 22:06, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 02:43, 14 January 2025
 Archives |
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
DCAU page
Hi! I'm currently engaged in an edit war with a user who believes that two films released in 2017 and 2019 are canon to an animated universe of TV shows from 1992-2006. I've provided multiple clear as day sources from the people who worked on these that show this isn't the case.
You can read it here. https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:DC_Animated_Universe#Article_Cleanup Walterwhitehartwell (talk) 23:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- I tried to read that: it's clear as mud. But yes you are in the middle of an edit war, and you really need to stop. If you want that talk page discussion, and your editing career, to go anywhere, you might could try making smaller edits and explaining them on the talk page--briefly, with sources. Drmies (talk) 23:31, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- Blanking your talk page is not a good idea. Drmies (talk) 23:32, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- Walterwhitehartwell, is this your only account? Drmies (talk) 23:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. I had a previous account a while back that I lost my password too.
- The person who I'm having an edit war with literally went and removed my sources, while his sources are non-existent or incredibly flimsy. Walterwhitehartwell (talk) 20:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
With respect to Bai Jingting
Hi, I seen few deletion, need clarity to improve. 1. For Philanthropic activity the source 8th line mentions artist name, need to understand why the source is doubtful. 2. If "features" is wrong vocabulary could it be replaced with other word? As new writer I observed many articles already accepted those details from years. Need to understand how to represent here with proper writing. SakuraSmart (talk) 20:00, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not every time someone is mentioned in some competition they're "featured". If someone is featured it means they get a special placement, and there is no evidence at all that this is what is happening here. Yes, it's a buzzword now used for every guest performance and appearance, and we need to fight back, like linguistic warriors. I don't really know what you mean with "source 8th line", but if you're talking about this source, it's pretty obvious to me that that gossipy glossy website is NOT an acceptable, neutral, independent source for BLPs. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. For Philanthropic activity link was used. 8th line suggest artist donation towards natural disaster. It was removed stating doubtful. If we mention actual ranks of few listings, instead of "feature" I hope it's fine provided link attached is not from gossip site and provides enough evidence. SakuraSmart (talk) 23:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- What 8th line? I see five lines, and then some weird image that took me 26 clicks on "Page Down" to get through--and then there's comments. Anyway, I see his name is mentioned, along with dozens of others, on a website that at best looks like a gossipy site for fans of entertainers. Whatever that site is, it's not publishing journalism; please see WP:RS. How much did he even give? Or did the record company give a few bucks in his name, to add to his resume? Who knows? Drmies (talk) 02:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh you mean the seventh line of that picture with a list of donors--who knows what that picture is, and what its authority is. Again, that's not how we operate here. It's too easy to manipulate pictures, and there's no source or context--"according to incomplete statistics" actually expresses part of the problem well. Drmies (talk) 02:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. For Philanthropic activity link was used. 8th line suggest artist donation towards natural disaster. It was removed stating doubtful. If we mention actual ranks of few listings, instead of "feature" I hope it's fine provided link attached is not from gossip site and provides enough evidence. SakuraSmart (talk) 23:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
References
- "持续更新！汪峰章子怡林志玲黄晓明等为河南暴雨捐款". ent.ifeng.com (in Chinese). Retrieved 2024-12-17.
You are being discussed here
Misplaced Pages:Administrative action review#Misplaced Pages:Administrative action review Doug Weller talk 16:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Very exciting, Doug--thanks! Drmies (talk) 19:54, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) Run, run, the horse is a revenant!!! Geoff | 20:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- A tremendous amount of truly reprehensible stuff does happen on this talk page. However, in my opinion, none thus far had been quite so egregious as using the word "revenant". That said, I myself understood the word immediately by way of it being the true and accurate translation from the Danish of the title of Ibsen's Ghosts. -- Softlavender (talk) 05:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hey I just learned a new word. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, @Softlavender:, a joke explained is not much of a joke. But what I meant by using the word was precisely a reference to the Danish sense in that the ghost of the quite dead argument had been revived by a (now blocked) user who started the (now closed) discussion. Let us hope for the new year that the argument inappropriately raised from the dead remains in the grave to which it was returned and that no further sticks are raised. Heaven forfend that I should post reprehensible stuff on this hallowed site. Geoff | 14:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Let the dead bury their dead. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- A tremendous amount of truly reprehensible stuff does happen on this talk page. However, in my opinion, none thus far had been quite so egregious as using the word "revenant". That said, I myself understood the word immediately by way of it being the true and accurate translation from the Danish of the title of Ibsen's Ghosts. -- Softlavender (talk) 05:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) Run, run, the horse is a revenant!!! Geoff | 20:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
User:Pinzunski/User:SukunaZenin and others
Thought they had given up and taken a new hobby, but nope... Here is this IP (https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/2001:8A0:67D4:8700:461:2CED:6508:F5E3), for instance continuing with the transfer speculation at Francisco Trincão (and reinserting their ref that "supported" Sporting CP winning the title last season by mentioning a S.L. Benfica match!!), duly reverted! Ah, with a completely polite and encyclopedical edit summary, so let's see what their reply will be (because they WILL reinstate their version again!)...
Happy 2025, take care RevampedEditor (talk) 16:37, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Edit warring started already, please intervene (you or somebody) ASAP! --RevampedEditor (talk) 17:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- User:Girth Summit, User:Izno, can you please have a look, given your experience with Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/SukunaZenin/Archive? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:53, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- RevampedEditor, I found another one (User:Lazaric12), and removed some of that awful content. Take care old friend! Drmies (talk) 16:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Happy New Year, Drmies! In 2024, other editors thanked you 1093 times using the thanks tool on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the #11 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024. Congratulations and, well, thank you for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! Mz7 (talk) 19:39, 31 December 2024 (UTC) |
- Haha thanks, Mz7--and I just hit you with a +2! Drmies (talk) 15:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Bbb23, happy new year, and how is it that you are thanked more than me??? I thought I was the good cop! Drmies (talk) 15:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- It's a conspiratorial ploy by the perps to cozy up to the bad cop.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Shoot I just thanked User:Gerda Arendt for an edit, and she was already ahead of me. Drmies (talk) 17:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- It's a conspiratorial ploy by the perps to cozy up to the bad cop.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
 | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
- As explained on my talk, I hope I do more real thank-you than lazy click-thanks ;) - Happy new year 2025, opened with trumpet fanfares that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page has). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Liebster Immanuel, Herzog der Frommen, BWV 123, my story today 300 years after the first performance, is up for GAN. Dada Masilo will be my story tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- My story today is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. Did you watch Masilo talk and dance? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:54, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
"Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Traditional monarchy (2nd nomination)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Traditional monarchy (2nd nomination) 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/2025 January 1 § Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Traditional monarchy (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached. Liz 01:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Edits to Columbia High School (New Jersey)
The article for Columbia High School (New Jersey) definitely needs additional sources and has to some issues of tone addressed. There are sources about the school available to update many of the issues you highlighted. Alansohn (talk) 23:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Happy New Year, Alansohn. I hope there are, and I hope they're grrrreat. That article was a bit excessive. Drmies (talk) 00:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Sockpuppet
Got someone editing as an IP to escape a block and complain at the Teahouse. Tarlby 00:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nevermind, they got globally blocked literally the minute I sent this lol. Tarlby 00:12, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oh, it's that one again. So boring. I wonder what their New Year's resolutions include. Haha, "this year I'm going to look for North Korean proxies". Good luck! Drmies (talk) 00:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Resolution 1: Complain about being banned on a website for almost 7 hours" Tarlby 00:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- I actually forgot how long it's been. Has it been a year? Ah--I blocked User:MidAtlanticBaby indefinitely on June 18. I see they're now actually banned by the Foundation: I don't know if you know this, but you have to go REALLY crazy to get banned by the Foundation. Drmies (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, definitely didn't know that...Also, this has been going on for MONTHS? Tarlby 00:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. When I say "childish" I mean it. This is likely a somewhat grown person with a driver license and the right to vote, who could be watching Georgia play football and make soup for their family and walk the dog. Instead, they're harassing a bunch of people including one who had nothing to do with them getting their dumb ass blocked. But they know some shit about proxies and whatnot and now they're just being cute, hoping to get caught and get attention. Drmies (talk) 00:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Well, now whenever I feel down I'll just remember I'm way happier with my life than MidAtlanticBaby! Thanks for this Misplaced Pages lore Drmies. Tarlby 00:36, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. When I say "childish" I mean it. This is likely a somewhat grown person with a driver license and the right to vote, who could be watching Georgia play football and make soup for their family and walk the dog. Instead, they're harassing a bunch of people including one who had nothing to do with them getting their dumb ass blocked. But they know some shit about proxies and whatnot and now they're just being cute, hoping to get caught and get attention. Drmies (talk) 00:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, definitely didn't know that...Also, this has been going on for MONTHS? Tarlby 00:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- I actually forgot how long it's been. Has it been a year? Ah--I blocked User:MidAtlanticBaby indefinitely on June 18. I see they're now actually banned by the Foundation: I don't know if you know this, but you have to go REALLY crazy to get banned by the Foundation. Drmies (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Resolution 1: Complain about being banned on a website for almost 7 hours" Tarlby 00:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oh, it's that one again. So boring. I wonder what their New Year's resolutions include. Haha, "this year I'm going to look for North Korean proxies". Good luck! Drmies (talk) 00:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
120.21.0.0/16
Hi, would you consider unblocking this IP range? I don't want to, both because I'm unsure of the situation, and because I'm a little bit involved — it includes the address I'm using for the wireless network at my local public library. I don't understand the reason for the block, since you blocked it almost a month after the latest edit appearing at Special:Contributions/120.21.0.0/16, and there are no deleted contributions. Nyttend (talk) 05:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hey Nyttend--I blocked the range because of one particular sock, who by now has created 215 accounts that we blocked and tagged, in a little over a year. There were two from that range that, looking at the block, were my immediate reason for the block, and since then it's been much quieter. Let me email you, lest I drop BEANS all over the place. Drmies (talk) 14:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. This response makes sense, and the email was great; thank you. Nyttend (talk) 19:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Advice needed
How can I convince user:Sky258 that, per WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, airport connections need independent sources? Nearly all his/her additions are unsourced and reverted. Warnings did not help but blocking seems over the top. Do you have any ideas? The Banner talk 17:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hmm I disagree: they were warned by multiple editors, and the content is unsourced. I was going to ask about talk page consensus, but there is project-wide consensus... Drmies (talk) 22:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Football sock
Not college football, but still... See WP:ANI#Footballnerd2007. I agree with GS and don't know why others are defending the user (casting aspersions indeed). Creating an RfA...doing so many moves it makes me dizzy...leaving trolling messages for other users... I'm on the edge of blocking myself for disruption, but a check would be helpful. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:35, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- The ANI discussion has derailed into a discussion about whether Footballnerd2007 is using LLM, which they clearly are, but the user is choosing, unwisely, to wikilawyer, and GS, also unwisely, is trying to "nail" them. I thought about hatting it, but it's so rapid and I'm not sure where exactly I'd hat it. Oh, btw, another on my list above - read the user's Talk page - it's a cornucopia of warnings.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:10, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- What a mess. That got out of hand quickly--I'm also not happy with the alien's response. A check was run on the user, and I guess it showed nothing... Drmies (talk) 15:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. They are now being "mentored".--Bbb23 (talk) 18:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Drmies, alien was obviously not trying to defend the user (you can tell through certain, subtle signs, such as the use of a face palm emoji and the phrase "You're not helping your case right now"), they were trying to de-escalate things. Is this really how you want to treat them? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 20:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I don't know what prompted this, and I certainly don't understand that last, loaded question. Did I say that they were trying to "defend" the user? Where? What you could to is ask what I meant, if you're really interested in me and what I think. Drmies (talk) 03:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- What a mess. That got out of hand quickly--I'm also not happy with the alien's response. A check was run on the user, and I guess it showed nothing... Drmies (talk) 15:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Mail call
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I stopped e-mailing you long ago, since it always bounced, but perhaps it may be worth trying again? Bishonen | tålk 09:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC).
- YES. I've been so lonely! Drmies (talk) 15:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2024).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RFC, Misplaced Pages:Notability (species) was adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.
- A request for comment is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.
Technical news
- The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.
Arbitration
- Following the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: CaptainEek, Daniel, Elli, KrakatoaKatie, Liz, Primefac, ScottishFinnishRadish, Theleekycauldron, Worm That Turned.
Miscellaneous
- A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
WP is not a Multilingual dictionary
Please take a look at Addition_to_WP:NOTDICTIONARY and comment. Though this may be implied by other policies, I think it's worthwhile making it explicit. Thanks, --Macrakis (talk) 19:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
FORDROCKEFELLER1974
See UTRS appeal #98810. The claim is that Bishonen allowed a new account to be created, in comments over at User_talk:TTTEMLPBrony. What are your thoughts? Note that I have not looked at the checkuser technical data and... am dubious... --Yamla (talk) 23:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ha, yes, but Bish said that before I had a looked and confirmed that Looney had logged in (and I just checked again, to make sure). I can't read the VRT (I still can't log in) so I don't know what the "compromised" thing was, but this is socking going back to 2021. Drmies (talk) 02:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Beeldenstorm
Perhaps you could take a look at this - a new but prolific ip with all the jargon. Possible returning sock? Greatly concerned about the reputation of Philip II of Spain. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 01:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Johnbod, there is a copious amount of logged-out editing there, though I don't see direct evidence of them using IPs to circumvent policy--but that the same person is editing without logging in is indisputable (and I warned them), so that leaves the actual IPs. In many cases the logged-out editing is from VPNs that have been blocked before, by User:ST47ProxyBot--who I see is retired? What is this world coming to... So I'm not exactly sure what to do, since that's not really my cup of tea, and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Open proxies isn't very insightful. I see User:Malcolmxl5 is running that but they are not a CU, and it's at least three or four different ranges. User:Ponyo, if you know how to handle them, can you have a look and do what's right on those ranges? Yes, Philip II is certainly well worth our time. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Do you have a second?
Could you walk me through reassigning user rights? I've discovered some PGAME at User:54rt678/sandbox and I blocked them while I redo the user rights. Sorry, I've not done much of this. I've got Special:UserRights/54rt678 open. BusterD (talk) 04:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- The user has 509 edits, and 250 of them were done three days ago on the linked sandbox. BusterD (talk) 04:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Do I merely uncheck, leave a reason and save (and watch)? Just something I haven't seen done recently. BusterD (talk) 04:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- It was so simple I figured it out myself, but I needed another editor to reassure me. Don't mind doing the job, but am sometimes nervous about affecting someone unduly. BusterD (talk) 05:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sure thing. That editor is headed for an indef: incompetence mixed with promotional editing. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Not a very mature approach, granted. Hey, this morning I welcomed (after I reverted) a user who'd burnt the Packers in Caleb Williams's article. It will get weirder than that... BusterD (talk) 14:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- At least they apologized. I really loathe those kinds of edits, though not as much as the "daddy" variation. Drmies (talk) 14:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Among their last 4 edits, two were adding commas to TP's post. Looking at that I'm not sure why we would trust them to edit any longer. Doug Weller talk 14:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Maybe, Doug, but I found nothing--I was thinking of various returning nuisances but saw no evidence. Wait and see, I think. Drmies (talk) 15:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- I tried to make it as plain as I could to the PGAMER that all their edits would be under close observation henceforth. If they can't hold themselves accountable, how can we? BusterD (talk) 16:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ha, is that a rhetorical question? Drmies (talk) 17:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- I tried to make it as plain as I could to the PGAMER that all their edits would be under close observation henceforth. If they can't hold themselves accountable, how can we? BusterD (talk) 16:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Maybe, Doug, but I found nothing--I was thinking of various returning nuisances but saw no evidence. Wait and see, I think. Drmies (talk) 15:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Among their last 4 edits, two were adding commas to TP's post. Looking at that I'm not sure why we would trust them to edit any longer. Doug Weller talk 14:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- At least they apologized. I really loathe those kinds of edits, though not as much as the "daddy" variation. Drmies (talk) 14:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Not a very mature approach, granted. Hey, this morning I welcomed (after I reverted) a user who'd burnt the Packers in Caleb Williams's article. It will get weirder than that... BusterD (talk) 14:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sure thing. That editor is headed for an indef: incompetence mixed with promotional editing. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- It was so simple I figured it out myself, but I needed another editor to reassure me. Don't mind doing the job, but am sometimes nervous about affecting someone unduly. BusterD (talk) 05:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Do I merely uncheck, leave a reason and save (and watch)? Just something I haven't seen done recently. BusterD (talk) 04:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
CS1 error on B. J. Hollars
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page B. J. Hollars, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
CS1 error on B. J. Hollars
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page B. J. Hollars, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
User:Pinzunski/User:SukunaZenin
Returned to Francisco Trincão AGAIN, with that nonsensical ref about a BENFICA match for a SPORTING championship win (reverted it on the spot)! I guess the rest can stay (should you see that the sources are appropriate, if not remove it), will duly compose it (i.e. Style of play section) when i get home.
Attentively RevampedEditor (talk) 19:44, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 66
The Misplaced Pages Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 66, November – December 2024
- Les Jours and East View Press join the library
- Tech tip: Newspapers.com
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --17:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Banned cease-and-desist photographer
I am really frazzled now. Someone is reverting edits by a user claimed to be a "Banned cease-and-desist photographer". I can not find any trace of that. You should expect some traces of that on ENWP, Meta or Commons, but no.
Do you (or your stalkers) know anything about this? It sounds a bit fishy to me right now. The Banner talk 14:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- No clue. I'll add to your note. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, seeing the edits of this account, the editor did this wiki-wide. The Banner talk 16:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- (stalker comment) I don't really have anything conclusive to add, but from what I see, the user who uploaded the images is not banned or even warned from either enwiki or Commons. He appears to be a professional photographer who uploads many of his images to commons, and then Misplaced Pages, replacing lower-quality existing ones if necessary (I guess there is a small chance its all a big copyright misuse but you'd have thought that would have been picked up upon, particularly as his work involves famous buildings and peopel so probably gets a lot of views). You can see on his talk page there is a message from an IP user in 2019 (who stopped editing in the same year) regarding 'excessive use of own images'. I'm unsure if any such rule actually exists, but in my opinion it was not applicable anyway as the use of the images improved the site, were not self-promotional in terms of including watermarks or anything to overtly identify the contributor, and was not excessive proliferation of photos within individual articles. The reverting user has only made 92 edits, half of which were reverting the photographer today. Not sure why they would even take this course of action, expect perhaps they noticed an image (one of their own?) replaced by the photographer editor, read their talk page, decided the 2019 message was something official and unilaterally decided it justified reverting all recent additions (in the same style as the 2019 user, which is suspicious too). Crowsus (talk) 17:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- Crowsus, thank you for doing some of that leg work--I had looked at various things but managed to miss that IP comment. And that IP comment: well, "excessive" use is a thing frowned upon but you laid out the (common sense) practices pretty neatly; thank you for that as well. Drmies (talk) 18:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- {{tps}} That photographer's license terms seem to take a strict position on the exact way credit must be given in off-wiki uses of their work. I'm not sure if they have pursued settlements against good-faith reusers or in other ways headed into license-trolling. I, like others, cannot find discussion about it on enwiki or commons.There was a previous case (long ago, different license-holder) where consensus formed that the effect of mass use of a certain creator's content on-wiki was to induce innocent/good-faith but not "strictly by the not-quite-expected license terms" use off-wiki, enabling forced legal settlements. There was thought that the creator themself was actually intentional about using wiki in this way, and that all of this exceeded the community's tolerance and good-faith. DMacks (talk) 18:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- DMacks, yes, thanks--I remember a case too and I think it played out on Commons, that guy who posted videos of himself ejaculating and stuff, and there was a guy who sucked his own ****. But more to the point, I also remember a case of a photographer who, it was judged, was basically here to promote their own business and I think an ANI post led to removal of some of those images. But I can't see what practical guidelines User:Arne Müseler is supposed to have broken. Drmies (talk) 18:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- I have no idea if there is off-wiki evidence of actual legal actions against re-users, or claims that WP sites are inducement. But I also assume anything I'd find by googling I couldn't mention here for OUTING anyway. DMacks (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yep, and any kind of case should be either discussed on-wiki or submitted privately if there's some privacy concern, rather than signaled (if that's even the word) with a boilerplate and vague edit summary. Drmies (talk) 18:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- I have no idea if there is off-wiki evidence of actual legal actions against re-users, or claims that WP sites are inducement. But I also assume anything I'd find by googling I couldn't mention here for OUTING anyway. DMacks (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- DMacks, yes, thanks--I remember a case too and I think it played out on Commons, that guy who posted videos of himself ejaculating and stuff, and there was a guy who sucked his own ****. But more to the point, I also remember a case of a photographer who, it was judged, was basically here to promote their own business and I think an ANI post led to removal of some of those images. But I can't see what practical guidelines User:Arne Müseler is supposed to have broken. Drmies (talk) 18:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- User:The Banner, I have reverted those edits. Thanks for bringing it up. Drmies (talk) 18:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- Your welcome. I hope the editor just made a mistake. The Banner talk 02:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
- For every one who's interested, please see User talk:RAL1028. Drmies (talk) 21:42, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Just to clarify posts on Miijumaaru talk page
The conversation I pinged you in at Annoyed at rule changes was a continuation of the post right above at Please do not use template main in the lead. The editor broke it into two parts for some reason and I wasn't about to correct the nesting issue since the conversation turned turbulent. Since they did multiple changes to articles I thought it would be good to let them know that {{main}} is never used in the lead per the template itself. This was made aware to Tennis Project awhile back and several of us have been slowly fixing tennis articles to comply. A daunting task. I hope this helps you understand the situation I encountered. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
On a side note to above template talk
While template "main" should not be used in the lead, the template "further" is less clear on placement. I just looked and the template "see also" also says not to use in the lead and is used only at the top of sections. "Further" says nothing about placement and I can't help but wonder if that should also say not to use in the lead. Where best to bring that up? On the narrow Template:Further talk page? Or is there a more general template talk page that it should be talked about? Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- That's a good question, and I don't have an answer for that--but I think Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Layout is the first place I would go to. I don't know that that page gets a lot of traffic, though... But if, as you say, there is a consensus for the other one, you might could ping some of the editors who discussed that. Drmies (talk) 21:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- I posted at Manual of Style/Layout first to see if anyone knows the answer. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:06, 13 January 2025 (UTC)