| Revision as of 03:54, 15 May 2013 editUbikwit (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,539 edits →TPm Moderated discussion 2: indent← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 08:27, 21 December 2024 edit undoSchroCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers113,347 edits →Merry Christmas!: new sectionTag: New topic | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{nobots}} | {{nobots}} | ||
| {{busy|image=Information icon4.svg|descriptor=sitting on the dock of the bay}} | |||
| ⚫ | ]]]] ]] | ||
| ] | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| <center> | |||
| <br> | |||
| <br> | <br> | ||
| ⚫ | ]{{search box}}]]]{{search box}} ]] | ||
| ⚫ | {{divbox| |
||
| {{divbox|red||'''''Apart from the Tea Party case, I'm currently inactive on all ArbCom matters.'''''<br> ]}} | |||
| ⚫ | {{quote|I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. ]}} | ||
| ⚫ | ]{{clear}} | ||
| <br> | |||
| ⚫ | {{divbox|green||'''''Welcome!!! Pull up a chair, let's have a nice chat. I'm glad you called. I'll put the kettle on.'''''<br> ]}} | ||
| ⚫ | {{quote|I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. ]}} | ||
| {{quote|Our text should arise as a summary of the reliable sources, rather than editors first deciding what they want to say and then looking for sources. ] }} | |||
| I am open to recall, using ]'s wording from their ]:<br> "if editors I trust and respect are telling me I should not be an admin, then I would voluntarily resign as an administrator." ] | |||
| </center> | </center> | ||
| {{clear}} | {{clear}} | ||
| == "]" listed at ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 14#Ryl}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 17:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ==Merry Christmas!== | |||
| == Follow-up question == | |||
| {| style="border:1px solid 3px; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}}; padding: 5px;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="center" | ] | |||
| Hi SilkTork, | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: center; height: 1.1em;" | '''A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!''' | |||
| Thanks for your input to the discussion on the WikiProject Bob Dylan Talk page. I've added a follow-up question for you. Thanks very much, and have a nice day. ] (]) 16:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="centre" padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |rowspan="2" | | |||
| == Concern over tenor of one editor at the TPM moderated discussion == | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align:top; border-top:1px solid gray"| | |||
| I fear at least one editor seems not to properly gauge the intent of a "moderated discussion" and seems rather more inclined at making attacks on others - including misstatements about them. If such continues, I fear the moderated discussion can not possibly succeed at all, which would be rather a shame. I find such behaviour to be abhorrent, and incredibly irritating. Cheers. ] (]) 20:13, 11 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| <br /> | |||
| <big>Have a great Christmas, and may 2025 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals!</big> | |||
| I have to agree. What happened to "comment on the content, not the contributor"? Incessant needling with comments like ''"relishes its role as gadfly — something else you and Mother Jones have in common"''; ''"You're being tendentious again."''; ''"Mother Jones, isn't that your Mother Ship, Xenophrenic?"'' or claiming an editor doesn't know how to do a simple , or ''"Xenophrenic is making the 'I saw Elvis' argument."'' Really? I've been ignoring the antagonism, but it is becoming very irritating. Regards, ] (]) 21:07, 11 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| <br /> | |||
| :Note that such comments were ''not'' made in my posts, of course. The editor was right that using Google without using the keywords to prevent "false positives" is an endemic problem, and that the famed actor is not the "Tea Party" personage at all. GoogleNews finds 255 hits for "Dale Robertson" total, and with "tea party" added it gets ''precisely'' zero hits, which I think was Malke's point about your "And my Google News search returns tens of thousands of hits" which does actually appear a tad errant in context. Cheers. ] (]) 21:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| <br /> | |||
| ::I'm not going to take up more of SilkTork's Talk page to argue with you, Collect. Nor am I going to instruct you on the use of Google News, with proper inclusion and exclusion modifiers, custom ranges and archive merging, so that you can get over your "precisely zero hits" hurdle. Malke's point was that I don't know how to perform a simple Google search (what possible reason would I have for including the actor or the athlete in my searches?), and I don't appreciate any of those little jabs. Individually, they are minor annoyances, but the frequency is increasing, so I wished only to note that they are becoming irritating. ] (]) 00:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| <big>Cheers</big> | |||
| <br /> | |||
| == TPm Moderated discussion 2 == | |||
| <br /> | |||
| <big>] (]) 08:27, 21 December 2024 (UTC)</big> | |||
| The discussion seems to be at an impasse on the bigotry and race material, so it doesn't look like any trimming is going to happen there unless vote count overrides policy. | |||
| |} | |||
| I've opened an RS/N thread, but am not hopeful that it will serve to stem the questionable use and abuse of sources overall. | |||
| In the meantime, from your recent comments it seems that you want to unlock the article before addressing the '''broad strokes''' issue of the agenda section and the constitution that I have raised. | |||
| Let me point you back to this thread ] and draw your attention to the first comment. | |||
| The opening sentence of the lead of the Misplaced Pages TPm article ''"as it stands"'' (which, if you'll recall, is the ''wrong version'') is<blockquote>The Tea Party movement is an American political movement that advocates strict adherence to the United States Constitution</blockquote> | |||
| The source cited for that statement is , and the source does not support that statement except within the very narrow bounds of the TPm-specific interpretation of "Constitution’s constraints on federal power" covered in one Article and on Amendment of the Constitution (a limited scope belying a Federalist agenda, i.e., advocacy of a TPm agenda item as per ], not representative of a comprehensive summary statement describing the actual state of affairs at present). | |||
| The NYT source article is from March 2010,incidentally, and therefore was published before calls by TPm activists and groups to repeal 2-3 extant Amendments and pass at least one (September 2010 proposal) to enact a new Amendment ] as well as call a Constitutional Congress. Note, however, that the source does mention “popular constitutionalism”, a topic with respect to which dedicated journal articles have subsequently been published specifically addressing the TPm, as included in the edits I made that were repeatedly reverted. | |||
| Numerous studies by legal scholars have been published since, including the Schmidt study (encyclopedic in and of itself) that cite and expand on the distinction made by ''"Sanford Levinson, a law professor at the University of Texas"'' cited in the NYT article in relation to the theme<blockquote>The larger point, these scholars say, is that the Supreme Court should have no more monopoly on the meaning of the Constitution than the pope has on the meaning of the Bible.</blockquote>So the reason I am here to for clarification as to whether or not you intend to address this issue in the moderated discussion.--]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 04:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :My intention is to get the article to a reasonably stable state before unlocking it. That would mean dealing with the major issues on the article, and if those sections you mention are part of that, then yes I'd like to deal with those as well. I'm a little bit dismayed that there has been a fair bit of distraction recently on the discussion page, and a lot of discussion over one sentence. But this is part of what happens - it is quote common for discussions to wax and wane. Hopefully we can make some more progress shortly. Keeping a positive yet realistic outlook helps. And having some patience! ''']''' ''']''' 08:06, 14 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::Your input has been helpful, but the discussion seems to have become a series of disconnected monologues, so to speak. | |||
| ::The impasse relates to more than the single sentence, but to cherrypicking sources and refusing to adopt a more integrated approach. | |||
| ::I've tried to have people consider addressing part of this in conjunction with immigration, and now have found a quote from the academic source that puts Robertson at the center of a dispute related to immigration insofar as it uses the phrase "the anti-immigrant movement" (as opposed to anti illegal immigrant) in describing the TP group he founded as being "the national faction most connected to" that movement. Have a look at the passage I quoted at the RS/N thread ]. | |||
| ::I hadn't known anything about Robertson until doing a google search to confirm some of the claims being made, and then TFD introduced the UC Press source. The issue would seem to be more complex than the single sentence about Robertson's bigoted sign, at any rate, and the section title ''"Discussion on proposed removal of Robertson material"'' would seem to encompass more than the single sentence at issue. That could be used to argue at a later date that all questions related to Robertson have been answered, or something along those lines. | |||
| ::Maybe you could create a subpage for starting work on a hypothetical immigration section for the article. That might assuage the concerns by several editors that the article is being whitewashed.--]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 03:53, 15 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 08:27, 21 December 2024
 | This user is sitting on the dock of the bay in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
SilkTork
I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. Barack Obama
Our text should arise as a summary of the reliable sources, rather than editors first deciding what they want to say and then looking for sources. Agricolae
I am open to recall, using Whpq's wording from their RfA:
"if editors I trust and respect are telling me I should not be an admin, then I would voluntarily resign as an administrator."
"Ryl" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Ryl has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 14 § Ryl until a consensus is reached. Thryduulf (talk) 17:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
|
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! | 
|
|
|
|