Misplaced Pages

User talk:JzG/Archive 24: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:JzG Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:41, 11 September 2006 editJzG (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers155,082 edits →Sources: reply← Previous edit Latest revision as of 10:01, 12 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
Line 1: Line 1:
]
{| class="messagebox" style="background: AntiqueWhite;"
|-
|This talk page is '''automatically archived''' by Werdnabot. Any sections older than '''7''' days are automatically archived to ''']'''. Sections with less than two timestamps (that have not been replied to) are not archived.
|-
|}<!-- BEGIN WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE --><!-- This page is automatically archived by Werdnabot-->{{User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere}} <!--This is an empty template, but transcluding it counts as a link, meaning Werdnabot is directed to this page - DO NOT SUBST IT --><!--Werdnabot-Archive Age-7 Target-User Talk:JzG/Archive-{{CURRENTMONTHABBREV}}--><!--END WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE-->
{{Administrator}}
{| class="messagebox" style="background: AntiqueWhite;"
|-
|'''I have moved house, am doing masses of real-life type stuff and will be below normal wiki-activity levels for a while.'''
|-
|}


==JzG essay==
{| align="right" width="260px" |-
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/Me_and_Wikipedia
|__TOC__
|-
|----
!align="center"|]<br/>]
----
|-
|
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
----


Don't let the trolls push you out of here. We need you.--] 15:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
]<br>
]
|}
'''Guy Chapman? He's ]'''
----
Thank you to everybody for messages of support, and to JoshuaZ for stepping up to the plate. I have started to write what happened at ]. Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible. ] 19:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
----
<center>'''Read This First'''</center>
'''If you need urgent admin help''' please go to ]. To stop a vandal, try ]. For general help why not try the ]? If you need me personally and it's urgent you may ], I read all messages even if I do not reply. If next time I log on is soon enough, '''''' to start a new conversation.


:Thank you, Guy, for that excellent essay.<br>Don't let the bastards grind you down. Cheers, ] 17:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
This page may contain trolling. Some of it might even be from me, but never assume trolling where a misplaced sense of humour might explain things. '''This user posts using a British sense of humour'''.
----
* ]
* <span class="plainlinks">] (] • ] • • • • )</span>


Excellent essay. Please come back when you've cleared your head. . --] 03:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
== Evolutionary musicology merger ==
* ]
I'm happy to do the merger, by the way. ] 10:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


Indeed, excellent essay. I agree with almost all your points, but - mostly, as technicality - I disagree with 'The Wild West'. ] :). PS. You know, I am stalked by my own 'Rfwoolf'. And the ArbCom has done nothing to stop him. I do wonder if such users will bring the project down... PS2. Please come back, don't leave us, yadda yadda - we had our differences but I believe we need people like you in the project. Hope to see you around,--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 00:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
== Chris Robertson article ==
] nominated ] for deletion and it was then speedy userfied by you (]). I was the orignial creator of the Chris Robertson article - and the article I wrote was about the sqaush player Chris Robertson, a former professional player who was once the world junior champion and ranked No. 3 in the world. I suspect that what happened is that ] then changed the article to one about a different Chris Robertson (who may well be himself). I've now recreated the Chris Robertson article in a similar format to when I orginally wrote it. I think it should stay as the squash player is, in my opinion, encyclopedicly notable. But the page may need monitoring to stop Urbanaddict tinkering with it. ] 03:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


May I suggest you restore the 7000+ edits to your talk page? As you've returned to editing, it really should not stay deleted. ] 16:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
== ] ==


I am proposing a merging with this article and ] due to the similarity in content. Agree? Please reply on ].


* This really is just a guy that should get back to work or he won't be able to afford his Volvo payments. ] 03:20, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
== RFA thanks ==
:* Heh! Funny. But I paid cash, as I always do... <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 10:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


:: Addiction to editing on Wikiulosia will likely cause the loss of job and family. The "me disease" is harmful. ] 14:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
{| style="background-color: #e7efef; border: dashed 2px lightblue;"
| ]
| Thanks so much for your support on my ], which closed successfully this morning with a result of (64/3/3). I will be stepping lightly at first trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! ] 11:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC) ] ]
|}


:::JzG, I totally *get* where you are coming from, but, selfishly, I will MISS YOU around... --] 21:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
== RfA message ==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|#FF33CC}}}; background-color: {{{color|#80b0c0}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="top" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em; color: #004060;" | '''My ] video message'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid #FF0099;" | ]<br />] 08:40, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
|}


== Regarding deletions... ==
==]==
Hello,


(I hope I type in this correctly in the correct space without deleting anything)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: ]. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, ]. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, ].
Well I have not written it myself, since I'm not neutral perhaps, but I asked for my friends to open an account an I started to wirte something but that was deleted, an then I asked for professional help. Of course writing about family is a bad idea, but is it forbidden? And regarding the deletion of a talk page today that WAS a misstake, I have problem with my connection and I typed while the test was marked and I couldn't restore. OK, sorry, is that fixed??
I just kindly ask you to help me to keep the pages (two of those that we are debating), I have collected so much info to my friends who have helped me and anyone else can offcourse change the page if you like!!--NGL 14:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->


* See the message on your talk page. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 17:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --] 11:53, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


== Support == == Oops ==


I didn't see your edits, until I went through them again. Well, I'm deleting ''all'' '''Bold text'''the external links until it can be figured out what is going on, and until notability for the individual articles established. I think the individual articles should just be speedied. ] 23:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I just came across the Arbcom case concerning ParalelUni and I would like to offer you my support. Comments like the ones he made have no place in Misplaced Pages, or in real life and I hope his ban will be endorsed by the Arbcom. Anyway, I hope this won't stop you from editing. If you ever need any help to get through a rough patch let me know. I'd be happy to share my recent ]-ness with you. - ]|] 08:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
* G11 is your friend :-) <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 23:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
**Oh, thanks, just what I was looking for. ] 23:21, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


== Countries == ==Joy, joy, joy!!!==
Truly happy to see you back and supplying your usual straight talk. ;-) Take care, ] 01:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
:Aye, rock on! ] 04:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
::Ah, ditto! ''']]''' 20:41, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


== Finished your redux for you ==
What are these two countries?? ] 17:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


You probably lost interest, but just in case ] is finished and sorted. ] | ] 20:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
== Why did you move Bowser? ==
:''], ]''
There was a debate, and a consensus in favor of moving to Bowser already. Why should we have to go through a new consensus because you decided that the previous one was invalid? - ] ] 22:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
:Because the previous "consensus" seems to have been between Nintendo fans and other Nintendo fans, and because the term bowser is the generic term for mobile tankers, the local term for ] in Australia and New Zealand, and is the main meaning of the word in dictionaries and treeware encyclopaedias, with around a century of usage to back it up. I said all this already. Having bowser as a dab page is the obvious answer, which is what we do for ]. ] 08:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::Oh, yeah, I forgot, Nintendo fans' opinions are of no worth. And will you stop using a dictionary entry? The dictionary covers NO FICTIONAL CHARACTERS WHATSOEVER. That is a horrible argument that holds no weight, and is essentially saying that being real is more important than being more deserving of the main article title.
::Now, see - apparently, it is not agreed that it is the "right thing to do". Yes, I know, it's just Nintendo fans, and they're less worthy of being Wikipedians than Almighty You, but hey, it's always possible that you might stop thinking that you own Misplaced Pages. - ] ] 08:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::: No, it's not that Nintendo fans' opinions are of no worth, it's more that you are completely ignoring the established usage in favour of a neologistic one which is hardly a surprise given that all the discussion thus far apears to have been on Nintendo-related pages, there has been precious little input from anyone else. Having bowser as a dab page is a perfectly reasonable solution. I'm not insisting on the century-old term being at bowser, so I fail to see why you are insisting on the Nintendo usage being there, especially since I have fixed not only the links but also the links and double redirects which were broken by the move last year. Please do go back and read Steel's comments. ] 08:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
:::: This type of discussion comes up frequently when people with a particular narrow area of interest meet up on the relevant Misplaced Pages article. Lots of people agree with JzG's decision on this one. This encyclopaedia is written in a timeless manner. So consider some time in the future - Nintendo characters will have been long forgotten, but the more general meaning will still be in use. ] 08:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
:::::Correct. And ask the average person on the street - not the technophile average we have on Misplaced Pages - and they won't give you "nintendo" as the meaning of Bowser. Indeed, I think having a dab page there is actually ''generous'', as far as I'm concerned the word has a primary meaning which should be in that slot - and it's nothing to do with Nintendo! --] 08:50, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
:::::: Even if Nintendo is not forgotten in time, I suggest that historical perspective will not elevate the arch-enemy of the Mario brothers to the status of an everyday household word, which bowser is in Australia, with mainstream news reports like "Are Australian drivers being ripped off at the bowser?". But the most compelling arguemnt for me is that the term is a genericised trademark, like ] or ]. ] 08:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
:::::::Or maybe, JUST maybe, they, like the rest of the people with the exception of a minority of people, DISAGREE ON THE MATTER. Christ, can't it be that they have their own opinions, instead of them being a bunch of stupid Nintendo fans voting to move "kuz dey luv bowser"? Just because you got to the vote late does not mean you can say that it doesn't count. Are you going to do that with every article that you're upset you didn't get to speak your mind in? Wait for people who get a consensus, and leave it at Bowser where it was in the first place.
:::::::And maybe - JUST MAYBE - we think that because the video game character is the most notable and recognizable usage of the word Bowser? You argue that being more recognizable in Australia as something other than Bowser is more important than the fact that across the world, Bowser is a video game character, not some gas crap in Australia.
:::::::And to you two guys - how the Hell is video gaming a narror interest? Christ, again with you people! At what point does being real overpower the fact that the fictional one is more notable?! Christ! It's not even the debate, it's you being an ass and deciding a consensus is invalid because you happen to think you're the God of Misplaced Pages. You can't freaking say you disagree with a keep result in an AfD and delete it, so why the Hell can you decide that the consensus is invalid because you weren't a part of it?!
:::::::Cliff's notes: You're an elitist ass, and the consensus was valid, and you should be blocked for not even bothering to have a discussion before you decided that your way was the only way. I wish Misplaced Pages would have less of you people.- ] ]
::::::::Lol, it's not wise to rant and rave like this on an admin's talk page - see ]. Misplaced Pages is not a democracy. We don't have to respect "votes", only arguments and the resultant consensus. As Guy pointed out to you, the "vote" was held amongst editors of the Nintendo page so you're not a representative sample. You now have 3 Wikipedians with no special interest telling you they disagree. <s>If you still maintain that the Nintendo article should be at ] you can take it to ] where the ''wider community'' can discuss it.</s> On that note, please refrain from cussing or there will indeed be a block issued - and it will be you my friend that gets it. --] 09:07, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::::: This is true. But once again we have the asserted "fact" that the Nintendo usage is more notable. No credible evidence has yet been advanced to support that. Much evidence has been advanced to contradict it. ] 09:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::::::On the other hand, ] goes straight to the plumber. I was kind of surprised that Bowser went straight to the Koopa, but yeah. --] <small>]</small> 10:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::::::: I'm happy to believe that if you asked a random sample of people what Mario meant they's either say "don't know" or reference the video game. If you asked the same random sample what bowser meant, I think you'd not find anything like as many who would reference the character in the video games. It's possible to have heard of Mario and never played it; that would include in a lot of parents, for example. To have heard of individual characters without having played the game is less likely. Also, there is no dictionary definition of Mario (other than as a proper noun). So: I think we agree. Where's the bunting? :-) ] 10:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::::::::Hah! But yeah, pretty much. --] <small>]</small> 11:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::::::::Well, I like to think I'm on the technical side of average, and "Mario" to me is either an Italian name or a computer game. ] is a tank or tanker of some description. HTH! ;) BTW, what's bunting? --] 11:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::::::::: A string of small flags used to decorate streets and large structures at times of particular celebration, m'lud. Do we have an article on ]? Aha! I perceive that we do. ] 11:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


== ] ==
I just noticed that per the lead of the article, the character's name is actually '''King Bowser Koopa'''. Shouldn't the article live there? --] 11:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
:Haven't a clue, mate. If it should then I will do the needful, it will be easy now all links are consistent. ] 11:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


Hi JzG,
I'm pissed off at the group, Just zis Guy. It is nothing personal. I do not have anything against you. It's your group of people, elitists. I bring up the fact that Mario is the biggest icon in gaming and highly notable all around the world (and by extension Bowser, also known as King Koopa), and you tell me that's not good enough, and your only arguments are awful. You argue that because Bowser appears in the dictionary as the real-life usages and not the fictional character, that they're more notable, which is more an argument that being real is more important than being more notable. And then the fact that it's likely more notable in Australia, yet you fail to understand that the Mario franchise is huge in Australia, as it is in Europe, North America, Asia, etc. While you have select notability and being real, I have worldwide notability. - ] ] 18:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Glad to see you are back! While I realize that this may not be the best time for this, and the personal pain that this page has caused you, there is an ] running amok on ] making personal attacks and generally making a mess of the article. I tried the ArbCom enforcement board, but an admin was unwilling to block as the ] has made a few minor edits (mostly unnecessary capitalization or wikilinks) in other articles. As you are very familiar with the editing history of the page, I would be very interested to have your opinion on it, however, I would understand if you do not wish to visit this page again. Thanks, ] 15:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
:Sorry to be blunt but you haven't established much notability at all. You've made some very broad, sweeping comments about the Mario series in general, but (amongst other things), you haven't said anything about how that applies to Bowser. By association or extension isn't good enough, I'm afraid. Mario may well be a well known name, but that doesn't automatically mean that one of his antagonists is equally as well known, which is what you're saying. -- ] 19:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks! ] 15:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
::Sorry to be blunt, but pointing out that Bowser isn't in the dictionary is an even worse argument. Bowser appears at the end of world 1 (consisting of four levels) in SMB, the best selling game ever made. In all likelyhood, people will have noticed him. Your arguments are that he doesn't appear in the dictionary (an argument that attacks his fictional status, not his notability) and that in certain regions, Bowser is known as gas pumps or something. But Mario is a huge franchise in Asia, Europe, North America and Australia. The majority of people who have played a Mario game likely will have heard of King Koopa or Bowser, but people in NA won't know what a bowser is in reference to a gas pump, neither will people in the EU. - ] ] 19:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks again, JzG. I noticed that you placed a full-protection template on the page, however the page is only semi-protected. I would endorse full protection to put an end to this counter-productive edit-warring. Thanks, ] 15:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
:::We're not talking about the Mario series, we're talking about one of many characters within it. You say that Bowser is very well known, but a says otherwise. The fuel pump thing is used in , and .<br>One thing I would like to emphasise is that we're not suggesting that the fuel pump term is given the ] page. We're suggesting that ] is made a disambiguation, where each of the many uses of the word are given an entry. You are acting as though we're trying to remove all mention of the Mario character from the entire encyclopedia. -- ] 19:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Clue deficiency. Fixed now. Frankly I think the project would be better off if that article were a lot shorter. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 15:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
::::It's not even that the debate is going on. You know why I am so pissed? It's because Just zis Guy is such an asshole by looking at a consensus and deciding it's invalid because he couldn't input his opinion! I've already dealt with another case of assholery where someone decided to ignore a keep result in an AfD and turned it into a redirect. I am so sick of people like you (not Steel) deciding that they have the right to ignore all rules and be completely disrespectful to people who disagree with them. I'm not showing you any respect because you've chosen to not respect others, and you thusly do not deserve any in return.
::::Additionally, Bowser (Nintendo) was at Bowser in the first place. Why the Hell should we have to jump through hoops to change it back? If you want to make a change, then you should freaking discuss it, not decide that Nintendo fans are too stupid to acknowledge that Bowser is the name given to a gas pump. The fact of the matter is that no only do more people probably know of Bowser or King Koopa as the video game character based on the fact that most people likely do not even know much about the gas pipes in the first place, but I assure you that there are more people who are going to search for Bowser looking for the video game character on Misplaced Pages, not search for a gas pump or some aviation thing. - ] ] 20:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
::::And you, JzG, you are such a hypocrite. you decide that the move of Bowser (Nintendo) to Bowser is invalid based on the fact that you and your buddies couldn't chime in, but you then turn around and say that there cannot be an overturning of an AfD despite there being a good reason to do so, based on the fact that I was not able to present an argument, an argument which convinved a few people who voted delete to then vote keep. - ] ] 20:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


*Hi JzG, whenever you get a chance, can you please see #14 (Protection) and #16 (For JzG) and #12 (edit request) on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:St_Christopher_Iba_Mar_Diop_College_of_Medicine Thanks in advance for your feedback. ] 21:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Guy, please note that I have blocked {{userlinks|A Link to the Past}} for 24 hours. I gave a gentle warning to refrain from incivility and maintain a collegiate atmosphere at penalty of such a block, to which he responded with incivility on my talk page. Please note also that I've temporarily protected the two pages in question from moves. --] 08:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
:See, that is what I'm talking about. You're as biased as anyone possibly could be! You're on his side, and you attempt to keep the article how you see fit, not how the majority sees fit. It was at Bowser originally, why should we have to try to get it put back? Why shouldn't he have to discuss it? Why shouldn't it be moved back to Bowser, protected and then unprotected when a decision has been made? Why did you decide to protect in favor of one party (coincidentally, the party that you are a part of) as opposed to the opposing party? - ] ] 00:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
::It's not about sides, it's about writing an encyclopaedia, and in this case specifically about writing an encyclopaedia which reflects the wider world, rather than the narrow locus of geek obsessions. ] 08:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
:::That came off as kind of nasty... ] 08:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
:::: I'll take your word for it; it was not meant as such (I am a self-identified geek, after all). I will confess to a degree of irritation at the use of ] in this case. Multiple credible references were provided for the longer-standing usage, and not one single reference showing that Nintendo is unambiguously the most common. Along the way I was accused by this and at least one other user of vandalism, which is plainly false since even if you disagree with it there can't be much doubt of good faith, given the reasons advanced then and now. And when the argument was clearly going against him, A Link to the Past responded by becoming more aggressive and often outright rude. Every now and then we all need to turn off the computer and remember that the world continues to exist outside. This is one of those cases. ] 08:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
:::::No, I came off as nasty whenever you declared nothing wrong with what you did, which is the most laughable notion I've heard in a while. And of course, to a lesser extent, what you did right there - said we had absolutely no evidence while you have a treasure trove. You have a Google search, and I have the fact that Mario is a huge franchise, both in the 80's, 90's and the new millennium. What makes you think this doesn't say anything about Bowser's notability? People who watch the movie see King Koopa, people who watch the cartoon or read the comics see King Koopa. And people who played SMB saw King Koopa four levels in. Just because it does not prove it for absolute fact does not mean it cannot be used for him. So, if you drop your crappy attitude, you'll have much less conflict. And no, my attitude isn't crappy, it's "assholey". What you do is subtly attack people buy disrespecting him. - ] ] 15:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
::::: Indeed. I always try to avoid getting into arguments with people with that much spare time. But I think there's consensus to move the page to ]. If you could do the honours? Thanks, ] 08:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
:::Hrm, now I that I am catching up on this debate it doesn't seem that bad compared to some of the other comments :(. Sorry you got involved in such an unfortunate situation... perhaps one way to look at it is that is can be very hard for someone to change their view. Personally, I agreed with the non-disambig side until I took a calm look at the debate a while ago on the grounds that it was popular usage, and it is completely understandable to me why someone would still think the other way, despite the lack of evidence. It can be hard to change one's mind without something that is completely obvious... ] 09:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


== A personal attack targeting you ==
== ] ==


<span class="plainlinks userlinks">] (] · ] · ] · · ] · )</span> made a personal attack targeting you in the now deleted article ]. I thought that you would like to know about this in case this user is stalking you and you did not know about it. This user also wrote another attack article on another administrator in the now deleted article ]. ] 16:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Crazy nut is talking about his lawyer and adding uncited things about this accreditation mill. And while this person is trying to pass off this accreditation mill as real, see what he did at the criticism of alternative medicine.
* Thanks, I think my "frustrated ] meter" is registering 100% on that one. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 16:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
:I am sorry if I make you distressed with the above notice, but I feel that administrators should stick together and help each other withstand trolls. By the way, due to the attacks, this account now has a final warning regarding attacks. ] 16:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
::Looks like this troll is indef blocked by someone else. ] 16:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
::: Could also have been username blocked. No biggie, though, just a garden-variety troll. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 17:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


== ] == == Sectarian Movement ==


Dont agree with your claim that protestant is the same as sectarian. Two completely different things.] 15:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
There has been no activity on the talk page for over a month, and there's little precedant for keeping articles protected indefinitely without ] action. I'm tempted to unprotect, but I'll wait another week or so. &mdash; ] | ] 18:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
* But in the absence of a more recent citation, it will do. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 16:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
==The THF thing==
Guy, I think you have done a good job of remaining neutral and fair in this dispute, and I will go out on a limb and say THF would agree. Would you be willing to open an ArbCom case to iron this out? I don't think it would be a good idea for either THF or myself to do it, because I think neither of us has the ability to present the questions posed in a productive manner. --<span style="color:#0000C0;">David</span> ''']''' 18:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


== More fake med schools on wikipedia == == You don't know me but... ==


<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">] '''Hello JzG''', SheffieldSteel has smiled at you! Smiles promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the ] by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! <br /> <small>''Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''</small></div><!-- Template:Smile -->
] The purportents of this seem to be role accounts.
*It's good to see you back at wikipedia. ]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 18:45, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


== Welcome back ==
==Long-Overdue RfA Thanks from ]==
Welcome back! I hope that your WikiBreak was enjoyable/restful/(insert other adjective as appropriate : )
{| style="border:6px solid black; background:#e7efef; padding:3px;" align=center
| <div style="border:1px solid black; background:white; padding:0px;">]</div>
|Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent ], which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA ]). I guess ] has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Misplaced Pages.


Whether I may or may not agree with your opinion in any specific instance is immaterial (though imo, I think you ''do'' try to be fair). Imho I think you (among many others) do a necessary, but often underappreciated, set of tasks around here, and it's nice to see you "back at it". : )
With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my ] or ] (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for ''you''.


I hope you're having a great day : ) - ] 09:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
<small> ''(Thanks go to ] for the incredible photo to the right.)'' </small> ] <sup>]</sup> 01:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


| style="color:lime; padding:5px;" valign=top |
| style="border:1px solid black; padding:0px; background:white;" | ]
|}
== Neologism ==
* {{On AFD|Winter holiday season}}
A concept used by U.S. Supreme Court Justices in their decisions for ] can hardly be called a neologism. (You can read Blackmun's opinion , for example.) Supreme Court Justices don't have a reputation for coining neologisms. ☺ ] 11:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
*It rather depends on who else has used it, I'd say. ] 11:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
**Indeed. From what I found when I went looking for sources, that would appear to be ... <small>&lt;cough&gt;</small> ... a fair number of people. ☺ ] 14:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
::* Doesn't stop it being a neologism, mind... ;-) <b>]</b> 15:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


== Gastrich == == fring ==


hi there
{{vandal|Use Your Naugin}} Hit his diploma mill article and two of my AfDs. See: ] and ]. ] 16:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


as per your comment in the afd
:Expect socks to come out of the woodwork for my recent AfDs of old Gastrich-cruft. And check out this never closed AfD from Jan. 2005. ]. ] 02:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
"Delete on balance, I think. The content is advertorial in style, and the references all appear to be traceable back to press releases and other non-independent sources. I don't think this is making its mark, and I suspect that the article is part of a campaign to fix that. Guy (Help!) 17:13, 1 September 2007 (UTC)"


The idea of this article is to educate people. Please help me edit the article so that it is not advertising. I don't understand what you mean about the references, also what is the difference between the ] article and the ], ], ], ] and ] articles, the list is endless. I used those articles as samples when making the fring article, so if fring goes then the others must also go must'nt they?


now i am confused please help me. Thanx simon
] 11:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


* Sorry, you'd need to pick someone who actually cares about that product. All I see is something being promoted on Misplaced Pages, and I'm not big on that. Comparison with massive global players like Skype and ICQ is unhelpful - a bit like asking that your garage band be included because we have an article on ]. You need to find substantial critical (as in analytical) editorial comment about the company, not mere reprints of press releases. A writeup of the company in one of the major business magazines is always a good place to start. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 11:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
== RfA ==


* Could you at least tell me what is viewed as advertising in the article so I can remove that text.
. ] 08:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
mmm so if I understand you correctly if fring becomes a massive global player then they can get to advertise on wiki like Skype and ICQ? Either the article is an advert or it isnt, even global players like skype and ICQ can't have advertising space?? or am i wrong. The article is not intended as advertising! fring is a global player in over a 150 countries, may i ask what defines a global player? Please help me not to loose my confidence in wikipedia. It seems to me that even if there is no advertising in the article they will still delete it. ] 15:36, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


==Thanks==
Welcome back.


Thanks for your support at ]. I was, in fact, wrong about the specific incident that set me off, but right on the generalities of the situation and -- I'm glad to hear you say -- right, essentially, on the policy issue. I'd give you one of ], but I don't feel comfortable giving out someone else's barnstars, and besides, you already have one, it looks like.
== Clary ==
I know of no other Christian who makes front page news in almost every town he goes to. Also I don't know anyone who can get on local ABC radio wherever he goes either. That is notability. When he came to our town look at the response: http://www.kkkau.com ] 08:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:It's easy to get on radio, especially in the silly season, but you miss the point: what you assert is ]. Who's the ] for him being "one of the most notable"? It's easy to find one for, say, ] or ]. I used to know ], I think ''he's'' very notable, but we only have a very short article on him and it is not padded out with the kind of hyperbole seen in Clary's article. I knew ] as well, his influence was very strong and is still felt, but his article is both shorter and less like a fan piece than Clary's. <b>]</b> 08:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


As I said at WP:AN/I, NeutralHomer doesn't seem able to track subtlety very well, so I don't know whether it will do any good or whether he will fall back on the vaguely conspiratorial language he resorts to when I'm not summarily banned from Misplaced Pages on his say-so. I know which way to bet, though.
== Jason Gastrich ==


Again, thank you, and welcome back. --] | ] 12:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
{{user|205.157.110.11}} and ] Now I am being harassed by {{user|205.157.110.11}} who's first edit was to vote on four of my AfDs- and only my AfDs. I reverted these comments, and Vivaldi returned them. Now this IPs is harassing me, and Vivaldi stop editing. ] 08:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:Hmmm. Not sure, I really think Gastrich is gone to ground for now. Might be better to take a few calm breaths and a dose of ], and see if perhaps you can't see where this user is coming from. Understanding people's motives can help to work productively towards those parts of your goals which overlap. Which is pap, I'm afraid, but it's the way things go. I know you are under pressure and feeling a bit isolated right now, but please remain calm and try to stick to what you do best, which is ensuring rigorous sourcing and neutrality in articles which otherwise tend to hagiography. <b>]</b> 22:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


==Well==
:: Yes, very true. Advice heeded. ] 20:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi,


Since you've directly rebuffed personal dialog, I will be moving the article back to mainspace for the duration of DRV, as I feel your move was improper, and you have chosen not to offer an explanation. I request that you do not blank this message (actually, I'd like you to restore my other one too) Best wishes, ] 14:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
It seems a new user used his first edits at the ] article, and added a link to Gastrich's website under the see also. ] 16:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
* I did offer an explanation (at DRV). I'm not ''opposed'' to dialogue, but I don't see that spreading it to multiple venues helps much. I am not very active right now, and didn't see much point. I also want to avoid the vast talk pages that I have historically had, they don't load on my Blackberry and take months to load over 3G. Nothing personal, you understand. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 15:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
*While I gladly accept your explanation, I was on the verge of taking it personally for a minute there! :) I really never understand when people blank individual messages off their userpages, especially if the message expresses a concern over a prior ''lack of communication''. Anyway, I hope ''my explanation'' at the DRV meets your satisfaction, because the course of action I pursued was quite typical. Perhaps, being less active, one might find it even more prudent to consult with others, more involved in a given set of circumstances, before assuming that "something is fishy". Just a suggestion for the future. Best wishes, ] 15:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


==Welcome back==
== Bowsers and stuff ==
Good to see you back in the saddle. ]. ] 15:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
: Agreed - good to see you back. ] 17:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


==Thank you==
I think we've reached a consensus on ]. Feel free to move the page to ] whenever you get the chance. -- ] 10:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
...for correcting me on the GFDL thing. I was thinking that it didn't matter if the stuff was copied back to the creator's userspace, but you're absolutely right, your way makes more sense. ] has the makings of a great contributor to our community, and I would like to mentor him/her past any inadvertant mistakes; I have to admit that Calton's rude messages on that talk page raised my hackles, because I don't want to lose a productive member due to something stupid and unnecessary. Thanks again. Respectfully - ] ] 16:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
:Cool. <b>]</b> 11:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
* No problem, VigilancePrime's error was small but worth correcting, I'm sure he won't do it again. He also needs to remove the laundry list of vandals from his user page. I'm not being drawn on Calton. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 16:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
==ArbCom==
Thanks for the advice, I will follow it. I haven't been sure how much of a case to build at this point, so I have focused on generalities with a few diffs. If I have been going about it wrong at this point, let me know, because I can supply ample diffs, although I figured since the case has not proceeded it would be better to wait until it does. --<span style="color:#0000C0;">David</span> ''']''' 18:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


== BenH back with another sock == == Possible BLP issue ==


An AfD was put up by a relatively new contributor, {{User3|Ontheveldt}}, as his 3rd contribution to en.Misplaced Pages. His second contribution to Misplaced Pages was to create the category, People from Middletown, Ohio, Dr Jan Adams' hometown. However, instead of immediately adding Dr Jan Adams to this category, he immediately nominated Dr Jan Adams for deletion. I suspect this is personal between Ontheveldt and Dr Jan Adams, however, I'm on wiki-break, and if you or someone watching your talk page, would monitor this situation if something more develops, I would appreciate it? Yes, yes, I know everyone is thinking, "Damn, Ontheveldt is more wikipedia savvy in just 2 edits than KP Botany will ever be." Be that as it may, BLPs and agendas don't mix well on Misplaced Pages. Thanks. ] 20:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
{{vandal|69.68.216.31}} has been making the same type of edits as BenH, and has the same ISP as the previous sock and BenH. I think a block for this IP would be in order. --] ] ] 15:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:Blocked. Please post on ] as well next time, you'll get a quicker end to his stupidity. <b>]</b> 17:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


== Hiya ==
== Tallest structures - "Paris area" ==


Good to see you again! ] 07:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
A few of us have managed to come into agreement over an "in the Paris area" title - as a former participant in the discussion, your views and vote on the matter would much be welcome at ]. Thank you. ] 17:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:Might be better to let it lie for a while. There is no deadline. <b>]</b> 22:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC) : Indeed! ] 09:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
:: Yep. I did let it lie for most of a month, but in the meantime a few of us actually managed to agree on something. The vote has been cast; let's ride it out. ] 09:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


== Question == == Another strange article ==


Could you explain to me what is going on on the ] page? Some users on my page seem to be arguing and I don't seem to have all the facts. ] 17:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC) After the COI post at WP:AN, I thought I'd point out ] to you. What do you make of that? ] 23:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
:As far as I can make out it's a small but heated content dispute between C56C and a couple of others including one anon, who was doing a lot to heat things up, so I sprotected it just to get people to be a bit more reaosnable - but there is so much argument by assertion on the Talk page that I am unable to form much of a view as to what the rights and wrongs of it all might be, so I left it at telling them to play nice. There are names there I recognise, but I think most of them have a dog in the fight by now so I can't really ask them for an unbiased view, as that would be unfair. If you can make head or tail of it then you are doing better than me, althogh to be fair I might have a better handle on it if I had more spare time right now. <b>]</b> 17:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


==Lostpedia Deleted?== == resolved ==
Hi... I'm very confused as well as the other people who pointed out the inconsistancy of deletion of pages here (I'm a regular wikipedia user, but not regular editor). As someone else pointed out, why did you delete lostpedia, but leave up fan wikis such as ], which is much smaller and I have never mentioned in major magazines (Lostpedia is discussed in Entertainment Weekly, the NY Times, and there is something coming out in Time about it). How does one renominate for an article to be recreated?


hi I noticed on my complaint about user MJis4freaks you have "resolved" it, how? I cant see anything on his user page. Let me no. ] 10:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
PS: Here is a whole list of fan wikis which have their own articles on wikipedia, most do not nearly have as many users or traffic:
:I think this user thinks that there should be a Blocked section on his userpage or have one of those indefinitely blocked templates on his/her userpage (like {{]}}). <span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 8pt;">] <span style="font-size: 7pt;">] ]</span></span> 10:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/List_of_wikis {{unsigned|70.111.126.33}}


==]==
* I regularly patrol the ] and have pruned and deleted many other insignificant examples. Lostpedia is covered as a footnote in Lost, whcih is just fine. This is supposed to be an encyclopaedia, not a web directory. <b>]</b> 21:40, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello,


An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: ]. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, ]. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, ].
:*I'd still have to question your quality control. Wookiepedia? Tenchipedia? Lostpedia has millions of pageviews and is one of the largest wiki communites on the web, and yet isn't allowed its own page. The above two have VERY detailed pages, yet who has even heard of them? Have they been mentioned in national magazines or pop culture resources? The other writer is right who said there is a double standard and favoritism here. You should be consistant about your inclusion and exclusion policy. If you are saying that fan wikis should not be allowed a page on wikipedia, that's fine, but those other two pages should be deleted, along with a slew of others. --Vix


On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ] ] 18:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
::* Two things: first, it's not ''my'' quality control; you make the mistake of assuming that I think Wookiepedia is notable, which is a big assumption. Second, the argument that some ''foo'' articles exist therefore this ''foo'' article should exist has never been persuasive. <b>]</b> 11:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


==Admin==
== Personal attacks. ==
Just a note...you told VigilancePrime that Calton is an "experienced administrator". No, he isn't, actually. He's not an admin. And isn't that the MOST important thing on Misplaced Pages? That the information is correct, no matter how you go about wording it or how rude you are when you say it? <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 06:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


==User:CyclePat==
Do not post personal attacks towards members of Misplaced Pages. Thank you. - ] ] 21:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Just a notification that not only hasn't he given up, he seems determined to ]. Note your name on the case. --] | ] 11:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
:That is not a personal attack, it's a mirror. Look in it and see your own reflection. Please do not ] <b>]</b> 21:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
::You were telling me that he has an opinion that is not in favor of CVG, as if that is so rare among CVG editors. Just because you didn't call me an ass does not mean that what you said was not insulting. I look into a mirror and see an unbiased Misplaced Pages editor. I'm the starter of a project devoted to cleaning up all cruft in fictional works, mainly gamecruft. You act as if CVG editors operate under a hive mind, and you have implied exactly that on numerous occasions - you first stated that a vote was invalid because of who the voters were. Would you say the same if the vote didn't have any game page editors at all? I doubt it. The connotation that CVG editors are inheritly biased is insulting, and if you don't see it, I hardly could think of you as unbiased, either. What could you be insinuating when you belittle CVG editors like you have?
::I'll drop this if you sincerely apologize for belittling and insulting CVG editors. - ] ] 21:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:::He doesn't have to apologize for anything; you'll stop being disruptive or you WILL be blocked. --] 22:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:::: Damn, I just spent a good five minutes penning a civil response and Inshaneee said it all but better in sixteen words. <b>]</b> 22:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


Hi Guy, just out of courtesy, I'm letting you know that I put an RFArb in for CyclePat as you suggested to do so, but as you're named as a party, you may still wish to comment at ]. Best of luck :-) ] 13:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
== RfC closures ==


: Yup, thanks. Needs to be sorted once and for all, I think. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 13:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
*Saw your comments - they make sense, except when I consider my own long run in with a particular anon editor see ] and ] - the talk page documents recent behaviour. What would the closure be - how does one move on? Escalate to ArbCom - I don't think they really want to know. Sorry to bother you but I felt maybe there are things that don't quite fit the mould. --] <sup>]</sup> 10:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:* There is no need to close a case like the one you linked above, it can be left open until the problem user goes away> Alternatively it can be moved to long-term vandalism. I think the point here is that the proposal would ''allow'' closure, not ''enforce'' it. But the illustration is a good one and I will address it at the VP page. <b>]</b> 10:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
::*Thanks :-) --] <sup>]</sup> 10:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


==]==
== Ralbot ==
Er, forget something? --] | ] 14:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
* TW did not post the nom, and I had to go and do that shit they pay me for. Done now. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 14:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


:Good one, ] 18:11, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
That's really weird...Ralbot made the edits, and I do have a bot flag for that account...are you sure you're hiding bot edits? ] (]) 16:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


::No way in hell it should be deleted in my opinion, Guy, looking at the last just about unanimous AfD to keep, but I'll sit back now that I've commented and tag the SPA's as they appear (one already, what's the over/under, 5, 10?) ] 18:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
: Another thing to note- when you go to your watchlist, you have to hit "hide bot edits" every time you visit it. MediaWiki doesn't save your preferences. ] (]) 16:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


No real opinion, Murphy asked so I passed it on, which is only fair after all. Guy 21:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC) <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) {{{2|}}}</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::Mystery solved: loss of session data on the new privacy-enhanced environment in the office. Sorry about that; I think I lost a Clue somewhere if you happen to see one... <b>]</b> 20:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:::I never had a clue in the first place. Wasn't aware ''at all'' that bot edits could be hidden in the watchlist! (And I '''run''' a bot! :)) --] 20:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


Guy, I really wish you'd simply let Don Murphy sue for Libel. He's unlikely to have a case, and we could use some precedent. Further, the incredibly contentious nature of his entire presence as a pair of words anywhere on Misplaced Pages's already resulted in the loss of H, after threats. I don't know why the OFFICE chickened out back then, except that H's leaving meant the issue was 'settled', but really, this is above the pay grade of all the volunteers here. That said, if there's a deletion, which looks unlikely, please salt the earth there, so we can simply avoid this ever again. ] 18:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
==Why did you block me when I did not violate ]?==


== proms ==
Hi,


Went to the proms today - Beethoven, Brahms, surprise extra the Academic Festival Overture, saw Joanna Lumley, met Richard Stilgoe and ran into a friend from the horn society. Good evening out! Guy 21:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I am appealing my recent 3RR block on the grounds that the following three questions are not answered by somebody--I don’t expect them to be answered because to the best of my knowledge the accusation that I violated 3RR is not true, but if you can shed some light I may not pursue this matter any further. Thank you for your consideration.


==Non-help on help page==
The sole definition of a “Revert” - as stated at WP:REVERT is “To revert is to undo all changes made after a certain time in the past. The result will be that the page becomes identical to how it used to be at some previous time”


Hi, while glancing at , I noticed a section at the end that does not look like it belongs there, but rather somewhere else. Check it out. ] 05:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
The accusation made towards me by you is that I reverted the Vic Grimes page more than 3 times over the course of 24 hours. The following were the edits I made to the page on September 5:
* Thanks for that. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 08:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


== Welcome back ==
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vic_Grimes&oldid=73877744 (3:20) http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vic_Grimes&oldid=73874225 (2:54) http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vic_Grimes&oldid=73872499 (2:42) http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vic_Grimes&oldid=73871536 (2:35) http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vic_Grimes&oldid=73871187 (2:33) http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vic_Grimes&oldid=73870424 (2:27)


Welcome back, Guy!!! -- ] 12:36, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
If my edits meet the criterion for constituting three or more reverts, then somebody is obligated to provide me with AT LEAST FOUR links to past versions of the Vic Grimes page (PRIOR to September 5) where the page is “identical to how it used to be at some previous time.” In this case, “some previous time” refers to - as I said just a few lines above - “past versions of the Vic Grimes page (PRIOR to September 5). I am not asking for four links that make the page look NEARLY identical to how it used to be; that is NOT the definition of a revert. I want you or somebody to provide me with AT LEAST FOUR links where the page is EXACTLY, 110% the SAME as it was at any of the following times on September 4:
:Yes, I'm slow on the uptake. -- ] 12:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


== Gastrich's latest petition ==
3:20 2:54 2:42 2:35 2:33 2:27


It is my belief that some of the sock puppets aren't Gastrich. I have reason to believe that ] is a sock puppet of banned user ]. This in no way excuses Gastrich's behavior, and in fact given his history the accusation is justified, but pointing out that his claim that he is being framed isn't ''entirely'' false. ] | ] 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
If AT LEAST FOUR links cannot be produced, I will continue to pursue this matter because that will indicate to me that my account was wrongfully suspended for ] despite my not violating the ] policy.
* And it's my belief that some of them are - and in any case it doesn't matter. There are two things Gastrich wants: to promote Gastrich, and to promote his agenda. Neither of those is compatible with policy. He is incapable fo editing within policy, he misperceives his own bias as neutrality, and I would be staggered if any other admin who has dealt with him would give you any answer other than "hell no!" <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 21:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


Thank you for your consideration.


{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
JB196
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
] 19:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
|rowspan="2" |
:Read the policy: three reverts is a limit, not an entitlement; wikilawyering about precisely which reverts may or may not count and whether the reverts happened over a period of 23 or 25 hours is completely ignoring the ], which is unambiguous - just as your behaviour was unambiguously disruptive. This has been a public service announcement from your friendly neighbourhood ], please take it to heart. <b>]</b> 20:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Special Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | To ]: For his administrative actions in the most recent ] affair, showing patience, objectivity, fairness, and understanding of all related issues. - ] 05:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
|}


== Awbrey's projects == == PDMA ==


Why did you delete the PDMA article? ] 21:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. After being signed-on for less than 24 hrs I'm convinced he's less interested in promoting an earnest project and more interested in tweaking the community's nose. Feel free to delete the one I joined as well... Please. ] 21:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks, I thought you might agree :-) Having met Jim in person (all too briefly) I'm guessing he'll be of the same mind. <b>]</b> 21:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC) * Same reason as last time: it was advertorial for an organisation with no obvious claim to notability. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
::You note that you believe I am connected with the PDMA organisation which is untrue . ] 03:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
::Hi, Guy. The purpose was to keep Awbrey in check, but since FM and I have had too many encounters with him, deleting wasn't an option for a few reasons. However, if you as a fold-up-bicycle-riding independent observer and fair-minded Admin want to trash the whole thing, GO FOR IT! In gratitude, ] 22:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:: I did, first time (I believe I found the link at ]). This time I did not. But that is not relevant. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 06:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


== Proab ==
== review of process request ==
Hi JzG,


I didn't remove the notice. I archived it because it was fully addressed + there is no reason to insist in shouting personal information on the streets. Nothing is achieved by your revert of mine . --] 07:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
You may be interested in ]. The page was moved after a small 3 to 1 consensus back in May (to a name that had RCC in the title). 3 months later, the 1 person who opposed the move, reverted the move against the consensus, without coming to talk, or requesting a move or anything. I asked an admin to revert that out of process move because I couldn't do it myself (not sure why, but the move tab wouldn't let me do it). This lead to a vote that seems to support the out of process's move's name. I think its messed up that there is a move first, vote second thing going on, and I thinkk going against a previous consensus is sneaky. However, now that there is more of a community to support the move, perhaps everything is fine as is. I just thought I'd bring the situation to your attention so you could review it if you have the time and feel it may be necessary. Thanks for your consideration.--] 22:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
: I am waiting for your response JzG. Please discuss it in the talk page of the relevant page where I opened a section explaining my edit. --] 07:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
:Oh, in case it wasn't clear what I wanted you to review, because I was blocked from moving the page, I imagine the previous "out-of-process" move was probably a copy and paste move that f'd up the page histories, so perhaps that needs to be 'fixed', if that is indeed the case. Thanks again.--] 22:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:: Yes, and you've been waiting for a whole 20 minutes at 8:30am my local time, which time I spent getting ready for work. The issue is not "addressed", it is a notice of an arbitration enforcement. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 07:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
::I am concerned that a lack of interest from the "silent majority" might allow Vaquero to portray a majority of those with a vested interest as being a consensus, and start moving the whole lot wholesale. There are so many potential problems with having things at Catholic (need for disambiguation, need to ocnstantly re-explain ''which'' parts of the Catholic tradition and so on) and so few with having it at Roman Catholic (actually only one as far as I can tell, which is that some really committed RC editors feel it is their church's ''right'' to be at that title). I've said it before, I know no RC who is offended by being addressed as RC rather than just Catholic, and a good many state their religion as ''R''C.
::: JzG, you blocked Proab because you wanted for people to see his personal identity for 24 hours. "''It needs to stay there for at least 24 hours to let people see it, so for that period you are blocked from editing''". You even opposed its archival. even after the issue was discussed by Arbcom members and Morven wrote a summary of the discussion. I'll leave the issue. The notice is there. Enjoy it! --] 07:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
:: The move history is a complete mess. Once again Vaquero has moved an article and now argues, days later, as if it was always there. But the history is in the current article, albeit with some history split elsewhere (not much, though). It has been through several homes including ], mostly at the hands of Vaquero. <b>]</b> 23:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:::: I have looked into it more since then. The original thing that was removed was a complaint with diffs and links that was problematic. Morven's notice was a factual statement with no external links. If people have a problem with this then they need to take it up with the arbitrators. I am not comfortable with multiply-blocked edit warriors removing this or any other arbitration notice. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 08:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
== ] ==
::::: I didn't remove it. I archived it because the case was brought to the attention of the committee and as a result Proab was placed on probation. That's it. The rest is your desire for "people to see it". To let them know of the personal identity of a wikipedia user. That was the logic behind your block: "It needs to stay there for at least 24 hours to let people see it, so for that period you are blocked from editing". Proab had only informed the Office, one arbitrator and a number of admins. He hadn't informed all arbitrators and admins; and that was certainly his error, but maybe he couldn't have informed "all" admins because someone was about to reveal his identity.
Hi Jz. Are you aware that you closed the debate at Talk:Roman Catholic Church prior to the notified closing. This is what is says: '''Voting ends 0600 UTC on 8 September 2006''' This is a highly emotive debate. --] 07:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
::::: JzG, I am a human being and as much as you are, having a physical brain working in a similar way as yours. I come here with my arguments not with my personality or my contribution list or others. Please comment on the statements, not on the editors. --] 09:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


:::::: The WP:AE post was drawing this to the attention of the wider community. Above all, the problem is entirely of Proabivouac's own making - he did not have to evade his ArbCom sanctions and he did not have to go straight back to the same problematic behaviour. I have asked ArbCom to clarify. Now drop it. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 09:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Maybe it would be more appropriate for an admin. who has not participated in the debate to close it. --] 09:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


::::::: That Proab acted incorrectly is clear. Yes, at times he may have shown problematic behaviour but this doesn't justify a straight generalization. He is a generally good and smart editor and I think there are many many editors on wikipedia who will agree with me.
: The debate is shedding more heat than light on the subject, and given that the debate has already been had several times in the recent past I am at a loss to understand why it was started in the first place. It sounds awfully like a case of keep asking until you (TINY) get the answer you want. <b>]</b> 10:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::: Thanks for asking for clarification from ArbCom. It is none of business anyways. Peace :) --] 09:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


:::::::: Ye,s it is ArbCom's business, and they can make the call. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 09:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
===Moves of RC by country===
On AN/I you said that only Britain and Canada are out of step with convention. There are quite a few articles in ] that are not in the form Roman Catholicism in Foo. I was going to list/move them as a group when this conflict settled down. The Canada one is important because there are two articles. Other articles out of step: ], ], ]. It looks like most categories are going by Roman Catholic Church in Foo, so ] is out of step with the category naming. ] 12:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
:OK, my mistake. Thanks for the comment. If you need help / backup with the move let me know, I'm certainly no expert on this one but I do find that the past move warring has left a lot of multiple redirects, which clearly needs to be addressed. Unfortunately it looks to me very much as if a small coterie of poeple who can't bring themselves to allow the word Roman are going to keep asking until they get what they want or get sent packing. The whole naming question at ] was settled after yet another lengthy debate only recently, and of course it's been re-opened because the answer was the "wrong" one according to them. <b>]</b> 12:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


On the same subject, is there any paticular reason the block isnt quite considerably long because of his use of sockpuppets to evade the sanctions? Or is arbcom dealing? ]] 09:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
== List of CRM vendors ==


* You are free to block him for longer, I guess. I don't think what he did was especially bad, but causing drama is only likely to draw more attention to the thing he'd rather hide. It's fine for an editor to change accounts to protect their real-world identity, but it's not fine for them to change accounts in order to evade a sanction. It's fine to change accounts to distance oneself from past misdeed,s, it's not fine to do it in order to distance oneself from the consequences of such misdeeds and thereby gain time to carry on the same problem behaviour. I'm undecided about whether Proabivouac is a net positive to the project. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 09:25, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I am not necessarily saying that the article should be kept. But there are a bunch of other lists that are similiar to this one. If the list of crm vendors is deleted, so should all the other lists. Also, I don't think the article is a spam magnet since each entry must be a wikipedia article. it is no more a spam magnet than other lists. --] 11:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
: I don't care enough about it to take action on my own behalf. Sounds like you don't either :-) Maybe those other lists should also be deleted; if they are bare (i.e. no added informaiton other than the name) then perhaps they should be. <b>]</b> 12:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


Proabivouac has been the target of sustained harassment, some from pov warriors and some from banned users running socks. In spite of it he does a lot of good scholarly work on some difficult pages, and makes a significant positive contribution. More than most editors, people of differing views recognize the value of his work. ] <sup>]</sup> 11:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
==]==


: I'm happy to take your word on that. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 11:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
If I may ask, does briefly being the instructor of someone who is notable confer enough notability upon the teacher that he deserves his own article? Google only brings forth hits for an actor named Ron Slanina not the person this article is about. <font color="Green">]</font> <sup><font color="Blue">]</font></sup> 23:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
:In a word: no. Being the teacher of many famous poeple might (see ]) but one person? Not really. <b>]</b> 23:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


== Chrome (XM)==
==]==
I have noticed you have deleted the channel page a second time after having a stub tag placed on the page. I do not know your definition of content-free, but that page does have information on it that is of value. If you disagree with this, please expand the page with more content or ask other editors to edit the page before outright deleting the page. ] 13:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Please assume good faith. I would appreciate not being accused of wiki-lawyering (particularly wiki-lawyering at its worst). I know that many pages incorporate public domain material, particularly that drawn from early encyclopedia editions. If public domain material provides an acceptable source for (what I believe to be) an encyclopedic topic, I see nothing wrong with this. I am going to de-prod the article, but feel free to list it for AFD. Best, ] 23:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
: Copy and paste is ''always'' a sign that you are doing something wrong. But actually I was accusing ''myself'' of Wikilawyering, instead of just deleting it! Sorry this was not more obvious. <b>]</b> 23:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC) * It's a directory entry for a minor facet of a company that already has an article. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 15:25, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
::An editor has asked for a ] of ]. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ] 14:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
::No problem. :-) ''Always'' is a big word though, per ]. ] 23:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
::: Indeed. But I stand by it: copying and pasting the entire contents of an article is never right. Even if it's from the 1911 EB, the state of knowledge has generally moved on. <b>]</b> 07:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


== Travelport, Galileo CRS and Jeff Clarke (CEO) ==
==Shady Side Academy==
Why was the ] article deleted? Admittedly there were issues about page, and one or two users dedicated to vandalizing it, but I don't think deletion was the answer. Wouldn't it be better to fix the flaws than delete out right? ] 00:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:Try making a version whicih has references and establishes the importance of the subject, in your user space. <b>]</b> 07:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
::I don't know exactly what you mean with "estabish the importance of the subject." It's a school, and many other schools that are far less notable have their own articles (my own ] for example). Are you saying that there needs to be something more for it to be an article?


On 9/7 you deleted these three entries: Travelport, Galileo CRS and Jeff Clarke (CEO). After reading your cited justification for the deletion, we've discovered that there are some footnotes that referenced press releases and the company website that, while common in other notable corporate profiles, did indeed violate the terms of the policy and will be revised or deleted. Aside from those points, the entries did not contain promotional language and there was strict adherence to referencing third party sources for every factual claim, including Forbes, the NY Times and the Financial Times. As a corporation, Travelport exceeds the criteria for being noteworthy in the context of companies listed on the Misplaced Pages "List of American Companies" with 2006 revenue of $2.6 billion, approx. 7,500 employees and operations in 145 countries. The company is also an important part of the Orbitz and Blackstone stories, both of which recently became public companies. In addition to his relevance to Travelport, Jeff Clarke was also an integral part of one of the largest mergers in the history of the PC industry (HP/Compaq). References for these types of claims were included in the original entries.
::As to your complaint for lack of references, I agree. However, there are thousands of articles on Misplaced Pages which have no references whatsoever, maybe even more. Is the answer to delete all of them? No, the answer is to fix them. A better solution would have been to place <nowiki>{{fact}}</nowiki> tags where necessary, and start looking for citations, or deleting the individual un-cited points. Your response was, in my opinion, a cheap easy way out, and completely counterproductive. Why didn't YOU try making a version which has references and establishes the importance subject? Now we're without what was a flawed, but nonetheless useful, starting point towards making a good article. But now it's gone, and I haven't time to start from scratch. Thanks a lot. ] 17:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Were there any other problems with the entries other than what was outlined in CSD G11? Since the basic criteria for Misplaced Pages content appears to have been met, I'd like to take your feedback and improve the entries. ] 14:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
* ], not an advertisement hoarding, and not the place to promote a business. Also, we have a ]. Your own company and it's glitterati are a ]. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 08:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


==Hampl, Punto, Leutgeb ... ==
::: Whatever some people may think, simply existing does not establish the importance of any institution. The problem with the article was that it had been hacked to death. Maybe at some point in the history there was a version worth having, I will take a look. <b>]</b> 17:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for your greetings. Sorry, because my english is also "not up to this". I'm a Horn player als amateur but i'm interrestet in history of horn and of horn players like Hampl etc. So i wish you, to make no "kikser" on your horn. --- ] <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 14:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


==Motorized Bicycles==
::::Thank's for undeleting the page. The version you deleted is one that I've reverted multiple times. Note my comments on talk page. Someone has a vendetta against the school.] 00:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your help pruning the external links on the ] page! Your help is very... helpful! ] 15:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


==Since you were wondering...==
== Broken Hearts On Ice ==
...this is typical behaviour of this user when interacting with others, as summarized ]. ] 17:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
*{{article|Broken Hearts On Ice}}


== Republic Magazine deletion ==
Hello,

I would like to know why the page for Republic Magazine was deleted. This was the answer YOU gave: (CSD G11: Blatant Advertising Bi-monthly, started in July? That's, what, two or three issues so far? No chance.)

What dont you understand about the term "bi-monthly"?? Bi-monthly is EVERY TWO MONTHS. The first issue came out in July and was for "July/August", the 2nd issue is out NOW and is for "September/October". There is only TWO issues in existence, July/August and September/October. Bi-monthly-----> every TWO months, not bi-weekly, which is twice a month. Did you think I was referring to bi-weekly? You must have. I would like the page back up. I dont appreciate you just deleting it without being warned. If I was warned, I could have told you the meaning of the term "bi-monthly" in advance.

I dont even understand your reason why it was deleted. You said "started in July? thats, what, two or three issues so far? no chance". I dont even understand that. How many issues did you think there should have been since July? If it was bi-weekly that would mean about 5 issues would exist. If it was monthly, about 3 issues would exist. I did not say how many issues were in existence on the page. I just mentioned underneath the picture of the magazine with Ron Paul on it that it was the 2nd issue----which was CORRECT, since the 2nd issue is for September/October. What exactly did you not understand? Im not trying to be smartassed---I really dont know what you misinterpreted. Please put the page back up, because if it's not, I will know it was removed out of biased reasons. I'm a writer, I will do a story on wikipedia's blatant censorship if it's not restored. I will have the proof, so it wont be libel. ] 07:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

* This is an encycloapedia. It exists to document that whicih is already verifiably significant, not promote that which people hope one day will be. Political activist magazines are a dime a dozen, and this one only just shipped its second issue. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 08:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

== Why the reverts and re-reverts? ==
Eeeek. Whats going on, Guy? ]<span style="color:black;">e</span>] 07:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
: Was kinda wondering too ... - ] ] 08:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
* Lack of Clue - I went to revert titface's edits and clicked your contribs by mistake. Half asleep. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 08:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
:: Heh! I know what that's like. 1:30am here and I'm stuck in work. Get some sleep, the two of you! :) - ] ] 08:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
::: 09:29 here, and into the second cup of coffee - I'll be awake Real Soon Now. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 08:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
:::: Ha ha. No worries. I just thought for a moment the troll had cloned your account somehow and was carrying on his revert spree. At this time of night anything seems possible! ]<span style="color:black;">e</span>] 08:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

== BIG Daddy M ==

Regarding , who did you suspect him of being? Just curious, but is very much alike to , not to mention the fact that this is another editor who wars for no reason and edits Wrestling-related and comic-related articles. ] <small>(] • ])</small> 23:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
* Let's not speculate further, shall we? <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 23:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I meant no harm, there's no further evidence to support this theory anyway. Sorry for the inconvenience. ] <small>(] • ])</small> 23:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)



==Merge==
You may be interested in ]. ]<sup>]</sup> 10:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

== OTRS Question ==

I noticed you made a deletion related to ]. Didn't know if you wanted to reply to it or not. Just a heads up more than anything. Have a great day. '''<span style="color:#c22">^</span>]'''</sup>]]&nbsp;<em style="font-size:10px;">15:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)</em>
* I commented in the otrs irc channel that someone else should reply, since I was the one who nuked it. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 15:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
** I wasn't in channel so I missed that, sorry. I'll take care of it now. I've also watchlisted the article in question. '''<span style="color:#c22">^</span>]'''</sup>]]&nbsp;<em style="font-size:10px;">16:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)</em>
::* No problem. I always think "I nuked it" looks less than caring in these circumstances, but it's what it needed; better to say "it has been deleted as failing blah blah" and have it come from an independent individual, IMO. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 19:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

== Great work, keep it up ==

{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For detecting and quashing racist propaganda in Misplaced Pages. ] 18:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
|}

== Thanks for RfA support and a question ==

Thanks very much for your support in my recently successful RfA. I appreciated your comment!

Since you seem to be online, I just blocked {{user|WillyOffOfWheels}} with account creation disabled as a meme of the infamous WillyOnWheels. Is this appropriate? The guy's feigning ignorance on his talk page. Cheers! -- ] ] ] 18:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
* Of course. He's gaming the system and can be ignored. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:14, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
:*That's what I figured. -- ] ] ] 06:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

== User:Edgarde/IPC ==

DGG is being commendably considerate of the right to vanish, but actually this is a subpage and is GFDL'd so I've restored it and moved it ot ] for you. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

:Super duper! This is everything I would have asked for if I thought I could have it. Thank you a lot. / ]<small> ] ]</small> 20:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

==] opened==
Hello, JzG. The ] in which you commented to has opened. Please provide evidences on the ] for the Arbitrators to consider. You may also want to utilize the ] for suggestions.

For the Arbitration Committee,<br>
- ] &#124; <sup>] / ]</sup> 21:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

== "Usual crap" ==
Do you really think "usual crap" is a civil way to conduct a discussion? ] 22:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
* Depends. If it's the owner of a website whose article has been deleted coming up with the usual crap about how if we have an article on Facebook then we should have an article on every single social networking site in the known universe, then yes. Actually if they came here themselves I'd just tell them to fuck off. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

== Larry Craig ==
I'm wondering why you removed the infobox from his article. He is, after all, a convicted criminal, and there's no question of this being a BLP issue - U.S. senators are clearly public figures whose criminal behaviour should be publicly reported. ] 22:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
* {{tl|infobox criminal}} is for people who are first and foremost criminals, as I understand it. But mainly it was about the image, which existed primarily to disparage the subject. I just removed the lot since we already have an appropriate infobox on that page. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
** And I restored the image, because... we don't speedily delete things which are "disparaging" if they may be encyclopedically relevant to the article subject. We're not talking about Brian Peppers here, we're talking about a U.S. senator. I find it a very arguable point that a U.S. senator's police mugshot may be quite relevant to an article about a U.S. senator who is now embroiled in a major scandal relating to his criminal activities. That's a discussion worth having, and I don't know which way I fall just yet, but I don't think it should be speedied. ] 23:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
::* Yes we do, ]. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 23:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
:::* I dispute your contention that a mugshot image is in and of itself unbalanced and disparaging. If placed in proper context, it is part of a balanced encyclopedia biography. A page consisting of nothing but a mugshot and "OMG CRIMINAL" would fit CSD G10, but this is not that. ] 23:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
::::* Things I hate about ] no. 7: it forces us to take a cautious approach and defend people who are, in real life, indefensible. We already have a picture, we know what he looks like. We have citations for the events. We don't need a mugshot to drive home, in your words, "OMG! CRIMINAL!" It adds nothing other than a gleeful celebration of his misfortune. Proverbs 1:26 is a lesson in life for bigots everywhere but a poor practice on Misplaced Pages. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 23:30, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==
Is this the sort of thing you were hoping for at ]? If I'm on the right track, i'll continue, if not, please clarify. ] 23:19, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
* Anything that replaces the crap with cited and neutral content (read: hopefully dry enough to drive off the whack-jobs but interesting enough to keep anyone who is serious about the subject proper) is good. Please do carry on. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 23:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I knocked out 8K of uncited crap, a serious amount of COATRACKing, some areas where there was actual promotion of steroetypes, etc., etc. I'm off for some friday night time, but take a look and let me know what you think, perhaps on the talk page there? ] 01:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

my run through the article. It's 11K shorter, I dropped almost anytthign I saw as unsourced and promoting or just stating a stereotype without review or citaiton in its' section, and so I think it's a stronger article. If it needs moer work, I would appreciate the guidance... ] 04:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

== NYLT ==


Would you please elaborate on the {{tl|accuracy}} tag just applied to ]. It is difficult to fix what we don't know is wrong. Thanks. --] 12:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
I was the creator of the Broken Hearts On Ice article. Why did you delete it? It is a notable article to have, as this producer is responsible for many innovative releases of progressive and avant-garde music. He is also an icon in his home town, Fairfield Connecticut. I severely disagree with your deletion and I suggest that you give it another read to see if you really think he is not worthy of archival. He is, and will continue to be, an important icon of underground, avant-garde music. You ought to have had a hearing.
* I'd love to, but the complainant was insufficiently specific. I've asked him to comment on the talk page. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 14:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
--] 06:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
: It failed to amke any assertion of notability, ] criterion A7. Please see ] for music articles: aspiring producers on their own labels are rarely considered notable. <b>]</b> 07:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


:Thanks. I figure you are the middleman between this and OTRS. I think we have been here before. BTW- {{tl|accuracy}} redirects to {{tl|disputed}}. --] 14:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
This one was. He invented a whole new form of aleatory music, which you would have seen if you had read the article. Aspiring producers can still be notable ones. And so you just delete the article, without perhaps asking for maybe better clarification or holding a hearing? Please put the article back up, at least pending on some revisions.--] 07:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
: I read the article. It made no credible and substantiated claim of notability, which is why Elonka tagged it and I agreed. Feel free to try again, though, remembering to cite references from reliable secondary sources. You will need some pretty extraordinary evidence to overcome the fact that it scores only six unique Googles, of which two are on Misplaced Pages and one is his own site. <b>]</b> 07:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


== Please enlight me ==
And so I'm going to have to write the whole thing over again? Why did you have to delete this so stubbornly? Couldn't you have given at least warning, or better yet, an official hearing like you're supposed to, so that I could have SAVED all of my efforts? As an 'admin', I'm sure you know the effort that goes into making these articles on Misplaced Pages. It just was not very helpful at all to do that. You could have easily just informed me that you felt this way about the article, and then I would have made it clearer and this would all have been painless. If for some reason the invention of a new form of aleatory music is meaningless to you guys, I would have made it meaningful. Please, please, tell me how I can get all of that information back. Thank you.--] 07:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


Wondering why you just deleted my article on Sigrid Lidströmer. You wrote "lacks significans". So you think she wasn't significant? Since you must know a lot about this - in what way was she unimportant? I'd like to learn that. My ears are open...
: The article was tagged for speedy deletion as failing to make any credible claim of notability. I agree: it failed to make any such claim. Notability can be crudely checked by a Google test, whcih reveals that there are, as above, six unique hits, of which two are on Misplaced Pages and one is his own site. You can ''ask'' for undeletion at ] if you like, but absent some really strong evidence of notability it will not be undeleted, or if it is it will be sent straight to ]. So: if you try again, please be sure to include credible external references from reliable seconadry sources. Alternatively you could try somewhere where there is a lower bar to inclusion. Remember, Misplaced Pages does not exist to help the interesting become significant, it exists to document that which is already verifiably significant. As an admin, I have had articles of my own deleted on occasion. It happens. Not everybody has an entirely objective view of the things they like. <b>]</b> 07:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
18:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)18:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)18:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)18:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
* See ]. Any chance you're going to stop arguing about your articles on your family? <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 18:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


==]==
::Addendum: you uploaded the cover art from the CD with a description that it was a picture of yourself. Please read ]. <b>]</b> 18:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Since ] is now a protected redirect to ], I had the thought that ] might do well as a protected redirect too. I'm checking with you because you were the last admin to deal with it. Whaddaya think? --] 21:05, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


== ] ==


I have noticed when you closed the above AfD, you did not remove the category template,
"REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD". By deleting this when closing it pulls the
discussion out of the category. I have deleted it from this discussion, but if you could
review any other closures you have done recently and remove the tag from them it would be
greatly appreicated. Thanks. --] <small>] ] ]</small> 14:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
: Yet more code... Ah well. I'm in favour of categories, I guess, so I will watch out for this apparently new thing. <b>]</b> 17:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
::This is a fairly recent change. The official policy is at ].
I have been going through the listing in each of the categories ] and removing
the tag from pages that are closed and adding the approriate category code for those in
the uncatagorised group. Thanks.--] <small>] ] ]</small> 19:26, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


== Question... == ==Sigrid Lidströmer==


Hello. You speedied ], saying that the article did not assert significance.
I created the cycling proficiency test article... but support Paul Smith pretty much unreservadly... but proudly drive a 740...but am I a member of piston heads... but am a member of c+... but vandalise wikipedia constantly... but love cycling.


The article is very messy and does not seem to assert major significance. However, it does seem to assert minor significance, indeed, quite a lot more significance than that of many pop singers and Pokemon who are lovingly written up in this "encyclopedia". As I've mentioned ], I don't see it as speediable material and I urge you to restore it. -- ] 22:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Therefore - am I good, back, ugly, or troll? Law of excluded middle applies.
:Guy, it appears that Hoary's account has been hijacked, as he's arguing for keeping an article. I thought she was the translator? ] 22:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
::] -- ] 22:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


''If you feel an admin has done you wrong, try talking to them. Nicely.'' I don't merely "feel" but rather I ''think'' that you did wrong to ], an article that was mediocre, perhaps AfD-worthy, but not obviously speedy-worthy. Niceness is hardly my forte, but I'll try: Please undelete this, and, if you wish, take it to AfD. Thank you. -- ] 00:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Thanks for the tip about wiper jets on your site, very useful :D ] 17:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:Hello again. No reply, so I moved what was in a scratchpad page of the writer to ]. Of course you're free to AfD it, but I think you'll agree that it's hardly speediable. -- ] 12:21, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
: You are the usual mix of good, bad, ugly, indifferent - and in supporting Smith, deranged ;-) Seriously, his arse-backwards statistical nonsense has been ridiculed by every statistician I've shown it to. Apart from that, everyone can live in peace and harmony if we want to and I'm sure if we met on uk.rec.sheds we'd share a ] and a ] and be quite happy :-) <b>]</b> 17:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:* She was a translator. She translated some stuff. Some of this stuff had not been translated before. She corresponded with the author of at least some of the stuff she translated. All we need now is a claim of encyclopaedic notability and we're away. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 12:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
::*If you think the subject is short on notability, you are of course very free to send the article to AfD. The steps involved are rather tiresome, of course; so as a gesture of amicability or whatever I'll even send it to AfD for you, if you ask me to. -- ] 15:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


== BLP Issue ==
==]==


Is there ''anything'' you can do about this editor's rants on the ] talk page? ]? He claims he represents Ms. Wilding, but all I can think is I sure as hell hope not, for her sake, since I don't have a serious grudge against her (unlike my grudge against ]). I've asked ] to assist with editing the page, but Real77 is chasing all the good editor's away, and no one can get in there to edit. In addition to which the talk page is a stream of indecipherable rants. My concern now is that the talk page looks like such a piece of ranting shit that it will ultimately reflect poorly upon Ms. Wilding and the article as part of its permanent history. I feel this is a legitimate concern, although an unusual one, for a BLP, that an editor claims to be representing the subject of the article, but is indirectly, by their actions, trashing the hell out of the person. It is extremely difficult to impress anything upon this editor, Real77, because of what appears to be a serious English language barrier. I don't know what's going on, but I don't think editors should have unlimited rights to make a living person look like shit on Misplaced Pages, even if they really are representing them. ] 06:23, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I wish you would have consulted me before deleting this, there are plenty of adequate versions in the history. Please undelete. ] ] 17:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
*
:I didn't consult because I rarely do when going through a large backlog at ]. But I have no objection to undeleting. I didn't notice how much history it had, which should have alerted me. The substantive content at deletion was:
*
:::Shady Side Academy is an independent school in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It was initially founded as a boy's boarding school in 1883, though the Senior School was only established at its current suburban campus in Fox Chapel in 1921. Fox Chapel High School, Shady Side Academy's other, is a public school offering the same opportunities for free.
:Many of the IPs are his, also. And he refers to himself oddly in the first person plural all of the time, having various excuses for this, "my wife is in the room," and "it's none of your business," being two I vaguely recall.
:::Criticisms
:] 06:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
:::The faculty is underpaid, none of them went to college, let alone high school, and students tend to be extremely flighty and dumb.
::Oh, nice, he just made a legal threat. ] 06:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
:Just that. No formatting, nothing. It also had the text from the speedy and hangon tags copy-and-pasted into the article above and below the tags. A mess, like I said. Feel free to try and find a valid version in the history if you can, it's been the subject of vigorous edit warring by the looks of it.. <b>]</b> 18:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
==DRV Image:Larry Craig mugshot.jpg ==
::A persistent edit warrior has reverted to that version a few times. Thanks for undeleting, I'll try to keep a special eye on it. ] ] 18:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
You were invloved in the deletion of the image now being addressed at ]. Please consider participating in that discussion. -- <span style="font-family:Kristen ITC;">''']''' <sup>''(])''</sup></span> 08:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
::: Fine. Let me know if it needs protection, I'll do my best not to pick ] ;-) <b>]</b> 19:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
::::In case you cared, the user who nominated the page for speedy deletion (]) was the same user who changed the content to the aforementioned shameful version. Thought you might want to know. ] 01:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
::::: I was intending to spend a bit of time this evening looking into it, so thanks for that. I suspect I need to dust off the cluebat (and apply it first of all to myself...) <b>]</b> 14:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


An editor has asked for a ] of ]. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. '''<span style="color:red;"><strong>→</strong></span>]<sup>&nbsp;♦&nbsp;]</sup>''' 09:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
== Bisexual erasure ==


== Chrome (XM) ==
''Do you have any evidence of its being "commonly used"? The very low unique Google count indicates otherwise.''<br>When will you learn? People don't need to provide evidence for stuff like this. They just ''know'' what they're saying is fact. -- ] 19:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


Now why on earth did you delete this page 3 times. It is not a7, so I don't know where you got that idea and it is definitley not a G11. Perhaps you don't remember what an a7 is. An a7 is a tag for a blatant advertisement of a product or service. Now was that really an advertisement? No. Every other damn page for an XM channel has not been deleted. You might as well just add XM tags to the other 120 XM Channel pages on Wiki. Perhaps semi-protecting it, but you trying to get that blocked is wrong. Obviously you have no clue as to the policies that have been set fourth here, and i strongly suggest you be instructed in the proper mode of editing wikipedia. I'm contacting a few more administrators.--] 15:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
== Your statement in the Vivaldi RfAr ==
* I'm just wondering how often I'm going to have to say this. It was an article that ''did not assert notability'' (]). It said this is one of the brands of XM (on which we have an article), I'd have redirected it only ''nobody but us'' refers to it as Chrome (XM), that was a made-up title. I put the link to XM Satellite Radio into Chrome, the disambiguation page. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 16:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)


== ] ==
"Arbustoo's personal views are hostile to this particular strand of fundamentalist Christianity, and as far as I can see to Christianity in general. This has not impeded a productive working relationship with other editors such as myself and JoshuaZ who are self-identified Christians" I don't know what gave you the impression that I'm Christian; I'm Jewish. ] 21:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:Damn! And I forgot to discriminate against you! You are better at neutrality than I thought. Should have guessed from the name. <b>]</b> 21:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
By his name? Tsk! ;) Anyway, was an '''excellent''' response, one of the best I've ever read. ] 22:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:Oh, er, thanks! I find this case difficult. Arbustoo does himself no favours sometimes, sadly. <b>]</b> 23:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


Actually, a reliable source isn't as necessary when the facts are easily ]. --] 19:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
== Londheart/Etaonsh ==
* You might want to read ], ] and the like. Nothing wrong with reposting with reliable sources, but reposting with the same crap sources is not on. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


What I find funny is that users say that TorrentFreak and the like are not "reliable". However when it comes to popular blogs such as engadget, people immediately seem to find that source "reliable". Excuse me, but I don't see how famous newsapers, blogs, and all that other crap makes you think it's reliable. What if all the sources you call reliable all disappeared into nowhere? It's all crazy talk if you ask me, utter shit actually. Now stop reverting it, PLEASE. ] 23:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I see you consider them to be the same. Have you requested a checkuser I don't know about or are you basing this on similarities in edit behavior? It could be that they're just people with the same POV. I'm sure we could get a checkuser confirmation if we asked, though. - ]|] 22:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
* I think you may be confusing me with other people. I have never called engadget a reliable source. Please cite reliable sources. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 23:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
: I was basing it on this: <b>]</b> 22:11, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
::As noted at ], there is no user named Londhart. That is (was) just ]'s signature. ] 22:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC) :I never said you yourself called it a reliable source. Popular != reliable. ] 23:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
:::That was how I understood it, too. <b>]</b> 22:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
::::Normally there would be something a little bit procedurally unorthodox about responding to a user's RfAr by having the most active arbitrator indef ban the user and then declare the case moot. And normally I would say that escalating straight from 48 hours (Etaonsh/Londhart's previous record) to indef is a bit hasty. But I don't see anyone lifting a finger to advocate for another chance for this person, and I'm certainly not going to be the first. Good job on compiling the evidence. ] 13:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
::::: It was an open and shut case, I reckon, and I'm always prefer clue-based administration over slavish following of process. I was on the way to doing exactly the same myself. There's no reason arbitrators can't act in their capacity as admins; all it means is that if it comes back to ArbCom for review, Fred will have to recuse, which is no big deal. Thanks for the compliment :-) I think ArbCom have enough to do without having to find the paper trail themselves, I was just helping out, really. <b>]</b> 14:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::Fred recusing could become a big deal given that the ArbCom seems to be working in slow motion these days (they ''still'' haven't finished voting the St Chris case), but no matter. I guess we'll never know now if this gentleman's mother really died that day, though.... Regards, ] 14:24, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::: Hey, don't worry - it'll be finished before the ] :-) <b>]</b> 08:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
:::::::: Regarding Londhart, the case could be considered withdrawn by him now, which is even easier than moot. See my comment at ]. Regarding St Chris, if they don't hurry I just might ]. ] 08:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


== "LBU is not accredited to award doctorates" ==


== Vopt AfD ==
What does this mean? You said it in the ] edit comments. A school doesn't need to be accredited to legally award doctorates. In effect, there is no such thing as "accredited to award doctorates." Maybe you misspoke. - JD {{unsigned|Jack Delay}}


:Go through this user's history. He added two Gastrich links to the LBU page. ] 01:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC) Kindly review the responses posted to the ] article ] 06:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
* Kindly add the assertions of notability to the article. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 06:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


I trust you will take another look at the article as well as the AfD discussion and have the good sense to keep the article as revised --] 15:59, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
== Sources ==
Guy, I read your comment on my talk page and I am uncertain what you meant. The sources referenced to the geocities site are newspaper, magazine and documentary articles that are no longer available on the internet, but appeared in published form in the past. The geocities site was created as a neutral site in which articles (that were previously linked to controversial, partison and biased Anti-Sai sites) could be listed free of promotion of a particular POV. This was agreed to by all parties in mediation with BostonMA (including Andries). If you believe that the geocities site cannot be linked to, then what do you suggest? No links? Anti-Sai sites are no more trustworthy than a geocities site. They are worse because they push an antagonistic POV that is exclusively critical of Sathya Sai Baba. Furthermore, these articles were never originally published on Anti-Sai Sites. Are you saying that the previous agreement in mediation is no longer applicable? ] <sup>]-]</sup> 05:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
:In which case they are copyright violations. We should not link to offsite copyright violations any more than we allow them internally; we can cite treeware without having to link to a copy of it on the web. Just cite the original source. An "anti" site which can be traced to an identified authority, that is, an authority on whose expertise other authorities rely (for example, newspaper reports and TV reports) is quite acceptable, the reader is unlikely to be misled by an open statement of an agenda. As far as I can tell the balance of informed opinion is that SSB is a charlatan, and we need to reflect that in the balance of the article, which means we can't ignore the work of opponents. <b>]</b> 08:54, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
There are no Anti-Sai sites that can be traced to an identified authority. Also, I must disagree with you when you say that the ''"balance of informed opinion is that SSB is a charlatan"''. Even Andries (an Anti-Sai activist) conceded that '''all''' of the people and agencies involved (that reported negative information against SSB) either held an Anti-Sai view or were sympathetic with Anti-Sai activists (something I discovered through independent research). Needless to say, all this information has been purposely withheld. Particularly disturbing was the Salon.com article. I found private e-mail correspondence between Goldberg and Anti-Sai Activists in which she confessed writing her article in cooperation with them. A fact never divulged in her article. Khushwant Singh, a journalist interviewed by the BBC, had openly stated in previous years that he was an atheist, rationalist and was anti-guru. This information was withheld in the ''Secret Swami'' programme although he was a prime interviewee. All this points to bias. Furthermore, you seem to be unaware of the numerous books and newspapers that speak favorably about Sathya Sai Baba and whose numbers far exceed Anti-Sai articles. Perhaps you can reference your sources for the ''"balance of informed opinion"''? I agree that Sathya Sai Baba is a controversial guru and I have no problem with the article discussing that. As a matter of fact, I do not object to the opposing or antagonistic POV whatsoever. ] <sup>]-]</sup> 15:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


: The balance of informed opinion is that one cannot produce gold, ash or indeed anything else from thin air. This much requires no citation. <b>]</b> 19:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC) * But it's still a directory entry. Why not include some of the colour mentioned in the AfD debate? know this is en encyclopaedia, but that article is a dry-as-dust description of what reads as an essentially generic product. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 17:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


== SqueakBox ==
Then that much you have. ] <sup>]-]</sup> 04:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


Guy, I appreciate your open mindedness about SqueakBox but really he does not invariably meet reason with reason. When my request to not depopulate a category without going through CfD is met by accusations that I'm enamored with the rape victims category, I find this unreasonable. When SqueakBox routinely accuses editors of secret pedophile-supporting agendas, oblivious to the fact that, hey, maybe just maybe some people wouldn't be too happy to be labeled pedophiles for ], I call that unreasonable. That's not to say SqueakBox can't be a productive editor: he often is. But he can also be a tendentious editor. Of course, this is partly explained by his involvement in articles in which edit warring, POV pushing and sockpuppetry are routine. That does not make it any more acceptable. It ''is'' possible to be a member of ] without being a dick with everyone you find in your way, it ''is'' possible to fight POV pushing pedophiles without "boldly" removing a perfectly decent article about an absurdly objectionable subject, it ''is'' possible to fight for tougher applications of BLP without attempting to change one of the fundamental principles of the deletion policy without any sort of discussion . A few weeks ago at ANI, Jimbo commented on the recent controversy with Perverted Justice and said something like "what we need is more passionate anti-pedophile editors who are patient and smart to watch these articles". As I replied, what we need is editors that are patient, smart and as clinical as they can be. Passion makes Misplaced Pages suck. It's why administrators get constant flack, it's why there are revert wars, it's why there are insults flung all over the place and it's ''never'' necessary. Were SqueakBox not fighting on the obvious side of the good guys, he would have been forced to change his ways or leave the project a long time ago. Did you take a look at the diffs I provided on ANI? If not, please do: they are definitely the mark of an editor who behaves in a way that's likely to drive away editors like me who can take ''some'' abuse but do think that at some point it's best to leave the inmates run the asylum. Cheers, ] 23:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
:I was also thinking, would it be appropriate to say that the ''"balance of informed opinion"'' also contends that Jesus is a charlatan? After all, using your reasoning, multiplying fish and wine and walking on water would fall under this same stipulation. Is this type of commentary allowed on Misplaced Pages? It sounds like POV pushing to me. Please explain. ] <sup>]-]</sup> 05:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


* As I've said, in my experience he has, which is not to say that others have the same experience, or that he always has. Zealous application of ] is good, and overzealous application should be met with calmness. Passion is not what makes Misplaced Pages suck, ''obsession'' is what does that. Most of the serious problems I've encountered have been with people who are determined to boost their own interests, not with those pursuing ]. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 06:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
::Not many people take Bible stories literally. One common interpretation of the feeding of the five thousand is based on the well-known phenomenon of the "bring and share" meal. I have no doubt that the Bible would be a very different book if Jesus had lived in the present day. <b>]</b> 08:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
:It's a fine line between unbdridled passion and obsession and passion stops being ok when it leads you to bulldoze your way through other editors. I suppose it's your right not to take a look at the evidence I provided or to write off SqueakBox's extensive block log as the sign of a passionate editor, but even if your interactions with him have been positive, it's important to point out that many others have found him stubborn, prone to wild accusations and prone to edit warring. And by "other editors" I don't mean sockpuppets of Voice of Britain, I mean myself, ], ], ], ], ], ], to name but a few. I'm grateful for the work that he does but I don't think there's any need for the crap that comes with it. ] 14:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Although I agree with you, I am more interested in whether or not one can include a comment on the Misplaced Pages articles on Buddha, Krishna and Jesus that the ''"balance of informed opinion"'' contends they are ''"charlatans"'' (your word) because the miracles attributed them are not possible. That is what I want to know. Thanks. ] <sup>]-]</sup> 15:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
:: Most of those are Wikifriends of mine, I've not heard from them about it. Regardless, a little patience should pay dividends. He's not some kid, he is a grownup. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 16:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
:::Perhaps you can ask them then, or perhaps you can take a look at the diffs I provided or, say, ], ]. I'm asking for 10 minutes of your time because I really am genuinely interested in having your thoughts on this. If you read these incidents and conclude that SqueakBox is just a little too enthusiastic about his work and that the problem is the lack of patience from myself, Georgewilliamherbert, Morven, well I guess I want to get advice on how to handle such things, because clearly I can't. ] 17:56, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


:I am not obsessed with any subject on wikipedia. We cant have unsourced claims that any living person is a rape victim and I went through the people in that cat on a case by case basis, I certainly made no attempt to depopulate the category as some of the sourced cases where aboslutely left till the cfd passed. I afd'd the NAMBLA article after being asked to do so after being BOLD and redirecting it. ascal, your claim that Sidaway has a problem with me is offensicve and you dont have the evidence to back it up as I have had a good personal relationship with him and we tend to agree on many issues including re possible pedophilia images. This inj itself makes me think you are muck-raking if not actually harrassing me. I dont believe you should handle anything in relation to me, Pascal, as your own behaviour towards me has been far from perfect, eg bringing private emails to my talk page, and even after being warned by El C, being angry that I didnt assume you were an admin when you were not on the admin list nor contactable by meail etc. I have asked for mediation, you are ignoring that request and if this continues an Rfc is probably the only feasible option, and indeed if you want to see me sanctioned arbcom is the only realistic way you willa chieve that. But if you want to leave me alone to get on and edit that would be great. Your campaign against me is anything but, is unwarranted and unwelcome, ] 18:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
: I do not think you can compare a situation where a story was handed down by word of mouth for several generations before being written down, with one where an individual still alive makes extraordinary claims but refuses to provide the necessary extraordinary proofs. It's no different to Uri Geller, really. <b>]</b> 15:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
:And Guy is right that I am not some kid but I feel you, Pascal, are treating me like you are the teacher and I am some unruly schoolkid,m which is so far from the truth that yopu'll have to forgive me if I don't take that approach seriously (I am an adult with serious responsibilities). You have accused me of recklessness etc but I dont see you as being in a position to make that kind of judgement concerning me which is why I would like to see medaition between you and I as the only solution to this issue, other of course than just ignoring each other, live and let live (you seem fine with my edits to the controversial ] so you clearly dont have a problem with many if not most of my main space edits, ] 18:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


==Edith Elura Tilton Penrose==
Guy, the fact remains that miracles '''are''' attributed to Buddha, Krishna and Jesus. Since that is the case, would it be proper to call them ''"charlatans"''. Sathya Sai Baba has not been exposed for faking anything yet. Dr Erlendur Haraldsson (who wrote a book about this very issue) investigated Sathya Sai Baba's alleged miracles and found no evidence of fraud. I consider this discussion ended because I don't think any Misplaced Pages article can state that the ''"balance of informed opinion"'' contends they are ''"charlatans"''. That sounds like your own personal view and POV pushing. I would like references to Misplaced Pages policy that would allow you to include such statements in Misplaced Pages articles. It all has to be referenced by reliable sources. Making these generalized and unattributed statements could be seen as potentially libelous and can be removed from the article without discussion in accordance with ]. ] <sup>]-]</sup> 16:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I was gonna start a stub for ] and noticed you have deleted it 3 times already. She's pretty obscure but very influential. Would it be worth me writing up an entry and then putting it forward for consideration before creating the page or is it a lost cause? I mean is the problem just a lack of assertion of significance, or something else? Thanks ] <small>—Preceding ] comment was added at 10:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: And the determined rationalist can explain them away (there are many books whihc set out to do juat that). Moreover, we do not have contemporaneous reports of these figures claiming to do these things. And those were simpler times. What we have with SSB, however, is ''contemporaneous'' claims of physical impossibilities, where the means to test such claims exist and have been offered, and a steadfast refusal to undergo such tests. Of course in the Bible (to quote the one I know best) we have "do not put the Lord your God to the test", but that is not incompatible with an allegorical interpretation. In the case of SSB no allegorical interpretation is on offer. <b>]</b> 17:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
* If a sourced article establishing notability can be written, just go ahead. The last version was, in its entirety: "'''Edith Elura Tilton Penrose''' (], ] in ] &ndash; October, 1996 in ], ]) was an economist." <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 10:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


==Did you call me a troll== == Blogs as sources ==


Your edit on the Roger Elwood article was proper. It's generally held to be a dirty little secret of the industry, alas, with no hardcopy sources to cite. Such is Wikilife: if you can't source, don't put it in. But I've reverted your edit to the article about John M. Ford, since it met the requirements of ] pretty nicely. --] 15:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
In your defense of Arbusto and his crusade against Vivaldi did you call me a troll or were you referring to something else?] 09:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
* I am very wary of stuff in the blogosphere which lacks an independent corroborating discussion in more reliable sources to attest to its significance. Bloggers have a tendency to blow things out of all proportion. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 16:47, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
: I didn't call anybody in particular a troll, I said that Arbustoo had been vigorously trolled in the past, which is undeniably true. Also, it's not a "defense of Arbustoo and his crusade against Vivaldi" since (a) I quite plainly state that I think that both sides have at least some merit and (b) unlike Vivaldi, I don't believe that Arbustoo is personalising it to the extent of a crusade. Is this question an indication that you feel uneasy about some of your past comments? <b>]</b> 08:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
** This is not an ordinary case. It would be like impersonating a favorite uncle at an intimate family reunion! If he had been impersonated, it would have come out in mere moments, and the scandal would have spread throughout the community. A Mike Ford post on ''Making Light'' is pretty much the gold standard for stuff coming from John M. Ford. --] 16:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
:: Thank you for clearing that up.] 09:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
::* But do we ''need'' dozens fo quotes from the horse's mouth? We are supposed to reflect what the ''reliable independent sources'' say about him, not simply repeat what he said about himself. I think we're straying too much into a journalistic profile from original sources and away from an encyclopaedic distillation of published material. We are not supposed to be the ones weighing the significance of primary sources. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 17:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
::: No problem. <b>]</b> 10:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
:::If the article was based on such posts, it would of course be absurd. The item which was sourced to that particular post was a trivial one, one well within the bounds of the ] guidelines. --] 17:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
:::: Trivia is... trivial. Does the article ''really'' need padding? <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 21:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


== Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Burger King menu items ==
== Note to self ==


You created an AfD over an existing archived AfD at ]. Ideally, you should have created ]. I'm not sure where to go from here. I don't know how to split article histories (if that is even possible.) The best bet may be to simply close the AfD, and revert back to the old version, and relist again at the second nom title, and I guess loose those 11 comments. What do you think? Did you purposely start and AfD over the existing archive?-]&nbsp;</sup>]] 02:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Possible merge of ] and ]; also possible merge of ] and ]. Both subjects indivisible and ocntain significant redundancy. <b>]</b> 14:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


* Twinkle might have done so, which would explain why I could not find the original... <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 10:00, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
== Question ==


== Clue help neded ==
Is the boldfaced "moving house" header atop this page still in force, or did you just forget to remove it? ] 17:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Over on BLPN. I from the SWK talk page, which implicitly compared him with Hitler and other notorious historical figures. Now I'm being attacked as a censor. Some cluebat assistance would be appreciated. Thanks! ] 06:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
: Ah yes, thank you. I have been fitting fire doors to my garage today :-) <b>]</b> 19:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


== Template:ChoralWiki == == Smile! ==


<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">] '''Hello JzG''', Meateater has smiled at you! Smiles promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the ] by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! <br /> <small>''Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''</small></div><!-- Template:Smile --> ] 11:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
I fixed your request on ] just to let you know. —'']'' <span style="color:gray;font-size:70%;">September 10, 2006, 20:17 (UTC)</span>
:Oh great, thanks. <b>]</b> 20:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


== Why is 2010 in film protected? ==
== United Kingdom accreditation ==


If you're feeling up to the task, maybe you can give this article ] a UK perspective? ] 01:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC) I have put a reference to 2010 in film in articles for upcoming Narnia movies, but the page title is protected from creation. Why?] 20:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:Good idea. I'll do some reading around in the next couple of days. <b>]</b> 08:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC) :Because Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball. Any such assertions are at this point pure speculation. --] 22:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 10:01, 12 February 2023

de:Benutzer Diskussion:JzG

JzG essay

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/Me_and_Wikipedia

Don't let the trolls push you out of here. We need you.--MONGO 15:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Guy, for that excellent essay.
Don't let the bastards grind you down. Cheers, CWC 17:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Excellent essay. Please come back when you've cleared your head. . --Tbeatty 03:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, excellent essay. I agree with almost all your points, but - mostly, as technicality - I disagree with 'The Wild West'. I believe there are hundreds of millions of articles we are still missing :). PS. You know, I am stalked by my own 'Rfwoolf'. And the ArbCom has done nothing to stop him. I do wonder if such users will bring the project down... PS2. Please come back, don't leave us, yadda yadda - we had our differences but I believe we need people like you in the project. Hope to see you around,-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

May I suggest you restore the 7000+ edits to your talk page? As you've returned to editing, it really should not stay deleted. Natalie 16:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


Addiction to editing on Wikiulosia will likely cause the loss of job and family. The "me disease" is harmful. 59.151.29.136 14:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
JzG, I totally *get* where you are coming from, but, selfishly, I will MISS YOU around... --Zeraeph 21:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Regarding deletions...

(I hope I type in this correctly in the correct space without deleting anything) Well I have not written it myself, since I'm not neutral perhaps, but I asked for my friends to open an account an I started to wirte something but that was deleted, an then I asked for professional help. Of course writing about family is a bad idea, but is it forbidden? And regarding the deletion of a talk page today that WAS a misstake, I have problem with my connection and I typed while the test was marked and I couldn't restore. OK, sorry, is that fixed?? I just kindly ask you to help me to keep the pages (two of those that we are debating), I have collected so much info to my friends who have helped me and anyone else can offcourse change the page if you like!!--NGL 14:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nike George (talk • contribs)

Oops

I didn't see your edits, until I went through them again. Well, I'm deleting all Bold textthe external links until it can be figured out what is going on, and until notability for the individual articles established. I think the individual articles should just be speedied. KP Botany 23:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Joy, joy, joy!!!

Truly happy to see you back and supplying your usual straight talk. ;-) Take care, FloNight 01:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Aye, rock on! Pete.Hurd 04:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah, ditto! Singularity 20:41, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Finished your redux for you

You probably lost interest, but just in case This is finished and sorted. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 20:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine

Hi JzG, Glad to see you are back! While I realize that this may not be the best time for this, and the personal pain that this page has caused you, there is an WP:SPA running amok on St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine making personal attacks and generally making a mess of the article. I tried the ArbCom enforcement board, but an admin was unwilling to block as the WP:SPA has made a few minor edits (mostly unnecessary capitalization or wikilinks) in other articles. As you are very familiar with the editing history of the page, I would be very interested to have your opinion on it, however, I would understand if you do not wish to visit this page again. Thanks, Leuko 15:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Leuko 15:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again, JzG. I noticed that you placed a full-protection template on the page, however the page is only semi-protected. I would endorse full protection to put an end to this counter-productive edit-warring. Thanks, Leuko 15:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Clue deficiency. Fixed now. Frankly I think the project would be better off if that article were a lot shorter. Guy (Help!) 15:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

A personal attack targeting you

Toomas Hendrik Ilves (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) made a personal attack targeting you in the now deleted article JzG. I thought that you would like to know about this in case this user is stalking you and you did not know about it. This user also wrote another attack article on another administrator in the now deleted article Moreschi. Jesse Viviano 16:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry if I make you distressed with the above notice, but I feel that administrators should stick together and help each other withstand trolls. By the way, due to the attacks, this account now has a final warning regarding attacks. Jesse Viviano 16:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Looks like this troll is indef blocked by someone else. Jesse Viviano 16:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Could also have been username blocked. No biggie, though, just a garden-variety troll. Guy (Help!) 17:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Sectarian Movement

Dont agree with your claim that protestant is the same as sectarian. Two completely different things.BigDunc 15:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The THF thing

Guy, I think you have done a good job of remaining neutral and fair in this dispute, and I will go out on a limb and say THF would agree. Would you be willing to open an ArbCom case to iron this out? I don't think it would be a good idea for either THF or myself to do it, because I think neither of us has the ability to present the questions posed in a productive manner. --David Shankbone 18:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

You don't know me but...

Hello JzG, SheffieldSteel has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Welcome back

Welcome back! I hope that your WikiBreak was enjoyable/restful/(insert other adjective as appropriate : )

Whether I may or may not agree with your opinion in any specific instance is immaterial (though imo, I think you do try to be fair). Imho I think you (among many others) do a necessary, but often underappreciated, set of tasks around here, and it's nice to see you "back at it". : )

I hope you're having a great day : ) - jc37 09:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


fring

hi there

as per your comment in the afd "Delete on balance, I think. The content is advertorial in style, and the references all appear to be traceable back to press releases and other non-independent sources. I don't think this is making its mark, and I suspect that the article is part of a campaign to fix that. Guy (Help!) 17:13, 1 September 2007 (UTC)"

The idea of this article is to educate people. Please help me edit the article so that it is not advertising. I don't understand what you mean about the references, also what is the difference between the fring article and the skype, Pidgin IM, ICQ, twitter and Googletalk articles, the list is endless. I used those articles as samples when making the fring article, so if fring goes then the others must also go must'nt they?

now i am confused please help me. Thanx simon Goplett 11:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Sorry, you'd need to pick someone who actually cares about that product. All I see is something being promoted on Misplaced Pages, and I'm not big on that. Comparison with massive global players like Skype and ICQ is unhelpful - a bit like asking that your garage band be included because we have an article on The Beatles. You need to find substantial critical (as in analytical) editorial comment about the company, not mere reprints of press releases. A writeup of the company in one of the major business magazines is always a good place to start. Guy (Help!) 11:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Could you at least tell me what is viewed as advertising in the article so I can remove that text.

mmm so if I understand you correctly if fring becomes a massive global player then they can get to advertise on wiki like Skype and ICQ? Either the article is an advert or it isnt, even global players like skype and ICQ can't have advertising space?? or am i wrong. The article is not intended as advertising! fring is a global player in over a 150 countries, may i ask what defines a global player? Please help me not to loose my confidence in wikipedia. It seems to me that even if there is no advertising in the article they will still delete it. Goplett 15:36, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Welcome back.

Thanks for your support at WP:AN/I. I was, in fact, wrong about the specific incident that set me off, but right on the generalities of the situation and -- I'm glad to hear you say -- right, essentially, on the policy issue. I'd give you one of Raul's Common Sense Bricks, but I don't feel comfortable giving out someone else's barnstars, and besides, you already have one, it looks like.

As I said at WP:AN/I, NeutralHomer doesn't seem able to track subtlety very well, so I don't know whether it will do any good or whether he will fall back on the vaguely conspiratorial language he resorts to when I'm not summarily banned from Misplaced Pages on his say-so. I know which way to bet, though.

Again, thank you, and welcome back. --Calton | Talk 12:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Well

Hi,

Since you've directly rebuffed personal dialog, I will be moving the article back to mainspace for the duration of DRV, as I feel your move was improper, and you have chosen not to offer an explanation. I request that you do not blank this message (actually, I'd like you to restore my other one too) Best wishes, Xoloz 14:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

  • I did offer an explanation (at DRV). I'm not opposed to dialogue, but I don't see that spreading it to multiple venues helps much. I am not very active right now, and didn't see much point. I also want to avoid the vast talk pages that I have historically had, they don't load on my Blackberry and take months to load over 3G. Nothing personal, you understand. Guy (Help!) 15:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
  • While I gladly accept your explanation, I was on the verge of taking it personally for a minute there! :) I really never understand when people blank individual messages off their userpages, especially if the message expresses a concern over a prior lack of communication. Anyway, I hope my explanation at the DRV meets your satisfaction, because the course of action I pursued was quite typical. Perhaps, being less active, one might find it even more prudent to consult with others, more involved in a given set of circumstances, before assuming that "something is fishy". Just a suggestion for the future. Best wishes, Xoloz 15:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

Good to see you back in the saddle. Illegitimi non carborundum. Raymond Arritt 15:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed - good to see you back. Orderinchaos 17:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

...for correcting me on the GFDL thing. I was thinking that it didn't matter if the stuff was copied back to the creator's userspace, but you're absolutely right, your way makes more sense. VigilancePrime has the makings of a great contributor to our community, and I would like to mentor him/her past any inadvertant mistakes; I have to admit that Calton's rude messages on that talk page raised my hackles, because I don't want to lose a productive member due to something stupid and unnecessary. Thanks again. Respectfully - Videmus Omnia 16:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

  • No problem, VigilancePrime's error was small but worth correcting, I'm sure he won't do it again. He also needs to remove the laundry list of vandals from his user page. I'm not being drawn on Calton. Guy (Help!) 16:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom

Thanks for the advice, I will follow it. I haven't been sure how much of a case to build at this point, so I have focused on generalities with a few diffs. If I have been going about it wrong at this point, let me know, because I can supply ample diffs, although I figured since the case has not proceeded it would be better to wait until it does. --David Shankbone 18:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Possible BLP issue

An AfD was put up by a relatively new contributor, Ontheveldt (talk · contribs · logs), as his 3rd contribution to en.Misplaced Pages. His second contribution to Misplaced Pages was to create the category, People from Middletown, Ohio, Dr Jan Adams' hometown. However, instead of immediately adding Dr Jan Adams to this category, he immediately nominated Dr Jan Adams for deletion. I suspect this is personal between Ontheveldt and Dr Jan Adams, however, I'm on wiki-break, and if you or someone watching your talk page, would monitor this situation if something more develops, I would appreciate it? Yes, yes, I know everyone is thinking, "Damn, Ontheveldt is more wikipedia savvy in just 2 edits than KP Botany will ever be." Be that as it may, BLPs and agendas don't mix well on Misplaced Pages. Thanks. KP Botany 20:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Hiya

Good to see you again! >Radiant< 07:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Indeed! William Pietri 09:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Another strange article

After the COI post at WP:AN, I thought I'd point out Malie Hidarnejad to you. What do you make of that? Carcharoth 23:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

resolved

hi I noticed on my complaint about user MJis4freaks you have "resolved" it, how? I cant see anything on his user page. Let me no. Realist2 10:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I think this user thinks that there should be a Blocked section on his userpage or have one of those indefinitely blocked templates on his/her userpage (like {{Banned user}}). x42bn6 Talk Mess 10:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 18:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Admin

Just a note...you told VigilancePrime that Calton is an "experienced administrator". No, he isn't, actually. He's not an admin. And isn't that the MOST important thing on Misplaced Pages? That the information is correct, no matter how you go about wording it or how rude you are when you say it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.35.127.0 (talk) 06:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

User:CyclePat

Just a notification that not only hasn't he given up, he seems determined to escalate things. Note your name on the case. --Calton | Talk 11:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Guy, just out of courtesy, I'm letting you know that I put an RFArb in for CyclePat as you suggested to do so, but as you're named as a party, you may still wish to comment at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#CyclePat. Best of luck :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 13:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yup, thanks. Needs to be sorted once and for all, I think. Guy (Help!) 13:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Don Murphy (2nd nomination)

Er, forget something? --Calton | Talk 14:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Good one, SqueakBox 18:11, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
No way in hell it should be deleted in my opinion, Guy, looking at the last just about unanimous AfD to keep, but I'll sit back now that I've commented and tag the SPA's as they appear (one already, what's the over/under, 5, 10?) SirFozzie 18:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

No real opinion, Murphy asked so I passed it on, which is only fair after all. Guy 21:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.109.81.203 (talk)

Guy, I really wish you'd simply let Don Murphy sue for Libel. He's unlikely to have a case, and we could use some precedent. Further, the incredibly contentious nature of his entire presence as a pair of words anywhere on Misplaced Pages's already resulted in the loss of H, after threats. I don't know why the OFFICE chickened out back then, except that H's leaving meant the issue was 'settled', but really, this is above the pay grade of all the volunteers here. That said, if there's a deletion, which looks unlikely, please salt the earth there, so we can simply avoid this ever again. ThuranX 18:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

proms

Went to the proms today - Beethoven, Brahms, surprise extra the Academic Festival Overture, saw Joanna Lumley, met Richard Stilgoe and ran into a friend from the horn society. Good evening out! Guy 21:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Non-help on help page

Hi, while glancing at your help page, I noticed a section at the end that does not look like it belongs there, but rather somewhere else. Check it out. Jjamison 05:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

Welcome back, Guy!!! -- Avi 12:36, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm slow on the uptake. -- Avi 12:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Gastrich's latest petition

It is my belief that some of the sock puppets aren't Gastrich. I have reason to believe that User:Hugo the Hippo is a sock puppet of banned user User_talk:Bible John. This in no way excuses Gastrich's behavior, and in fact given his history the accusation is justified, but pointing out that his claim that he is being framed isn't entirely false. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

  • And it's my belief that some of them are - and in any case it doesn't matter. There are two things Gastrich wants: to promote Gastrich, and to promote his agenda. Neither of those is compatible with policy. He is incapable fo editing within policy, he misperceives his own bias as neutrality, and I would be staggered if any other admin who has dealt with him would give you any answer other than "hell no!" Guy (Help!) 21:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


The Special Barnstar
To Guy: For his administrative actions in the most recent Gastrich affair, showing patience, objectivity, fairness, and understanding of all related issues. - Nascentatheist 05:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

PDMA

Why did you delete the PDMA article? Nzgabriel 21:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

You note that you believe I am connected with the PDMA organisation which is untrue . Nzgabriel 03:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I did, first time (I believe I found the link at WP:COIN). This time I did not. But that is not relevant. Guy (Help!) 06:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Proab

Hi JzG,

I didn't remove the notice. I archived it because it was fully addressed + there is no reason to insist in shouting personal information on the streets. Nothing is achieved by your revert of mine . --Aminz 07:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I am waiting for your response JzG. Please discuss it in the talk page of the relevant page where I opened a section explaining my edit. --Aminz 07:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, and you've been waiting for a whole 20 minutes at 8:30am my local time, which time I spent getting ready for work. The issue is not "addressed", it is a notice of an arbitration enforcement. Guy (Help!) 07:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
JzG, you blocked Proab because you wanted for people to see his personal identity for 24 hours. "It needs to stay there for at least 24 hours to let people see it, so for that period you are blocked from editing". You even opposed its archival. even after the issue was discussed by Arbcom members and Morven wrote a summary of the discussion. I'll leave the issue. The notice is there. Enjoy it! --Aminz 07:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I have looked into it more since then. The original thing that was removed was a complaint with diffs and links that was problematic. Morven's notice was a factual statement with no external links. If people have a problem with this then they need to take it up with the arbitrators. I am not comfortable with multiply-blocked edit warriors removing this or any other arbitration notice. Guy (Help!) 08:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I didn't remove it. I archived it because the case was brought to the attention of the committee and as a result Proab was placed on probation. That's it. The rest is your desire for "people to see it". To let them know of the personal identity of a wikipedia user. That was the logic behind your block: "It needs to stay there for at least 24 hours to let people see it, so for that period you are blocked from editing". Proab had only informed the Office, one arbitrator and a number of admins. He hadn't informed all arbitrators and admins; and that was certainly his error, but maybe he couldn't have informed "all" admins because someone was about to reveal his identity.
JzG, I am a human being and as much as you are, having a physical brain working in a similar way as yours. I come here with my arguments not with my personality or my contribution list or others. Please comment on the statements, not on the editors. --Aminz 09:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
The WP:AE post was drawing this to the attention of the wider community. Above all, the problem is entirely of Proabivouac's own making - he did not have to evade his ArbCom sanctions and he did not have to go straight back to the same problematic behaviour. I have asked ArbCom to clarify. Now drop it. Guy (Help!) 09:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
That Proab acted incorrectly is clear. Yes, at times he may have shown problematic behaviour but this doesn't justify a straight generalization. He is a generally good and smart editor and I think there are many many editors on wikipedia who will agree with me.
Thanks for asking for clarification from ArbCom. It is none of business anyways. Peace :) --Aminz 09:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Ye,s it is ArbCom's business, and they can make the call. Guy (Help!) 09:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

On the same subject, is there any paticular reason the block isnt quite considerably long because of his use of sockpuppets to evade the sanctions? Or is arbcom dealing? Viridae 09:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

  • You are free to block him for longer, I guess. I don't think what he did was especially bad, but causing drama is only likely to draw more attention to the thing he'd rather hide. It's fine for an editor to change accounts to protect their real-world identity, but it's not fine for them to change accounts in order to evade a sanction. It's fine to change accounts to distance oneself from past misdeed,s, it's not fine to do it in order to distance oneself from the consequences of such misdeeds and thereby gain time to carry on the same problem behaviour. I'm undecided about whether Proabivouac is a net positive to the project. Guy (Help!) 09:25, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Proabivouac has been the target of sustained harassment, some from pov warriors and some from banned users running socks. In spite of it he does a lot of good scholarly work on some difficult pages, and makes a significant positive contribution. More than most editors, people of differing views recognize the value of his work. Tom Harrison 11:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy to take your word on that. Guy (Help!) 11:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Chrome (XM)

I have noticed you have deleted the channel page a second time after having a stub tag placed on the page. I do not know your definition of content-free, but that page does have information on it that is of value. If you disagree with this, please expand the page with more content or ask other editors to edit the page before outright deleting the page. TravKoolBreeze 13:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Chrome (XM). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. TravKoolBreeze 14:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Travelport, Galileo CRS and Jeff Clarke (CEO)

On 9/7 you deleted these three entries: Travelport, Galileo CRS and Jeff Clarke (CEO). After reading your cited justification for the deletion, we've discovered that there are some footnotes that referenced press releases and the company website that, while common in other notable corporate profiles, did indeed violate the terms of the policy and will be revised or deleted. Aside from those points, the entries did not contain promotional language and there was strict adherence to referencing third party sources for every factual claim, including Forbes, the NY Times and the Financial Times. As a corporation, Travelport exceeds the criteria for being noteworthy in the context of companies listed on the Misplaced Pages "List of American Companies" with 2006 revenue of $2.6 billion, approx. 7,500 employees and operations in 145 countries. The company is also an important part of the Orbitz and Blackstone stories, both of which recently became public companies. In addition to his relevance to Travelport, Jeff Clarke was also an integral part of one of the largest mergers in the history of the PC industry (HP/Compaq). References for these types of claims were included in the original entries.

Were there any other problems with the entries other than what was outlined in CSD G11? Since the basic criteria for Misplaced Pages content appears to have been met, I'd like to take your feedback and improve the entries. TP kelli 14:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Hampl, Punto, Leutgeb ...

Hello. Thank you for your greetings. Sorry, because my english is also "not up to this". I'm a Horn player als amateur but i'm interrestet in history of horn and of horn players like Hampl etc. So i wish you, to make no "kikser" on your horn. --- 217.233.122.176 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.233.122.176 (talk) 14:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Motorized Bicycles

Thanks for your help pruning the external links on the Motorized bicycles page! Your help is very... helpful! Fbagatelleblack 15:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Since you were wondering...

...this is typical behaviour of this user when interacting with others, as summarized here. Icemuon 17:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Republic Magazine deletion

I would like to know why the page for Republic Magazine was deleted. This was the answer YOU gave: (CSD G11: Blatant Advertising Bi-monthly, started in July? That's, what, two or three issues so far? No chance.)

What dont you understand about the term "bi-monthly"?? Bi-monthly is EVERY TWO MONTHS. The first issue came out in July and was for "July/August", the 2nd issue is out NOW and is for "September/October". There is only TWO issues in existence, July/August and September/October. Bi-monthly-----> every TWO months, not bi-weekly, which is twice a month. Did you think I was referring to bi-weekly? You must have. I would like the page back up. I dont appreciate you just deleting it without being warned. If I was warned, I could have told you the meaning of the term "bi-monthly" in advance.

I dont even understand your reason why it was deleted. You said "started in July? thats, what, two or three issues so far? no chance". I dont even understand that. How many issues did you think there should have been since July? If it was bi-weekly that would mean about 5 issues would exist. If it was monthly, about 3 issues would exist. I did not say how many issues were in existence on the page. I just mentioned underneath the picture of the magazine with Ron Paul on it that it was the 2nd issue----which was CORRECT, since the 2nd issue is for September/October. What exactly did you not understand? Im not trying to be smartassed---I really dont know what you misinterpreted. Please put the page back up, because if it's not, I will know it was removed out of biased reasons. I'm a writer, I will do a story on wikipedia's blatant censorship if it's not restored. I will have the proof, so it wont be libel. 24.170.225.64 07:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

  • This is an encycloapedia. It exists to document that whicih is already verifiably significant, not promote that which people hope one day will be. Political activist magazines are a dime a dozen, and this one only just shipped its second issue. Guy (Help!) 08:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Why the reverts and re-reverts?

Eeeek. Whats going on, Guy? Rockpocket 07:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Was kinda wondering too ... - Alison ☺ 08:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Heh! I know what that's like. 1:30am here and I'm stuck in work. Get some sleep, the two of you! :) - Alison ☺ 08:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
09:29 here, and into the second cup of coffee - I'll be awake Real Soon Now. Guy (Help!) 08:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Ha ha. No worries. I just thought for a moment the troll had cloned your account somehow and was carrying on his revert spree. At this time of night anything seems possible! Rockpocket 08:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

BIG Daddy M

Regarding this, who did you suspect him of being? Just curious, but his tone is very much alike to this guy's, not to mention the fact that this is another editor who wars for no reason and edits Wrestling-related and comic-related articles. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I meant no harm, there's no further evidence to support this theory anyway. Sorry for the inconvenience. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


Merge

You may be interested in Talk:California Biblical University and Seminary#Merge proposal. KillerChihuahua 10:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

OTRS Question

I noticed you made a deletion related to this. Didn't know if you wanted to reply to it or not. Just a heads up more than anything. Have a great day. ^demon 15:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

  • No problem. I always think "I nuked it" looks less than caring in these circumstances, but it's what it needed; better to say "it has been deleted as failing blah blah" and have it come from an independent individual, IMO. Guy (Help!) 19:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Great work, keep it up

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For detecting and quashing racist propaganda in Misplaced Pages. TeaDrinker 18:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for RfA support and a question

Thanks very much for your support in my recently successful RfA. I appreciated your comment!

Since you seem to be online, I just blocked WillyOffOfWheels (talk · contribs) with account creation disabled as a meme of the infamous WillyOnWheels. Is this appropriate? The guy's feigning ignorance on his talk page. Cheers! -- Flyguy649 contribs 18:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Edgarde/IPC

DGG is being commendably considerate of the right to vanish, but actually this is a subpage and is GFDL'd so I've restored it and moved it ot User:Edgarde/IPC for you. Guy (Help!) 20:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Super duper! This is everything I would have asked for if I thought I could have it. Thank you a lot. / edg ☺ ★ 20:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Attack sites opened

Hello, JzG. The arbitration case in which you commented to has opened. Please provide evidences on the evidence page for the Arbitrators to consider. You may also want to utilize the workshop page for suggestions.

For the Arbitration Committee,
- Penwhale | 21:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

"Usual crap"

Do you really think "usual crap" is a civil way to conduct a discussion? Kappa 22:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Depends. If it's the owner of a website whose article has been deleted coming up with the usual crap about how if we have an article on Facebook then we should have an article on every single social networking site in the known universe, then yes. Actually if they came here themselves I'd just tell them to fuck off. Guy (Help!) 22:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Larry Craig

I'm wondering why you removed the infobox from his article. He is, after all, a convicted criminal, and there's no question of this being a BLP issue - U.S. senators are clearly public figures whose criminal behaviour should be publicly reported. FCYTravis 22:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

  • {{infobox criminal}} is for people who are first and foremost criminals, as I understand it. But mainly it was about the image, which existed primarily to disparage the subject. I just removed the lot since we already have an appropriate infobox on that page. Guy (Help!) 22:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
    • And I restored the image, because... we don't speedily delete things which are "disparaging" if they may be encyclopedically relevant to the article subject. We're not talking about Brian Peppers here, we're talking about a U.S. senator. I find it a very arguable point that a U.S. senator's police mugshot may be quite relevant to an article about a U.S. senator who is now embroiled in a major scandal relating to his criminal activities. That's a discussion worth having, and I don't know which way I fall just yet, but I don't think it should be speedied. FCYTravis 23:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  • I dispute your contention that a mugshot image is in and of itself unbalanced and disparaging. If placed in proper context, it is part of a balanced encyclopedia biography. A page consisting of nothing but a mugshot and "OMG CRIMINAL" would fit CSD G10, but this is not that. FCYTravis 23:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Things I hate about WP:BLP no. 7: it forces us to take a cautious approach and defend people who are, in real life, indefensible. We already have a picture, we know what he looks like. We have citations for the events. We don't need a mugshot to drive home, in your words, "OMG! CRIMINAL!" It adds nothing other than a gleeful celebration of his misfortune. Proverbs 1:26 is a lesson in life for bigots everywhere but a poor practice on Misplaced Pages. Guy (Help!) 23:30, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Stereotypes of East and Southeast Asians

Is this the sort of thing you were hoping for at Stereotypes of East and Southeast Asians? If I'm on the right track, i'll continue, if not, please clarify. ThuranX 23:19, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Anything that replaces the crap with cited and neutral content (read: hopefully dry enough to drive off the whack-jobs but interesting enough to keep anyone who is serious about the subject proper) is good. Please do carry on. Guy (Help!) 23:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I knocked out 8K of uncited crap, a serious amount of COATRACKing, some areas where there was actual promotion of steroetypes, etc., etc. I'm off for some friday night time, but take a look and let me know what you think, perhaps on the talk page there? ThuranX 01:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

finished my run through the article. It's 11K shorter, I dropped almost anytthign I saw as unsourced and promoting or just stating a stereotype without review or citaiton in its' section, and so I think it's a stronger article. If it needs moer work, I would appreciate the guidance... ThuranX 04:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

NYLT

Would you please elaborate on the {{accuracy}} tag just applied to National Youth Leadership Training. It is difficult to fix what we don't know is wrong. Thanks. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 12:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I figure you are the middleman between this and OTRS. I think we have been here before. BTW- {{accuracy}} redirects to {{disputed}}. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Please enlight me

Wondering why you just deleted my article on Sigrid Lidströmer. You wrote "lacks significans". So you think she wasn't significant? Since you must know a lot about this - in what way was she unimportant? I'd like to learn that. My ears are open... 18:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)18:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)18:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)18:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Angry Nintendo Nerd

Since Angry Video Game Nerd is now a protected redirect to ScrewAttack, I had the thought that Angry Nintendo Nerd might do well as a protected redirect too. I'm checking with you because you were the last admin to deal with it. Whaddaya think? --UsaSatsui 21:05, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


Sigrid Lidströmer

Hello. You speedied Sigrid Lidströmer, saying that the article did not assert significance.

The article is very messy and does not seem to assert major significance. However, it does seem to assert minor significance, indeed, quite a lot more significance than that of many pop singers and Pokemon who are lovingly written up in this "encyclopedia". As I've mentioned here, I don't see it as speediable material and I urge you to restore it. -- Hoary 22:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Guy, it appears that Hoary's account has been hijacked, as he's arguing for keeping an article. I thought she was the translator? KP Botany 22:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
There have been precedents. -- Hoary 22:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

If you feel an admin has done you wrong, try talking to them. Nicely. I don't merely "feel" but rather I think that you did wrong to Sigrid Lidströmer, an article that was mediocre, perhaps AfD-worthy, but not obviously speedy-worthy. Niceness is hardly my forte, but I'll try: Please undelete this, and, if you wish, take it to AfD. Thank you. -- Hoary 00:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. No reply, so I moved what was in a scratchpad page of the writer to Sigrid Lidströmer. Of course you're free to AfD it, but I think you'll agree that it's hardly speediable. -- Hoary 12:21, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
  • She was a translator. She translated some stuff. Some of this stuff had not been translated before. She corresponded with the author of at least some of the stuff she translated. All we need now is a claim of encyclopaedic notability and we're away. Guy (Help!) 12:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
  • If you think the subject is short on notability, you are of course very free to send the article to AfD. The steps involved are rather tiresome, of course; so as a gesture of amicability or whatever I'll even send it to AfD for you, if you ask me to. -- Hoary 15:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

BLP Issue

Is there anything you can do about this editor's rants on the Anna Wilding talk page? User:Real77? He claims he represents Ms. Wilding, but all I can think is I sure as hell hope not, for her sake, since I don't have a serious grudge against her (unlike my grudge against User:Hoary). I've asked User:Acalamari to assist with editing the page, but Real77 is chasing all the good editor's away, and no one can get in there to edit. In addition to which the talk page is a stream of indecipherable rants. My concern now is that the talk page looks like such a piece of ranting shit that it will ultimately reflect poorly upon Ms. Wilding and the article as part of its permanent history. I feel this is a legitimate concern, although an unusual one, for a BLP, that an editor claims to be representing the subject of the article, but is indirectly, by their actions, trashing the hell out of the person. It is extremely difficult to impress anything upon this editor, Real77, because of what appears to be a serious English language barrier. I don't know what's going on, but I don't think editors should have unlimited rights to make a living person look like shit on Misplaced Pages, even if they really are representing them. KP Botany 06:23, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Many of the IPs are his, also. And he refers to himself oddly in the first person plural all of the time, having various excuses for this, "my wife is in the room," and "it's none of your business," being two I vaguely recall.
KP Botany 06:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh, nice, he just made a legal threat. KP Botany 06:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

DRV Image:Larry Craig mugshot.jpg

You were invloved in the deletion of the image now being addressed at Misplaced Pages:Deletion_review#Image:Larry_Craig_mugshot.jpg. Please consider participating in that discussion. -- Jreferee 08:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:Larry Craig mugshot.jpg. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. →Lwalt 09:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Chrome (XM)

Now why on earth did you delete this page 3 times. It is not a7, so I don't know where you got that idea and it is definitley not a G11. Perhaps you don't remember what an a7 is. An a7 is a tag for a blatant advertisement of a product or service. Now was that really an advertisement? No. Every other damn page for an XM channel has not been deleted. You might as well just add XM tags to the other 120 XM Channel pages on Wiki. Perhaps semi-protecting it, but you trying to get that blocked is wrong. Obviously you have no clue as to the policies that have been set fourth here, and i strongly suggest you be instructed in the proper mode of editing wikipedia. I'm contacting a few more administrators.--NightRider63 15:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

  • I'm just wondering how often I'm going to have to say this. It was an article that did not assert notability (WP:CSD#A7). It said this is one of the brands of XM (on which we have an article), I'd have redirected it only nobody but us refers to it as Chrome (XM), that was a made-up title. I put the link to XM Satellite Radio into Chrome, the disambiguation page. Guy (Help!) 16:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

MediaDefender

Actually, a reliable source isn't as necessary when the facts are easily verifiable. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 19:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

What I find funny is that users say that TorrentFreak and the like are not "reliable". However when it comes to popular blogs such as engadget, people immediately seem to find that source "reliable". Excuse me, but I don't see how famous newsapers, blogs, and all that other crap makes you think it's reliable. What if all the sources you call reliable all disappeared into nowhere? It's all crazy talk if you ask me, utter shit actually. Now stop reverting it, PLEASE. 208.127.155.20 23:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I never said you yourself called it a reliable source. Popular != reliable. 208.127.155.20 23:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


Vopt AfD

Kindly review the responses posted to the Vopt article RitaSkeeter 06:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I trust you will take another look at the article as well as the AfD discussion and have the good sense to keep the article as revised --RitaSkeeter 15:59, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

  • But it's still a directory entry. Why not include some of the colour mentioned in the AfD debate? know this is en encyclopaedia, but that article is a dry-as-dust description of what reads as an essentially generic product. Guy (Help!) 17:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

SqueakBox

Guy, I appreciate your open mindedness about SqueakBox but really he does not invariably meet reason with reason. When my request to not depopulate a category without going through CfD is met by accusations that I'm enamored with the rape victims category, I find this unreasonable. When SqueakBox routinely accuses editors of secret pedophile-supporting agendas, oblivious to the fact that, hey, maybe just maybe some people wouldn't be too happy to be labeled pedophiles for closing an AfD as speedy keep, I call that unreasonable. That's not to say SqueakBox can't be a productive editor: he often is. But he can also be a tendentious editor. Of course, this is partly explained by his involvement in articles in which edit warring, POV pushing and sockpuppetry are routine. That does not make it any more acceptable. It is possible to be a member of WP:PAW without being a dick with everyone you find in your way, it is possible to fight POV pushing pedophiles without "boldly" removing a perfectly decent article about an absurdly objectionable subject, it is possible to fight for tougher applications of BLP without attempting to change one of the fundamental principles of the deletion policy without any sort of discussion . A few weeks ago at ANI, Jimbo commented on the recent controversy with Perverted Justice and said something like "what we need is more passionate anti-pedophile editors who are patient and smart to watch these articles". As I replied, what we need is editors that are patient, smart and as clinical as they can be. Passion makes Misplaced Pages suck. It's why administrators get constant flack, it's why there are revert wars, it's why there are insults flung all over the place and it's never necessary. Were SqueakBox not fighting on the obvious side of the good guys, he would have been forced to change his ways or leave the project a long time ago. Did you take a look at the diffs I provided on ANI? If not, please do: they are definitely the mark of an editor who behaves in a way that's likely to drive away editors like me who can take some abuse but do think that at some point it's best to leave the inmates run the asylum. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 23:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

  • As I've said, in my experience he has, which is not to say that others have the same experience, or that he always has. Zealous application of WP:BLP is good, and overzealous application should be met with calmness. Passion is not what makes Misplaced Pages suck, obsession is what does that. Most of the serious problems I've encountered have been with people who are determined to boost their own interests, not with those pursuing WP:BLP. Guy (Help!) 06:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
It's a fine line between unbdridled passion and obsession and passion stops being ok when it leads you to bulldoze your way through other editors. I suppose it's your right not to take a look at the evidence I provided or to write off SqueakBox's extensive block log as the sign of a passionate editor, but even if your interactions with him have been positive, it's important to point out that many others have found him stubborn, prone to wild accusations and prone to edit warring. And by "other editors" I don't mean sockpuppets of Voice of Britain, I mean myself, User:DanielEng, User:Morven, User:Tony Sidaway, User:ElKevbo, User:Kylu, User:Georgewilliamherbert, to name but a few. I'm grateful for the work that he does but I don't think there's any need for the crap that comes with it. Pascal.Tesson 14:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Most of those are Wikifriends of mine, I've not heard from them about it. Regardless, a little patience should pay dividends. He's not some kid, he is a grownup. Guy (Help!) 16:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps you can ask them then, or perhaps you can take a look at the diffs I provided or, say, User_talk:SqueakBox/history#NAMBLA_article, User_talk:SqueakBox/history#RfA_comments. I'm asking for 10 minutes of your time because I really am genuinely interested in having your thoughts on this. If you read these incidents and conclude that SqueakBox is just a little too enthusiastic about his work and that the problem is the lack of patience from myself, Georgewilliamherbert, Morven, well I guess I want to get advice on how to handle such things, because clearly I can't. Pascal.Tesson 17:56, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I am not obsessed with any subject on wikipedia. We cant have unsourced claims that any living person is a rape victim and I went through the people in that cat on a case by case basis, I certainly made no attempt to depopulate the category as some of the sourced cases where aboslutely left till the cfd passed. I afd'd the NAMBLA article after being asked to do so after being BOLD and redirecting it. ascal, your claim that Sidaway has a problem with me is offensicve and you dont have the evidence to back it up as I have had a good personal relationship with him and we tend to agree on many issues including re possible pedophilia images. This inj itself makes me think you are muck-raking if not actually harrassing me. I dont believe you should handle anything in relation to me, Pascal, as your own behaviour towards me has been far from perfect, eg bringing private emails to my talk page, and even after being warned by El C, being angry that I didnt assume you were an admin when you were not on the admin list nor contactable by meail etc. I have asked for mediation, you are ignoring that request and if this continues an Rfc is probably the only feasible option, and indeed if you want to see me sanctioned arbcom is the only realistic way you willa chieve that. But if you want to leave me alone to get on and edit that would be great. Your campaign against me is anything but, is unwarranted and unwelcome, SqueakBox 18:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
And Guy is right that I am not some kid but I feel you, Pascal, are treating me like you are the teacher and I am some unruly schoolkid,m which is so far from the truth that yopu'll have to forgive me if I don't take that approach seriously (I am an adult with serious responsibilities). You have accused me of recklessness etc but I dont see you as being in a position to make that kind of judgement concerning me which is why I would like to see medaition between you and I as the only solution to this issue, other of course than just ignoring each other, live and let live (you seem fine with my edits to the controversial Roman Catholic sex abuse cases so you clearly dont have a problem with many if not most of my main space edits, SqueakBox 18:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Edith Elura Tilton Penrose

Hi, I was gonna start a stub for Edith Penrose and noticed you have deleted it 3 times already. She's pretty obscure but very influential. Would it be worth me writing up an entry and then putting it forward for consideration before creating the page or is it a lost cause? I mean is the problem just a lack of assertion of significance, or something else? Thanks Paki.tv —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 10:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Blogs as sources

Your edit on the Roger Elwood article was proper. It's generally held to be a dirty little secret of the industry, alas, with no hardcopy sources to cite. Such is Wikilife: if you can't source, don't put it in. But I've reverted your edit to the article about John M. Ford, since it met the requirements of WP:SELFPUB pretty nicely. --Orange Mike 15:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

  • But do we need dozens fo quotes from the horse's mouth? We are supposed to reflect what the reliable independent sources say about him, not simply repeat what he said about himself. I think we're straying too much into a journalistic profile from original sources and away from an encyclopaedic distillation of published material. We are not supposed to be the ones weighing the significance of primary sources. Guy (Help!) 17:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
If the article was based on such posts, it would of course be absurd. The item which was sourced to that particular post was a trivial one, one well within the bounds of the WP:SELFPUB guidelines. --Orange Mike 17:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Trivia is... trivial. Does the article really need padding? Guy (Help!) 21:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Burger King menu items

You created an AfD over an existing archived AfD at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Burger King menu items. Ideally, you should have created Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Burger King menu items (second nomination). I'm not sure where to go from here. I don't know how to split article histories (if that is even possible.) The best bet may be to simply close the AfD, and revert back to the old version, and relist again at the second nom title, and I guess loose those 11 comments. What do you think? Did you purposely start and AfD over the existing archive?-Andrew c  02:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Clue help neded

Over on BLPN. I removed some inflammatory comments from the SWK talk page, which implicitly compared him with Hitler and other notorious historical figures. Now I'm being attacked as a censor. Some cluebat assistance would be appreciated. Thanks! FCYTravis 06:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Smile!

Hello JzG, Meateater has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Meateater 11:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Why is 2010 in film protected?

I have put a reference to 2010 in film in articles for upcoming Narnia movies, but the page title is protected from creation. Why?Alan 20:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Because Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball. Any such assertions are at this point pure speculation. --Orange Mike 22:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)