Misplaced Pages

User talk:Tom harrison: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:30, 3 October 2006 editCrzrussian (talk | contribs)24,747 edits Gorbushka← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:05, 19 November 2024 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,142,213 edits →ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery 
Line 1: Line 1:
{| class="Talk-Notice"
|-
|<center>]</center>
|<center><font color="green">'''Admins: <u>If I have erred in one of my admin actions, or my rationale for the action no longer applies, please don't hesitate to reverse it.</u> I have no objection to my actions being reversed, as long you leave me a polite note explaining what you did and why. Thanks.'''</font></center>
|}
== For new users == == For new users ==


If you are new here, welcome. The page ] has links to a tutorial, and answers to frequently-asked questions. ] <sup>]</sup> 16:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC) If you are new here, welcome. The page ] has links to a tutorial, and answers to frequently-asked questions.

== Archives ==


==Archives==
Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.
If further archiving is needed, see ]. If further archiving is needed, see ].
Line 17: Line 23:
] ]
] ]
]
]
]


Other old material is available in the page history.
<!--{{busy|]}}-->
<!--{{wikibreak|]| early next week.}}-->


== Noel Rose (a page you deleted in 2006) ==
==]==


Hi Tom, I work in the field of autoimmune disease and went looking for a page on Noel Rose, but noticed a 2006 version had been deleted by you. I expect it was a guideline problem (e.g., a verbatim copy of existing content), but let me know if there was some other reason. I am going to start creating the new page, but if you have issues please let me know. Thank you.
Dear Mr. Harrison, I see you have recently intervened at the user page of 'Uberlol' on the grounds of 'personal attacks'. I can tell you I'm the depicted person in question, if you need proof of identity I can provide it in the form of scanned documentation. I just need a secure way to let you see it. I'm not putting it online anywhere.


] (]) 13:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
This same vandal has published the same libelous spew under the Wiki account name of 'Louis Shum' but the account was removed by another admin . Now the same vandal is back under the different name 'Uberlol'.


== Invited! ==
While its not a article per se, doesn't every Wiki user page have to abide by standards on the biographical depiction of living persons?


Hi Tom! Next on my list to bring to Featured Article level is the Collapse of the World Trade Center article. I have commenced doing some adjustments and some may become major as it proceeds. I feel it lacks the engineering discussion needed to provide a full understanding of how and why the buildings collapsed and for that I need persons better versed than I to at least steer it along the correct path...so anything you have to suggest there or here is welcome.--] (]) 14:08, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
==]==
:Thanks, sounds good. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Why have you removed the external link to streetball.co.uk?<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>
::I think some organizational issues persist and was thinking a brief summary of the attacks, followed by a detailed description of the collapses (the article lacks many finer details) then on to the mechanics of what happened. I am not sure a lengthy discussion about lost artwork, etc, belongs as I think this needs to mainly discuss the engineering aspects. We may have to address conspiracy theories was well near the end if for no other reason than to put them in their bed.--] (]) 21:27, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
:::Agreed; some pruning is due. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:45, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
::::Sorry been absent a bit still thinking about what the article should emphasize..will be working on it more next week.--] (]) 17:21, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
:::::No problem, same here... ] <sup>]</sup> 18:18, 3 August 2018 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2018 election voter message ==
:You mean "Streetball.co.uk - UK based Streetball website, currently the number 1 Streetball site in the world"? I thought it looked more like an attempt to promote the website than contribute to the encyclopedia. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


{{Ivmbox|Hello, Tom harrison. Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Well, it's the number one search result in google for "Streetball" and is far more popular than the other sites currently mentioned in the article. So surely that merits its inclusion? By the way, I have no direct involvement with the website itself, I just visit it occasionally.] 15:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. ] (]) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2018/Coordination/MMS/11&oldid=866998401 -->


==]== == Unblock? ==
Tom,
I did add nonsense a few days ago. I added a line about Joseph Smith in the opening description, out of sheer curiosity to see if it actually worked. However, my edit of removing ] from the article made very good sense. Joseph Smith cannot be considered a Christian martyr. Mormonism IS considered heresy by every mainstream Christian denomination and this fact is well-established. Additionally, Smith is hard to consider a true "martyr", as he died in a shootout with the federal government. Compare this to the scores of true Christian martyrs who died for their unwavering support of biblical doctrine and their commitment to Jesus Christ, as He is described in the Christian Bible. I'm sorry, Smith doesn't compare. This edit stands.<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>


As it's such a long time since the block and a Checkuser has said there's been no evidence of recent block evasion, would you be happy with an unblock at ] now? ] (]) 15:25, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
:The page ] is available as a place to discuss changes to the article. If a ] supports your edit, and it meets our other standards (see welcome above), then it probably will stand. ] <sup>]</sup> 16:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2019 special circular ==
==Illuminati Summons==
] vandalism at ]. I would appreciate it if you would take a look at his entries on that template, and consider a block. Thanks. ] 18:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
:It looks like he has been warned. I'll block him briefly if he persists. You have to be quick around here. I need 750 more to level up, and people keep beating me to the block. Thanks for letting me know. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


<div class="notice" style="background:#fff1d2; border:1px solid #886644; padding:0.5em; margin:0.5em auto; min-height:40px; line-height:130.7%; font-weight: 130.7%;">
== Mediation ==
{|

|valign="top" style="padding: 0.5em 1em 0 0.25em;"| ]
{| style="width:100%; text-align:left; font-style:sans-serif"
|<span style="font-size: 125%;">'''Administrators ] secure their accounts'''</span>
! style="border-bottom:3px solid; background:orange; font-size:14pt; font-weight:bold" | The Mediation Cabal: Request for case participation
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|-
* Use strong, unique passwords for your Misplaced Pages account and associated email
! style="background:#EEEEEE; font-weight:normal; font-style:sans-serif" | Dear {{PAGENAME}}: Hello, my name is Wikizach; I'm a mediator from the ], an informal mediation initiative here on Misplaced Pages. You've recently been named as a dispute participant in a mediation request here:
* ] if your Misplaced Pages account password or email password is reused on another website, , or weak
: ''']'''
* ] for improved security
I'd like to invite you to join this mediation to try to get this dispute resolved, if you wish to do so; note, however, it is entirely your choice whether or not you participate, and if you don't wish to take part in it that's perfectly alright. Please read the above request and, if you do feel that you'd like to take part, please make a note of this on the mediation request page. If you have any questions or queries relating to this or any other dispute, please do let me know; I'll try my best to help you out. Thank you very much. Best regards, ]]Zach| ] 16:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
|} |}
<span style="color:#5871C6;cursor:pointer" class="mw-customtoggle-ArbCom_2019_special_circular">{{clickable button|1=View additional information}}</span>
</div><div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-ArbCom_2019_special_circular" style="display:none">
<div style="border-style: dotted; border-color: #886644; border-width: 0 3px 3px 3px; padding: 0 0.5em 0.5em 0.5em;">


{| style="border-left: 3px solid black; padding-left: 1em;"
==ANI==
|{{null}}
Bro, you have already been on ANI for the template, are you sure you want do to ? --] 18:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
; Why have I received this message?
:"Conspiracy buffs" is a direct quote from the Times article cited. If you think I have done something wrong, take it to ANI if you want to. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
: All administrators are receiving it.


; What prompted you to send this message?
==reverting edit to MAJ12 page to include SOM101==
: Recently, several Misplaced Pages admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were ]. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh ] after losing control of their account.
Why have you removed (basically simply reverted my edit) the Special Operations Manual (SOM101) text from ] page? That SOM101 document is one of the documents in the "official" http://www.majesticdocuments.com/ site, just like the docs already listed in the Misplaced Pages article...<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>
:The extract you posted is far too long, but most important, majesticdocuments.com is not a reliable source for anything but what its operator thinks. The talk page ] is available as a place to talk about what might be included in the article. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


; What do I need to do?
== Polls at ] ==
: Only to follow the instructions in this message.
:# Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites).
:# Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable).
:# Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers.


; How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)?
I do not want to engage in an edit war about inclusion of these polls, yet Striver insists on placing them in the article rather than build consensus first. Next steps? --] (]) 20:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
: You can find out more about 2FA at ].
:We have discussed these polls on several different pages. I don't think they are appropriate for this page, and as original research they may not belong anywhere. If there are enough editors following ''9/11 Truth Movement'', maybe a consensus will emerge in the next few days. If not, maybe a request for comment (just about the page's content, not about user behavior) is in order. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
|}</div>
</div>


<small>This message was sent to all administrators following a ]. Thank you for your attention. For the ], ] 02:55, 4 May 2019 (UTC)</small>
== GreekWarrior again ==
<!-- Template:ArbCom 2019 special circular -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Cameron11598@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Bradv/Adminlist-mms&oldid=891852932 -->


== Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular) ==
I'm not sure if you've seen his ...


ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
<blockquote>time is coming for revenge soon turk, i will avenge my uncle, my hatred of turks is unreal, you would have to experience it for yourself to understand it, i am totally dehumanized to the suffering of turks now, i dont laugh when turks die, because it is only a few when Kurds attack, i am like a 1/8th full glass, only a massacre of turks, a huge massacre, will placate my need for vengence, and even then it will only do it for while, i need to see dead turks, i want to see them die en masse. i hate them so much, i wish every turk in the world died of the most painful cancer imaginable, eating their intestines, god in heaven holds my words to be true or strike me down, i reaffirm again that i dont hate turks, i loathe them, from the pits of my heart, i need blood vengeance for what they did to my family, we are coming turks, get ready.</blockquote>


Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are ] to "have strong passwords and ]." We have ] our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, ] remains an ''optional'' means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
Can you please do something about this guy? Thanks. &mdash;<span style="font-family:Palatino Linotype">]</span> 00:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
:I have blocked the ip for one month. If this happens again, we may need to ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


For the Arbitration Committee, -] 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)</small>
::Thanks again. &mdash;<span style="font-family:Palatino Linotype">]</span> 17:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
<!-- Template:ArbCom 2019 special circular correction -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Cameron11598@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Bradv/Adminlist-mms&oldid=891852932 -->


== Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society ==
==External links==
] Dear {{PAGENAME}},
I would like to speak to you about your list of questionable links, what makes the links from chabad.org questionable? --] | ] 19:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
:Just that there are so many of them - four hundred is too many. Some are justified, but I think we are being taken advantage of to promote the organization. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Do you have any specific links that you believe to be questionable? As was discussed on ] chabad.org is the largest Jewish website in terms of visitors and one of the top in terms of content. The website that the organization uses to promote itself is lubavitch.com. While chabad.org is the content wing which spreads the message of Judaism. I will be happy to take a look at any specific links that you find questionable and either explain to you why it is there, correct the description, move it to a more appropriate article or if found that it doesn't belong there, to remove it. If you perfer to use email for this you can email me by clicking on the email this user by my userpage. --] | ] 12:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:I have not read the pages that link, and I have not followed the links. My concern is that there are so many links at all. My interest is not particularly in chabad.org, as you can see from ]. I searched for links to chabad.org because I knew about the links from AN. No doubt other sites have more links with less justification. (I have not figured out how to get a list of sites with more than 100 links.) Prisonplanet.con and its satellites have over a hundred. More are added as ] writes the material. ] would probably tell me that each individual link is justified and informative. I think he is misled by his enthusiasm for Jones' work. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the ''']''', an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Misplaced Pages project for fifteen years or more. &#x200B;
== ] ==


Best regards, ] (]) 16:43, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Greetings. I noticed your comments on the above article's long-standing revert war this morning, and added some notes of my own that may also be of interest to you - there's more amiss there than what first meets the eye.
{{clear}} <!-- Template:Fifteen Year Society invitation -->


Regards, ] 14:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


== ] ==
: Thanks for your message. Just to let you know that I'm impartial in this story. There is no 'right' side in that argument - both sides are ridiculous actually, and neither ''can'' be right because both have no references to refer to - both are making fictitious claims. This is not something I can correct, if not to eliminate the chart completely: one cannot compare the inexistent. ] 16:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


Hi you recently protected ] for edit warring. Looks like it is starting again except this time they are calling it vandalism. Should I take it to ] since this is a long term issue with them removing the same material against consensus for months? ] (]) 13:58, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
== Unprotected ==
:Yes, unfortunately that's the next step. ] <sup>]</sup> 11:49, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
:I've protected the page again. Please give your views on the talk page if you would. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:13, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
::Done, thanks again for the help! ] (]) 19:09, 12 May 2019 (UTC)


== Review ==
I unprotected Steven Jones article...I thiought a week was long enough, but they seem to be editing ferverishly over there again.--] 15:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
What is missing or should be culled from ]. I feel we have too many sections and some areas could be combined. I have a period of free time and may try and push this to peer review after I reread the NIST report. If you're inclined, feel free to post any suggestions to the article talkpage so we can get a dialogue started.--] (]) 19:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:Well, maybe it will settle down. The only reason he has a page at all is his 9/11 conspiracy theory; without that he would be a non-notable academic. If that can't be mentioned neutrally, it can't be mentioned at all, and the page needs to go. At the same time, the page is a bio of Jones, not a pov fork to allow an exclusively favorable presentation of his theory under cover of WP:BLP. It looks reasonably balanced and sourced right now. If it stabilizes that way, we won't have to stub the page and start over. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:Great, I'll start reading. ] <sup>]</sup> 01:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::I really don't understand why it's necessary to reduce the WTC section. As you say yourself, it's why he is notable.--] 16:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:It all has to balance. If his theory is to be presented at length, criticism of it has to be presented at length. Then the whole business dominates the article. It stops being a biography and becomes yet another pov fork of ]. So it's not necessary to keep it short in theory, but may be in practice, in order to get a stable page that is legitimately a biography. ] <sup>]</sup> 16:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


== Your block of ] == == Collapse of the World Trade Center ==


Hello Tom, Can I ask you to look at the recent "edits" on the ], which you reverted earlier. A noted conspiracy buff then reverted back to his preferred version, which I reverted back. This has been reverted, yet again, by the same person. My suggestion was to wait until ]'s proposed rewrite, but this has been ignored. Regards, David, ] (]) 18:10, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I wanted to let you know that I feel your block of Jeff was extremely ill-advised. Civilized discussion is never disruption and without a doubt not block-worthy. If you feel the discussion was "clogging up" ANI or wasn't headed anywhere or was unproductive, fine, advise the participants to move it somewhere else, a user talk page perhaps. But blocking someone because they're arguing a minority viewpoint is in no way constructive and will never solve any problem. --]<sup>(]/])</Sup> 21:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:David, I'd say wait and see how it develops. Thanks, ] <sup>]</sup> 12:24, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
:He was being disruptive. He was responding to every single comment and numerous admins made it clear he was being disruptive.--] 21:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
::"He was being disruptive because numerous admins said he was being disruptive," is a nonsense argument. --]<sup>(]/])</Sup> 21:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:::I understand your opinion of my block. If you want to talk to Mongo, it might be easier to use Mongo's page, or your own. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


==Jim Hoffman== == Restore page ==


Hi, can you restore ] for me please? I had it deleted but he has come back to the game and is now notable. Thanks,--]] 17:00, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
I see that you warned ] about the three revert rule. He has continued to censor out sourced material and has reverted the article around 6-8 times today. ] 21:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:Well, now that he has been warned, I hope he will stop. If not, he will have to be reported, just like anyone else who violates 3RR. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC) :Done; happy editing. ] <sup>]</sup> 12:26, 4 August 2019 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2019 election voter message ==
==Spacing==
The infoboxes on the 9/11 article are taking over the page...is there a way to reduce the size of the infobox on deaths, etc. or at least give it better spacing so the article text doesn't but up against the box..see this edit window......I only come to you as I know you're better with this sort of thing than I am...I've been looking for the guidelines on these types of templates, but can't seem to find them due to other disractions as of late.--] 22:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
:I see what you mean. I'll see if I can come up with something. You might also ask Phaedril; She might be able to improve the whole layout. ] <sup>]</sup> 23:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
::She is apparently on a long break, maybe permanently. I have already made some adjustments I think it looks fine now. I am also making sure all the cited references work, and updating them all to reflect when they were accessed and using cite templates. I hope to get half of the cited references done and will let you know where I stop if you wish to pick up from there...it would be nice to ghet the article as straight as possible in the next day or two. I'm shooting you an email as well.--] 07:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
::I got as far as the section on Motive. Mainly, I'm just making sure the cite templates are used, checking the links to make sure they work, ensuring the retrived date is in the citation, so we know when it was last checked, and getting rid of those embedded links.--] 09:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
:::Sounds good. ] <sup>]</sup> 12:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
==Translation of ]==
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2019|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
Hello. I'm considering doing (at least some of) the translation you requested back in January for ] However, before I start, I'd like to confirm something. As I've commented on the ], the article in the Japanese Misplaced Pages has been criticised for lacking accuracy and not taking a neutral point of view (and I agree with these criticisms). If you're still interested in this article, perhaps you could tell me - do you think that it would be useful to do the translation, given these problems? ] 13:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
:I would say no. I think the Japanese article needs to take the lead on this. Let the contributors there get it in order and then it can be translated. If we translate something that's not neutral, we just multiply the problem. Thank you, though, for looking into it. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
==AbrCom Question==


If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. ] (]) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Just wondering, when an AbrCom is filed and there is a section titled "involved parties" do I add the parties involved or do I just leave myself and the person the AbrCom is being filed against and wait for others to place themselves as "involved parties"?--] 21:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
</td></tr>
::I don't know for sure, but I would err on the side of not adding anyone unless you are sure he is involved. It seems like a name can be added later more easily than removed. If they take the case, the arbcom can look at anyone they want to. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2019/Coordination/MMS/01&oldid=926750232 -->


== Request to unprotect ] redirect ==
:Also, I could have sworn that Striver had 2 RFCs. One by Zora a long time ago (]) and another one but I can't find it. Am I mistaken? I think I might be.--] 22:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
::I'll look, and post a link if I find anything. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


{{yo|Tom harrison}}
== 9-11 Commission ==


Would you mind kindly unprotecting the ] redirect so that I can fix the double redirect error and also nominate for ]? Protection is no longer required, as I believe it was protected ~13 years ago or so.
I just signed up.
Don't know what I'm doing.
The 9-11 Commission article ( http://en.wikipedia.org/9/11_Commission_Report#Criticism ) has a quote from Paul Craig Roberts that says "citation needed." I believe the article is here:
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts02062006.html
If you would like to tell me why this is wrong, I'm teachable.
] 00:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


Cheers,
:Welcome. The simple version would be to replace <nowiki>{{fact}}</nowiki> with <nowiki></nowiki>. I'll leave a boiler-plate welcome message on your talk page. It has some useful links to tutorials and policy pages. Happy editing, ] <sup>]</sup> 01:00, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
<br />--]''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:top;"> ]</span>''·''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:bottom;">]</span>'' 19:20, 8 February 2020 (UTC)


Done, ] <sup>]</sup> 20:15, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
==Thanks==
Re: the ] doesn't even know his/her politics. The right wing is adolf, not the left wing. "ADOLF STALIN" is juvenile. ] (]) 02:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


== Bob Dylan and Alcohol ==
And gratitude from my part for referencing that BBC link in ] 09:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


Hi Tom harrison, Following my deletion of this material ], there is a discussion of Bob Dylan and Alcohol here: ]. Any comments you wish to make are welcome. ] (]) 18:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
:You're welcome, both. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


== ] ==
==Reverting edit on barter==


Hi Tom. I'd appreciate your input ] Thanks. ]&nbsp;<sup>(]&#124;])</sup> 09:58, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
I was making a contribution on ] and do not understand why you reverted it. As I did not even achieved half of the explanation, I am shure you could not understand the meaning of what I wrote. It is the synthesis of a hard job of 3 year, that Idecided to present publically.
My contribution to the subject is a software algorithmic approch to the unexplored area of barter.
You should ask to an economic expert before considering my contribution as vandalism. I did not unedit nor remove anything, I just brought new ideas that are not yet verified by evrybody. Is it what you call vandalism?
If you limit your encyclopedia to the consensus, I really think it is useless. I simply ask for an honest verification of what I write.
The page ] is considered as of very low quality, and I really agree with this. The only contributors are private barter corporates, but no economists, or good experts on the subject. Is ] the favorite field of battle for vandalism fighters?
I really appreciate the work made on this encyclopedia, and that is the reason why I contribute to It, but it is the second time I am accused of vandalism without any explanation. I expect you will change your mind, give me some advices, or at least explain your act.<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>


== Mark WikiProject Linux as inactive? ==
:Looking more closely, I see that your edit was not vandalism. I'm sorry for mischaracterising it. It does, however, appear to be your own ], which Misplaced Pages does not publish. In fact, we do pretty much follow concensus. New ideas that are not yet verified really have no place here. I am in no position to peer-review your work. I suggest you publish elsewhere first. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


Hi! I was directed to your talk page by the ] on ]. I've started a ] whether we can keep it running, or mark it as inactive.– ] (] 06:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
If you want to have a better comprehension of the ideological battle of money in the economic field, please have a look to my user page. The consensus is not the truth. Galileo paid a lot for it. It explains very clearly why contributions on money are excellent, and the low quality of barter article.


== indef ==
I understand your position if you consider your responsability is limited to the reputation of this encyclopedia, but most contributors consider it very wider. I suppose you are well aware of it, and that your readers will not be desappointed.


Please consider making your block an indef, given their userpage and edits, I see no good coming from this account. ] (]) 13:15, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
No academic publications are interested on the subject, so I put my contribution on the discussion page, explaining the real stakes of the debate. Very few experts are really working on the subject, and the article will remain a no man's land as long as it will be considered as a field of hostility.
:Yes, I'm changing the block to indefinite; other admins are welcome to review and change as appropriate. Thanks, ] <sup>]</sup> 13:17, 11 November 2020 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message ==
If the administrative aspect of your work is determinant, ( I know, I am French), You should also consider that:
<blockquote>''there is only fool and economists who think that an unlimited growth is possible in a limited world.''</blockquote>
and the urgency there is to give new lights on this ideological economic debate.


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
Finally, It is not a research, (I made it very silently since a long time), but the real consequences of a research. When I said it will be verifiable, I meant it is not yet verifiable '''on line'''. It is only a small and very real software that I can run in front of anyone interested to it.
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2020|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
] 11:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. ] (]) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
An other amaizing detail that looks like an abuse of power in the semantic field. Do you understand why barter is in the numismatic wikiproject since barter practice, in it's common sense, does not use any monetary system?
</td></tr>
] 10:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2020/Coordination/MMS/01&oldid=990307860 -->


== About a Research on the History of Conspiracy Theories ==
:It's not really an area I know much about. You might ask on ] or ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 12:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


Dear Tom Harrison,
==It's Over for "Truth Professor" Jones==
BYU has placed the good professor on paid administrative leave. See . ] 21:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
:''Jenkins said BYU's reputation was a consideration, too. "It is a concern when faculty bring the university name into their own personal matters of concern," she said.'' - I wonder how long it will be until "9/11 researcher" becomes a pejorative. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
::Don't mean to intrude, but I think you'll both get a kick out of this: --] (]) 00:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:::That is interesting, and amusing. I think she has a future in tv. ] <sup>]</sup> 03:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
----
::::I find it not so amusing if people 'erroneously' suspect the wrong suspects, and demonstrate at a place which is very emotional for the relatives and survivors. &#151;&nbsp;] <small>]</small> 14:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
----
::For months the Jones article has either explicitly said that Jones' work has not been peer-reviewed, or, as is probably more appropriate, said nothing on the subject, but pointed out that he had not published in a reputable journal. Ironically, today, the day after he has been suspended by BYU, which in explanation said, " BYU has a policy of academic freedom, '''but''' what's expected is that professors submit their work to academic peer reviews so it can be challenged and debated by experts", there is now a line in the article that says his work ''has'' been P.R. So, now we have BYU stripping Jones of his teaching duties, in part because they say he has not submitted his work to P.R., but our article now says his work was P.R. As I am unable to edit the article, and it looks like you and Mongo were involved in the edit today, I guess I am just wondering what your thoughts are on this subject. Thanks ] 02:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


I take the liberty to contact you, I am a doctoral student in Political Science at the University of Paris 1 and my work focuses on the history of conspiracy theories, on which I have already published a few scientific articles and I am now preparing a book. I have been interviewing conspiracists and truthers, their critics and opponents for several years, working particularly on the French association ReOpen911 and the question of 9/11, as a now "historical" case of conspiracy...And obviously[REDACTED] has been a rather major theater of discussions/criticisms on the subject.
:::Hopefully in the next few days things will settle out into a balanced and accurate presentation of what the reliable sources have to say about it. Stay tuned, I guess. ] <sup>]</sup> 03:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


Looking at the related conspiracy pages' statistics, I realized that you have worked for long on these issues on wikipedia, hence my message and a small request: I would really appreciate if you can share bits of this "experience" with me in an interview.
== Please review ==


All the best
Hello Tom,


Pierre France
I have found you to be a very neutral admin and so I am asking to review a case concerning an editor you have had experience with in the past .
pierre.France zoho.com
https://univ-paris1.academia.edu/PierreFrance <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 09:57, 29 January 2021 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


:Sorry, no. Best wishes with your research, ] <sup>]</sup> 18:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks,
] <sup>]</sup> 16:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:I will look into it, probably later today. ] <sup>]</sup> 16:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks anyway though! :) ] <sup>]</sup> 18:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


== Alt-right ==
I just remembered - you can still look at considering CltFn got no response from an admin to his incident notice. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:22, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:It looks like interesting material, but it's not something I'm ready to get into right now. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


Hi Tom; just wanted to see what your particular reasons were for this revert on ]. Did you think I was cutting too much? I've been a major contributor to this article for a few years, adding a lot into it, but it's clearly gone way over the recommended ] so I've been trying to prune in back, in the hope that one day we can get it through GAN and FAC. Any particular parts of my pruning that you disagree with? ] (]) 12:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
==]==
:Hmm, must have hit rollback while scrolling through the watchlist. Thanks for letting me know, sorry for the inconvenience. ] <sup>]</sup> 12:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
::Not a problem, Tom. Have a good week! ] (]) 12:50, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
==Three Marys==


Dear Tom, would you care to explain ? ] ] 19:59, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
RE: ]
:Sorry, must have hit the button by accident. Thanks for letting me know, ] <sup>]</sup> 20:05, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
:That's allright. ] ] 20:08, 30 October 2021 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message ==
Thanks for all of your hard work. I have been really pleasantly surprised with your ability to build consensus and comprimise. I see why you were elected and continue to be an admin. You are a uniter, not a divider. :) ] (]) 19:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks for your kind words. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
==CT AFD List==
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2021|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
Hey, ] made a very helpful list of CT afd's. ]--] 01:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
:That might be useful as a central list of articles. I think some of those duplicate material that is already in others. Maybe some merging or reorganization is in order. ] <sup>]</sup> 01:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
== Re-naming Consensus ==


If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)</small>
Yes, at the current time it does show 3-2 to keep the current title (although ''''Allegations'''' is a weasel word) ]]Zach| ] 21:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
</td></tr>
:Or more correctly, it shows 3-2 against renaming to ]. Please read my messages before assuming it's the big obvious poll ] 21:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2021/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1056562944 -->


== Administrators will no longer be ] ==
:I do not agree that ''allegations'' is a weasel word, or that ] trumps ] and ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


A ] Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove ] from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with ], choose to ] this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the ]. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
== Ellison page ==
<!-- Message sent by User:Barkeep49@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators/Message_list&oldid=1058184441 -->
== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ].


The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
hi there,


Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
i changed the word "anti-semitism" to "racism" because the daily article he wrote never mentions anti-semitism but is instead concerning accusations of general racism. his letter that is later quoted is in reference to the nation of islam and farrakhan, as well as other leaders in the nation of islam. the way it was orginally posted made it appear as if ellison's letter was directly addressing anti-semitic comments by farrakhan which he had earlier defend in the daily, which is a misrepresentation.<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>
<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> –] (]]) 20:38, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
:It's a direct quote from two major papers, which are cited. We can't very well attribute to the Washington Post something they did not say. ] <sup>]</sup> 16:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


== How we will see unregistered users ==


<section begin=content/>
that makes sense. quoting the letter of ellison's to the star tribune might be more accurate. would it be ok to cite the letter directly instead, since it seems like the washington post's quote inferred farrakhan only erroneously?
Hi!


You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
:If his letter is published and verifiable, yes, that would be great. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.


Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin '''will still be able to access the IP'''. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on ] to help.
here is the letter's link. www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/keithellisonletter%20JCRC.pdf


If you have not seen it before, you can ]. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can ] to ].
:A blog is not a ]. I thought his letter was in the Star Tribune. Even if it were only on his campaign website, we could say, "According to Ellison..." ] <sup>]</sup> 19:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


We have ] this identity could work. '''We would appreciate your feedback''' on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can ]. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.


Thank you.
ok, the letter, an authentic copy, was only posted on the blog, which i agree is not a reliable source. is it ok since the quote from the letter is introduced as such in the wiki text?
/]<section end=content/>
:The letter can only be included if it has been published in a reliable source. In this case, that might include Ellison's campaign website, or a press release. Then we could attribute it to him or his campaign. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Johan (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=User:Johan_(WMF)/Target_lists/Admins2022(2)&oldid=22532495 -->


== New administrator activity requirement ==
The old version is a completely biased version of a politian who is up for office today. if this biased version is locked in, the next 5 hours people will be getting online to read the wiki version created by his oppostition. then if he wins and the headlines go national, everyone looking him up will be introduced to the biased parties point of views. the other version did not delete their points but instead brought other points, all of which were supported with legit sources. so whats your angle on this?


{{ivmbox|The administrator policy has been updated with new ] following a successful ].
:I do not care what is in the article, as long as it is neutral and reliably sourced. If it can't be both, I (or someone else) will reduce it to a stub. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:
#Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
#Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period


Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.
Tom, the Washington Post article is citing the original[REDACTED] on keith which contained the misinformation. it seems like the journalist took that information directly of this wiki page when writing the article instead of reading the Daily article being reference on the wiki page. the actual article that is being referred to, both by this wiki page and the washington post, says nothing about anti-semitism. if i post some misinformation on wiki, then a journalist uses it, does that suddenly make it accurate? please read the original article by Keith Ellison in the daily, which is cited.
}}
22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Barkeep49@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=All_administrators&oldid=1082922312 -->


== ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message ==
:The Washington Post article does not mention Misplaced Pages. I do not see any indication that either Patrick Condon of AP or Alan Cooperman with the Washington Post relied on Misplaced Pages for any part of their reports. Both say 'anti-Semitism.' The bottom line is, we summarize what reliable sources say. Two independent reliable sources say 'anti-Semitism'. If you want to say something else, you have to find a reliable source to quote. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2022|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.


If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)</small>


</div>
Tom, the wiki page is attempting to sum up an opinion piece of Ellison's which can be found here: http://www.mndaily.com/archive/download.php?archives/1989/11271989.tif
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2022/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1124425177 -->


== Hi Tom can u help me? ==
nowhere in that opinion piece does he mention jews or anti-semitism. therefore the "reliable sources" are not talking about the same article which is being discussed on the wiki page. thats why, even though they are reliable sources, they are not appropriate in the context of what is being talked about on the wiki page. please read the 7th page of the pdf file containing the opinion piece being discussed on the wiki page. after reading it i hope you will be convinced that racism is the appropriate word instead of anti-semitism and that the two reliable sources are talking about some other article or they are in error.


I contributed a lot to the mu online article in Spanish and LuchoCR just for having contributed without vandalism blocked me forever from Misplaced Pages, you can review the changes I made on the page and I asked them in a good way to remove the block since I had not done anything and instead they gave me a 13-day block and then for asking librarians for help in Spanish they undid my changes asking for help on their discussion pages and they blocked me forever, the librarian Taichi is complicit I asked for help with this user https://es.m.wikipedia.org/Usuario_discusión:MajinBaki who is 3 years old and they blocked my IP forever without having done anythinghttps://es.m.wikipedia.org/search/?action=edit&redlink=1&title=User_discussion:186.11.123.149 Taichi deleted my discussion page where I put the unlock template explaining everything and rightly put that it was unnecessary, just to delete it, vandalizing my page discussion page Here is an example of the help I asked a librarian in Spanish on the subject and the ocelot librarian as a mafioso reverted the changes https://es.m.wikipedia.org/Especial:MobileDiff/152986729 and asked my ip ban without doing anything, I just ask for help to do justice, the user Ocelot asked for my IP ban and the mafia user LuchoCR thanked him for reverting my help changes on librarian pages and said yes to me ip ban requested by ocelot https://es.m.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Tablón_de_anuncios_de_los_bibliotecarios/Portal/Archivo/Nombres_inapropiados_y_vandalismo_persistente/Actual?markasread=52216326&markasreadwiki=eswiki#c-Ocelot-2023081016300 0-Block_Breach_10 there is a mob on[REDACTED] in Spanish that is why I ask you for help, please translate everything that appears in the links that I send you so that you understand MajinBaki(talk) 20:26, 10 August 2023 (UTC) ] (]) 23:23, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
:It's not up to a bunch of random guys on the internet - us amature encyclopedia writers - to characterize the article one way or the other. That is the job of journalists, with real editors who review their work. We do not examine primary sources and draw conclusions. We summarize what journalists say. If you don't like what AP and the Post said, email them and make your case. We can't 'correct the record' here. ] <sup>]</sup> 00:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==
i was seriously wondering if that is what i had to do. do you think there is a shot i could actually get in contact with them? if so, how? if not, please have a laugh at my expense for asking.


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
:You could certainly email the reporters and make your case, or get in touch with other local news people. Also, I would think Rep. Ellison's campaign has press people on staff who might give you advice. ] <sup>]</sup> 12:21, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
== September 11, 2001 attacks ==


If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
Hi there. I've reverted your edit to ] , but welcome you to either put it back if you feel strongly, or join the discussion at ] about where or if to place that link/footnote. I understand that you made this edit in good faith, and I hope you will see my attempts to appropriately locate that information in the same light. Thanks, and happy editing! -] 16:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1187131902 -->


== You've got mail ==
==9/11==
Please limit your remarks to discussion of the article. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


{{You've got mail}}
:Okay. --] 22:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
:] (]) 16:53, 23 October 2024 (UTC)


:Thanks! ] (]) 11:33, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
==Here's one for you to block==
] ] 02:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks, I'll keep an eye on him. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


== Invitation to participate in a research ==
==Pictures==
Here are some pictures from yesterday on . We ran into Dylan and Alex here, and were less than civil. Alex's behavior was particularly outrageous (disparaging the FDNY, alledging that they were "in" on 9/11), as were some of the regular ny911truthers. Anyway, pictures are tagged with "loosechange" and related terms, with links to debunking sites. Haven't yet a chance to see if/where any would be useful for Misplaced Pages. --] <small>(] ] ])</small> 15:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
:That's good work. Some of those pictures will add a lot to the encyclopedia. Thank you very much for the barnstar. There was the inevitable vandalism, stupidity, and promotion, but I was pleased to see how many people worked hard to improve the page, including a number of anonymous contribtors. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


Hello,
==Barnstar==
{| 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;" | Also, want to add thanks for watching the main 9/11 article yesterday.--] <small>(] ] ])</small> 15:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
|}


The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this ''''''.
== Reversion at ] ==
Hi, why did you revert this edit ? Seemed like quite a good edit to me, actually. Was that a mistake? ] ] 14:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
:Yes, that was a mistake. Thank you for catching and correcting it. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
==Cremation of Care==
Hey Tom, I noticed you merged ] into ]. I think that's actually a bad idea, since it actually exists and stuff. I'd rather suggest merging it into the ] (not including the transcript). and and I would put the ] article up for deletion. --] 16:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
:That sounds fine to me. Maybe the "transcript" can go in ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 17:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
::I don't know, maybe it's copyrighted.--] 20:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
:Good point. We can remove the text and just link to it, I guess. Or just not link to it. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] .
See ]. ] 01:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
== sub ==


Kind Regards,


]
Sir,
Please do not make changes to the Rosey page. The place is not meant for everyone. People who actually spent time there know better. Not all are created equal and some should not get involved in areas and circles they do not belong to. You do great work on other parts of Misplaced Pages and keep up the good work.


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
Best Regards.<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins&oldid=27650221 -->


== Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research ==
==Contest==
The best reply to the above comment gets a nice, wholesome cookie. The page is ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''First entry''' -- fitting that an all boys school would be named Institut Le Rosey, also known by its full name Institut Le Rosey Palms. ] 02:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
*And its companion, Le Rosey Rectory. Looks like they are known for turning out Communists, given all the "red" links in their list of "notable" grads. ] 02:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


== Oklahoma ==

I think no-one can claim to posess the truth about Oklahoma. Therefore[REDACTED] should present the facts, all facts, unfiltered, and leave it to other gremia to decide what really happened. Misplaced Pages is not a research unit or High Court.

Please see ] &#151;&nbsp;] <small>]</small> 14:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

(citing)
:I oppose the inclusion, for reasons discussed at length above. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I think it is not reasonable to oppose inclusion, instead of trying to find a neutral wording together. There has to be some way to describe facts in a wiki article such that it meets wiki standards? Why else do we bother writing wikipedia? Please reconsider. &#151;&nbsp;] <small>]</small> 15:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

==PBS mentions Misplaced Pages==
*{{cite news|url=http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/ |author=Glaser, Mark |title=Reliving 9/11 Without Glitz of Big Media |publisher=PBS |date=], ]}}
:"] — Misplaced Pages entry: Though I’ve had plenty of reasons to shun Misplaced Pages and its attempts at a neutral point of view, I’ll give it credit for this entry, which covers a vast array of details about the attacks. There are simple timelines, photos, and the entry even includes some of the ] in a relatively balanced way."
--] <small>(] ] ])</small> 19:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

::That's nice to hear. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:22, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

== rv ] ==

I think my addition
:in particular Building 7, must have been
is useful, since WTC7 is least debated among those conspiracists. It is more accurate, and is not an undue elaboration of any conspiracy theory. It is simply more accurate.

I will alter my addition. Please explain yourself if you disagree. &#151;&nbsp;] <small>]</small> 22:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
:This has been extensively discussed on the talk page. You might want to read through the archives there. If I have any thoughts beyond what I have already said in the archives, I'll post there. ] <sup>]</sup> 23:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

== Citation tag ==

Hi i removed the citation tag you just left. Here's what i said on the :

I removed the tag from the first sentence because obviously no citation is needed, since this page is explaining precisely what the Controlled-Demolition Theory is. If that doesn't make sense, please state your reason(s) here. Thanks! Mujinga 00:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Shall we continue the discussion on the talk page if there is a need to? Cheers! ] 00:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

== Gorgon's Head Lodge ==

Mr. Harrison,

The Gorgon's Head Lodge is a secret society dating back to the early 1900s at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. I am currently a member and can provide you evidence that we have existed for over 100 years. We are rival societies with the Order of the Gimghoul and should be and are cited on their Misplaced Pages website. If you have any questions or would like any evidence, please feel free to ask. Thank you for your time.<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>

:Thanks, but Misplaced Pages does not publish ], which your personal knowledge would be. I noticed that the page was deleted in 14 December 2005, so I deleted it today as a ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

::I was just finishing splitting the old and new nominations and it turned to a red link. Grrrr :) Cheers, ]] 19:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

== I'm learning ==

Thanks for the help with http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Comedy_and_Tragedy_The_Theater_Masks_named_Sock_and_Buskin&oldid=75892700

this is my first attempt at writting an article.
I hope I was headed in the rigt direction.

You deleted all of the citations to articles in wickoedia.
Aren't they necessary?

Adding in the further reading links was started but the way the internal links was done is still a mystery to me.

Citations for the use of the names "sock and Buskin" can be found in uite a few articles and titles in Wickpedia.
Do I simply add a link to those pages as a citation?

:Certainly you are headed in the right direction. I thought the material was very interesting, and a good contribution. I moved it from its own page to ], which is in need of good material. We generally try not to cite one page to another within Misplaced Pages. When we want to refer the reader to a related page we use an internal link, e.g. "see ]." The ] is a good place to start to learn about the mechanics. A good ] for the names ''Sock'' and ''Buskin'' would be a book on the theatre: ''Professor Marlowe's guide to theatrical lore'', by Kit Marlowe, St. Martin's press, 1982, to use a fake example. I don't know much about the subject myself. Welcome, and thanks for your contribution. ] <sup>]</sup> 00:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

== A plea for Paul Thompson ==

Hi Tom, I notice you voted to delete the article on ]. While I know we disagree on many things, somehow this judgment call surprises me. If you have time, I'd love to hear your reasons. (You can just pop over to my talk page at your convenience.)--] 19:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
:I've added a comment to the AfD. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks. I'd say writing a book (and doing all that research) is a bit more of an effort than that category of pseudo-newsworthy people you mention. I see your point, but I do think there is plenty of independent coverage and use of his ideas. My suggestion was that he's notable now but will probably be outright famous soon, at which point it won't be an issue. His inclusion in the Dec. 2004 "genius issue" of Esquire is pretty telling; as is Richard Clarke's use of the book as a teaching resource at Harvard. The congressional briefing is also suggestive. Like I say, I doubt this will be an issue in a couple of months. I really think you're being too hard him. Anyway, happy editing.--] 21:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

== Pot calling Kettle ==
Hi Tom. I guess you don't understand the etiquette of Misplaced Pages. You should not remove a person's contribution just because you disagree with the source. You need to prove the source is unreliable in order to <em>justify</em> your deletion. How many people's contributions have you deleted because of your misunderstanding of this guideline? --] 23:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

:Well, here is our ]. Right at the top it says:
1. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reputable sources.

2. Editors adding new material to an article should cite a reputable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor.

3. The obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it.

:That seems contrary to your suggestion that I need to prove the source is unreliable in order to justify deletion." Or have I misunderstood you? ] <sup>]</sup> 23:32, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

::I say the source is reputable. You say the source is not reputable. Who is correct, you or me? Nowhere in your 3 points does it say who is responsible to <em>prove</em> that the source is reputable. Just because you say "it is not reputable" does not make it so. I could say "encyclopedia brittanic: not reputable" which is false and yet according to the 3 points that you listed, I could remove someone's statement simply because I do not trust the Encyclopedia Britannica. This is your flawed logic. --] 00:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Tom is correct. His logic is not flawed. THe burden is on you to prove the claim is verifiable and part of that is proving the source is reliable. In this case, it is not reliable and fails a number of tests. --] 02:22, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

::::So... what are these "tests" that WRH has "failed" according to Mr. Beatty? --] 04:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

::::: Here's the ] and ] of many. --] 04:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

== Boston's Hidden Restaurants ==

I noticed that Boston's Hidden Restaurants was being considered for deletion because I added links to the page from various pages (Boston, New England, restaurants, New England cuisine), since I noticed that the Boston's Hidden Restaurants page had a note saying there were few incoming links.

I took all these links down from the Boston, New England, restaurants, New England cuisine pages, since it appears that this is what triggered the consideration of deletion. If so, I apologize for this, since I was unaware of what the deletion policies were.

Sincerely,
Marc<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>

:You din't do anything wrong. I did notice the page when you added a link to it, but the reason I think it should be deleted is that it fails the ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 16:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

== unblock? ==

Erm, Hi.

I appear to have been blocked and I don't know why. i have added maybe two articles on wikipedia, and didn;t realise I was doing anythign wrong. Could you please enlighten me as to what has happened?

:I replied on your talk page. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

== Personal attacks ==

Hello, I had reported ] on the ], and another administrator had noted that he had already been blocked (for a 3RR, and not for personal attacks), and moved him to the "open cases". After returning from the block he has blanked his talk page warnings, and wrote "what a great nerd you are" This in itself is not much of an issue, but the personal attacks have gone now gone way past the point of acceptable.

First of all I'm a ] living in Canada, and this user has made reference to ], a very anti-Baha'i organization in Iran that has persecuted the Baha'is in Iran. He first wrote "Say, do you know about the Hojjatieh Jeff?" , he then wrote: "How's Canada? is it a good country? I should visit sometimes." , and then "There shouldn't be too many Baha'i'communities in Canada, in a few cities perhaps, like Toronto, Ontario, or in Nova Scotia. Must not be hard to find people." and finally "::::I sense fear in your tone. Your action is more uncivilized than any of my tone. Provocative and coward. Hidding behind friends to make a stupid illogical point. I will be visiting Canada Jeff. Trust me it's easy to find people." . This is a direct personal attack, not only in terms of words, which I can easily forget, but much more. You can check my words to him on his talk page (need to check diffs as he's blanked his talk page), all civilized, but he has continued his attacks. What can be done about this. -- ] 15:24, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

:I have blocked him for a week. If he makes any more threats, I will block longer. Please let me or another admin know if there is any more of this. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks -- ] 15:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I have extended your block on the account to indefinite, having been the one to block him for 3RR in the first place and been following his edits since. There are no significantly useful edits from the account, and we should show zero tolerance to people who are only here to disrupt. He'd been trolling all the way through his block period, including evading his block through an IP, and although I didn't see a future as a productive contributor I have to say I didn't expect him to go this far over the line. --]<sup>]</sup> 16:22, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

:An indefinite block is fine with me. Thanks, ] <sup>]</sup> 18:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

==Angela Beesley==
Re: revert. Please outline your reasons on the talk page. In particular, there is no original research, no citation of[REDACTED] (only a link to[REDACTED] as a primary source for angela's comments), and all statements are supported by cites, contrary to your edit summary. --] 16:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

== Alva Noto repair ==

This article Should Not be deleted. But I guess it does need repair (I did not create it). I just added-in some new helpful info. But, being new here, I'm not sure how to boost this article's citations or credibility. Can you make recommendations for this article and reasons why you thought it should be deleted? Thanks.<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>
:It looks better now. Links to independent reviews are helpful. ] <sup>]</sup> 12:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

== You're cheap! ==

Ha...--] 11:21, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
:I prefer "inexpensive." ] <sup>]</sup> 12:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

== Citation request (controlled demolition) ==

Hi Tom, you want a reference for "the controlled demolition hypothesis proposes that". Does this mean that you want a source (or set of sources) that proposes this, or someone who confirms the existence of the hypothesis? The best source for the first is, of course, Steven Jones (but the article provides many others as well); the most authoritative statement of the hypothesis, in the latter sense, is probably the NIST report and the recent FAQ. But you already know about those, so I'm a bit confused about what claim you want referenced.--] 13:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
:I want a reliable source who says there is a controlled-demolition hypothesis, and who says what it consists of. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
::Isn't NIST such a source. That failing, Bazant and Verdure 2006?--] 13:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
:Sure, as long as it supports what the article says. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
::Obviously. Do you have any doubts about that?--] 13:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
:I do have doubts, but I'll remove it for now, and see what citations are provided to support what is said. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:02, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
::Great. I've opened the discussion on the talk pages. It would be great to have at least that first section in plain language that also has your approval.--] 14:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

==]==
Thank you for your objective and precision recent edits to the above. I've made a minor amendment for accuracy &mdash; I presume "front matter" is not quite the same, but, if it is, feel free to rv. ] 21:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

==Navayāna Buddhism on the ] page==
I have cited sources that show that scholars have called Ambedkarite Buddhism navayāna. Dhammafriend refuses to believe that Ambedkarite Buddhism could be branded
:Dr. Ambedkar revived Buddhism in India so you can not brand is Old OR Neo! Its Buddhism. People from Europe /USA are converting to their own found Buddhist practices. All are Buddhist so newly converted people are not branded as neo ! Please also visit www.e-b-u.org. In Indian Context Buddhist from Ladakh, Assam, Maharshtra, Karnataka etc. are a fighting unitedly for Buddhist Revival. Do you know All Indian Buddhist Monk Association ? Especially for Mahabodhi Temple Liberation Movement world Buddhist are united. Buddhist monk from Japan Bhante Surai Sasai is doing best in Central Region of India Nagpur to mobiliese masses Dhammafriend 10:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
the fact is all Buddhism is branded something or the other and scholars have branded Ambedkarite Buddhism as navayāna. Ambedkarite Buddhism is the only Buddhist movement in India. Buddhists from Ladakh, Assam, or Darjeeling are ancestral Buddhist populations that did not get extinguished, hence, the "Indian Buddhist Movement" should only be applicable to Ambedkarite Buddhism, which has been called navayāna
Dhammafriend is stubborn and keeps reverting the article and removing statement "or Navayāna Buddhism (Pāli नवयान navayāna, literally "new vehicle")". May I put this back in, along with my citation.
] 02:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

:Sorry, this is nothing I am familiar with. You might ask for a ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 03:18, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

==Hello==
I am addressing you as an neutral, dissintrested and uninvolved third part admin: Could you please revert , tell the person to not delete "citition needed" and tell him to stop adding that the letter is disputed unless he presents any sources that do so? The fact tags are not there to questioning the statments, but the simple fact that sources are needed. Thanks and peace. --] 11:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
:Oh, i see that he did add sources, but they are in Arabic... could you then tell him to stop removing fact tags? --] 11:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

More . I would understand if it were primary sources, but i can not see how it is helpfull to add Arabic secondary sources. --] 11:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

:If ], born in Damascus, is a Syrian scholar, would not ], born in Nishapur then be an Iranian scholar? I think instead people would say al-Hajjaj was a Persian scholar, or maybe an Abbasid scholar, and that Al-Dhahabi was an Umayyad scholar. Anyway, it sounds like there is a reasonable disagreement, so the <nowiki>{{fact}}</nowiki> tag should remain until more ] sources are found. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

==]==
Hello, Hello,


I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ].
An Arbitration case in which you commented 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, ].

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ] 02:33, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

== ] has attacked me again ==

:While the complaint is still pending, he just made more ethnic attacks against me. He called me "anti-Buddhist" and characterized my alleged "Caste" by referring to me as a "Brahmin"/"Shudra" (amusingly, I'm not even a Hindu).I am adding diffs to that effect in the PAIN report but I humbly request you to please intervene. His inflammatory comments in the talk page of ] are making it very difficult for us legitimate editors to create a good article. The diffs of his most recent attacks are below:


http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk%3AIndian_Buddhist_Movement&diff=77509724&oldid=77417417

In particular, the comments from the diff above:

{{cquote|If kelkar Or all anti-Buddhist people who are unaware of the Present ] can come and understand the status.}}

{{cquote|] hate is too much in ] ] ] minds}}

Referring to both me and ]

and

{{cquote|Mr.] you are not the first anti-Buddhit person on this planet.}}

{{cquote|The Language used by u like which planet etc.. shows you are full hate towards ] so debate is a civilised manner}}.


Despite the fact that I have made no attacks against anyone.

] 09:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
:I have pasted a copy of his recent attacks on PAIN and request some intervention here. Thanks very much.] 09:40, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

::] has attacked me as ] even though I write only about Buddhist Movement in India. His clain that he is not attacking anyone is also strange. Coz on this same page we can find he has attacked others also. ] 21:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

I see you have deleted the above entry. What did not get deleted was the talk page assosicated with it; does that not go with the article. thanks.--] <small>] ] ]</small> 19:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks! ] <sup>]</sup> 19:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

== Limecat ==

Hi... I saw that you deleted the article I created recently, titled "Limecat," with the reason that it had been deleted previously. I never saw the previous article, but I did see the "debate" (someone pointed it out on my article's talk page) and I think I had addressed the concerns. Could you at least restore the article so it could be vetted again the way the previous version apparently was? Thanks. ] 21:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
:No, but you are welcome to take it up on ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
OK, will do, thanks. ] 21:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

== Merkabah ==

Hi Tom, A quick message to say thanks for the great job of combineing Merkabah and Hekalot. I was just checking if it had produced any messages on the talk pages and found it was already job done. That should make life easier for people researching this stuff like me. Regards -- ] <sup>(])</sup> 22:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks, it's good of you to say so. ] <sup>]</sup> 23:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


==] personnel attacks==

i am trying to improve of ] but user ] has said me a ] though i am not a muslim.

"there are entire countries in the muslim world that massacre non-muslims and spread hate against them (Pakistan against Hindus, Saudi Arabia against Christians" i tired to warn him about critising against a relegion.

THIS IS CONVERSATION BETWEEN HIM AND A MEMBER

:The present ref does not say that Tipu founded the Jacobin club, only that he was a member.Hkelkar 02:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

In the article it clearly states as hazrath Tipu Sultan as a founding member and not a member! there were 59 early members of which hazrath Tipu Sultan was one of them. Is a there a difference between a founding member ( might be tipu as it was the very beginning of the club in mysore) and a member,could you please explain.


Mujeerkhan 12:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

:Rubbish. Nowhere in either of the references is the word "founder" even mentioned.Hkelkar 05:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

What do mean "rubbish" after the efforts i have made in the improvements of the article. oh "founder" is not given the sources which i have provide but its said in the article of hazrath tipu and we have to check who made the error. I have made so many corrections for the errors in the article and for quite a while you have been telling me whats "wrong" and whats "correct" instead of helping me out. is this the way you treat other wiki members for thier contributions.

Mujeerkhan 17:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

:I am perfectly within my rights to point out gibberish when it is there. Since it is a comment on content, not on contributor, it is neither incivility nor a personal attack. The fact remains that 90% of the article is balderdash, hooey, jive, bakwaas, drek,and other similar such descriptions from any number of languages that anyone can think of. What's more. the edits are colored by the worst case of religious/nationalist fundamentalism I have ever seen on[REDACTED] so far. Hkelkar 08:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


In this instance a member is trying to correct the article but user ] is making fun out of him. he wants the article to be in his own ideas.

could you please do something about the user
]14:49, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

::I suggest you ask for help at the ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:05, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Since my comments were on the content, not on the contributor, they do not satisfy ]s criteria for a personal attack. I think that new users should read the policy before wasting admins time.] 01:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

==Morton Devonshire==
Thanks for the note. I don't do feuds... just wikipedia. However, I will take your advice and disengage, as he sees it as very personal. I'll leave it to you and others to keep a weather eye. ] 21:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Cheers. I noticed you made a reference to Angela Davis - which rang a bell.... ] 21:25, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

LOL. You mentioned her recently in a talk post as an example, which would be relevant to those of us of a certain age. Not that I'm giving away mine. I just picked up on it, so I thought I'd say I got the reference, as it probably escaped most people. ] 21:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

:You recommended that I back off from Morton for a while, and I have shown good faith by doing so. Unfortunately, it has not been reciprocated. Morton made this about me. I have asked him to , which I believe merit an apology also. He has simply ignored this, and archived the talk.

:He has also archived from another admin, ], and stated that he has acted on suggestions to remove offensive content from his user page. However, as Runcorn has , the same content remains unchanged on . I also note on ], firstly a copyvio of the Che Guevara image, where permission is only given to "propagate his memory and the cause of social justice throughout the world". The usage does not do this. Secondly there is an attack on "Alex", which in the context of Morton's stated views can only be interpreted as Alex Jones.

:I might mention that Runcorn is now the third admin to ask Morton to remove this content. User pages are, as you know, for building up the encyclopedia, not for content which is guaranteed to be provocative and cause disruption. I would be grateful for your attention to this. Thanks.

:] 14:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

::Where is this Che Guevara image? I thought he removed it. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Che Guevara can be found here. ] 17:12, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

::I see. A picture of Che Guevara remains in an archive of his talk page, after he removed another at your request from his user page. And you say this is a copyvio because it is contrary to Korda's terms for use of the image? Reading those terms, I think its use there is acceptable. Unless I misunderstand the basis for your reasoning, either it can be used as Morton used it, or it cannot be used in any neutral biography of Che Guevara. Since it can (apparently) be used in our page on Che, where we record considerable criticism of him, I think you misunderstand Korda's terms. I do not see any basis for saying Morton cannot use it. ] <sup>]</sup> 17:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

:::I didn't make the request that Morton should remove the Che Guevara picture. That was made by Guinnog. No matter. It was clearly Korda's intent that it should be used to support Guevara, so I think the use in an article with hostile comments would not pass muster, though that of course would not preclude fair use. I'm not interested in pursuing the matter.

:::Why have you only responded to that, and not the other points mentioned? Thanks. ] 19:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

::Beyond that I'm not sure what you are asking me to do (and I even misunderstood what you wanted about the picture). If you are asking me to mediate, you should find a better mediator. I'm not very good at it, and although I do not share his rather generous opinion of el Che, I think Morton is more right than wrong.

::Beyond that, what? I think Alex Jones' followers (and others) use Misplaced Pages to promote and legitimize conspiracy theories. Conspiracism is a fallacy. Identifying conspiracy theories and theorists as such is a good thing, and improves our encyclopedia.

::You want me to chide Morton for not assuming good faith on your part, while you manifestly assume bad faith on his? You want him to not archive his talk page until you say it's okay? Unless I'm mistaken, the bot has already archived the thread from the noticeboard. He has seen what people have said to him, he has made some compromises, he has moved away from at least one page you edit. And now you say he is ignoring your request for an apology. You accused me without basis of defamation, wikilawyering, and ]; I'm (mostly) ignoring that. Many things are better ignored. For everything else, there is ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Needless to say I don't agree with what you have written, but I'm not interested in point scoring (I am not saying that you are either) and I do agree that many things are better ignored, so I shall apply that philosophy here to save even more wasted time. ] 20:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

::::I am not unaware of your conversation here. As such, I have taken yet more steps to calm things down. I would appreciate it if that would be the end of things, and that you would respect me request to disengage. Thank you. ] 20:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

:::::Thank you Morton. I regard this as a good-will gesture which I respect. I have backed off myself from editing ] following your gesture there. I have also spoken against ArbCom hearing the case against you (though there's little chance of that anyway). I will post to Runcorn and say that I think the best thing now is to put this behind us. ] 20:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

==] block==

It wasn't very well expressed, but there's no need to pick up on a technicality. I used ] as a shorthand, I must confess. The basic point is that he was making a defamatory comment, was warned, and made another one. I am sure you know how seriously libel on living persons is regarded, and his response was flippant about the whole business. I discussed it with MONGO and invited him to shorten or remove the block, but he declined and also left a warning. Do you have a problem with this? ] 17:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
:I do. I am concerned about using BLP this way. I wonder, is Tbeatty subject to the same protections BLP affords Steven Jones, as you understand BLP? ] <sup>]</sup> 17:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

::Could you kindly say what you mean? ] 17:59, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

== Mr ]'s language ==

Sir,

Could you please check Mr. HKelkar's language.for instance ]Insted of giving references/documentation/proofs he is threatening others. I understand Misplaced Pages is made for all the people on this earth and have equal rights to express their views. If the other person has different view he should come up with valid arguments rather that putting warnings, complaining to administrators.

You have blocked my brother's id, I hope you had valid resons but you are allowing Mr. ]'s nonstop nonsense? May I ask/request, why you are allowing him to continue?

He has unnessarily posted warning/puppet notices on my talks even though I have told him that I live in USA and Dhammafriend lives in Germany.

Thank you.--] 18:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

:I suggest you look at ] and follow the procedure listed there. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

::] I have asked you to come for open and healthy debate. Why are you branding me as Sockpuppetry? ] is my elder brother is USA. If you are in USA, Europe Or Germany I'll arrange meeting for discussion on Buddhist Movement in India. So don't be a hidden attacker. If other users are writing anything on Hinduism you should not relate me with them. ] 21:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

:::] The Bodhidharma is my elder brother in USA. ] has branded me that I am using another username. If you want contact details we can meet anywhere. These hidden attackers only to spoil articles. ] 21:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

::::About ] branding everybody as anti-Hindu is strange. He has done lot of personnal attacks against me by branding me as ] but it is ur decision if u want to him blacklist or not. All Misplaced Pages Administrators should take care of such Hidden Users ] 21:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

== Bot shutoff button ==

That does not seem to be an issue on FF. Go ahead and move/preview until it looks fine, I wont mind.''']''' 19:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

== Thank you ==

I am reading[REDACTED] policies and procedures now.

My apologies for the irresponsible changes I made.
I will stick to the[REDACTED] policies and procedures and expect same from administrators and "so called administrators" to follow the same.

Thank you.--] 21:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

== dispute flag ==

Hi Tom, please see ]. I've put the flag back. Regards, &#151;&nbsp;] <small>]</small> 23:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
::Do you get what I'm ]? &#151;&nbsp;] <small>]</small> 01:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Hi, I've continued the discussion on: ]. Would you please take a look? &#151;&nbsp;] <small>]</small> 10:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

==Dhammafriend and Truthlover==
Dhammafriend (and Truthlover) has completely reverted ] to how it was prior to his/their ban. He/They did not only remove the navayana concept, which he/they question but also all the citations that cleared up citation neccessity's. I have reverted the page to how it was prior.
] 23:22, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

It is also important to note that "they" reverted the 'official-style' referencing back to their informal previous citations, they also removed claims of dubious assertions and etc.
the proof is ], ], ]
] 23:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

:I really do not know enough about the subject to be able to help. You might look at ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 01:05, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

== AOL block ==

Hey Tom your block of Jon W, while justified, has left a ton of AOL subscribers locked out. I can't even create my own user page.

Please consider lifting the block before too long.

Thanks!--] 06:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

==Policy==
Thanks for your note. I have left a comment. ] 16:42, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
:Follow-up edit to yours. ] 17:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

==Need help in understanding how to report hypocritic people==
Sir, I was looking into policies and procedures. I could not find how to report such people. I have been discussing About Buddhism on ] pages, Insted of having healthy conversations, other people are just engaging in to threats and "block" user game. insted of countering my arguments.

I follow this methodology for any arguments to reach its conclusion.
1. I ask about the percetion of each user about the subject.
2. If there is a difference in opinion I prefer inference. Read all the reliable sources I have and other user has provided and try to think logically to find answer.
3. If there is no clear logical answer I demand valid testimony. an Authorative document which clearly describes the topic in length.

I expect others to follow the same but insted they continue to have vague arguments which does not lead anywhere and continue with their personal propaganda. If I change the document they complain that I am vandalising the article. I get warnings. How do I report such hyporitic and autocratic people?

How do I request third party intervention?

Thank you --] 20:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

:I suggest you try the ] for personal attacks, and the ] system for everything else. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:14, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

== Your comment ==

I am not "habitually uncivil". I do however take great exception, that when I take pains to improve articles and compromise with other editors, and then someone else comes along and calls me everything under the sun (even threatening real life retaliation), I get treated as though I am just as bad as him. And I take even more exception when, after this insulting mistake is made, the insulting admin refuses to apologise. And I get absolutely apoplectic at the thought that there is no way of getting this appalling insulting mistake deleted from the record, so that anyone might happen on the circumstances and assume that he had in some way been justified in what he did.

That makes me very angry indeed. And justifiably so. Of course people who have not been involved, coming in and misreading the situation, does not help. ] | ] 15:14, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

:Have just realised that you were the <!-- idiot-->admin who was the first to block me for a non-existent 3RR when I was trying to compromise with another editor. So you have no excuse for getting it wrong. The French have a proverb: Cet animal est très méchant: Quand on l'attaque, il se défend. ] | ] 16:23, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
::Since this is the English wiki, translated, "This animal is very mean: When one attacks it, it defends himself."--] 16:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Refer to ] <sup>]</sup> 16:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

== The Under Revision tag on the 9/11 article ==

Hi Tom. Obviously your prerogative to be bold and remove this. However, at present the article is undergoing such massive revisions that it would be better to rephrase it to be more inclusive to new and casual editors than to remove it comepletely. Do you think we could take this to the article talk page, please? On the basis that we are discussing everything I am about to revert your removal, but only once, and justify that on the talk page. ] 14:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

==Kevin Barrett==

Hi Tom. I was hoping you could take a look at this article. There is a new editor over on the Kevin Barrett page who has started an edit war over the notion that Barrett "was suspected of planning to teach CT." He keeps deleting sourced material ( lying in his edit summary), and screwing up the sources, both in the reference section and in the article. If you look through the edit history you'll see he has tried to insert several different unsourced assertions. He has called me a liar when I have deleted his unsourced contributions. I've tried to reason with him, but he just keeps reverting to "his" latest version, despite never having demonstrated a deficiency in the status quo. He seems intent on theorizing about what Barret was "planning" to do. Anyway, on the talk page, he has said he hopes an admin will look things over. I posted this on Mongo's talkpage as well, but the other editor has again reverted, and again asked for admin assistance. If you have the time...Thanks ] 20:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

:I changed the wording, per talkpage, and added back in the uncited quote you removed. That was my mistake...I thought I had to do something different to cite the source (it is a video of a news appearence). It appears to be alright though. Thanks for looking at the article, and please let me know if I have cited that video incorrectly. Cheers, ] 21:44, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Tom, please take a look at new edit. I didn't know of you before, so I couldn't make a direct and personal request to you the way Levi P did, but after your recent involvement I came to your user page to let you know that I have made another attempt to edit the Kevin Barrett page and to keep it neutral and well sourced but Levi P has already reverted it without discussion or explanation. I thought Misplaced Pages policy was against reverting good faith edits. Please do something. ] 04:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


Take the survey ''''''.
::Tom, Pihanki has now knowingly violated WP:3RR. I am not going to revert again, since I believe I am at my limit. Since he has also insulted me, and told bald-faced lies in his edit summary, it seems something should be done. Thanks for looking into this. ] 04:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


Kind Regards,
If it's a violation, and if he did it after being warned, you can report it at the ]. Probably no great harm will come from letting it all sit for a day or two. ] <sup>]</sup> 04:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


]
:That's a good point, and I'll do so. I did warn him, and that coupled with his other actions has gotten me annoyed. I'm going to go do something that doesn't involve editing with strangers. Thanks, ] 04:53, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
== User pages ==
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 -->


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
Do you have some specific objection to Morton Devonshire's? ] <sup>]</sup> 19:09, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
:Yes. See . Tbeatty has now refactored my remarks to avoid repeating the offensive and possibly actionable remarks. Morton has, in trying to tone down the libel, actually made it worse in my opinion, as I intend to tell him. I don't see why anybody needs to have material like this on a user page; it's hard to think of an encyclopedic reason. --] 03:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
::I certainly wouldn't want anybody to think it was personal; it isn't. I'll consider your advice of course, but I think my polite request to him to remove potentially libellous and certainly unencyclopedic content from his user page is a reasonable enough one. --] 04:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
:::Point taken, I am not a lawyer and don't mean to come across like one. There's something though about having controversial stuff like this on a user page that I find rather uncollegial, and maybe I should focus on that rather than my very real worry that we could leave ourselves open to legal threat by publishing such material, even in user space. --] 05:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
== Removing protected broken redirect ==
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Good evening, I have found that you are working on removing pages tagged for speedy deletion. I came across a broken redirect that is fully protected, and need a admin to can it for me. ] is the page name. Thanks for your help. --Willy ] (] - ]) 02:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
== ] ==


</div>
Have you got a rationale for me, Tom? - <b>]</b><small> ]/]</small> 16:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 -->

Latest revision as of 00:05, 19 November 2024
Admins: If I have erred in one of my admin actions, or my rationale for the action no longer applies, please don't hesitate to reverse it. I have no objection to my actions being reversed, as long you leave me a polite note explaining what you did and why. Thanks.

For new users

If you are new here, welcome. The page Misplaced Pages:Welcome, newcomers has links to a tutorial, and answers to frequently-asked questions.

Archives

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Misplaced Pages:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Other old material is available in the page history.

Noel Rose (a page you deleted in 2006)

Hi Tom, I work in the field of autoimmune disease and went looking for a page on Noel Rose, but noticed a 2006 version had been deleted by you. I expect it was a guideline problem (e.g., a verbatim copy of existing content), but let me know if there was some other reason. I am going to start creating the new page, but if you have issues please let me know. Thank you.

Aaron Abend (talk) 13:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Invited!

Hi Tom! Next on my list to bring to Featured Article level is the Collapse of the World Trade Center article. I have commenced doing some adjustments and some may become major as it proceeds. I feel it lacks the engineering discussion needed to provide a full understanding of how and why the buildings collapsed and for that I need persons better versed than I to at least steer it along the correct path...so anything you have to suggest there or here is welcome.--MONGO (talk) 14:08, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, sounds good. Tom Harrison 20:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
I think some organizational issues persist and was thinking a brief summary of the attacks, followed by a detailed description of the collapses (the article lacks many finer details) then on to the mechanics of what happened. I am not sure a lengthy discussion about lost artwork, etc, belongs as I think this needs to mainly discuss the engineering aspects. We may have to address conspiracy theories was well near the end if for no other reason than to put them in their bed.--MONGO (talk) 21:27, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed; some pruning is due. Tom Harrison 14:45, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Sorry been absent a bit still thinking about what the article should emphasize..will be working on it more next week.--MONGO (talk) 17:21, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
No problem, same here... Tom Harrison 18:18, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Tom harrison. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Unblock?

As it's such a long time since the block and a Checkuser has said there's been no evidence of recent block evasion, would you be happy with an unblock at User talk:Mstrojny now? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:25, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
 Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

Why have I received this message?
All administrators are receiving it.
What prompted you to send this message?
Recently, several Misplaced Pages admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account.
What do I need to do?
Only to follow the instructions in this message.
  1. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites).
  2. Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable).
  3. Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers.
How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)?
You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:55, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear Tom harrison,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Misplaced Pages project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Urhixidur (talk) 16:43, 9 May 2019 (UTC)


Black Hebrew Israelites

Hi you recently protected Black Hebrew Israelites for edit warring. Looks like it is starting again except this time they are calling it vandalism. Should I take it to WP:AN/EW since this is a long term issue with them removing the same material against consensus for months? PackMecEng (talk) 13:58, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately that's the next step. Tom Harrison 11:49, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
I've protected the page again. Please give your views on the talk page if you would. Tom Harrison 18:13, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Done, thanks again for the help! PackMecEng (talk) 19:09, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Review

What is missing or should be culled from Collapse of the World Trade Center. I feel we have too many sections and some areas could be combined. I have a period of free time and may try and push this to peer review after I reread the NIST report. If you're inclined, feel free to post any suggestions to the article talkpage so we can get a dialogue started.--MONGO (talk) 19:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Great, I'll start reading. Tom Harrison 01:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Collapse of the World Trade Center

Hello Tom, Can I ask you to look at the recent "edits" on the Collapse of the World Trade Center, which you reverted earlier. A noted conspiracy buff then reverted back to his preferred version, which I reverted back. This has been reverted, yet again, by the same person. My suggestion was to wait until MONGO's proposed rewrite, but this has been ignored. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:10, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

David, I'd say wait and see how it develops. Thanks, Tom Harrison 12:24, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Restore page

Hi, can you restore User:EchetusXe/Nathan Ferguson for me please? I had it deleted but he has come back to the game and is now notable. Thanks,--EchetusXe 17:00, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Done; happy editing. Tom Harrison 12:26, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Request to unprotect 2006 Bilderberg Meeting redirect

@Tom harrison:

Would you mind kindly unprotecting the 2006 Bilderberg Meeting redirect so that I can fix the double redirect error and also nominate for RfD? Protection is no longer required, as I believe it was protected ~13 years ago or so.

Cheers,
--Doug Mehus T·C 19:20, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Done, Tom Harrison 20:15, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Bob Dylan and Alcohol

Hi Tom harrison, Following my deletion of this material ], there is a discussion of Bob Dylan and Alcohol here: Talk:Bob_Dylan#Alcohol. Any comments you wish to make are welcome. Mick gold (talk) 18:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

9/11 Truth Movement

Hi Tom. I'd appreciate your input here. Thanks. Evan  09:58, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Mark WikiProject Linux as inactive?

Hi! I was directed to your talk page by the participants list on WikiProject Linux. I've started a discussion whether we can keep it running, or mark it as inactive.– Abuluntu ( talk 06:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

indef

Please consider making your block on this user an indef, given their userpage and edits, I see no good coming from this account. Praxidicae (talk) 13:15, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I'm changing the block to indefinite; other admins are welcome to review and change as appropriate. Thanks, Tom Harrison 13:17, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

About a Research on the History of Conspiracy Theories

Dear Tom Harrison,

I take the liberty to contact you, I am a doctoral student in Political Science at the University of Paris 1 and my work focuses on the history of conspiracy theories, on which I have already published a few scientific articles and I am now preparing a book. I have been interviewing conspiracists and truthers, their critics and opponents for several years, working particularly on the French association ReOpen911 and the question of 9/11, as a now "historical" case of conspiracy...And obviously[REDACTED] has been a rather major theater of discussions/criticisms on the subject.

Looking at the related conspiracy pages' statistics, I realized that you have worked for long on these issues on wikipedia, hence my message and a small request: I would really appreciate if you can share bits of this "experience" with me in an interview.

All the best

Pierre France pierre.France zoho.com https://univ-paris1.academia.edu/PierreFrance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.187.1.47 (talk) 09:57, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, no. Best wishes with your research, Tom Harrison 18:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Alt-right

Hi Tom; just wanted to see what your particular reasons were for this revert on Alt-right. Did you think I was cutting too much? I've been a major contributor to this article for a few years, adding a lot into it, but it's clearly gone way over the recommended WP:Article Size so I've been trying to prune in back, in the hope that one day we can get it through GAN and FAC. Any particular parts of my pruning that you disagree with? Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hmm, must have hit rollback while scrolling through the watchlist. Thanks for letting me know, sorry for the inconvenience. Tom Harrison 12:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Not a problem, Tom. Have a good week! Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:50, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Three Marys

Dear Tom, would you care to explain your revert? Str1977 19:59, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, must have hit the button by accident. Thanks for letting me know, Tom Harrison 20:05, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
That's allright. Str1977 20:08, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of List of secret societies in popular culture for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of secret societies in popular culture is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of secret societies in popular culture until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

–LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:38, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

  1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
  2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Tom can u help me?

I contributed a lot to the mu online article in Spanish and LuchoCR just for having contributed without vandalism blocked me forever from Misplaced Pages, you can review the changes I made on the page and I asked them in a good way to remove the block since I had not done anything and instead they gave me a 13-day block and then for asking librarians for help in Spanish they undid my changes asking for help on their discussion pages and they blocked me forever, the librarian Taichi is complicit I asked for help with this user https://es.m.wikipedia.org/Usuario_discusión:MajinBaki who is 3 years old and they blocked my IP forever without having done anythinghttps://es.m.wikipedia.org/search/?action=edit&redlink=1&title=User_discussion:186.11.123.149 Taichi deleted my discussion page where I put the unlock template explaining everything and rightly put that it was unnecessary, just to delete it, vandalizing my page discussion page Here is an example of the help I asked a librarian in Spanish on the subject and the ocelot librarian as a mafioso reverted the changes https://es.m.wikipedia.org/Especial:MobileDiff/152986729 and asked my ip ban without doing anything, I just ask for help to do justice, the user Ocelot asked for my IP ban and the mafia user LuchoCR thanked him for reverting my help changes on librarian pages and said yes to me ip ban requested by ocelot https://es.m.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Tablón_de_anuncios_de_los_bibliotecarios/Portal/Archivo/Nombres_inapropiados_y_vandalismo_persistente/Actual?markasread=52216326&markasreadwiki=eswiki#c-Ocelot-2023081016300 0-Block_Breach_10 there is a mob on[REDACTED] in Spanish that is why I ask you for help, please translate everything that appears in the links that I send you so that you understand MajinBaki(talk) 20:26, 10 August 2023 (UTC) MajinBaki (talk) 23:23, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Tom harrison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
NotAGenious (talk) 16:53, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! NotAGenious (talk) 11:33, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

User talk:Tom harrison: Difference between revisions Add topic