Misplaced Pages

User talk:TheDarkOneLives: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:52, 5 November 2017 editDoug Weller (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Oversighters, Administrators264,055 edits Only warning: Harassment of other users on Talk:Stand (R.E.M. song). (TW)← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:33, 5 October 2021 edit undoPrimeBOT (talk | contribs)Bots2,065,232 editsm Discretionary sanctions alerts, please read: Task 24: removal of a template following a TFDTag: AWB 
(15 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on {{#if:|]|my talk page}}, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome --> --] (]) 00:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC) I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on {{#if:|]|my talk page}}, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome --> --] (]) 00:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


== The murder of Vince Foster ==
''I've answered your question at the help desk.'' --] (]) 00:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


I just noticed your Oct 4, 2018, addition to the talk page of the "Suicide of Vince Foster" article. If you have any ideas as to how to fix that article, which is an utter journalistic atrocity in its current state, I'm all ears. The evidence is overwhelming that Mr. Foster was murdered. I'm disgusted by how Foster's death is portrayed in that article. If WP would at least rename the page "Death of Vince Foster", and provide both sides, I would be happy.
==Why did you turn blue==


If you like, see what I just wrote in the talk page. It is the last discussion there currently, entitled "The Suspicious Death of Vince Foster" - something like that, anyway.
Why did you turn blue honey? You were much sexier when you were red
== New Arbitration Request ==


] (]) 10:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
A request for arbitration has been filed with the Arbitration Committee that lists you as a party. The Arbitration Committee requires that all parties listed in an arbitration must be notified of the aribtration. You can review the request at. If you are unfamiliar with arbitration on Misplaced Pages, please refer to ]. ] (]) 06:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


== Discretionary sanctions alerts, please read ==
==Comment that TallNapoleon deleted from his talk page==


{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. ''It does '''not''' imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.''
I left this on TallNapoleon's talk page related to the "debate" regarding his Anti-Rand paper seen on either TallNapoleon's or TheJazzFan's page and he subsequently deleted it with the comment "not interested". Yes, he does seem to be averse to the truth.


You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called ] is in effect. Any administrator may impose ] on editors who do not strictly follow ], or the ], when making edits related to the topic.


For additional information, please see the ] and the ] decision ]. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> {{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. ''It does '''not''' imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.''


You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called ] is in effect. Any administrator may impose ] on editors who do not strictly follow ], or the ], when making edits related to the topic.
::"You pedantically assert that words have meaning and then proceed to dance around to avoid defining them. Jazz completely outed your fallacious methodology.


For additional information, please see the ] and the ] decision ]. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
::Your analogy of "faith" in God & in the sun rising is beyond absurd. One is observation of an event involving observable bodies with measureable properties and interacting in a known, observable fashion - even if the mechanism isn't completely understood there's nothing to suggest they'll interact in a different manner during a given period. You most certainly can prove the validity of the assertion that "the sun will rise" (i.e. the Earth will rotate) - you can see it happen. The sun never *stops* rising.
}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> ] ] 17:49, 3 August 2019 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2019 election voter message ==
::So-called "faith" in God is an amorphous urge that doesn't even rise to the level of a valid assertion given that it's related to some equally amorphous pseudo-entity you've failed to define, thereby rendering impossible anything that can be called a "belief" that's worthy of serious consideration. You're trying to avoid that evidence requires a criteria against which to evaluate it.


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
::Reason an evil idol? You're just another in a long line of folks trying to use reason to disprove the validity of reason, and as is always the case, utterly failing." ] (]) 15:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
<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.
== ] ==

This is a courtesy note notifying you that I have brought your recent posts to ]. ] (]) 08:53, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

::That's nice.] (]) 01:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

:::Noting with some amusement TallNap's current topic ban.] (]) 21:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

==On verifiability==
Misplaced Pages's reliance on published sources isn't an "adage" that is "tossed about", but has become one of the core policies of the project (see ] for the full explanation). It is necessary because, while any one individual may be capable of discerning for him or herself what is "truth" and what is "total crap", one cannot rely on the community of anonymous Wikipedians with their diversity of skills and motives to make good judgments for everybody without appeals to trusted authorities. The reliability of any particular source certainly can be put up for discussion on an article's talk page. What is of no use is discussing edits for which one can cite no reference. When engaging in such discussions, age and circulation are only two of many factors which can help gauge a source's reliability.

If you do not agree with the policy on verifiability, my suggestion would be to post your concerns at ]. Since a general consensus has built around the importance of verifiability as it has been stated, any actions you undertake contrary to it are likely to be reversed. --] (]) 23:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

* I'm not saying it's perfect. I'm saying it's Misplaced Pages (which is, by the way, not an academic project aiming to produce new knowledge but a popular project aiming to index and distribute existing knowledge). If you are privy to greater truths than those accepted here, the easy solution is to publish them independently. (i. e. "get a blog"). --] (]) 14:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

==Vote needed==

Votes are needed on the ] ] (]) 02:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

==]==
Hi, you appear to feel strongly about what Reliable Sources say about TJ's paternity of Sally Hemings' children, but are arguing against them rather than providing sources that support your personal opinion. It does not appear you have thoroughly read the Annette Gordon-Reed book or the material on the Thomas Jefferson Foundation (Monticello) website about this, nor the strong criticisms cited in the article about the minority Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society Scholars Report, which has demonstrated weaknesses. You are looking for DNA evidence from TJ that does not exist. Please stop insisting on the TJ TAlk page that editors support your personal views on this issue. Misplaced Pages is supposed to reflect the scholarship, and that about Jefferson has changed in the last decade.] (]) 15:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
:What I feel strongly about is that Misplaced Pages is supposed to state what the scholarship actually says, not offer an interpretation some would like to make. The conclusions are all qualified. '''''"You are looking for DNA evidence from TJ that does not exist"''''' That the evidence doesn't exist is an unalterable fact and it's improper to treat the evidence that does exist as if it is just as conclusive. It isn't and shouldn't be treated as if it is.] (]) 18:55, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

==]==
An editor has moved most of the historiography content on the "Jefferson-Hemings controversy" to a new article, ], but it has been recommended for speedy deletion as duplicating material in the ] article and not having included the Talk page discussions on this topic.] (]) 17:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

==Opinions/wide range of consensus needed==
Hi 'TheDarkOneLives', we are presently trying to decide where to place various sections on the Thomas Jefferson page. If interested please join us on the ] to help resolve the issue. -- ] (]) 21:12, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

==Jefferson-Hemings controversy==
Hi, I'm trying to understand your position on the section on Current Scholarship, and what you are looking for. I understand you disagree with scholars who have accepted the conclusion that Jefferson fathered Hemings' children, but new works deserve coverage. Fact: There are scholarly works which have been written since 2000 that include conclusions that Jefferson fathered Hemings' children (which I referred to as the consensus, as it has been referred to in other cited works.) Fact: Another scholarly effort that asserts this position is the current exhibit at the National Museum of American History, a collaboration by the Smithsonian/Monticello, which is considered ground-breaking for its treatment of slave families and Jefferson as slaveholder (I can give the cite). How would you treat these works and the exhibit? They are facts in the academic world; the scholarship of the last decade is part of the academic work on Jefferson and his life. Do you have specific works that you want to add to the discussion? The scholarship doesn't end with sources published in 2000 and 2001. ] (]) 22:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
:I've stated it in the talk page at the article. You've repeatedly inserted editorializing, assessments, etc. that are yours, not that of any referenced RS.] (]) 07:21, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
::Among other deletions, you deleted a cited paragraph that stated the existence of the 2012 Smithsonian exhibit on Jefferson and slavery. That is not my POV or editorializing, but yours. You seem to be interested in removing anything you don't agree with. When I added cites of reviews of each history noted, you deleted all that. That's your own POV and inappropriate. Why don't you add sources that comment on current scholarship, or don't you think that 12 years of scholarship has to be accounted for?] (]) 14:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi,<br>
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current ]. The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages ]. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to ] and submit your choices on ]. For the Election committee, ] (]) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692203726 -->

== ]: Voting now open! ==

{{Ivmbox|Hello, TheDarkOneLives. Voting in the ''']''' is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.


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. 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 2016 election, please review ] and submit your choices on ''']'''. ] (]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) 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. ] (]) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
</td></tr>
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/30&oldid=750612131 -->
<!-- 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/03&oldid=926750323 -->

== November 2017 ==
] ] and thank you for ]. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a ], talk pages such as ] are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on ] and the project ], ] about the topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting ] and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-chat1 --> <span style="color:#D70270;background-color:white;">Sum</span><span style="color:#734F96;background-color:white;">mer</span><span style="color:#0038A8;background-color:white;">PhD</span><sup>]</sup> 02:13, 2 November 2017 (UTC)


== November 2020 ==
] Please refrain from using talk pages such as ] for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on ] and the project ]; they are ]. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting ] and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See ] for more information. ''Article talk pages aren't a forum where you can comment on Misplaced Pages or its editors. Use Jimbo's talk page if you must.''<!-- Template:uw-chat2 --> ] ] 12:23, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
<div class="user-block" style="padding: 5px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; border: 1px solid #a9a9a9; background-color: #ffefd5; min-height: 40px">]<div style="margin-left:45px">You have been ''']''' ''']''' from editing because it appears that you are ]. </div><div style="margin-left:45px">If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the ], then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;''}}. &nbsp;] (]) 08:34, 29 November 2020 (UTC)</div></div><!-- Template:Uw-nothereblock -->


:Damn, I hadn't noticed the earlier warning. Consider mine a final warning in that case. ] ] 12:24, 5 November 2017 (UTC) If you want to rant about your political opponents, there are plenty of places on the internet where you can do that. You can't do that here, though. ] (]) 08:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC)


{{unblock reviewed|1=This block is capricious, based on exactly one issue after a number of years on Misplaced Pages. I removed text on the ] article that states as definitive fact that she will be VP and referring to Biden as President-elect and I clearly stated the reasons why I removed it. As is well known as of this time vote counts in several states are being contested in the courts and the official process to declare a President-elect has not been completed, Biden has *not* been declared President-elect by a body that has official, legal standing, no other entity matters and citing sources that have no legal standing - Forbes, Pew Research Center - is meaningless and an invalid citation. This is a fact per US election law and the Constitutional process. ] ignored this reality and reverted the edit - with the editorial comment "Not this again". By "this" apparently they mean the legal reality of the election process. They don't like that I called them on it on their talk page. If you knowingly promote material that's not fact, then you're promoting a narrative. They further took it upon themselves to look at my contribution history and revert another edit I made, again based on fact - ]'s "Early Life" begins at his birth, what some ancestor of his did two centuries before he was born isn't part of Kemp's early life, it was clearly inserted to try and connect his name with slavery. Note Volunteer Marek's latest commentary, asserting that the section is about his "family history". No, it isn't - it's titled "Early Life".


To say I'm "clearly not interested in building an encyclopedia" is editorializing not backed up by reality. I'm not the one clogging Misplaced Pages with material that's factually wrong, invalidly cited - if someone *is* doing that you should look at them with a suspicious eye. ]'s objectivity should be scrutinized as well. ] (]) 09:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC)|decline= Misplaced Pages summarizes what independent ] state, not necessarily what is official or legal. Almost all reliable sources state that Biden/Harris won the election because they can do math and do not need to wait for formalities to occur. They also don't need to wait for legal challenges without evidence(that's not my opinion, but what judges have said) to be finished(Trump lost again in PA. last night). If you disagree with what the sources say, you will need to take that up with them first and get them to to retract their reporting(good luck). Given your posts and unwillingness to collaborate with others regardless of political viewpoint, I would only consider unblocking you if you agreed to not make edits related to American politics. You are free to make another request to attempt to convince another administrator to unblock you without such a condition, though I think that unlikely. I am declining this request. ] (]) 10:10, 29 November 2020 (UTC) }}
] This is your '''only warning'''; if you purposefully and blatantly ] a fellow Wikipedian again, as you did at ], you may be '''] without further notice'''. ''Your deletion of an editor's comment here was obvious retaliation for the warning you were given by that editor.''<!-- Template:uw-harass4im --> ] ] 12:52, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:33, 5 October 2021

Welcome!

Hello, TheDarkOneLives, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --barneca (talk) 00:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

The murder of Vince Foster

I just noticed your Oct 4, 2018, addition to the talk page of the "Suicide of Vince Foster" article. If you have any ideas as to how to fix that article, which is an utter journalistic atrocity in its current state, I'm all ears. The evidence is overwhelming that Mr. Foster was murdered. I'm disgusted by how Foster's death is portrayed in that article. If WP would at least rename the page "Death of Vince Foster", and provide both sides, I would be happy.

If you like, see what I just wrote in the talk page. It is the last discussion there currently, entitled "The Suspicious Death of Vince Foster" - something like that, anyway.

Vcuttolo (talk) 10:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alerts, please read

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 17:49, 3 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) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

November 2020

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:34, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

If you want to rant about your political opponents, there are plenty of places on the internet where you can do that. You can't do that here, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

TheDarkOneLives (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

This block is capricious, based on exactly one issue after a number of years on Misplaced Pages. I removed text on the Kamala Harris article that states as definitive fact that she will be VP and referring to Biden as President-elect and I clearly stated the reasons why I removed it. As is well known as of this time vote counts in several states are being contested in the courts and the official process to declare a President-elect has not been completed, Biden has *not* been declared President-elect by a body that has official, legal standing, no other entity matters and citing sources that have no legal standing - Forbes, Pew Research Center - is meaningless and an invalid citation. This is a fact per US election law and the Constitutional process. Volunteer Marek ignored this reality and reverted the edit - with the editorial comment "Not this again". By "this" apparently they mean the legal reality of the election process. They don't like that I called them on it on their talk page. If you knowingly promote material that's not fact, then you're promoting a narrative. They further took it upon themselves to look at my contribution history and revert another edit I made, again based on fact - Brian Kemp's "Early Life" begins at his birth, what some ancestor of his did two centuries before he was born isn't part of Kemp's early life, it was clearly inserted to try and connect his name with slavery. Note Volunteer Marek's latest commentary, asserting that the section is about his "family history". No, it isn't - it's titled "Early Life".

To say I'm "clearly not interested in building an encyclopedia" is editorializing not backed up by reality. I'm not the one clogging Misplaced Pages with material that's factually wrong, invalidly cited - if someone *is* doing that you should look at them with a suspicious eye. NinjaRobotPirate's objectivity should be scrutinized as well. TheDarkOneLives (talk) 09:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Misplaced Pages summarizes what independent reliable sources state, not necessarily what is official or legal. Almost all reliable sources state that Biden/Harris won the election because they can do math and do not need to wait for formalities to occur. They also don't need to wait for legal challenges without evidence(that's not my opinion, but what judges have said) to be finished(Trump lost again in PA. last night). If you disagree with what the sources say, you will need to take that up with them first and get them to to retract their reporting(good luck). Given your posts and unwillingness to collaborate with others regardless of political viewpoint, I would only consider unblocking you if you agreed to not make edits related to American politics. You are free to make another request to attempt to convince another administrator to unblock you without such a condition, though I think that unlikely. I am declining this request. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 29 November 2020 (UTC)


If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.