Misplaced Pages

User talk:Morton devonshire: 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 20:30, 11 November 2006 view sourceSeabhcan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,216 edits →Please Stop← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:10, 28 August 2024 view source MKsLifeInANutshell (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,128 edits Notification: listing of The Whole Experience at WP:Articles for deletion.Tag: Twinkle 
(920 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{message}} {{pp|small=y}}
{{not around|date=November 2007}}
==My work here is done==
]
Aye, I've been dodging the conclusion for months. Tweaking the PrisonPlanet.com people kept me in the game, but I can't avoid it anymore: There's just not much Wiki-violatin' vanity-conspiracy-spamology left to delete! I leave it to you all to monitor for the time being -- I'm going on an indefinite Wikibreak, and moving on to more productive enterprises. See you all at the Grove! Cheers to all of you, on both sides of the rabbit hole -- it's been a real pleasure. Call me on the Bat Phone if anything comes up. </font><small><span style="border: 1px solid #F06A0F">]]</span></small><span style="color:#ffffff;"> · </span> 19:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
:Sad to see you go. You take care man! It has been an interesting venture with you here. Peace to you good friend. ] <small>]/]</small> 19:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
:You've done work to be proud of. Take care, ] <sup>]</sup> 01:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
::I hope you can be productive. ] (]) 00:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


<div style="float:left; border:1px solid #000000; margin:2px;">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px; background:#FFFFFF;"
| style="width:45px; height:45px; background:#FFFFFF; text-align:center; font-size:14pt; color:black;" | ''']'''
| style="font-size:8pt; padding:4pt; line-height:1.25em; color:black;" | This user is a member of the '''Counter-Propaganda Unit'''
|}</div>


Hey Morton,
<div class="toccolours" style="width:80ex;">
just thought you might like to see this piece on you taken from prisonplanet.com;
<span style="text-align:center; font-size:1.4em;display:block;">
]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Discussion Conventions
</span>
* Please post new messages at the bottom of the page to prevent confusion.
* Please sign your comments. Type <code><span style="background-color:white; border-style:solid; border-color:#7f9db9; border-width:1px;"><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></span></code> after your text or use the ].
* Please use section headings to separate conversation topics.
* Caveat: '''Please keep in mind that I don't necessarily agree with the thoughts expressed by others on this page.'''
</div><!-- Please do not edit this line -->


You're famous dude!--] (]) 01:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
{| class="infobox" width="270px"
|-
!align="center"|]<br>]
----
]<br>
]<br>
]<br>
]<br>
|}<!--Template:Archivebox-->
----


Hey Morton! What have you been up to? Been keeping up with the Joneses? ] (]) 02:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
== Further to my previous comments ==


::You go, I'm back. Have fun in the Grove. Say hi to Hilary for me. ;)
I see that you have archived my previous message and have not acted on any of it. This is not in your own best interests. I am quite impartial as to the content dispute, and am solely interested in maintaining Misplaced Pages. You cannot be seen as a credible participant in the content dispute while you have ] in its present form. It would be a good idea to withdraw your remark here.
::But seriously, I wonder what really keeps you ticking. Do you really believe you did the right thing? &#151;&nbsp;] ♫☺♥♪ <small>]</small> 19:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


:In case you ever eventually read this: I didn't know you at the time but you seem to have been doing awesome work. I also borrowed and adapted (and adopted) ], then ] inspired from material on one of your pages. Who knows, maybe other people will also use them in your memory. I hope you're doing well, —]] – 11:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
And you cannot refuse to take part in an Arbcom case. You need to tsake it seriously.--] 11:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
:Thank you for your comment, but your a little late to the ballgame. I've made my peace with Tyrenius, and have made the changes to my user and subpages that were requested. Moreover, the Arbcom was denied. ] 18:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


== The mice have grown bold. ==
::You don’t appear to have understood the ArbCom rules very well. I would suggest that you re-read them again, because you're not out of the woods yet. It takes FOUR arbitrators to deny or accept the case, and if it gets four accept votes, it will be accepted regardless of who or how many voted deny previous to that. Granted, that’s unlikely now because I have seen that in most cases when the first one votes to not accept, the rest generally follow suit.


Yes, it's happening again. Eternal vigilance is needed!
::Finally, you need to stop archiving your talk page when there are still open issues on it. Its uncivil and will reflect poorly on you if you continue to do so. --] 18:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
*]
:::Shortfuse, as was stated by the one party that has declined to review the case, all parties can be examined...this means that your edits and activitiues can also be under review. Making bold statements about banning people that you are in dispute with is not a good thing to be doing and Misplaced Pages is not a place for advocacy of conspiracy theory jargon. Continuing to taunt Morton here is not likely to give you the results you desire.--] 19:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
*]
It's dire, Morton. Most dire.--]] 20:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


== Take Two: Request for change in consensus ==
Runcorn, I have made further changes to address your concerns. I thought I had made the changes that you requested, and that the matter was over -- that's why I archived. For the sake of keeping peace, I have made additional changes. ] 20:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


Take Two: Request for change in consensus. Change title to "Franklin Child Abuse Allegations"
== fbi ==


"A small group of editors can reach a consensual decision, but when the article gains wider attention, others may then disagree. The original group should not block further change on grounds that they already have made a decision. No one person, and no (limited) group of people, can unilaterally declare that community consensus has changed, or that it is fixed and determined."
Hi, I've continued the discussion on: ]. Would you please take a look? &#151;&nbsp;] <small>]</small> 10:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


The existing title "Franklin Coverup Hoax" is, in the opinion of many who have commented (Gyrofrog, Awfultin, Wayne, Tom1976, Conexion, Apostle 12), fatally biased. To start out saying that the subject material is a "hoax" is indefensible, especially when that point of view is hardly universal. A specially called county grand jury used the word "hoax;" that is all. And there is ample reason to believe that those who comprised the jury had a vested interest in protecting local people.
== WAAAAHHH ==


In the previous section, various editors commented on their support for, or opposition to, a name change to "Franklin Coverup Incident." Those who commented over the space of several days included Sherurcij, PopeFauveXXIII, Wayne, Orange Mike, Apostle12, and Rosicrucian.
What a pity, such a great contribution such as that was lost.--] 20:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


Orange Mike came up with a suggestion: How about "Franklin Child Abuse Allegations"? Neutral, takes no position regarding "hoax" or "coverup" claims.
== Jimbo Wales on user pages ==


I '''support''' this newly proposed title change and am asking for additional comments at this time from concerned editors. ] (]) 20:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I thought you might like to see this contribution from ] , especially his point that "using userpages to attack people or campaign for or against anything or anyone is a bad idea". I am not suggesting at the moment that you should change anything. Indeed, I am not currently acting in my capacity as an admin, merely making a friendly gesture as one editor to another to keep you informed. I have no doubt, however, that you will wish to review your user pages to ensure that they are in conformity wirh Jimbo's views. Good luck.--] 14:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
:The userpage is fine, and he has already made adjustments.--] 16:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
:: (refactored to avoid repeating libel) but it seems that including this adds nothing to the project anyway. Why not take it down? --] 16:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
:::I will continue to alter my edits to conform to Misplaced Pages policy, and will change my edits to address perceived problems (the two are not necessarily the same). Having said that, I do not believe that I have violated BLP, but I will make the change to keep the peace. I will continue to (a) ensure that Misplaced Pages articles which address conspiracy theories adhere to Misplaced Pages policies of no original research, (b) cite to reliable sources, (c) express facts without employing synthesis to advocate a particular position ensuring a neutral point of view, (d) do not provide undue weight to a particular set of facts, and (e) describe notable subjects where notability is addressed by reference to third-party reputable sources. ] 16:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
::::Thanks for that. I am still unhappy with the unreferenced negative statements you make about David Icke and Paul Thomson. In my opinion, using weasel words ("many have described as...") is almost worse than the previous version. I would urge you to ensure that any claims like this you make on your user page conforms fully with policy. I would also ask you to review the value of having material like this on your user page, however well-sourced. Thanks again --] 03:29, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
:::::] has a whole section of his Misplaced Pages article dedicated to . It seems that David Icke's encyclopedia arcticle would be a better place to start refactoring than an editors user page. --] 03:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
::::::Yes, it has, as I noticed when I read it prior to my last post. I don't have any issue with the (referenced) article on Icke. It is very clear from reading the article that Icke has denied being an anti-Semite. It is less clear, as I said, why this material is germane on a user page. --] 03:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


== Image:TinFoilHat_Superfriends.jpg listed for deletion ==
(further clarification) The Misplaced Pages article on ] is balanced, and clearly shows that Icke has refuted these accusations. Your page appears imbalanced and a POV attack as it only shows one side of the story. If you review ] alongside I hope you can see why what you have contravenes policy. Even worse than that apparent breach of policy, I think it stands in the way of collegial discussion when you have material that opinionated on your user page. As Jimbo says, "using userpages to attack people or campaign for or against anything or anyone is a bad idea".
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} ] <sup>]</sup> 15:33, 26 May 2008 (UTC) <!-- Template:Idw -->
Can you at the very least please provide a reference for the "pseudonym" claim, and consider just removing that, the "cruft so crazy it would be funny" comment and the anti Semitism claim, in line with policy, with Jimbo's clearly expressed preference, and with maintaining harmonious and constructive working relations with other editors? Thank you for your consideration and the spirit of compromise you have shown in making the changes you already have. --] 20:33, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
:Guinnog, the POV pushing that folks like Morton deal with leaves little room at times for compromise. Their ongoing attempts to misuse Misplaced Pages as an advocacy platform for their conspiracy theories is something that doesn't have to be condoned at any time. Morton has made some alterations to his userpage that is in keeping with with the current policy, maybe a couple other areas could use some reduction in opinion. If this is the only userpage that details an editors major emphasis to the project, that would be news to me. If Morton wishes to demostrate on his userpage the articles he is glad to see deleted or the ones he thinks shjould be, there is no reason he can't. There is also no reaosn he can't provide, as a disclaimer, his major emphasis on this project to keep 9/11 conspiracy theory rhetoric minimized in accordance with the undue weight clause of NPOV. I support Morton's efforts to keep this nonsense on Misplaced Pages in it's proper place.--] 20:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


== Image:Kat_man_doo.png listed for deletion ==
::Rather than waste any more time on this, I will further sanitize my userpage. Quite frankly, this is beginning to feel oppressive to me, and I hope that you will take that into consideration. I reviewed your Rfa, and I can't help but notice that of the people that opposed your Sysops status, many of them opined that you seem to not let go of things until someone aligns with your point of view, particularly in the area of 7WTC conspiracy theories.
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} ] ] 23:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC) <!-- Template:Idw -->


== Image:Morton_hoodie.png listed for deletion ==
::I am not going away. I will continue to: (1) ensure that Misplaced Pages articles which address conspiracy theories adhere to Misplaced Pages policies of no original research, (2) cite to reliable sources, (3) express facts without employing synthesis to advocate a particular position ensuring a neutral point of view, (4) do not provide undue weight to a particular set of facts, and (5) describe notable subjects where notability is addressed by reference to third-party reputable sources.
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} <!-- Template:Idw --> ] ] 01:35, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


==Fair use rationale for File:Purple punch.jpg==
::If you wish to show me some good will, I would appreciate your assistant with the new Phenomena article that I am creating and that is linked-to below. Thank you. ] 21:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to ''']'''. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under ] but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to ] and edit it to include a ].


If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no fair use rationale-notice --> ] (]) 17:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Thanks for revising your user page in the manner I suggested, and for your interesting comment on my RfA. I'm sorry that it felt oppressive, and I'm glad you don't plan to go away, as I value your contributions. I will have a think about the request, and I will certainly help in any way that I can. --] 23:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


==AfD==
==]==
Please see: ].] (]) 17:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Rather than waste my time arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, I have started a project page at ]. The purpose of the project is to draft an article summarizing how the 9/11 conspiracy theory phenomena is described in mainstream reliable sources. I encourage you to visit the page and add your thoughts. I'm aiming for a neutral plain-Jane description of the movement. ] 05:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
:Hi Morton. I just added that Vanity Fair article you asked about to the CTPP page. (Unfortunately, all the pages have simply been scanned in as JPGs, so it's extremely annoying to read, but at least it's there.) Sorry it took me a while, but my Wikistress level has gone through the roof in the last 24 hours, to the point where I'm damn close to walking away from this place. (Nothing to do with anything 9/11 related; you can plow through my user contributions looking for ] refs and comments on other's user talk pages if you're really interested.) --] 00:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
::BLP is finally getting some notice from Upper Echelons -- bout friggin' time. See e-mail from me regarding the topic. ] 02:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
==Tarpley==
What a surprise. Guess we found ourselves another afd candidate. I'll nominate it. --] 00:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
*Done. ]--] 00:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
**Oh, now you're just being mean! Soon, we'll have no conspiracy articles left! --] 04:26, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


<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 ].
== RE: No more AfDs ==


The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.
LOL, one part of wikipedia decrustified, 9,999,999 more to go. Someone should put together a War on Cruft campaign ribbon. ] 00:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC)


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 template from the top of the article. ] (]) 21:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
== A little more info, please, if you will? ==


== Notification of automated file description generation ==
It is not that I disagree with your edits on the 9/11 CD theory article, I just think the rationale would merit some more discussion. Please would you drop by ] where I have set up a couple of subheadings. We're trying to build consensus on what I know you know is a contentious and difficult article. Nothing is being done to prevent an editor from being bold, as you have been, naturally. It's just that knowing a little more there about your thought processes would be beneficial. In case you are wondering where I stand (ie pro or anti conspiracy theory) I can tell you clearly that I stand on no side, though feel conspiracy is unlikely. I am just interested in the quality of the article. which, as we know, is about the CD Conspiracy Theory, and is not about the collapse itself. I don't need a personal reply ] 09:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Your upload of ] or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.
:Did it. ] 21:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)


This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions ]. Thanks!<!--Template:Un-botfill--> ''Message delivered by ] (])'' 14:53, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
== Conspiracy links in Latin wikipedia ==


== ] ==
I suspect some external links in ] should be removed, but I don't know which ones in particular. Would you like to have a look? Thanks, ] 12:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
:Perfectus. Dabit Deus his quaque finem. Sorry, my college Latin is almost gone! ] 15:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
== Which list? ==
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692007949 -->
I don't know which list to add this to - not an AfD, but a DRV. . ] 18:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
==File source problem with File:Blood hound missile.jpg==
:I fixed the problem by writing the article that should have been written to begin with, tagging her article repeatedly to get it cleaned up to cite reliable sources, and she became notable in the interim, as the press discovered her this week because of the tight race. Anyway, I hope admins will respect process in the future, rather than changing consensus based on IRC chat. ] 19:37, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
]
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the ].


If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion -->
==Jim Hoffman==
We could use your input at ] article. --] 00:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


Please refer to the ''']''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a . If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] <sup>]</sup> 09:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
== Re: War on Freedom AfD ==
== File:Can you hear me now.png listed for discussion ==
] A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] ] ] 00:46, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


== Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago ==
Hi Morton,


{{User QAIbox
I saw it. I'll notify the five people who voted to update their votes. ] 00:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
| title = Awesome
:Okay, you beat me to it. Thanks. ] 00:30, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
| image = Cscr-featured.svg
::Cruft... Cruft... It's everywhere! ] <small>]/]</small> 20:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
| image_upright = 0.35
| bold = ]
}}
--] (]) 06:23, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
== PEST nomination ==
<blockquote>Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
I wonder if we would agree about ] as well.--] 02:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
:BDS was just up less than a month ago and survived. I'd like to keep it, myself... --] 03:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
:Naah. One is by a notable political columnist the other is by a non-notable psychologist.--] 03:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
::But both are non-notable jokes that lost their relevance a long time ago. Krauthammer may be notable, but not every silly thing he says is. Anyway, was just curious, not interested in debating the issue. have a nice day.--] 04:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 21:33, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
I am opposing deletion of PEST. I have added a couple more reliable sources to the EL section (will make them proper cites if the article survives). This is a notable term that I hear Rush Limbaugh use at least once a week, and have heard Matt Drudge use the term on his radio show. Plus, this article gives exposure to the moonbattery and mentally unhinged state of the left, which is a good thing. ] 17:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
== ] ==
<blockquote>Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
You seem to have replaced the contents of this redirect page with the actual text "The close said delete, not redirect." That is not an appropriate encyclopedia article. If you believe the redirect is not appropriate and should be deleted, we can discuss the deletion with an admin, but doing "your own deletions" this way is not appropriate. I believe the redirect is not a recreation of the deleted text, per ]. Frankly I do agree the article was not sufficiently notable in itself. However, it is good enough for a paragraph in the article of ]. If the AfD for that succeeds, the redirect should certainly be removed, however if it doesn't, as I believe it will not, after the rewrite, then the redirect should also stay. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:55, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
:I believe that you created the redirect in bad faith, directly contradicting the remarks of the closing admin, which clearly state "delete", and say NOTHING about a redirect. ] 23:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
:: There is a certain policy that you should ], actually :-). However, that's beside the point. If you want to assume that I'm malicious, I don't know how to stop you. I could mention that I'm not one of your "walled garden" people, that I have not been editing 9/11 conspiracy articles, and so forth. But in any case - assume I am the most horrible thing you can assume. That is still not a justification for creating an unencyclopedic article. ]. Again, if you want the thing deleted, ask an admin. She may very well delete it, at which point I will wait for the AfD to be closed, then ask politely to restore the redirect, as a useful redirect. But I am quite sure she will not revert the article to your text. ] <sup>]</sup> 23:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
:::You deliberately went against the closing admin, and you're calling me disruptive? Don't waste my time. ] 23:44, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
:::: Nominating it for speedy deletion is appropriate. No problem there. It's just replacing it with text that bothered me. ] <sup>]</sup> 23:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 21:36, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
:::::Well, it's gone now, so apparently your trick didn't work. ] 00:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
FYI: now that the JWW AfD is over, I ] the W3 redirect with the admin who did the , and they did restore it, as I had hoped. Just so you don't feel that this is happening in secret. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
<blockquote>Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use</blockquote>
:Bizarre! I had ] on my watch list, and your action didn't even show up. What's up with that? ] 01:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
== James W. Walter ==


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
Hi Morton, thanks for getting in touch. As the closing admin I took into account the substantial rewrite of the article, the rationales of those who had expressed opinions, and when they had expressed them. As the AfD was 5 days old yet the debate had largely focussed on a very different version of the article I felt this relisting was the fairest course of action to take. On a general point, AfD discussions are not "votes" that can be boiled down to a ratio or percentage (unlike, say, requests for adminship), but are a place to express opinions about a given article which are then considered by an admin. I have absolutely no interest or axe to grind with this topic, I simply took a decision based on the available information. The article is now being discussed with the new sources, and this will lead to a much more complete picture of community opinion. Please give me a shout if you have any other questions. <b>]</b> <small>]</small> 00:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks for the explanation. ] 00:38, 14 October 2006 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 21:45, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
== The Counter-Propaganda Unit makes <s>worldwide</s> <s>wikiwide</s> local campus news! ==
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
We've been found out! Activate plan G643BVZ-R/7 '''immediately'''!
<blockquote>Misuse of wikipedia as a webhost, no foreseeable encyclopedic use</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
*]
*
*]


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
Heh heh heh... --] 06:29, 14 October 2006 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 21:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
::Very funny. Heh, can you send me a link to the Afd -- I can't find it. Sadly, Guinnog won't even let me use the Che image because he says it violates the spirit of the license, which he says requires users to use the image "for the good of the revolution". Which is even funnier. So, Mao had to step in. Keep chuggin Comrade. ] 16:51, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
:::The AfD is at ]. Che still lives on my page for now, since the userbox is hand-created. Unless someone starts checking for individual links to the Che image, it should be okay. --] 03:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
<blockquote>Misuse of wikipedia as a webhost, no foreseeable encyclopedic use</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
If we wanted to use the Che image to further the revolution, where would we find it?
--] 03:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
:I don't dare directly link, for the safety of the revolution, but one may wish to look for an image entitled "CheHigh.jpg". --] 03:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 21:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
::For the revolution. Oh, the copyright actually says "The copyright holder allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that it is used to propagate the memory of Ernesto 'Che' Guevara." So I suspect if you use the the image with the tag "A trnbute to the memory of Che Guevara" we'd be okay. Maybe build a user box that says "A tribute to the memory of Che Guevara" and put it at the bottom of all these AfD's. --] 04:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
==Thanks==
<blockquote>Misuse of wikipedia as a webhost, no foreseeable encyclopedic use</blockquote>
Thanks a lot for the mail, Morton. (I will avoid the one you mentioned in future.) --] 10:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
== ] - It just gets better and better ==


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
Look at who just voted '''strong delete'''! Ha ha ha! --] 03:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 22:44, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
: You might get another barnstar for for protecting the project. Way to go! ] <small>]/]</small> 03:42, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
::Check out Jimbo's tongue-lashing of the Spark. ] 04:15, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
<blockquote>unused, low-res, no obvious use</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
:::Maybe he's finally realizing all the crap that's out there, considering his own article came to the BLP notification board. Check out this highly notable ] ] 04:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
::::Just a guess, but I get the feeling the Klausutis AfD is going to close as either "no consensus" or, worse, as a full-blown "keep", and that's going to be the straw that broke the camel's back. --] 05:01, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify -->
:::::I hope you're right. ] could use some major reworking. The ] article is completely disgusting. Can you imagine being her husband, knowing that the first Google result on your dead wife's name is an article directing you to Joe Scarborough? What a legacy! The Leftists will stop at nothing to make their point. Do we not have any morals on Misplaced Pages? ] 05:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
:::::::That's why there needs to be no redirect or an article even. The delete button sure looks juicy at this point.--] 05:14, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


<span style="color:red;font-weight:bold;">This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual file for details.</span> Thanks, ] (]) 01:01, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
:::::::Morals? I didn't realize I'd come to the "joke of the day" page. ] 13:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
:::::I am cautiously optimistic. The closing admin is supposed to weigh the arguments (i.e. it's not a vote). I don't know how you weight Jimbo's 'Strong Delete' against any other arguments. Also Fred Bauder, arbcom member, weighed in earlier with 'delete'. That will make a nice note at the top of the article after the 5th day. And don't kid yourself about keeping it opening a lot of introspection. You would be even more disgusted at what we've been fighting about Klausutis on the Scarborough page. --] 05:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
<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.
::::::Oh, I know it won't result in any introspection amongst the ]. But it will result in some amongst instrospection amongst the Jimbotariat. And when all is said and done, his is the only opinion that counts. One post from him to WikiEN-L and all hell could break loose. (Cf. Kelly Martin and the Great Userboxen Uprising of 2006, which was entirely due to a single line in one of Jimbo's mailing list posts, IIRC. Not that I in any way think her actions there were a good thing; I think it caused immense long-term damage to the entire project. I'm just saying, when Jimbo even ''hints'' that a change is needed somewhere, a lot of people will start attempting to implement that change before the words even finish coming out of his mouth.) --] 05:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
:::::::I don't think Jimbo will comment on it again. not on the mailing list either. But I will be looking. --] 05:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


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 until the discussion has finished.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> <b>] ]</b> 17:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::::He may well not, but hey, I can dream. --] 18:59, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

:::::'''Note to Closing admin''' Fred Bauder, arbcom member commented '''delete''' and Jimbo Wales, founder, commented '''Strong Delete''' and pointed out that the arguments for keep were not convincing. --] 05:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

::::::] needs some major reworking and needs to be voted into full guideline status as well; Sandy can attest to that. We're getting spammed like crazy with articles that are blatant political advertisements. Check your email, Morton. --] 05:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

::::::If the Klausutis article does get deleted, it needs protection from re-creation. Need to add that to note to closing admin. ] <small>]/]</small> 13:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

:::::::Copying an opponent's campaign ad into a biography is an advertisement? (Supporting a politician whose article didn't have a DRV after an AfD by the way.) No, that's an attackisement (using an attack advertisement as the source for a neutral, unbiased, NPOV edit): advertisement is more simple&mdash;using the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee as a "reliable source". ] 13:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Here's what Jimbo Wales said today in response to former Misplaced Pages founder and now rival Larry Sanger's announcement of Misplaced Pages competitor Citizendium:

"Since then, the encyclopedia's other founder, Jimmy Wales, has taken some steps to bring more order to the Misplaced Pages approach, although he has avoided using authority figures such as editors. Asked in an e-mail exchange how such disagreements should be resolved, Mr Wales replied: “With strong support for individual rights, and respect for reason.” His e-mail went on: “It is the fundamental responsibility of every individual to- think-, to- judge-, to-decide-. We must never abdicate that responsibility, not to the collective, not to Britannica, not to Misplaced Pages, not to anyone.”

Full article at . ] 00:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Morton, I have what must be a naïve question about the Lori Klausutis deletion discussion. Why on earth is this so controversial?

To set the scene for the question, I have no idea nor interest in whetehr any of the participants are left wing or right wing. I simply care, asyou may have guessed with my intervention at the periphery of the 9/11 controlled deletion hypothesis article, about making the <u>articles</u> better, and able to be viewed correctly as NPOV, etc. I don't give a monkey's about US politics. So why is this article and its deletion so controversial? ] 19:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

: You're pretty much answering your own question. MD is a controversial Misplaced Pages editor who, according to his user page, ''does'' "give a monkey's about US politics". So are many of his friends and enemies. So this is yet another battleground between those who care more about politics than the Misplaced Pages, some of which exist on each side of this argument. But don't sweat it, they're roughly evenly matched, so you, and those who feel like you, will likely carry the day. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

::Thanks Mouse, but I like to answer my own questions. Here’s the bottom line for me: My chief objection to Misplaced Pages is that it is used as a political battleground, rather than as an encyclopedia. I believe that there are objective, neutral ways to discuss controversial subjects, including 9/11 Conspiracy Theories. We can do this and still follow Misplaced Pages rules by summarizing what third parties have reported in objective reliable sources ], and not trying to argue or synthesize these points ]. Unfortunately, that’s not what happens on controversial subjects, as people here often cite to extraordinarily subjective sources, such as blogs, slant and mischaracterize comments, and most egregiously, try to use Misplaced Pages to argue on behalf of their own pet theory (e.g. that the WTC towers were brought down by “controlled demolition”, violating ]. I don’t object to describing “controlled demotion” theories by citing to mainstream reputable sources – that’s okay – but trying to prove these theories by relying on blog sources violates our rules. Because of the way Google ranks Misplaced Pages results, often these articles are created about non-notable persons or subjects for the purpose of creating notariety about and advancing these pet theories. For those articles, the solution is not to try to fight off the daily POV-advancement, but to eliminate the articles entirely, because they are written about subjects which are not discussed widely enough in mainstream sources to warrant notability, or to be able to evaluate what the objective facts are. Hence, the efforts of myself and my fellow editors to delete these articles.

::The Lori Klausutis article is a special case. If you look through Gamaliel’s and others comments with respect to the subject, you will begin to understand that the article was created to disparage Joe Scarborough. The mainstream press says that Klausutis’ death was from natural causes, and there is absolutely no evidence that Scarborough is involved at all. So why does Misplaced Pages need an article about her describing thoroughly discredited facts? It’s just overkill, and not a subject that’s taken at all seriously in the mainstream press. For that reason, it’s not encyclopedic, because Misplaced Pages REQUIRES that objective reputable sources have spoken about the subject at length. Let me say again, there are ZERO reports in the mainstream press which say that Scarborough is implicated in Klausutis’ death. ZERO. Misplaced Pages is not the press, and we are not first-party publishers of original reporting. So why is there an article? To try to make Scarborough look bad, that’s all. That’s not the Misplaced Pages way. ] 21:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

:::Thanks, Morton. I had a feeling that woudl be the case. And, Mouse, I know MD is viewed as controversial, though what he has said in his reply is flat and fair enough, and very much aligned with my own view - that we are creating an encyclopaedia, not a tabloid. ] 21:29, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

== quick note ==

Hey Morton,

I don't mind if you comment on articles that you add or move around at ] but would you mind signing your comments? Otherwise people attribute them to me.

Keep up the good work,
] 13:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

:Roger. ] 18:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

== Thanks ==

Thanks for the barnstar! ] 01:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Haha, yeah thanks. --] 01:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

==User:GabrielF/911TMCruft==

Just a quick note. I was thinking this one should be added to the list. Mostly more cruft from Mr. Jones. ] Thanks, ] 02:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

== You should be made aware of this ==

]. --] 06:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

== spam ==
Please do not spam my talk page again with regard to AFD. I neither need nor appreciate yours or anyone else's thanks or solicitations on this or any other AFD. If you must thank me again, a personally tailored note would be less tacky than a template; that extra bit of effort shows that you actually mean it. ] 07:37, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
:How gracious of you to turn a thank you into an opportunity to attack me. Don't feel like you gotta hold back your feelings Matey. I hope we can be good friends. ] 10:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

::I came over to thank you for the thoughtful daisies, Morton. It's rare that anything we do on Wiki *really* matters in the "real world"; I'm sure the deletion of that tragic article made a difference to Lori's family. Best, ] (]) 13:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

:::Thanks for the good spam. It shows that we can make a difference, and I am sure this woman’s family appreciates the fact that Misplaced Pages didn’t keep a tabloid type article on her to smear someone’s reputation. Again, keep me informed of this type article so we can keep this project presenting only proper material. Later - ] <small>]/]</small> 17:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your message, I am interested in edits not editors. I don't know you; how could I take an interest in you? Your edits interest me. I take no notice of you beyond the context of those edits. Just as admins should not involve themselves in articles they edit, you should avoid rewriting any policy the day after an adminstrator refers to it regarding your behavior.

As to spam, I don't care for it including thanks; I didn't leave my comments as a favor to you or to anyone else. That's not just you &mdash; I also don't care to be thanked for RFA votes; it's obnoxious. I especially don't care for votestacking solicitation spams. Thank you. ] 01:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
:You have the timeline wrong -- what I sent you was a thank you AFTER the Afd was complete. You seem to be a very angry person -- I am concerned that you would immediately remove my comments on your talk page. That's not a common practice here. Maybe you ought to consider taking some time away from Misplaced Pages. I wish you the best. ] 01:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

::I know when you sent the thanks. I also know that you routinely send solicitations, about 50 , and not much has changed. I don't care for either. Also, I'm not ''angry'' at all. ''Annoyed'' by people gaming wikipedia, though. I don't like it when people try to undermine something I've worked rather hard at building.

::It is not at all unusual to remove read messages routinely; I can direct you to several examples by well-known editors. Are you new here or something? I am much more concerned about someone rewriting two policy pages, without discussion, instantly after his actions are complained about under them. I've seen you referred to as "controversial" several times; you might find it enlightening to ponder why you have been described that way by others. Perhaps you should take some time off Morton? When you come back, please respect policy and quit trying to single-handedly re-write it without discussion. I wish you the best. ] 06:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

===Shakespeare===
I think this refers to the same thing that the others are writing about, the Merchant of Venice quote, but I didn't want to leave my response under that same heading. Anyway, thanks. I've never gotten poetry on my talk page before, it's impressive, and quite pleasant. I didn't at all expect it. I'm even tempted to vote delete on a few more articles just to get more poetic gratitude. (I think I can resist the temptation, though.) Again, it's a really nice thing, and thank you. ] <sup>]</sup> 05:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

== Editng policies ==

Please do not edit Misplaced Pages policy to remove the infractions you've been warned for. Policy is changed by consensus, not to keep yourself out of trouble. Disrupting policies in this manner has lead to people being blocked - please cease your edits to ] and ] until you have a consensus of editors to make those changes. Thanks. ] <sup>]</sup> 08:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
:I haven't been warned about anything. I change the policies because they're redundant, and I've been monitoring both for a long time. The current wording that you say is consensus is not consensus, but is something new placed by the editor who is trying to get me into trouble here. I won't be intimidated by attacks launched by Derex, whom you well know as a trouble-maker. I follow Misplaced Pages policy in my edits, and will continue to do so. ] 19:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
::You have, in fact, been warned about spamming internally to stack votes on an AfD - if you didn't get that last time, let me reiterate that it is against Misplaced Pages policy. Second, Misplaced Pages policy is not changed becuase you feel its redundant and I find it hard to believe that anyone else would agree with your assertation. Get a concensus on the talk page before making your changes. ] <sup>]</sup> 09:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
:::I have no idea what you're talking about. ] 19:34, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
::::Specifically, these edits , , . ] <sup>]</sup> 20:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
::::::The policy edits I'm aware of. The warning is what I'm confused about. ] 20:08, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

==]==
It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed content from ]. Please be careful not to remove content from Misplaced Pages without a valid reason, which you should specify in the ] or on the article's ]. Thank you. <!-- Template:Test1a-n (First level warning) -->. Also, knock off the veiled threats. --] | ] 07:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Do not use the edit summary to threaten other editors. Consider this an official administrative warning. ] 17:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
:Warning another editor about 3RR is not improper. ] 18:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
::Use the 3RR template or let an administrator do it. The edit summary is not the place for it. ] 18:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

== Did you know? ==

? I would appreciate your opinion on this matter. ] 15:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

== MfD and other matters ==

I have restored the MfD tag on ]. As noted on the tag, this notice should not be removed until the MfD discussion is completed. Please do not remove it again. I have also removed your comments regarding the ] article from your user page as they constitute an ] violation and a blatant attack on other editors and their motives. ] 21:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
:I was commenting on the article, not editors. Please ]. ] 21:59, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

==Use of the Word Terroist==

In light of the discussion concerning the use of the word terrorist in relation to the Al-Qaeda organzation, I have made a RfC. If you would like to comment, you can do so ]. Thank you ] 03:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

== Regarding you comments on ] ==

Please tell me how is not a personal attack? And it's not like I brought it on myself, that was my first comment in that discussion and it wasn't in any way deserving of that kind of a response. Would you mind explaining your comment further? I usually only allege personal attacks when they are made. Point out a good instance of me making a false claim please. You are encouraging an editor to continue making impolite comments and pov edits, could you explain why? ]] 05:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
:You have a history of making these allegations when you disagree with people's edits. How do I know -- because you've done it to me and to others around me. I am going to assume good faith that you just don't understand ] and ] -- it's okay to disagree, and disagreement, including making disparaging comments about political movements, is not vandalism or a personal attack, it's just disagreement, which is permitted on Misplaced Pages. Lots of people disagree with me, but that's not a personal attack, it's just a difference of opinion. That's okay on Misplaced Pages, even if the opinions are stated strongly. ] 05:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
::When have I said you made a personal attack against me? I have disagreed with you and said you have promoted a biased view of of a subject (notably black blocs), but I have not said you made personal attacks or vandalized, I merely said you were making biased statements and edits (and I stand by that). That example I provided was a clear case of a personal attack though. Here are some quotes from the policy on personal attakcs: "Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views — regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme" and "Comment on content, not on the contributor." I made an argument and the user, instead of commenting on the content of my argument, decided to call me a traitor due to my political beliefs. That is a clear example of focusing on the editor (in a negative way) and not their actual argument. And I never accused that user of vandalism, I even said that they were ''not'' being accused of that as you seem to think they are. ]] 05:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
:::I mean this with all seriousness when I say that you would get along better here on Misplaced Pages if you focused on arguing Misplaced Pages policy, rather than trying to influence editing by intimidating editors. This is not a dig, just a suggestion. I wish you the best here. Happy editing! ] 01:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
::::You are still avoiding the question. Look above, I quoted policy for crying out loud. ]] 05:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

::Could you give your opinion at ? Thanks. ] 07:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
== If this wasn't so sad, it would be hilarious ==
Check out ], particularly the description of dKOSpedia's "non-NPOV policy". At first I thought that was a misstatement, but the rest of the comment seems to imply that the article is not written POV enough to make it into Kos' pathetic wiki. Unfreakingbelieveable. - ] 17:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

==Coincidence theory==
I added some references and edited the POV last paragraph to make coincidence theory an actual alternative to conspiracy theory: if you look at millions of relationships between millions of people and events, you find some which would (falsely) make you think there was a conspiracy.] 17:47, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

==Schädenfreude==
], ], ]]]
Allow me to celebrate this for just a moment, then I'll get back to being gracious.
From ]: "The result of the debate was keep, a snowball keep and the only interested parties have now been banned from the debate for turning it into a cesspit. JzG 22:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)"

Take that, Evildoers! ] 23:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

And a "Tip of the Hat" from an opponent: "You have pissed off a well organized group of partisans, who have much more power than you do." That was nice of him to say! Inaccurate? Yes. But pleasant anyway. ] 02:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


They didn't have the train wreck when I was at Montparnesse. They should have left it. That would have been cool. Aquaman. 03:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


I guess we're not super friends anymore. Rats. --] 04:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

:Wow, congratulations guys, you bended a novice user to your collective wills. I should make an award for this. Maybe an award with a trainwreck in it? That is something you can hang up on your walls.

:Glad you like the trainwreck image, because if you read my posting ''' ''really closely,'' ''' I was using the "train wreck" analogy in reference to some of the partisan editors who were opposed to the novice too. In my experience, sooner or later, disruptive partisan wikipedians get AfDs against them and eventually get booted, it is only a matter of time.

:In addition, the novice user appears to be changing his ways, so there is one more editor who you can't push off of wikipedia.

:RE: "And a "Tip of the Hat" from an opponent: "You have pissed off a well organized group of partisans, who have much more power than you do." Please keep in mind that we are all wikipedians here, attempting to build an encyclopedia. I find it troubling that you would call me an "opponent". Further, what portion of the sentence do you feel is inaccurate, and why do you think that I was talking about you Morton? I don't recall mentioning your name. I would suggest that you all unwatch the novices user page, and quit baiting him here. Out of courteousy, I wanted you too know that I have suggested that he bring this up to an impartial/neutral third party, such as Thatcher. Actually, in regards to my sentence quoted here, everyone is biased, including me. I am a partisan too. What is the first step in AA? Signed: ] (]) 04:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

::A novice user with over 2,000 edits? {{userlinks|NBGPWS}} . seriously, my point wasn't to "bait" him but to point out the ridiculous. I am glad that he is changing his ways. IT makes everything more partisan when we are forced to use the "wikipolicy hammer." Not only does it hurt him, but it hurts everyone that would have defended his points and it makes editing very heated. The goal isn't to piss people off. But it happens when a single edtor gets and MfD closed as a "Snowball Keep" because of the attention he attracts. No one wants that. --] 05:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
:::I agree 100%. That is why I suggested on the ANI that the page remain closed, and I have chastized him. I think he actually got the message. :) Excellent points Tbeatty, thanks. ] (]) 05:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
::::<nowiki>*sigh*</nowiki>And after all that there was . On it's own, no big deal. But you know their will be another "wikipolicy hammer" that will dredge this up. --] 05:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
:::::What is a wikipolicy hammer? You mean a disruptive edit war? I strongly agree that the "novices" edits have been troubling.
:::::: I meant to quote you verbatim but my memory failed me. It is your "wikipolicy sword" on FAAFA talk page. --] 05:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
:::::That said, are you an admin Tbeatty? I am a little concerned that your association with other wikiusers, who you edit with often on other pages and who are edit warring with him now, may possibly be coloring your administrative decisions. I don't know, I may be wrong, what do you think?
::::::I am not an admin. 05:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
:::::Here is some unsolicited advice, its worth what you paid for it:
===Suggestions===
1) I would suggest unwatching the page, and allowing Thatcher to watch the page and his edits, (more about this below)

2)I would also suggest that other users who you associate with delete their edit history page about him, which could be considered harrassment by some, and that all of the other users you associate with, including Morton unwatch his page. I will suggest that the "novice" does the same.

3) I have voluntarily committed not to edit the terrorism page for a month, or to edit any AfDs, I would encourage the user who I was arguing with before too voluntarily do the same, as Thatcher suggested (see the ANI page). I will ask the "novice" to do the same.

In regards to getting an impartial editor to watch his edits, Thatcher has been closely involved with several disputes with the same editors (including myself) and he seems relatively impartial. I will suggest that he watch his edits. See: ]

I hope this all blows over, so I can get back to the real world, which I am neglecting. It appears like the user has calmed down.

Have a great evening, it is almost morning, isnt it? I am so behind in school... wikipedia: the drug of choice for computer nerds... ] (]) 05:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
:Good night. I have my own articles that I watch and an occasional editor. You really only have to watch a few since everyone follows everyone else around. For example, I haven't put my AfD's on Gabriels page but the editors still found them. Heck, I found the Andy Stephenson recreation from FAAFA. At this point, we don't need the page for AfDs because everyone is tuned to everyone else. --] 05:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
::Just a suggestion, for what it is worth :) Good night, FYI: here is the suggestion: ] ] (]) 05:49, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Thanks. For what it's worth, I don't believe in RFC's, and would never initiate one against him. I'd be happy if he just dis-engaged from his one-man Kamikaze assault, but I'm guessing that that's unlikely, as he seems to welcome the blade. ] 06:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

== Award ==

{| 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;" | USS ''Morton'' DD-948
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I award you this image of ] for your fight against cruft. As far as I can tell it was the only US Navy vessel named Morton. The ] launcher may have been capable of carrying nuclear weapons, too bad they can't be used against the cruft pages you diligently fight. Keep up the good work. --] 03:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


|}
==Special friends?==
What happened to your special friends section? Did you have to delete it, or you decided to delete it. It is mentioned here, by another user. ] (]) 04:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
:Just curious, what are you studying? ] 06:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
::Law and international relations. :) Why do you ask?
:::You had mentioned school, so I was curious. I have a similar undergrad degree, which I discovered didn't open many doors, so I obtained advanced degrees in a different field. Much happier now. ]<font size=2><font color="Blue">]</font></font>] 21:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
::What happened to your special friends section? :)] (]) 15:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Dumped it so I'd be less of a target. ]<font size=2><font color="Blue">]</font></font>] 21:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

==Operation Gladio==
That was my thinking exactly. Apparently they not only believe it, but defend it pretty vigorously as well. I printed the whole thing out so that I could start to make notes, but have yet to do so. ] 05:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
:It's ridiculousness at such a grand scale, I don't know where to start! ] 05:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I found this: Keep Ganser has done important work in progressing a very important and underexamined area of 20th century history. His work is being cited increasingly on this controversial topic, including on the U. S. State Department website where he is accused of misinformation. ] follow it and it goes here: ] 17:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

:Is that the circular logic firing squad?--] 17:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

::I took a day of down time and it looks like I missed all of the fun. ] 14:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

:::I really wish you'd all understand the difference between 'true' and 'notable'. Something doesn't have to be true to be interesting and included in Misplaced Pages. If it did, we wouldn't have articles on ] or ] because you'd never get everyone to agree which is true. Tbeatty, you may consider it circular logic to say that Ganser's work has been criticised your government because you assume I'm trying to prove it 'true'. I'm not. I'm saying its notable. Whether I personally think it is true is irrelevant. If I were to delete everything on wikipedia I didn't believe in there wouldn't be much left. That would be censorship and that is what you and your friends are trying to do. ] 14:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

== edit summaries ==

<div style="background-color:#F9F9F9; border:1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;"> ] Hello. Please don't forget to provide an ]. Thanks, and happy editing. <!-- Template:Editsummary --></div> --] 16:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

Thought you'd ''"love"'' this... ] 13:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks Glen. Almost as important to the Encyclopedia as ]. Will this ever get any better? ] 16:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

That was '''the'''fastest AfD I have ever seen. --] 05:15, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


==]/]==
Hi Morton, I have been working on ]/], still need to add a couple of touches, but its my hope that it replaces WP:RS. Kind of feel bad about taking an opposing view, but have to this time. Cheers, ] 07:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

== I don't follow your comment: 1RR ==

Yours is the only edit that I have reverted for a long time, so I am not sure why you think I am preventing other people from editing.
I reverted your edit because not only did I strongly disagree with it, but I believe that it runs counter to the tenor of recent discussions. We have been generally paring down unnecessary things like specific examples and moving those points to the FAQ. By all means bring it up on the talk page since you feel strongly about it.

For whatever I did that gave you the wrong impression, I apologize. Many eyes make a strong Wiki. ] (]) 01:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


==RfC==
I opened an RfC regarding ], it is located at ] and would appreciate you comments if you have any. This message is being posted to anyone's talk page who it seems has had much contact with the user in question. --]<s>]</s> 22:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

== Please Stop ==

Please stop removing sourced material from articles. There is no justification for this and it borders on vandalism. I will block you if you continue. ] 02:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

:It is not vandalism to insist that Misplaced Pages policies with respect to ] and ] be followed. ]<font size=2><font color="Blue">]</font></font>] 02:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

::Its silly and childish to claim that Dr Ganser's book is not a reliable source. You may disagree with him, but that doesn't make it fail WP:RS. If you remove material using this source again I will treat it as vandalism. ] 02:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

:::It is improper for you to use or threaten to use your Admin powers in edit disputes. ]<font size=2><font color="Blue">]</font></font>] 02:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

::::This is not an edit dispute. Your are roaming around wikipedia stripping sourced material. This is bordering on vandalism. If you were an IP user I'd have blocked you already. ] 02:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

:::::These issues have come to my attention because of ]. I am now interested in seeing that articles that mention the term do not rely upon disreputable sources. That's all. ]<font size=2><font color="Blue">]</font></font>] 02:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

::::::Please discuss it on the article talk pages. On the Italy Gladio page you removed 95% of the material without warning. You did the same on the main Gladio and this was rightly reverted automatically by the VandalBot. This behaviour is unacceptable, as you well know. ] 02:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Ganser's seminal work on Gladio is without merit. Here's what the CIA said about his work:
<blockquote>
Swiss scholar Daniele Ganser has written the first book on this subject. In it, he asserts that the CIA and MI6 were the prime movers behind the networks, unknown to “parliaments and populations” (1). He goes on to charge that the CIA in particular, with its covert action policies that are by definition terrorist in nature, used the networks for political terrorism.

After acknowledging the validity of the stay-behind networks, Ganser quickly clarifies his argument. He alleges that, since the Soviets never invaded, some GLADIO members became right-wing terrorists in Italy. In the 1970s and 1980s, using the explosives and other supplies in the prepositioned caches, they were responsible for hundreds of terrorist attacks whose real purpose was to discredit the communists. Although Ganser’s sourcing is largely secondary— newspapers and the like—his argument is convincing to the extent that both things happened. What is in doubt is the relationship between the attacks and government policy. Were the caches made available officially to terrorists, and were the terrorist attacks part of Operation GLADIO? Or were they separate acts by groups whose members had been trained as part of the now defunct stay-behind networks and knew the location of some of the caches? Ganser takes the former position, charging the CIA—and to some extent MI6—with responsibility for the terrorist acts. (14)

But proof is a problem for Ganser. He complains at the outset that he was unable to find any official sources to support his charges of the CIA’s or any Western European government’s involvement with Gladio. Nevertheless, his book devotes 14 chapters to the “secret war” in various Western nations on his list. Much of the narrative is historical. The chapter on Portugal, for example, begins with background in 1926; the chapter on Spain, with the Spanish Civil War. The history of how relationships were established among Western nations after World War II is interesting and valuable, as is the survey of pubic reaction to Operation GLADIO. But Ganser fails to document his thesis that the CIA, MI6, and NATO and its friends turned GLADIO into a terrorist organization.
</blockquote>
Ganser connected dots that weren't there. Why should we have over 35 articles in Misplaced Pages that assert that this "Baloney" (to use your favorite word) is true? ]<font size=2><font color="Blue">]</font></font>] 03:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

:I imagine the KGB has similar things to say about charges against them. Don't know if I'd accept their say-so as the final word on those matters either. Neither would exactly be considered a disinterested party. There are scholarly sources beyond Ganser discussing this, and I've just added two of them to the Gladio talk page. ] 03:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

::Most of what Ganser writes is not original, but it is a rare study of Gladio in the English language and across all the countries where Gladio operated. Monty, why don't you buy yourself a copy of Ganser's book and see what it says?
::As for the CIA book review - it is misleading. Despite the difficulties, Ganser did get hold of official sources of the security services in most countries.] 03:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

:LOL. What's next? You cite Tim McVeigh as authority as to what he did was right or not? Ganser's work as accepted as a dissertation by a university. It is your claim that his work is without merit that has no merit and suggests serious delusions of grandeur. Once you hold a professorship in history so that you are qualified to judge dissertations, come back. Until then, please stop your propaganda drivel. "Proof is a problem for Ganser" is plain and simply unauthorized assumption of authority. The faculty of history of the University Basel judged that he had sufficient evidence and it is the one who has authority to judge that. Your efforts at removing verified and peer-reviewed information for the sake of state propaganda are antithetical to the purpose of an encyclopedia. Please take your jingoism to a private blog and stop harassing those who actually do research with reliable sources. --] 19:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
::McVeigh? When did I cite to that crackpot? By the way, it's not me making the decision that Ganser is unreliable by Misplaced Pages standards, it's Admin Fred Bauder. See the perma-links of Bauder cited here. ]<font size=2><font color="Blue">]</font></font>] 19:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

:::Bauder's opinion is not law on wikipedia. He is wrong. ] 19:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
:::I never said that you cited McVeigh. I said you're doing the same as citing him. You cite the accused as an authority of whether they did anything wrong, which is just as much crackpot behavior. Bauder has no authority to do judge the reliability of Ganser's work. Neither does the admin position qualify him for such judgement nor does he have anything like professional qualifications even remotely authorizing him for such a judgment. The material is peer-reviewed. You don't like it? Tough luck. Bauder's opinion is devoid of any relevance. --] 20:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Bauder summed things up pretty clearly I believe...just because Seabhcan didn't get the respionse he hoped for from Bauder, then that makes Bauder "wrong"...anyway, as far as Ganser...I won't argue whether his work on previous issues is correct of not, but when he "joins" a group related to supporting 9/11 conspiracy theories, then what we have is a situation which simply discredits his work, and frankly, makes me wonder if he hasn't had a beef with the U.S. all along. I think for those outside the U.S., who are bigoted against the U.S., that concepts such as a government coverup on 9/11 and related issues, are easier to digest. What a pity, that someone who is supposed ot be "educated" could be so completely ignorant as to get involved in the 9/11 "truth" movement...an absurdly humorous title for an organization that provides little truth.--] 20:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
:Yes. Bauder gave a stupid answer so I don't accept it. Really Mongo, for someone from "the land of the free" you are amazingly against free speach and discussion. What are you afraid of? ] 20:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC):Yes. Bauder gave a stupid answer so I don't accept it. Really Mongo, for someone from "the land of the free" you are amazingly against free speech and discussion. What are you afraid of? ] 20:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

:What's humorous is the delusions of a bunch of jingoists that they're more qualified than the department of history of the University of Basel. If Bauder claims the world is flat, it won't snap to conform with his world views. Ganser's ideas about 9/11 have no place here. And given that you are too lazy to actually research what they are, you shouldn't mention them. The only thing you prove is that what you're interested in is slander, not actual reliable data. And even IF Ganser had a beef with the US, it would change anything about the fact that peer-reviewed data is peer-reviewed data and doesn't become unreliable because some jingoists are jealous of other people's education. If the faculty of history decided that his conclusions on Gladio are justified, your suggestion that they aren't illustrates delusions on your part, not on Ganser's. --] 20:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
::I want to mention something here. Some users think that just because someone wrote a book on a political subject, the content of the book must be true – after all, it is in writing. Let me emphasize that it is just as easy to write a lie as it is to speak one. If users are using unreliable outside information that is based on political bias to amend articles to propel untruths, this is a defiance of what the project is really about. I was once told by another user in a AfD discussion that ''"we are not in the truth business"''. What a dangerous thing to say about Misplaced Pages. ] <small>]/]</small> 20:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:10, 28 August 2024

This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Morton devonshire has not edited Misplaced Pages since November 2007. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

My work here is done

Dude!

Aye, I've been dodging the conclusion for months. Tweaking the PrisonPlanet.com people kept me in the game, but I can't avoid it anymore: There's just not much Wiki-violatin' vanity-conspiracy-spamology left to delete! I leave it to you all to monitor for the time being -- I'm going on an indefinite Wikibreak, and moving on to more productive enterprises. See you all at the Grove! Cheers to all of you, on both sides of the rabbit hole -- it's been a real pleasure. Call me on the Bat Phone if anything comes up.  MortonDevonshire  Yo  · 19:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Sad to see you go. You take care man! It has been an interesting venture with you here. Peace to you good friend. JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 19:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
You've done work to be proud of. Take care, Tom Harrison 01:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I hope you can be productive. Mujinga (talk) 00:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


Hey Morton, just thought you might like to see this piece on you taken from prisonplanet.com;

You're famous dude!--Cantsi Wontsi (talk) 01:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey Morton! What have you been up to? Been keeping up with the Joneses? SkeenaR (talk) 02:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

You go, I'm back. Have fun in the Grove. Say hi to Hilary for me. ;)
But seriously, I wonder what really keeps you ticking. Do you really believe you did the right thing? &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (talk) 19:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
In case you ever eventually read this: I didn't know you at the time but you seem to have been doing awesome work. I also borrowed and adapted (and adopted) one of your user boxes, then created another one inspired from material on one of your pages. Who knows, maybe other people will also use them in your memory. I hope you're doing well, —PaleoNeonate – 11:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

The mice have grown bold.

Yes, it's happening again. Eternal vigilance is needed!

It's dire, Morton. Most dire.--Rosicrucian 20:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Take Two: Request for change in consensus

Take Two: Request for change in consensus. Change title to "Franklin Child Abuse Allegations"

"A small group of editors can reach a consensual decision, but when the article gains wider attention, others may then disagree. The original group should not block further change on grounds that they already have made a decision. No one person, and no (limited) group of people, can unilaterally declare that community consensus has changed, or that it is fixed and determined."

The existing title "Franklin Coverup Hoax" is, in the opinion of many who have commented (Gyrofrog, Awfultin, Wayne, Tom1976, Conexion, Apostle 12), fatally biased. To start out saying that the subject material is a "hoax" is indefensible, especially when that point of view is hardly universal. A specially called county grand jury used the word "hoax;" that is all. And there is ample reason to believe that those who comprised the jury had a vested interest in protecting local people.

In the previous section, various editors commented on their support for, or opposition to, a name change to "Franklin Coverup Incident." Those who commented over the space of several days included Sherurcij, PopeFauveXXIII, Wayne, Orange Mike, Apostle12, and Rosicrucian.

Orange Mike came up with a suggestion: How about "Franklin Child Abuse Allegations"? Neutral, takes no position regarding "hoax" or "coverup" claims.

I support this newly proposed title change and am asking for additional comments at this time from concerned editors. Apostle12 (talk) 20:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:TinFoilHat_Superfriends.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:TinFoilHat_Superfriends.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 15:33, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Kat_man_doo.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Kat_man_doo.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 23:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Morton_hoodie.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Morton_hoodie.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 01:35, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Purple punch.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Purple punch.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 17:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD

Please see: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The terrorists have won (2nd nomination).Kitfoxxe (talk) 17:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Karen Russell for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Karen Russell 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/Karen Russell until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Can you hear me now.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:53, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. 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 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Blood hound missile.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Blood hound missile.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly 09:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Can you hear me now.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Can you hear me now.png, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:46, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:TinFoilHat Superfriends.png

The file File:TinFoilHat Superfriends.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:33, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Matt Devonshire.jpg

The file File:Matt Devonshire.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:36, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Tin foil hat 9.png

The file File:Tin foil hat 9.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:45, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Kat man doo.png

The file File:Kat man doo.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Misuse of wikipedia as a webhost, no foreseeable encyclopedic use

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Living room expression.png

The file File:Living room expression.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Misuse of wikipedia as a webhost, no foreseeable encyclopedic use

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Tin foil hat 5.png

The file File:Tin foil hat 5.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Misuse of wikipedia as a webhost, no foreseeable encyclopedic use

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 22:44, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Strawberry Rhubarb Pie Ala Mode.jpg

Notice

The file File:Strawberry Rhubarb Pie Ala Mode.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of The Whole Experience for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Whole Experience 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/The Whole Experience 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 until the discussion has finished.

MK at your service. 17:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Categories: