Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:46, 22 June 2014

Thanks for stopping by!

Here in Misplaced Pages, I go by "Winkelvi". I enjoy patrolling the "Recent changes" page, looking for vandalism by IP addresses. While I try to be accurate with the reverts I make and the subsequent warnings I leave on talk pages, I am only human and will make mistakes from time to time. If you're here because of a revert I've made to one or more of your edits and you feel I've made an error, please leave me a (civil) message below by clicking "New Section" above.

If you're here to whine, complain, or express anger, please go elsewhere.

One last thing: Some administrators and regular joe editors are great, some are total assholes, some administrators have had the tools way to long and have totally lost the idea behind the "anyone can edit" philosophy. If at all possible, they are best to be avoided. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 00:42, 26 March 2014 (UTC) Winkelvi likes this.

The Barnstar of Dilegence

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For keeping up with and reporting countless Monterrosa socks, I award you The Barnstar of Dilegence! XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 01:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I humbly thank you, XXSNUGGUMSXX and will keep up the good fight! -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 02:23, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Possible help

Winkelvi, given how you've been able to keep up with all those Monterrosa socks, perhaps you could help myself, STATicVapor, Homeostasis07, and IndianBio track socks of a user named Reece Leonard? To give some background, Reece is a user who last month got topic-banned from Lady Gaga articles for persistently trying to make it seem as though critics responded more positively than they actually did (i.e. changes "mixed reviews" to "positive reviews") for her album Artpop. Last week he got blocked for three days for ban evasion for trying to promote more positive reviews on Artpop (for which CheckUser confirmed a sock and the sock account was indef blocked) and afterwards just got blocked for a week for using an IP to remove negative reviews from the Artpop song "G.U.Y." (another ban evasion attempt). While bans and blocks are separate things, I'm sure you can spot either type of evasion in users. You can talk to any of the other three people I mentioned for further details. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 06:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Request For an Opinion

Hi, Winkelvi. I apologize for some of the past disagreements we've had, and I'd very much like to say I value your opinion and appreciate your help. Hopefully there are no hard feelings between us. I'm dropping this message here to let you know I'd like to cite video interviews for the purpose of expanding the Sound of Contact page and its related pages. I've taken a look at Misplaced Pages:Video links and Misplaced Pages:Verifiability, and I don't think video interviews are barred from being used as sources. It would be very helpful as there's a lot of information in the video interviews that does not exist in any other medium. I've left a message on the Sound of Contact talk page for further discussion of the issue.

I'd like to ask if you'll approve of this before I get to work on adding information to the pages. Thanks! :) Vuzor (talk) 07:44, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Because you deserve it

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		I know that tracking sockpuppets and filing the appropriate reports is time consuming so your efforts with the socks of Monterossa are much appreciated. Cheers MarnetteD | Talk 17:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Template:Z147

This is awesome - especially the knight's suit of armor. Thanks, MarnetteD. I will wear it proudly! -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 18:14, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

You are most welcome. Have a great week on Wiki and (more so) off. MarnetteD | Talk 19:11, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Please Check Your Comments at WP:ANI

I may be mistaken, but it appears that another editor edited your comments at WP:ANI in which you advised him to drop the stick and back away from the dead horse. If so, the other editor was guilty of a serious talk page violation. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Robert. I did replace them with a new sig and time/date stamp. Appreciate the notification. I'm really, really tired of the drama. Would rather just talk it out on the article talk page and edit the article. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 21:36, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Edits by Enter333

Thanks for nominating the "world cinema filmographies" category as mentioned above.

User:Enter333 seems to have left a lot of other unexplained edits which need reviewing and in many cases reverting. I left questions at User talk:Enter333 but he has simply blanked the page. Someone had better look through them all. Would you be prepared to do it, please? – Fayenatic London 22:15, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 22:21, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Done. Hopefully it was done correctly and I didn't screw anything up :-) -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 00:09, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! – Fayenatic London 08:31, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Please help

Hi, on May 8 and May 9 you correctly intervened to stop this editor (http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:74.66.11.71) from inserting poorly sourced content that did not adopt a neutral tone into the article on Shael Polakow-Suransky. After several attempts by you and other editors the page was temporarily protected. Now it appears the same editor has returned and is using the signature Hashtag411, to insert the exact same content you removed a few weeks ago and has attempted to vandalize other parts of the page by removing large sections of sourced content. These attempts have currently been undone by other editors but someone with more experience may need to intervene again. Truthnyc (talk) 12:15, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2014

• News and notes: The English Misplaced Pages's second featured-article centurion; wiki inventor interviewed on video

• Featured content: Zombie fight in the saloon

• Traffic report: Get fitted for flipflops and floppy hats

• Recent research: Predicting which article you will edit next

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Misplaced Pages:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Misplaced Pages:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Misplaced Pages:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. — MusikAnimal 04:56, 4 June 2014 (UTC) — MusikAnimal 04:56, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, MusikAnimal. I appreciate the confidence and trust you've expressed in granting this permission. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 05:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up

Thanks for the heads up about using the edit box. I have been trying to be more diligent in using it. However, I sometimes click save before I realized I have entered the information of the material I have added. :-)

I do have one question. Where did you find the info on Kevin Tighe's wife? I have not found a good source to cite that. Just curious.

Thanks again!

I am trying to understand your logic for the edits on Kevin Tighe's page. Can you clarify as they do not make sense on some levels. We got blasted by another bot for using IMDB.. Which means we have had to use other sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NDakotaCelt (talk • contribs) 04:31, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

My edits have been well explained in the edit summaries. The prose you have written is in many ways not encyclopedic in tone, there has been redundancy in content, some of it out of place, some of it extraneous, some of it just not encyclopedic at all. Some of it has been lifted from online sources (for example, "bohemian lifestyle"). I plan to further copy edit the article over the next several days, so working cooperatively on this is a must. IMDB is not a reliable source, it cannot be used. In the future, it would be best for you to question edits and rationale on the article's talk page. Thanks. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 04:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Just wanted to say that I apologize if this edit summary comes off as rude. The actors and filmmakers project recommended avoiding "best known" for a number of reasons years ago. FWIW I am old enough to have watched Emergency! in its original run and, thus, was happy to see Kevin show up in Lost. Thanks again for all you work with the Monterrosa sock situation earlier today. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 04:50, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

It did come off as rude, but I'll get over it. I, too, am old enough to remember Emergency in its original run. I know better than to put in "best known", and must have been asleep at the wheel. Thanks for fixing it. You're welcome for the Monterrosa dealings, and thank you for being there to help with the needed reversions. While reverting him was certainly justified, I didn't want to get dinged for edit warring ("even if you think you're right"). Best, -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 04:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome as well. Best regards. MarnetteD | Talk 05:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2014

• News and notes: With paid advocacy in its sights, the Wikimedia Foundation amends their terms of use

• Featured content: Worming our way to featured picture

• Special report: Wikimedia Bangladesh: a chapter's five-year journey

• Traffic report: You can't dethrone Thrones

• WikiProject report: Visiting the city

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

BLP

I appreciate your writing to me. I am, in fact, myself one of the "long-time editors" you speak of, having been on Misplaced Pages for nine years, so I've been well aware of WP:BLP policy for a very long time. I'm also aware of WP:BRD, which stands for "bold, revert, discuss." Your interpretation of BLP is not universal, and to say, "This is the policy and I'm right and everyone else is wrong" really isn't the way Misplaced Pages prefers to handle differences of interpretation.

In this case, the information on the children is very reliably sourced, as the policy requires. I hope you're not suggesting that content sourced to Time Inc. publications like People and ], to networks like E!, to books, to newspapers and the Associated Press is not being reliably sourced.

Second, this information is not based on anonymous, unattributed "sources" but on official statements by the parents and their representatives themselves, who are proud and happy to introduce their children to the world — some of them even do so on the covers of magazines.

This goes to a third point: When this kind of pertinent biographical material appears widespread in reliable sources cited in the articles themselves, it's unencyclopedic to try to hide and censor information that is readily available everywhere except an encyclopedia. And that ties in to a fourth point: Any professional biographer knows that a person's family is a vital part of a subject's life and biography — and this holds true even in cases that don't involve Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin naming their child "Apple," which sheds light on those particular subjects' beliefs, preferences and personalities.

And most important: When your bold edit is reverted, you are not supposed to ] by re-reverting. You're supposed to discuss the issue on the talk page. If you disagree with the way a discussion is going, you can call for mediation or a Request for comment. But you do not edit-war to change stable articles and unilaterally declare that your way is the only way, end of discussion.

I'm going to start discussion on those three pages. I hope you will discuss. If not, we'll have to take this up with admins, I suppose. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I see you've removed talk-page comments by another editor who has an issue with your editing style. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:21, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict on my own talk page, how totally annoying) Wow, Tenebrae. Your attempt at intimidation ("I'm one of those long time editors") and threats re: edit warring and involving administrators noted. I reverted because the articles in question are BLPs. I'll certainly discuss on the article talk page(s), but this may have to go to a noticeboard because I get the feeling you're going to insist on your interpretation of policy. Regardless, adding the names of those non-notable minor children do not enhance the reader's understanding of the article subject.

As far as removing comments from MY talk page, I remove stuff as I see fit and it has nothing to do with what you are implying (as if it's any of your fucking business). And if you keep this bullshit up on my talk page, I'll remove your comments as well. Simply because you're starting to really piss me off with your unproductive and uncivil high-horse attitude. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 16:34, 22 June 2014 (UTC) -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 16:34, 22 June 2014 (UTC)