Misplaced Pages

User talk:Fran Rogers: 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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:01, 19 November 2007 view sourceFran Rogers (talk | contribs)8,995 editsm Restoring posts of banned editors to facilitate disruption and trolling: more appropriate title← Previous edit Revision as of 06:39, 19 November 2007 view source MONGO (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers76,644 edits Arbitration: new sectionNext edit →
Line 108: Line 108:


:: As you requested, I have changed the title to take the focus away from you, and instead to talk about the systemic problem. - ] <sup>]</sup> 03:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC) :: As you requested, I have changed the title to take the focus away from you, and instead to talk about the systemic problem. - ] <sup>]</sup> 03:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

== Arbitration ==

I have added your name to involved parties in the arbitration case as shown .--] (]) 06:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:39, 19 November 2007

User:Krimpet/header I prefer to keep all correspondence in the same place; if you leave me a message here, I will respond here. If I post a message on your talk page, please reply there rather than here. Thank you!
Archives


1/2/2007 - 5/5/2007
5/5/2007 - 6/18/2007
6/19/2007 - 7/23/2007
7/24/2007 - 8/24/2007
8/22/2007 - 11/6/2007
11/7/2007 - present

Thank you

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest Krimpet,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 137 supports, 22 opposes, and 5 neutrals. Your kind words of support are very much appreciated and I look forward to proving you right. I would like to give special thanks to The_undertow and Phoenix-wiki for their co-nominations. Thank you again and best regards.

LaraLove 18:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.

CommonsHelper (CH²)

I love your CH² script. Do you think you would be able to move it over to en.wikibooks? I tried, but I couldn't get it to work :(. Thanks, Ρх₥α 19:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I've taken a shot at porting it — check out b:User:Krimpet/CommonsHelper Helper and let me know if it works for you or not :) --krimpet 04:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Delete of page due to 'fairly strong consensus'.

No, it was a large minority group (last count 28 versus 15, or so). I protest against the decission of deleting the article Robert Young (longevity claims researcher).

I cannot imagine the Misplaced Pages Community standing behind a harassment campaign against Stan Primmer and his research foundation. As a Wikipedian I would strongly reject that. In my view, he is entitled freedom of speech.

I find some very disturbing underlying tendencies among some of the participants in the debate. Celvin11 04:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD is not a vote; numbers are irrelevant (though even raw numbers were strongly in favor of deletion here). It is a discussion to determine consensus. Consensus clearly indicated that there was a lack of reliable sources upon which to base a verifiable article; even the few arguing for keep did not rebut this. Verifiability and no original research are core, non-negotiable policies here on Misplaced Pages. --krimpet 04:11, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Just as you were closing the discussion Stan Primmer ((founder of the Supercentenarian Research Foundation) actually posted a verification statement which was met with immature and bullying behaviour from Ms BrownHairedGirl and her gang.

Did nt you notice the agenda ?

Memberlist of Scientific Advisory Board of Primmer's research foundation is online here http://www.supercentenarian-research-foundation.org/SAB.htm

This surely isnt a great moment for Misplaced Pages. Celvin11 04:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thankspam

User:Neranei/adminthanks

Deletion of Thich Nhat Hanh image

You've deleted the image for Thich Nhat Hanh, and I would like to reinstate that image. The image was indeed on WikiCommons, but inappropriately so and has since been deleted. This image is authorized for use on websites about Thich Nhat Hanh, the Order of Interbeing, and Plum Village, but is not authorized for other uses or alteration. It seems to me that this is a good example of fair use for an image and is used in the way the original author intends. I do have another image of Thich Nhat Hanh that I have specific permission to use, but I don't want to upload it until I know it won't be deleted for similar reasons. Thank you for your consideration. Nightngle 14:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and restored it for now - keep in mind, though, that if the license was inappropriate for Commons, it may likely be deleted here as well unless permission can be obtained :( --krimpet 16:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll look into obtaining permissions. Nightngle 20:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

This looks suspicious

Your protection of NPA right after Viridae edited it looks suspicious. You do realize that Viridae is a contributor to wikipedia review, a website that has long permitted postings that seek to out the real life identities of our contibutors.--MONGO 00:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

ha. Viridae 00:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Protection is not an endorsement of the protected version. At the time I had the protection tab open, one of Crum375's reverts was actually the last revision; that Viridae edited again right before was a coincidence, though not surprising given all the sophomoric back-and-forth revert warring that was going on there. Please, take it to the talk page. --krimpet 06:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify - my final addition wasnt edit warring, but adding the disputed tag. Viridae 06:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA

I considered not spamming talk pages but not saying "thanks" just isn't me. The support was remarkable and appreciated. I only hope that I am able to help a little on here. Please let me know if I can help you or equally if you find any of my actions questionable. Thanks & regards --Herby 12:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Straw poll results2.jpg

Undelete this now, it is not the same map. I update it and I am not going to create an account on commons so I can update it since it changes so often. It should not be on commons because this is more of a statistic than an image. I also do not appreciate not being told that this was deleted or having my contribs taken away for all my hard work on the subject.--Southern Texas 22:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that, I appreciate it.--Southern Texas 05:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Do as you please, but...

These are not people you should be carrying water for. Tom Harrison 01:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Obscuring and hiding away complaints like that only further gives trolls gives them the recognition they crave, by seemingly confirming their claims of conspiracy and secrecy. The Tor node's blocked - simply rebut the comment, or ignore it and let it sit. Transparency is a very effective weapon against disruption of every stripe, if only more people realized this. :/ --krimpet 01:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

File:Dainsyng.gif

Please don't restore disruptive posts of banned editors operating through Tor nodes, , as you did here. Block and ban evasion are serious matters. If you don't understand how to identify a Tor node you can ask me or Dmcdevit for a quick lesson. Policy is to block these nodes on sight for 5 years to prevent disruption. Thank you. - Jehochman 02:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I've moved this discussion to the administrators' noticeboard to get advice on how to handle.- Jehochman 03:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
As you requested, I have changed the title to take the focus away from you, and instead to talk about the systemic problem. - Jehochman 03:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration

I have added your name to involved parties in the MONGO 2 arbitration case as shown here.--MONGO (talk) 06:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)