Misplaced Pages

User talk:Random user 39849958: 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 21:35, 31 January 2008 editAnthon01 (talk | contribs)4,204 edits Note← Previous edit Revision as of 21:47, 31 January 2008 edit undoPouponOnToast (talk | contribs)1,392 edits Article Probation (civility): new sectionNext edit →
Line 51: Line 51:


:: It was a result of this. and the section below. There is also this, added to the policy page of NPOV, without any consensus or discussion on the talk page. :: It was a result of this. and the section below. There is also this, added to the policy page of NPOV, without any consensus or discussion on the talk page.

== Article Probation (civility) ==

The article ] is under article prohbation per ]. Editors making disruptive edits may be banned by an administrator from ] and related articles or project pages. Editors of such articles should be ''especially'' mindful of content policies, such as ], and interaction policies, such as ], ], ], and ]. Editors must be individually notified of article probation before being banned. All resulting blocks and bans shall be logged at ], and may be appealed to the ]. Your edit could be considered a violation of civility. ] (]) 17:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:47, 31 January 2008

Archive
Archives

Starting fresh

Time to archive. -- Levine2112 03:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Prominence

I have nominated Misplaced Pages:PROMINENCE for deletion because it is an underhanded way to twist policy to suit one's own interpretation. Feel free to comment. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 22:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I have. Thanks for that. Short of arguing it to death, what road would you suggest to solve the issue with ScienceApologist at both Deadly nightshade and Rue? -- Levine2112 22:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
WP:DR has many options, but I think these problems, and those related, have gotten to the point where mediation would probably be best. I suggest you work with the editors to create a request you all agree to. --Ronz (talk) 00:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the constructive advice. Last time I tried a mediation I got burned by incivility. So forgive me if I am a bit cautious with that route. -- Levine2112 01:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but I'm suggesting something slightly different that should avoid such problems. If you can all agree first to exactly what you want mediated, then you've already resolved the problem that you (and most others) encounter when trying mediation. --Ronz (talk) 01:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I fail to see how that is any different from last time. I guess I want a response from other users besides you. -- Levine2112 02:14, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Categorical imperatives

Hi Levine2112... Just wanted to let you know how much I appreciated your supportive comments over the last couple weeks regarding the whole "category:pseudoscience" thing on WP. And it looks like reason (as outlined in NPOV) may even prevail! -- at least, outside homeopathy, where lawlessless and chaos rule.... btw, speaking of 2112, have you heard the 1974-ish bootleg of Rush in Cleveland? Damn fine show. cheers, Jim Butler 22:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. It is much deserved. Have you considered adminship yet? I haven't heard the bootleg, but as you know I am a fan and now that I know it exists I shall track it down! -- Levine2112 23:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I think you can find that boot on one of those ok-by-artists, live-recording Bittorrent sites like Trader's Den or Dime-A-Dozen. I discovered it by surfing around about Larry Williams, whose songs the Beatles covered a bunch of; Rush does this crazy Zeppelin-esque cover of one of them. Adminhood: to the extent that I've decided to stick around and work to improve WP, sure; I guess I'm as qualified as anyone. No great rush though (totally unintended pun until I typed it :-) cheers, Jim Butler 03:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
P.S. Adminship is supposed to be not that big a deal, but in practice seems to have become an hours-consuming stressful "hazing"-type deal, which I'm not sure is really worth it... just to get a set of sysop tools that should ideally be available to all, yet hardly ever used. ("Ideal" is a long way off, of course.) I think that energy may be better spent editing at Citizendium. That site like a nice next step, and growing. best regards, Jim Butler 05:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the info about the artist-friendly download sites. I am very sensitive to that as I have had friends lose their jobs as the record industry battled with pirates. And I hear you about adminship. I've seen it described as merely a software update. That said, I also feel that admins serve a greater purpose than policing. I feel they serve as interpreters of policies for the rest of the "civilian" editors because they are given a higher level of respect having earned their position. Generally, I agree with your perceptions into policy and therefore I feel that Misplaced Pages would be a better place with editors like you lending your view on policies to the hoi polloi. Whatever you decide to do, best of luck in all of your endeavors! -- Levine2112 05:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Note

Why did you move my comment? Anthon01 (talk) 23:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Mine was in direct response to OrangeMarlin's and therefore I wanted mine to follow his. All I did is change your indentations for ease of ready. Feel free to change it back if it is an issue. -- Levine2112 23:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
It's ok. You didn't think I was responding to his challenge? Anthon01 (talk) 23:20, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I guess not. I will reread. -- Levine2112 01:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Please check the bottom of my talk page. Anthon01 (talk) 21:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

And this Anthon01 (talk) 21:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow! Were you reported by someone originally? Sorry you had to go through that 8 minutes of confusion. -- Levine2112 21:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
It was a result of this. and the section below. There is also this, added to the policy page of NPOV, without any consensus or discussion on the talk page.

Article Probation (civility)

The article Deadly Nightshade is under article prohbation per Talk:Homeopathy/Article probation. Editors making disruptive edits may be banned by an administrator from homeopathy and related articles or project pages. Editors of such articles should be especially mindful of content policies, such as WP:NPOV, and interaction policies, such as WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA, WP:3RR, and WP:POINT. Editors must be individually notified of article probation before being banned. All resulting blocks and bans shall be logged at Talk:Homeopathy/Article probation#Log of blocks and bans, and may be appealed to the Administrators' noticeboard. Your edit here could be considered a violation of civility. PouponOnToast (talk) 17:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)