| Revision as of 13:56, 13 February 2008 editRandomXYZb (talk | contribs)15,343 edits →Calton: r← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:51, 14 February 2008 edit undoMarynega (talk | contribs)46 edits →note from mary: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 318: | Line 318: | ||
| Finally if, indeed, you are writing an article, then I look forward to reading it. Whilst this may seem forward of me, may I offer you two pieces of advice? First, make it accurate. Second, make sure you get a really good sub-editor. Your use of apostrophes (particularly ) is, frankly, shocking. Oh, and you can quote me on that - verbetim (sic). <sub>]</sub><sup>]/]</sup> 13:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC) | Finally if, indeed, you are writing an article, then I look forward to reading it. Whilst this may seem forward of me, may I offer you two pieces of advice? First, make it accurate. Second, make sure you get a really good sub-editor. Your use of apostrophes (particularly ) is, frankly, shocking. Oh, and you can quote me on that - verbetim (sic). <sub>]</sub><sup>]/]</sup> 13:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == note from mary == | |||
| Hi MegaMom, | |||
| Thanks so for your note. My story actually just ran, but I'd still be love to speak with you whenever you're available. I can be reached anytime via email @ mary.spicuzza@sfweekly.com | |||
| Best,Mary] (]) 21:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:51, 14 February 2008
| This is MegaMom's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Invitation to join WikiProject Textile Arts
Hey, MegaMom! I've noticed that you've made helpful edits to a few articles that fall within the scope of WikiProject Textile Arts, a collaborative project which aims to help improve articles about textile arts. I think you could be a wonderful addition to the project! To join, just add yourself to the list of participants, and then check out the Project Page to find ways to help.
If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a line on my talk page.
Best wishes – Dok 01:09, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Stained glass
Hi MegaMom!
Thanks for your edits to Stained glass. I'm the main recent editor of that page. I've just incorporated your edits a bit differently, moving them up into the second paragraph. i've left out the bit about the solder because the process is explained in more detail further down. --Amandajm 11:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
July 2007 Wikiproject Food and Drink Newsletter
WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter July 2007--Christopher Tanner, CCC 19:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Task Force
|
You are being recruited by the Salem Witch Trials Task Force, a collaborative project committed to improving Misplaced Pages's coverage of the Salem witch trials. Join us! |
Psdubow 21:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Help!
Hi Megamom,
Thanks agian for being part of this important task force.
Becuase as you know, Misplaced Pages's coverage of the Salem Witch Trials is absolutely terrible. Most of the people involved don't even have biographies written about them. Plus, the biographies that do exist are horrible. They are ridden with vandalism, nonfactual information, spelling and grammar errors, and they do not have a Neutral Point of View. Most of them probably have to be re-written! Also, most of the existing biographies are stubs anyway.
Unfortunately, besides you and I, we only have five other members. And seven people alone can not do all of this work!
Is it possible that you could help me and other members of the Task Force recruit more members?
And together, we can hopefully improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the Salem Witch Trials.
Thanks.
Psdubow 15:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Witch trails entry
Thanks for the heads-up on your response. Unfortunately, I'm also pretty new to Misplaced Pages, so I really wouldn't know how to go about properly adding an attribution\reference, either. I do think those additions would benefit from attribution to the published work, however. -ReverendTed 05:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Gee, that's too bad. Your contributions, although few, led me to think that you were an experienced Wikipedian. Oh, well. I'll try to figure out the whole footnote process on my own. Thanks any way. MegaMom 06:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Pictures?
FWD: There are so many wonderful renderings of key figures in these events, as well as many photos of historic sites and memorials available online. It seems that the introduction of more images would improve many of the biographies. Does anyone know anything about adding pictures to Misplaced Pages? It seems that much of this material would fall in the public domain. I'm unclear on the process of adding images. Any guidance would be appreciated. MegaMom 07:36, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
This should help you: Misplaced Pages:Upload and Misplaced Pages:Images. - Psdubow 15:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Witchcraft article
Hello there, I've made some changes to the edits you recently made to this article, which I hope you'll be OK with. As the article is about witchcraft in its general, historical context (and not modern neopagan witchcraft only) I've reduced the overall length. I've also toned down the references to 'white witches' as I've never actually heard any of my fellow Wiccans refer to themselves this way. I suspect some newcomers to neopagan witchcraft do in fact use the term, but I think it's going too far to suggest that 'most' do. I also removed the sentence on 'black witches' as I have never, ever heard or read of neopagans using the term. If you have a reference for the claim, then of course you could cite this and re-insert the sentence. Best wishes, Kim Dent-Brown 10:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Okay? I think your edits are great! Thanks so much for your help. As for the use of the terms "white" and "black" witches, I understand the point you are making. I have heard these terms used more in the context of simplified explainations provided to concerned outsiders or new comers. Drawing a distinction between their perceptions of witchcraft and actual practice can provide some measure of comfort. I'm not certain I could provide a citation for the whole black/white thing and it may not really be necessary. I'll give it some thought. Thanks again for your help. MegaMom 02:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
SWTTF Newsletter
Hi MegaMom,
I was thinking about making a Salem Witch Trials Task Force Newsletter, that would be published once a month and it would be dleivered to all the members of the Task Force. It would sort of be similar to the Military History WikiProject Newsletter (latest Military History newsletter: June 2007 issue).
What do you think? Any thoughts?
Psdubow 16:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
August 2007 Wikiproject Food and Drink Newsletter
WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter August 2007
September 2007 WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter
WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter September 2007
--Christopher Tanner, CCC 15:26, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
SWTTF Newsletter
 Volume I, September 2007 | |
|
This is are first newsletter, and because of me its a day late. This first issue was not very well announced (which is probably also my fault :D), but for the next issue we encourage everyone to help write it. Also for the first time I delivered the newsletter personally, but for the future Grafikbot or betacommandbot hopefully will be doing this automatically. So please place your self in the right place here. And last but not least please be bold in your editing. Happy Editing! Yamaka122 ...:) 22:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC) Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 10 – November 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing! |
|
Articles Needing Attention
Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.
| |
| |
| |
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | |
Horticulture and Gardening Collaboration of the Month
| The WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening collaborations are: |
|
| To propose future collaborations, please contribute here! |
Wassupwestcoast 05:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter November 2007
WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter November 2007
--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 04:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Departure of User:Calton
Calton hasn't left, Wyatt. Cut back, yes; left, uh uh. Oh well. --Calton | Talk 05:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I am not Wyatt. I had never even heard of Wyatt until I googled your name in connection with cyberstalking. http://www.fireflysun.com/book/Berkeley_Wikipedia_cyberstalking.php It's amazing how many people on the Internet seem to have complaints about your behavior. Honestly, my husband and I are seriously considering creating a website dedicated in part to publicly compiling complaints against you. Rest assured, that if we do, we will go out of our way to expose every bit of personal information we can about you. It seems a healthy dose of your own medicine might be the only thing that might get through to you. Attempting to destroy strangers reputations on the Internet is just wrong. Your behavior is cruel, callous and unecessary, particularly when you target minors for humiliation. It's easy to behave in a cruel and heartless manner when you are anonymous. I suspect that it would be very unpleasant for you to be held publicly accountable for your conduct. You seem to be deliberately messing with people's careers. Does your employer know how many hours a day you spend editing Misplaced Pages? How would you feel if the shoe were on the other foot? I think you should consider that. You must have some idea as to how many people you've angered on Misplaced Pages and other sites. Imagine if there was a whole website where they could all tell their side of the stories. You are wrong about my identity. You were wrong in your assessment of my son. How many more people have you been wrong about? How many innocent people are out there who have legitimate complaints against you? I seriously hope that you take a break and reconsider your course of conduct. MegaMom 07:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hello, MegaMom. Please don't type things like "we will go out of our way to expose every bit of personal information we can about you". It's not conducive to a collaborative project. Why not try being collegial toward all editors, and, where that's not possible, just ignoring them. (It's what I try to do.) Thank you. ---Sluzzelin talk 17:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
You are absolutely right! Going out of your way to expose personal information about people and humiliate and embarrass them on the Internet is very wrong - and against Misplaced Pages's rules. That is exactly the point I am trying to hammer home to Calton. Thank you for pointing out the fact that it just isn't conducive to a collaborative project. I will point out, additionally, that interjecting yourself into a talk page discussion that has nothing what-so-ever to do with you might also be considered bad form. Thanks and have a nice day! MegaMom 07:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- Point taken, I'm working on my form. Peace. ---Sluzzelin talk 12:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter December 2007
WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter Decemberr 2007
--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 22:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Textile Arts newsletter
Happy New Year! WikiProject Textile Arts is starting 2008 by initiating a project newsletter. The project had 7 new articles at Template:Did you know in December and we hope to see more of you in 2008. Cheers, Durova 20:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
January 2008
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added to the page Kate Mulgrew do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Misplaced Pages is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Misplaced Pages uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ageekgal (talk) 05:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm really not sure what it is you are objecting to. Can you please cite, with specificity, what section of Misplaced Pages's policy you are referring to? Readers of the Kate Mulgrew article may well find her fansite to be a useful link for information and further reading. What exactly are you objecting to? Sorry, I just don't get whatever point it is you are trying to make. MegaMom (talk) 05:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Please read the link regarding External Links contained in the warning on your talk page, specifically the section on Misplaced Pages:External_links#Restrictions on linking linking restrictions. Fansites violate the copyrights of others and are, for that reason among others, not permitted as links here on Misplaced Pages. Further, the site you linked is "under construction" and redundant to Kate's official site. The note I left on your talk page is a Misplaced Pages-standard warning template for spam/inappropriate links. - Ageekgal (talk) 05:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I see - thank you! I didn't realize that fansites were not allowed. I wasn't meaning to break any kind of guidelines or anything. I didn't understand why anyone would be deleteing something so useful to readers. Thanks for your assistance. Best wishes for a Happy New Year! MegaMom (talk) 05:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- No problem at all. Sorry if the warning template sounds a little curt. I didn't write it, and it's meant to be concise/to-the-point, but I realize it can kind of be a mish-mash of stuff if you haven't encountered it before. No harm, no foul. Happy New Year to you, as well! - Ageekgal (talk) 05:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators noticeboard/Incidents#User:Calton
Good afternoon. This is just a courtesy note to advise you of the above thread, in which you were mentioned in connection with diffs involving Calton (talk · contribs). You may wish to review the thread, at your convenience. Thank you. UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 19:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter January 2008
WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter January 2008
--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 05:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thank you for the kind words. I am unfamiliar with Caltn, so I don't quite get the irony , but I'm always happy to make articles better. Canadian Monkey (talk) 16:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Stay away from Calton
Given that I just protected List of fictional ducks due to an ongoing edit war there in which you're a participant, please be aware that I find it a somewhat...unfortunate...coincidence that you've shown up at Jack Sarfatti, an article that has been edited extensively by one of your opponents.
If I see you editing – for the first time – any other articles frequented by Calton, I will block you. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 06:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have to say, I am somewhat dumbfounded by your message. There appears to be some confusion here. My sole edit to the Jack Sarfatti article had nothing what-so-ever to do with Calton. I was doing some research about Misplaced Pages Cyberstalking victims for an article I’m writing and came across his name. I had a look at his biography and made ONE edit to it that is entirely consistent with Misplaced Pages’s policies regarding biography’s of living people. I had no idea that Calton was a “regular” editor to the article.(Although somehow I'm not surprised!) Now that I look, I see that he made one edit to the article back in November and another back in July I’m really not sure that makes him a regular editor to the article. As near as I can tell, the information I addressed in my edit was not even contributed by Calton. Has he stalked me to the page and reverted my legitimate edit? Yes, he has. I am not following Calton, he is following me – as seen here and in this blind revert to this edit. Why are you leaving me a warning and not warning Calton? I have simply reverted some talk page vandalism by Calton, as numerous other editors have also had to do. Honestly, I don’t understand why administrators are not reverting his page blankings. Isn’t that vandalsim? Aren’t unsourced defamatory statements about living people, such as the revision I made to the Jack Sarfatti article supposed to “be removed immediately” in accordance with WP:BIO? Is there some rule that I don’t know about, whereby, people who disagree with Calton are not allowed to edit any articles he has edited? I am confused. I, sincerely, am not trying to make any kind of trouble here. I am legitimately concerned that "Calton" is using Misplaced Pages as a means of slandering and harassing people and I believe he needs to be exposed and stopped. As I see it, he is in clear-cut violation of Misplaced Pages’s policies. You leave me a warning when I have done nothing wrong – what are you doing about him? MegaMom (talk) 08:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Wyatt Ehrenfels
Instead of hurling false allegations of sock puppetry at other editors, why not try abiding by Misplaced Pages’s rules?
As far as I'm concerned, I follow Misplaced Pages content and usage rules consistently, while you -- and probably also using a smattering of TOR nodes and anonymous IPs -- to blindly revert another editor's edits, are not. Please don't insult my intelligence with this talk of following rules while you self-servingly pick and choose which ones you follow, Wyatt. --Calton | Talk 06:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Again, I am not Wyatt, nor have I edited under any TOR nodes or IP's other than the one attached to my account. You're behavior is uncivil and inappropriate. MegaMom (talk) 06:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- And what I have reverted is called VANDALISM. I suggest you familiarize yourself with WP:TALK or I will most certainly be bringing this matter up the chain of command. Consider that a friendly warning. MegaMom (talk) 06:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- And I suggest you familiarize yourself with the actual meaning of vandalism before accusing someone of it. Say, doesn't that fall under the civility guidelines you claim to uphold?
- Again, I am not Wyatt - Yeah, your sudden appearance echoing his beliefs, obsession with me, prose style, and intimate knowledge thereof while jumping in with false accusations concerning me and blind stalking of my edits is SO coincidental. --Calton | Talk 06:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- Gee, last I checked PAGE BLANKING and reposting old deleted messages on talk pages was considered vandalism. And it IS a coincidence. Go file a report - I'm not Wyatt and I have no affiliation with him. Go ahead and have me checked out - you are mistaken. Yes, I've seen Erhenfel's Cyberstalking Site - as thousands of people probably have. I have also read the very unflattering material available about you on the Encyclopedia Dramatica and numerous other sites. Whether you would like to admit it or not, you have made yourself NOTORIOUS all over the Internet for harassing people. And as for Erhenfel's or anyone else having an "obsession" with you, I would suggest the reverse is more likely the case. Famous people are seldom "obsessed" with unknown people. If you actually read the Cyberstalking article instead of just blindly reverting it, you might learn a thing or two. No one is "stalking" you. You are not the "victim". The people you have libeled and harrassed are the victims.MegaMom (talk) 06:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- Gee, last I checked PAGE BLANKING and reposting old deleted messages on talk pages was considered vandalism -- Really, the last time you checked? Where, pray tell, is this oh-so-specific wording, person-who-is-not-Wyatt?
- Famous people are seldom "obsessed" with unknown people Famous? Wyatt? Wyatt Ehrenfels is a crackpot who has to use a vanity press to print up his bilge, and his "fame" is purely imaginary on his part. As for the rest of your hyperbole -- thousands of people are reading some crackpot's vanity website? I'm notorious "all over the Internet"? -- you need your Reality Meter recalibrated. --Calton | Talk 17:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- ...until I began researching your cyberstalking activities Speaking of false accusations, Wyatt: I haven't started; you haven't stopped. --Calton | Talk 12:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Sockpuppets of Wyatt Ehrenfels
To follow up on your comment here, User:Tai Streets and the two IP addresses flagged as sockpuppets of User:Wyatt Ehrenfels are, in fact, sockpuppets of Wyatt Ehrenfels - I haven't got the time to dig out the diffs, but I think all three of them said as much (or referred to one of Wyatt's sites as their own). Where User:Canadian Monkey talks about editors in good standing on Calton's talk page, I think he's talking about you... Giles Bennett 07:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. My point is that those four accounts are clearly (from either comments which they have made, or from looking at their controbutions) sockpuppets of one and the same person. For some reason Calton is of the opinion that you, too, are a sockpuppet of that person, notwithstanding that there is no evidence from your contributions that you are. When User:Canadian Monkey was telling Calton not to accuse editors in good standing of being sockpuppets, he meant you.
- I think its pretty clear from your contributions that you're not Wyatt, unless you spent nine months "under cover" working on articles about needlepoint and breastfeeding. For Calton to continue to call you Wyatt and a sockpuppet in the absence of any evidence to that effect, and without taking the evidence he thinks he has to suspected sock puppets, is a failure to assume good faith and a breach of WP:Civil. I note that he's been editing today and hasn't responded to any of the comments from yourself or CM, so wonder if he's taken CM's view on-board.
:Apologies for the non-formatting of wikilinks in the above, but I'm on a Blackberry and can't find the square brackets! Now reformatted! Giles Bennett 08:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- Calton does, correctly, point out that you haven't provided any evidence that he harrassed your son. It might be useful if you could say what your son's username was to see any historic interaction between him and Calton. If you're unwilling to do this on-wiki then you're welcome to use the "Email this user" link on my userpage to communicate in private. Giles Bennett 17:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- As I have previously stated, my son made the mistake of using his real name on this site. Why on earth would I e-mail a complete stranger, who has previously made some remarks that appear to support Calton, my child's name? This matter has nothing to do with my son. Calton is just trying to throw up another smoke screen, and I'm not placing my child's privacy or my own real life identity at risk to quelch what I see as paranoia. If Calton thinks I'm Wyatt, he needs to go ahead and file a report and stop harassing me. Thanks for your offer. I'm sure it is meant in good faith, but it would be fool hardy for me to comply when I can be cleared via a simple IP check. I hope you understand. Thanks. MegaMom (talk) 04:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Noted and, to an extent, agreed. The offer was meant in good faith, but I do see your point of view. I'm not sure which remarks of mine you're interpreting as supporting Calton in this particular fracas, however - have you had a read of his talk page, recently? You appreciate, your reasons notwithstanding, that Calton will doubtless leap on this as another example of why you are clearly a sockpuppet of Wyatt? Giles Bennett 08:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
User:Calton
MegaMom, please be aware that I'm keeping an eye on Calton's edits. I gave him a warning that he'll be blocked if he continues to accuse you, off WP:SSP, of being Wyatt, and I intend to fulfill that warning. I'm a strong believer in warning before blocking, otherwise I would have blocked him already. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you. I appreciate your fairness and objectivity in this matter. MegaMom (talk) 06:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- For now, there's been a dialog between me and him. One reason to warn before blocking - allow the user a last chance to explain himself, get answers to his questions, etc. I think that this may be helping with Calton. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps. I have to say I'm somewhat bothered by his misleading presentation of what he sees as "evidence". I've slowed down my editing a bit, as he seems to be following me about. I'm also very concerned about what I perceive to be his misuse of Misplaced Pages to defame and embarrass people on the Internet. If you have a chance, please read the message I left on Giles Bennett's talk page. Ehrenfels is just one example. It looks like there are a number of people, Calton may be harassing - misusing Misplaced Pages as his weapon. Have you seen this? To me, it reads like an attack page for editors he doesn't like. It shows up on google searches of some of the names. I tested it. I find it all very troubling and seemingly, quite deliberate. MegaMom (talk) 07:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- After reading his posts in several places, including in edit summaries, I believe that he has a mistaken, but good faith, suspicion against you. I'm trying to get him to deal with his suspicion in the correct way - using WP:SSP - and not by harassing you everywhere (by the way, notice the shortcut capitalization). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Regarding your latest message to me - Calton didn't accuse you, in that message, of being a sockpuppet. According to WP:MEAT, a meatpuppet is a different person, who is editing on behalf of the original user - not an alternate account of that user. Although I don't believe that you are one, I'd ignore that comment unless he continues to make similar ones. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Wyatt Ehrenfels
I suggest you revert your amendment to the above page. There have been contributions by that editor - see here. Giles Bennett 09:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, and you might want to stop citing "WP:Harass" in your edit summaries. There's no such policy page called WP:Harass. Are you thinking of WP:Talk? Giles Bennett 09:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, I now realise there is no WP:Harass, but there is a Misplaced Pages:HARASS. Better create a redirect for that one, then! gb 17:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
OUCH! Lol! I couldn't find any contributions on my own. Guess, I'm wrong - sort of. Thanks. I've only been on Misplaced Pages nearly a year and I still don't know exactly what I'm doing in some areas! Lol! Thanks for your much needed help. It looks like my point is still valid, however. I think it's WP:STALK I'm trying to cite. MegaMom (talk) 09:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Please, walk before you run. The account wasn't created a few days ago. The current version of the page was created a few days ago, but if you look at the deletion log for the userpage here you'll see that the sockpuppet tag has been there for a while until the entire page was deleted in March 2007. When the page is deleted, then the edit history is cleared, which is why you can't see any edits prior to January of this year. There is a difference between an editors contributions and the edit history of their userpage or talk page.
- Calton didn't create the account, and there have been contributions by the editor concerned - my comment above has a link to the contribution history of Wyatt Ehrenfels' account.
- Please also read my discussion with Calton on this very point here and here. I pointed out to him that the evidence originally provided was by Tai Streets. I had proposed a middle-of-the-road tag which achieved (I think) everything everyone had wanted to achieve. I'm restoring the tag, but will leave it to you to remove your comments from the talk page. Giles Bennett 09:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm confused. Why was the page deleted? Why would anyone be recreating it now? For what purpose? MegaMom (talk) 09:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- The edit summary in the page history logs show why the page was deleted originally. It arises out of an ANI here. When I say "recreated", I don't mean that someone is recreating the page (ie. resurrecting the deleted version), just that they've edited the page anew, thus creating a new page at that location. Giles Bennett 09:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand the chain of events here, but it seems that Calton had something to do with the deletion of the edits. It seems that Calton may have made his own bed, and now he must lie in it. If there are no edits establishing Wyatt Ehrenfels as a sock of these other accounts, it seems there is no justification for the tag. I think I'm right on this. This seems like something an administrator should be deciding - not us. Re-tagging deleted pages years after the fact on an editor who isn't even blocked seems "fishy" to me. MegaMom (talk) 10:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Again, please don't run before you can walk. The edits were deleted because they revealed personal information about a user (in violation of the policy you were looking for earlier here. Wyatt Ehrenfels isn't the sock, he's the puppeteer. The other accounts are sock puppets of his, and that's what the tags on his page and the other relevant pages say. Giles Bennett 10:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, and I suggest you remove the post you made here, on the presumption that you agree you acted a little hastily. The {{db-author}} tag would probably be the best way. Giles Bennett 10:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Honestly, I think you may be a bit off base with this. Whether there was a tag before or there wasn't - it seems a decision was made to delete the page. I'm not saying there isn't sock puppetry. It looks like there might be - but the specifics regarding malintent are murky to me. The original tags were posted by Calton, who clearly has a COI in this matter. Doesn't seem like there was any legitimate due process. I'm not sure that there is any legitimate point to be made for recreating a page years after the fact other than vengance and possible harassment. I don't understand why anyone would be assisting Calton in what appears to be some sort of personal vendetta. No evidence - no tag - that's how I see it - but maybe that's just me. I won't revert you. Let's allow an administator to make decision on this tomorrow. It's "sticky" and should probably be decided by someone with more experience and authority. MegaMom (talk) 10:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
(unindenting) Please - calm down. I'm taking the trouble to guide you through the various policies and guidelines surrounding all the issues here, and I don't particularly like being accused (unless I've misread your comment) of assisting Calton in what you call his personal vendetta when I've taken a great deal of time in trying to stop the edit war between the two of you, and put an end to his breaches of WP:Civil in calling you a sockpuppet without suitable evidence to justify such an assertion.
As you cannot see the deleted history of the page, you don't know that the original tags were posted by Calton - there were tags on the deleted versions of the page, and only an admin would be able to see who posted those. Whilst the latest versions (in January of this year) were posted by Calton, there is evidence to show that the sockpuppet tags currently in place, after a number of people have considered and discussed them (having read all the contributions from all of the editors suspected of being sockpuppets) are appropriate and reasonable in all the circumstances. Hopefully we have now got to a place where everyone concerned is happy that the current situation reflects the truth of the matter, so we can just leave it behind and forget about it.
Your post to User talk:Wyatt Ehrenfels was both hasty and factually incorrect, and as blanking it doesn't remove it from the page history, I have marked it for speedy deletion using the {{db-author}} tag I mentioned earlier. At this stage leaving the page available in the history will, I guarantee, merely serve to add fuel to the fire of an on-wiki conflict which doesn't serve to improve the encyclopaedia (or keep anyone's stress levels below boiling). gb 10:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Gee, I'm really sorry if I've offended you. That certainly wasn't my intent. Re-reading it, I guess I can understand how you may have misconstrued my comment above. I really was speaking in a global manner, with "anyone" includng myself. I'm sorry if my meaning wasn't clear. I really appreciate all the time you've taken to explain these policies and guidelines to me. You've been so helpful and I feel that I've really learned a lot from you. I'm very sorry if I've inadvertantly offended you. Thanks for all your help, really. MegaMom (talk) 05:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's fine - I think it's now sensible to just leave everything where it is, and see if all concerned can move on from this. Misplaced Pages's a pretty big place, so unless one of you actively seeks out the other, it should be pretty simple for you and Calton to not cross paths and / or swords again. If you've got any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. gb 09:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Archiving your talk page
By the way - your talk page is now getting pretty crowded. This may be a good time to "archive" it. Have a look here for information - if you have a look at my talk page you'll see an archive box a little way down on the right hand side, which links to the various archives of my talk page, and which is just one way of displaying information on archived versions of your talk page. Feel free to leave a message if you have any questions or would like some help. gb 09:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Textile Arts newsletter
Hello again, this month's textile arts newsletter highlights the expansion of top-importance knitting and good article candidacy for Palestinian costumes. We've had several more new articles appear at Template:Did you know and other exciting developments. Regards, Durova 23:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Calton
I have seen your message to Od Mishehu, and I must tell you that you are skating on exceedingly thin ice. You are making very serious allegations against Calton yet provide no evidence for those allegations whatsoever. To do so at the same time as protesting about his "flagrant violations of Misplaced Pages's own rules regarding defamation of character" shows, frankly, remarkable hypocrisy. I have looked at a list of his sub-pages (which can be seen here and cannot see any which would constitute an attack page - as with your mixup at User:Wyatt Ehrenfels, it is likely that you have misunderstood or misinterpreted what you are seeing. It is not difficult to interpret your remarks about a newspaper article you claim to be writing as being a very thinly veiled threat, and although I'm not sure, I suspect that WP:NPA applies. You would do well to remember that WP:Civil cuts both ways and to end this little feud now. gb 10:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- I am "skating on exceedingly thin ice"? Now that sounds like some sort of threat or attack. I'm not really sure why you continue to try and insinuate yourself into a matter that really doesn't involve you. You seem to be trying to take on the mantle of an administrator, when you aren't one. I'm sure that if Od Mishehu shared your view he/she would be perfectly capable of communicating that information on his/her own, without any assistance from you. The message you refer to is not the first time I mentioned writing an article. It is not a "thinly veiled threat" - I am trying to be fair and up front with people. You may not like the fact that a number of journalists have decided to address Misplaced Pages's problems in the press, but that does not negate their legal right to do so.
- I'm not quite sure why you seem to feel that I am under some obligation to reveal my personal information to you and provide you, personally, with "proof" of anything. Considering the gross invasions of writer Mary Nega's personal privacy that have recently been documented on Misplaced Pages's pages, I have every intention of maintaining my right to anonymity on this site as I conduct my preliminary research. Surely, speculation as to a writer's alleged non-notable relatives is inappropriate. Likewise, speculation, (stated as fact) as to an anonymous user's real life identity is a blatant violation of Misplaced Pages's own rules and, if incorrect, could constitute libel. Surely, listing a self identified professional journalist working on a story as a sock puppet falls outside the boundaries of civility. Calton’s behavior is even more overtly hostile and inappropriate when one considers this message, which he clearly read and responded to. Considering the fact that his allegation of sock puppetry was unfounded, I can't wait to read her article!
- Contrary to what User:Calton may think, one cannot "libel" an anonymous user name. Regardless, I can document and/or source every statement I've made. And BTW, I only need to personally identify myself to people I am actually interviewing at this juncture. Thanks for your concern, but I know my rights and obligations. The fact that at least two writers have now seemingly expressed an interest in writing about User:Calton's conduct for the press, should give Misplaced Pages' administrators pause to think and examine the actual nature, tone and stated objectives of that editor's activities more closely. Please, don't feel obligated to respond. Thanks, MegaMom (talk) 02:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- When it comes to those two policies, their enforcement is not merely restricted to the domain of the admins - it is an obligation upon every editor both to keep those policies, and to ensure that they are kept by others. That is why I am involved in this - initially in trying to ensure that Calton, in his dealings with you, abided by them, and now (it would appear) in ensuring that you do the same.
- I am happy to consider this conversation closed, but although you say that you know your rights and oblgiations, please bear in mind that no matter what reasons bring any editor to Misplaced Pages, all are obliged to follow the policies and guidelines which govern the site. I suggest you read them. GB 09:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please also keep in mind that, although only admins can actually block users, many blocks are done by request of other users, once an admin confirms that the user in question should be blocked. If Gb posts a request on WP:AN, WP:ANI or WP:WQA, then a whole lot of admins will see it - and Calton's treatment of you won't help you much in this case. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- I doubt the REAL WORLD where established "Wikipedians" don't have the ability to CENSOR opposing opinions will see it the way you two do. Thanks for the quotes. This is priceless material! Thanks again! LOL! MegaMom (talk) 09:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- If you think that Gb and I are being unfair, you may choose to take this to a wider forum (Wikiquette alert noticeboard seems like the obvious place), but then they will also look at your behavior. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- I doubt the REAL WORLD where established "Wikipedians" don't have the ability to CENSOR opposing opinions will see it the way you two do. Thanks for the quotes. This is priceless material! Thanks again! LOL! MegaMom (talk) 09:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
(unindenting)
I struggle to see what, if any, of the previous posts on this topic would constitute "interesting", let alone "priceless", material, and struggle equally to see where any of my contributions have fallen below the standards of Wikiquette required of editors. If you feel that they have then feel free to take it up at WP:WQA as Od suggests. In the meantime, however, I would suggest that you take your own advice to heart when you said (here) "Misplaced Pages is not a free web hosting service which you can abuse for the purpose of harassing people and smearing their names on the Internet".
Finally if, indeed, you are writing an article, then I look forward to reading it. Whilst this may seem forward of me, may I offer you two pieces of advice? First, make it accurate. Second, make sure you get a really good sub-editor. Your use of apostrophes (particularly here) is, frankly, shocking. Oh, and you can quote me on that - verbetim (sic). GB 13:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
note from mary
Hi MegaMom,
Thanks so for your note. My story actually just ran, but I'd still be love to speak with you whenever you're available. I can be reached anytime via email @ mary.spicuzza@sfweekly.com Best,MaryMarynega (talk) 21:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)