Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:21, 20 July 2005

AI's INBOX

The current date and time is: 14:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC).

Messages for AI can be left here: INBOX.

Note: I consider this my "in-box" and clean it out regularly. See the history if this is a concern to you.

Dr. Oweiss Article

Al, I'm really not sure about Dr. Oweiss' citizenship. You'd have to email him. If I get a chance at some point in the future I can try to ask if I get the opportunity. Sorry about that! Once again, thanks for your great work on the article. ~ Dpr 04:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Re: I can't find the policy

Horatii, I can't find the Wikipolicy that explains that removing posts by others is against the rules. Do you know which policy this is? Please help, thank you. --AI 02:53, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Uh, well that's a good question. On user pages and talk pages it is illicit to remove user space content unless vandalism was added against the editor, or other Wikipedians find content offensive. (see here). On articles, etc. it is fine to revert edits of other users if you find that it is vandalism or in need of a clean-up (see here). I hope this helps you, because in all honesty I'm confused about most of the policies on Misplaced Pages. Take care, Horatii/Dbraceyrules 14:47, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:No personal attacks

I guess we're both a bit late in voting - but better late than never for a good policy. Thanks for leading me to it. Cheers, -Willmcw 09:46, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

I should clarify - that page was already on my watchlist and when you voted it popped up. I hadn't ever paid attention to the old poll and when I saw your edit summary I went to go look, and didn't realize when I added my name that it was so old (many folks didn't date their entries). So I was just joking on our voting on an already adopted policy. It wasn't intended personally. Cheers, -Willmcw 15:58, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

3RR

elements cross-posted

Hi there!

On Misplaced Pages, we have a rule that a great number of people take very seriously called the "three-revert rule", oft shortened to "3RR", which is described here. I imagine that you weren't aware of this rule until now; what it means is that, in any 24-hour period, users should not make more than three reverts on any one page; if they do so, they are likely to be blocked by a sysop (senior editor, such as me) for up to 24 hours, as a form of giving people an opportunity to "cool-down".

I've noted that you have, indeed, done so, on Talk:David S. Touretzky; I hope that you will take this rule into account in your future editing, both for your ease and the rest of our's, too.

Yours sincerely,

James F. (talk) 23:02, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, sorry, but on that I feel that we will have to agree to disagree. :-)

James F. (talk) 23:17, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Do I actually have to cut & paste each of the edits to show you that the 4th is not a revert? --AI 23:19, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Clarification of "personal comment"

A personal comment is a comment about a person. A hypothetical example would be: "Let's ignore (some user), because he is obviously (ethnic)." This is of course wrong on many levels and may be removed according to policy, though the policy pages explicitly caution that such editing may be seen as controversial. However, comments directed at a person are not personal comments. A hypothetical example would be: "You, (some user), are obviously mistaken when it comes to (some issue)." This is not a comment about a person and should not be removed from a talk page. How else can you have a discussion on a talk page? One has to be allowed to address other participants in a debate. Please do not remove such legitimate comments from talk pages. If in doubt, it's usually better to err on the side of caution and leave borderline comments in place rather than deleting them. --MarkSweep 23:21, 20 July 2005 (UTC)