Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:33, 22 February 2008

Previous archives available here.

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Thanks for all your work. I appreciate it. Keep it up! Gonzo fan2007 02:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For going the extra mile in reverting vandals' personal attacks, and ultimately getting the rascals banned! Thanks! Skylights76 (talk) 08:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Tyler, Texas

hi, I have been modifing my this site on my home town Tyler, Tx. I have added some good stuff, I even took down some things that did not fit. I noticed that it has a sister cities portion which included some strange and unrelated towns all around the globe. So I looked up what it meant to be a sister city. These towns on the list are neither geographically nor socially nor in any known way connected to Tyler. So I took it down, so I was wondering why you put it back up? Ryan Peveto —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peveto (talk • contribs) 19:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Responded to your talk page , I sourced the material and readded it. Snowfire51 (talk) 19:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

TPiRFanSteve's page

I just got bitten off by an IP for it. Wanna send this to ANI?32 00:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

hi

Hey its me again. I was just curious about the sister cities thing in Tyler Texas. It just makes no sense to me. Please explain--Ryan Peveto (talk) 03:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok so I am still figuring out your message service. Honestly I have found this experience some what offensive. Your telling me that rediculous things like Anchorwoman (a show that did not even run for a season), and sisiter cities to no-where are more relevant than "Culture" or links for PUBLIC attractions and healthcare for more information. If someone were to want to know things about Tyler do you think that is what they would be looking for? Why delete everything I do and leave crap? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peveto (talk • contribs) 17:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Three Sheets

Why does my write-up on the Three Sheets page keep getting edited. Someone always comes in and says it needs references like I copied it out of some book, but I wrote it on my own and it is my own original content to add to the site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Psykostevo (talk • contribs) 18:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied to your talk page . Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 18:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Rock Lobster Edits

As stated on the discussion page for Rock Lobster, I only stopped reverting once a reason was provided. Yours is the best reason, and only reason that I have really seen. Now to see if DH agrees. Daedalus969 (talk) 19:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Rollback tools

Hey dude, not trying to be trollish or anything, but are you sure that using rollback tools like this is okay? This looks like more of a content dispute to me. It might have been better to just manually remove the restoration (or do an "Undo" but with a non-automated edit summary) and then take up any issues on the talkpage. Just my two cents. GlobeGores (talk | contribs) 06:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem (response to your response on my talkpage). I agree with what you said, it's better to discuss. This is a big thing with lots of popular movie articles - lots of obscure references in different media. Some mentions are and some... aren't. Thanks for the reply! GlobeGores (talk | contribs) 06:13, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Removing valid links

Please stop removing pertinent links. You are supporting the efforts of an individual to remove all other relevant links to promote his website. The additional links are a benefit to many people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guest2610 (talk • contribs) 09:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Already left a message on your talk page explaining, as per WP:EL. Snowfire51 (talk) 09:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know, I reported him for violating 3RR. V-train (talk) 09:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: your reports to WP:AIV

Hi, it's very important for us to have well formed requests, please take some time to read the notice at the top and the comments hidden in the edit box. Thanks. -- lucasbfr 09:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied to your talk page for clarification . Snowfire51 (talk) 18:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow... I meant to post this message on User talk:Daedalus969... I have no idea on how I opened your talk instead of his. -- lucasbfr 18:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh. Missed it by that much, eh? I figured it was something like that, but I wanted to AGF and make sure. No problems. Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 18:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Pools ARE great for holding water

you deleted my post when I said that pools are great for holding water. What part of "pools are great for holding water" isnt true? matt ryans —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.156.149 (talk) 03:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

What you're doing is called vandalism. You have been warned several times. Do so again and you will be blocked. This was your last warning. Daedalus969 (talk) 03:44, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Not sure who that message was for, but I've replied to your talk page. Snowfire51 (talk) 05:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

In response to your question on my talk page, I was not refering to you, but the guy who seems to be obesssed with pools and the fact that they hold water. Daedalus969 (talk) 05:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Again in response to my talk page, thanks. I don't know exactly what triggered it in my mind, but around our discussions reguarding Rock Lobster... Well, actually, the user Vanboto triggered it, with his sick-minded message. Either way, I've been patroling the Recent Changes special page ever since then. May all the vandals be banned. Daedalus969 (talk) 06:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

DJH47

Well said. Wryspy (talk) 19:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

KLR650

Just want to ask why you are removing valid KLR650 links. What have you got to gain by doing so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 08greenhornet (talk • contribs) 21:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

You are spamming wikipedia, and have been repeatedly warned in at least two different identities not to add links that violate WP:EL. I have no personal stake in this discussion, there are several wikipedia editors trying to get you to stop. Snowfire51 (talk) 21:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Snowfire51! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. β 17:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

RE:Your edits to are not allowed. No links to Forums are allowed. They have been revereted.

I received this message about the KLR650 page. If there is a rule that no links to forums are allowed on wikipedia, then why do links to other forums still remain on this page? Either reinstate the klr650.net/forums link, or remove all the other forum links as well. Fair is fair. KLR650.net is THE KLR forum, with over 16,000 members it has been a part of the KLR650 history for many many years now, and is the forum Kawasaki dealers inform new KLR owners to refer to. All other KLR forums including the Kawasaki forum and klrworld are imitators.

The message I received also states, "You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war." I don't know what that is, but if someone is unfairly deleting links that have always been apart of the KLR650 wiki which have helped thousands of people, thats just wrong. My editing was not in any way wrong, but the person who deleted the klr650.net links on the KLR650 page in the first place IS. Put the links back on the KLR650 page.Firemedicntx (talk) 01:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I have never left a message on your talk page, and you and I have had no contact. I assume you're leaving this message because of a discussion I've had with your sockpuppets. I responded to your page. Snowfire51 (talk) 01:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I understand that Misplaced Pages is not a collection of links, but the WWW is. So to be fair, either put the klr650.net links back up, or remove all the others from the KLR650 page. To remove only links from one forum and not all the others that are still present on the page shows me and anyone else who reviews this that something very unfair/unscrupulous is going on here.Firemedicntx (talk) 01:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, not a collection of links. There are plenty of link available on the page, and all of the forum links you're trying to add seem to be contained within other links already rpesent. There's no need to have multiple links to the same site, as per WP:EL.

I looked at the history and noticed that one link in particular for the KLR650 page has been in place almost since the beginning until now. For some reason someone has decided now is the time to remove the link to the most in depth and largest technical information database pertaining to the KLR650, which also happens to be an affiliate of Kawasaki, WHY? The KLR650 page was created 18:22, 13 February 2004, and the original forum and database links were added 00:09, 14 May 2004. At that time the other links and sites that appear on the page did not exist. Misplaced Pages is an information database, a collection of links on the www connected by links, if all links to it are deleted from the www, it will cease to exist. The same goes for all the other forums on the www. There can be only one reason the links to klr.net forum were deleted and the other forum links were left in place (which still remain in duplicate), and that is because someone here has something to gain by deleting them. If deleting links to promote your own site isn't against the rules here, then you have no rules here. The "no links to forums" and "wikipedia is not a collection of links" rule you keep quoting is a farce and a lie. I suggest you take your own advice and start deleting every link to every website on every wikipedia page if you want to continue quoting this so called rule, or reinstate the links that have always existed on the KLR650 page.Firemedicntx (talk) 20:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Cultural stuff

My feeling are more aligned with yours on these as there is a ton of scholarly pop culture material out there, from libraries etc, that no-one seems to use. However unreferenced stuff often ends up in a free-for-all revert war. My advice would be to keep anything you feel you can reference in your drafts/sandbox section for use later once referenced. The revert wars are a pain in the neck though until then. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Response to Daedalus696

Dear Mr. or Ms. Daedalus, I am puzzled by your description of my edits to the Worcester MA article as vandalism. I am not a vandal. ~~Pepkoka~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepkoka (talk • contribs) 02:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Of course you're not. However, you're not posting on the correct page. I don't have any idea who you are. Snowfire51 (talk) 02:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

UCS

User confusion syndrome.. apparently.. heheh.. It is quite strange.. Daedalus (talk) 06:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Courteous inquiry from Pepkoka

Dear Mr. Daedalus969,

I am not quite sure what you are talking about. I have not commented on anyone's talk page.

Sincerely, Pepkoka —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepkoka (talk • contribs) 00:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea how you keep coming here, but maybe you should try paying a bit more attention. This is Snowfire's talk page, not mine, as the one you would find under the talk link in my signature. Daedalus (talk) 01:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Nicknames

Please do not interfere with the Shawn Marion nicknames, he is referred to as "The Barbarian" after he got 18 rebounds in his second game, and got the name "The Crust" after he sold ten thousand dollars in pizza coupons to a local Miami-Dade High School (Saint Joseph-Saint George's)Robo-Rebound is a fake name and I will abologize for making but please, leave "Barbarian" and "The Crust". Thank you, have a nice day/ :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge34 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Responded to your talk page. Snowfire51 (talk) 20:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the point of mascot vs. spokesperson regarding Jared Fogle - - - a fine point I overlooked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.183.229.39 (talk) 20:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for cleaning up the vandalism on my userpage! Zagalejo^^^ 05:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

RE:Gracias

No problem, I actually saw the report to AIV and the edit on your page at about the same time, so I figured I would check it out. Maybe 6 weeks will calm him down a little. Oh and sorry I never replied to your email, I dont know if you noticed from the note on my user page a week or so ago, but my laptop broke and I had to send it in, and I forgot to redirect my emails, thus I didnt get any of my emails for a two week period. When I got the email I figured things had been solved. Hope all is well! – Gonzo fan2007 06:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

That's good, and yeah when your computer breaks a week after second semester starts, life becomes a little complicated ;-) Have a good night! – Gonzo fan2007 06:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Removing another editor's comments

When an editor makes a false accusation on someone talk page, that cannot be allowed to wait until the discussion is over. Personal attacks must be reverted immediately. Certainly some poor editor should not have to come back to her account and find that waiting for her - most of it would be completely incomprehensible to her (it's barely comprehensible to me) but she would probably get that she's being accused of some sort of terrible offense and someone "official" is very angry at her. That's not how to welcome a useful editor to Misplaced Pages and encourage her to do more of what she's been doing. So no, I do not accept that I did anything wrong in removing the defamation.

As for AIV, I did not edit anybody's comments. I merely changed the section header, which does not form part of any one editor's comments. All comments on the subject appear under that header, and I think the topic of discussion should be Hu12's false accusations, not my undoing them. -- Zsero (talk) 06:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

You're deleting comments and warnings left by another editor, an admin no less, to a page that's not yours. That's not your right, nor responsibility. A warning is not a personal attack. I'd advise you to just let the WP:AIV run its course, and let other editors and admins weigh in on the matter. Snowfire51 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Put yourself in the shoes of, say, Ashleylmack. Imagine that you've just created a WP account, you've found seven articles that could be improved with links to pages you've come across at the uni library archive, and you've made those edits. Two days later you find three more and add them as well. Then you come back after lunch, or tomorrow, or the next time you think to try your hand again at editing, and there's this big yellow sign informing you of a message. And there is this incomprehensible screed that you can't really make heads or tails of, but you know one thing, you're being accused of spamming. There's a list of accounts and IPs you know nothing about, and something ominous about an "only warning". I know if that were me, I'd freak out. I'd certainly feel that I'd been personally attacked, whether it technically fits the definition at NPA or not. I certainly wouldn't be well disposed to contribute to WP again.

I don't think an attack like that can be allowed to remain while people discuss this. Not that I think there's anything to discuss. The links are clearly not spam, Hu12 seems to have a warped definition of what spam is, but this is certainly not it. But discussion or not, the damage, which amounts to defamation, had to be removed.

That, by the way, is another point to consider: calling someone a spammer is a personal attack, even by the WP:NPA definition, but even if you'll argue that it isn't it's certainly defamation. Spammers are hated; they get threats; when something bad happens to a spammer there are inevitably the online jokes about how he deserved it. It's not quite as bad as calling someone a paedophile or a racist, but it's worse than calling someone a thief. Nobody jokes about killing thieves. The vandal warnings are carefully worded to avoid calling names; we AGF and speak of edits that are "unconstructive" or not quite what we were hoping for. We don't shout "Vandal! This Is Your Only Warning! Prepare To Be Exterminated!". And that's people who add "poop" and "penis" to articles, or think it's clever to change people's birth dates by one year and see if anyone notices. Shouting "Spammer" is just unacceptable. -- Zsero (talk) 08:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your insight, but the point I'm trying to make here is that you are not allowed to edit other user's comments. That's all. There's no back door to this rule. You don't edit other user's comments, and you certainly don't change a header at WP:AIV. An admin issuing warnings is clearly not a WP:NPA. If the warning is incorrect, that's another matter for other admins to handle at WP:AIV, where you've posted but don't seem to want to wait for due process.

This matter could have, and should have been handled more civilly, but that's not relevant right now. If the admin is acting incorrectly, bring it up at Requests for comment/User conduct: Use of administrator privileges or Administrator's noticeboard: Incidents, and let a discussion begin. Don't edit war, under any circumstances. That's the wikipedia way. Snowfire51 (talk) 08:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

If you're so concerned about edit-warring, "under any circumstances", why are you reverting? That's just as much edit-warring as anything I'm doing. And yes, I am allowed to remove another user's comments from a user talk page, when that comment is defamation. By all means let's talk this out civilly, but in the meantime the defamation can't be allowed to stand. Even if Hu12's warnings turn out to be correct, what harm would be done by leaving them off for a few days? But if they're wrong, as I maintain they are, leaving them on does enormous harm. So I'm removing it yet again, and I ask you to act civilly and leave it as it is until we can talk it out. If you're so concerned about civility and not edit-warring, and don't really care about the content, that is. Either way, don't expect another response from me until tomorrow afternoon, because I've been up far too long and it's already 4 in the morning and I'm going to bed as soon as I've cleaned up the defamation again. -- Zsero (talk) 09:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:3RR Question

I appreciate you taking a look at the 3RR I posted on Zsero, and your quick response. I don't understand, though. I know there's a discussion going on at WP:ANI, and the actions of this admin are up for debate. However, I didn't think there was ever an excuse for edit warring, much less willfully doing so. Is there more to this than I'm understanding, and should I not have brought it to the ;;WP:3RR]] page? I appreciate your time. Snowfire51 (talk) 10:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

You were right to bring it there. However, as the discussion of Zsero is wider than just edit warring, blocking him at this stage would be unhelpful. That's why I've deferred to the ANI. Stifle (talk) 10:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Blotto adrift4 has been indef blocked

Sorry for the trouble. He reported you to WP:AN/I, clearly bad faith, clearly impersonating an established user. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

No problems, I appreciate the help. He's just the latest in a long line of socks trying to put his name on wikipedia. Snowfire51 (talk) 18:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

If I wasn't laughing at the nads it took to actually report you for harassment, I'd be crying. Another day, another vandal. Onward and upwards! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out with him yet again. One of these days he will give up. I've added yet another page to my watchlist. Bleah. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sorry

No problem. His comment sounded off enough that I had a look at his contribs, and wasn't surprised at what I found. His support was the last thing I needed. If he wasn't already blocked I'd have told him to run off and play, and leave the argument to the grownups.

I still disagree with you on our argument last night, but his claim that you were emotionally invested in your edits made no sense, because the edits you were defending weren't yours, they were Hu12's. For that matter, the edits I'm defending against Hu12 aren't mine, and I had no investment in them when I started. Sorry things got so heated between us, I don't know what time zone you're in, but I was long past my bed time. -- Zsero (talk) 19:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)