Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:51, 4 April 2008

Hello.

I'm a newbie...

and i am curious to know as of how things work here i would aprreciate it if you showed how things worked here?

Shor7es7 s7raw —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shor7es7 S7raw (talk • contribs) 19:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

That's a bit of a broad question - our policies are at Misplaced Pages:Policies and guidelines. Are there specific things you're wondering about? Phil Sandifer (talk) 22:15, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Blogging

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Blogging, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Blogging and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Blogging during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Collectonian (talk) 00:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Comics/Peer review/Anarky

Phil, User:Cast has put a lot of work into this and I think it should be nominated for featured but he wants to run it through peer review first. Can you have a look at it and offer some comments please? Thanks, Hiding T 23:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Merciless review wanted

Hey, since you’ve done so much on List of Halo characters (or, the list once known as Characters in the Halo series, List of Characters in the Halo series, and List of Characters in Halo…) I was wondering if you could pop by and tell us how it’s coming along. Thanks, David Fuchs 00:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the drop-in, we'll keep truckin'! David Fuchs 21:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You’re right

True, sorry. --Van helsing (talk) 20:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Blanking RFAR threads

Do not do that as an involved participant. Doing it again would be seen as blanking vandalism. Lawrence Cohen 20:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Phil, would you change your removals to strikethroughs, please? Durova 20:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not even touching that one again at this point. Do what you want with it. I'm disgusted at the insistence of people on maintaining a thread that it is clear everybody has thought better of. No wonder there's such a poisonous atmosphere surrounding this case. Everybody is far more interested in humiliating the perceived opposition than in actual progress. Phil Sandifer (talk) 20:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's full protected now. I agree we should be doing more to mend fences and build bridges. I wonder if there's something that could be done to improve this situation along the lines of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, which grew out of the Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles case. Durova 03:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Protection of Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for arbitration/IRC/Proposed decision

On 17 January, following a series of edits to Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for arbitration/IRC/Proposed decision, User:FloNight protected the page and added the following in an edit summary: "I protected the page from all editing until the case is closed or edits all agree to make all productive comments about the proposed ruling and not other editors". Flonight has not left any further messages as yet, so I am posting this message to all those who edited the page in this period, and asking them to consider signing this section at Flonight's talk page indicating that they will abide by this request. Hopefully this will help move the situation forward, and enable the talk page to be unprotected (with any necessary warnings added) so that any editor (including those uninvolved in this) can comment on the proposed decision. Thank you. Carcharoth (talk) 05:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:Watchlist-notice

Hi, is there a guideline for inclusion of a notice on watchlist? That RFC message is perfectly fine, don't you think the community should be notified of an important event that may have significant impact afterwards? Regards, - PeaceNT (talk) 15:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

We could discuss on Template talk:Watchlist-notice, if you are interested. Regards, - PeaceNT (talk) 15:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Prod notice

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The Sandman Companion, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of The Sandman Companion. 152.91.9.144 (talk) 05:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I note that the template above requests that you comment on the article's talk page why you removed, and that to date you have not done so. However, in your edit summary, you note that this is from the "same publisher as the comics." Unless you're proposing that the Misplaced Pages:Notability (books) be changed in a fairly drastic manner that would allow everything by a particular publishing house to become notable automatically, you've not satisfied the concern raised in the now-removed prod statement.
If this is a work in progress, why not consider creating it in user-space instead of leaving it half-done in mainspace?
152.91.9.144 (talk) 05:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

If you are sincerely suggesting that consensus does not exist to keep books from major publishers, feel free to AfD the article and see if it gathers consensus there. I can't imagine that it will, however. The article is a stub - I was filling in requested articles with stubs I could do more or less from the top of my head, because that's a productive thing to do. I left it in its current state because somebody can expand it, but the basic information is there. But it is not "half-finished" in any meaningful sense. Phil Sandifer (talk) 05:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

It's clearly not even half finished: It doesn't tell us why it's improtant, or why anyone should care. And the current accepted at practice Misplaced Pages:Notability (books) doesn't match what you're describing. It's a shame if you're suggesting I use AfD as {{cleanup}} because you aren't willing to make the effort to create an article with enough information to justify its own existance. I note that a stub is "a few sentences of text." This article is two.
152.91.9.144 (talk) 05:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

The article describes the book and gives pertinent information about it. There is certainly lots to be added to the article, but the article clearly flags the book's importance. I've added another sentence in case this is unclear to somebody unfamiliar with the comic, but I am hard pressed to believe that the article requires anything more to function as a preliminary stub, or that anybody looking at the article could have serious doubts about the appropriateness of its subject matter. Phil Sandifer (talk) 06:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Help with Fair Use Rationale

Phil - I've been notified that an album art image I uploaded some time ago has insufficient fair use rationale. At the time I uploaded it, I used the standard fair use boilerplate template, {{Non-free album cover}}. I am now told that I must supplement this with {{Non-free use rationale}}. Besides a note of the specific article the image was intended for, and an affirmation that it is a low resolution, complete copy of a piece of album art, I'm not sure what else to state, or how strong a case I need to make. Can you advise?

Also, when and for what reason was this new policy settled on? It seems prohibitively difficult and inherently non-inclusionist. Thanks, --Peter Farago (talk) 22:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Use of {{prod}}

You have suggested several templates on Templates for Deletion should be "Prodded", i.e. go through the WP:Proposed deletion process. {{prod}} can only be used for Articles, User pages, and User talk pages, per the first paragraph of WP:PROD. Also, once an article has been nominated for deletion through WP:AFD (for Articles) or Miscellany for Deletion (for User pages and User talk pages), or if an article has previously been "Prodded", it is forever ineligible for {{prod}} per Misplaced Pages:Proposed_deletion#How_it_works. Articles can be taken to the appropriate Deletion Discussion after an unsuccessful prod, but they may never go the other way. I think what you mean to suggest is that it should be Speedy Deleted, in which case you should name the appropriate criteria. There are general criteria as well as namespace specific criteria (such as WP:CSD#T3 for templates). If a speedy deletion criterion applies, an admin may decide that the discussion should be closed early and the page deleted (on the other hand, an admin may decide to just let the period run).--Doug. 00:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

SupermanBatman8.jpg

Kara Zor-El appears on the cover. This is the first image of the modern version of Kara Zor-El as she appears in Superman/Batman #8. The cover is notable as the characters modern debut.Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 03:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I simply don't see a reason to remove it. Shrouded or not, it does illustrate Kara Zor-El and its the same illustration used for the interior of the comic book. perhaps a better caption would be more appropriate- "Kara Zor-El's modern age debut as she appears on the cover of Superman/Batman 8" etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk • contribs) 04:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

IAR

I saw that you removed the section I added to IAR. I don't know what you mean about "misuse" in your edit summary - IAR is not a rule, and can't be misued. IAR is the principle that you in general one should ignore the written rules and go about one's business. As I interact with other people, I'm becoming more convinced of the need for some explanation on the policy page. The point of policy documents is to document the way we do things - except the IAR page, which is cryptic to the point where, apparently, it is being misunderstood. — Carl (CBM · talk) 17:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

A Beautiful Sunset

I see you've deleted the article for the Buffy comic "A Beautiful Sunset" yet again. I can't say I find your rational for this action particularly convincing. There was no "crystal balling" in the article; all information was referenced. You also mention about not having articles for individual issues of comics. Yet there are other individual Buffy comics have articles concerning them. The original deletion vote was taken several months ago; part of the reasoning behind the deletion being that the comic's release was far off. Since it is being released within the next four days that line of reasoning is hardly valid anymore. --Cyclonius (talk) 22:38, 03 February 2008 (UTC)

Mediawiki security

Hi Phil. I noticed this post. It got me thinking. I think an earlier post by you pointed out that this incident shows one very damaging thing admins can do with their tools. I've heard various dark mutterings about very bad things rogue admins could do. Is that one of them, or is the Mediawiki stuff more concerning? Someone also mentioned sitewide css. But I'm guessing most of the actions to the latter two are easily reversible. It is the disentangling of histories that seems the really difficult thing to undo (though it should be spotted quickly and desysopping would follow). More generally though, as the project lasts longer and gets bigger, these loopholes will get discovered, and, worse, someone with real knowledge of the system (ie. Mediawiki) will become so disgruntled that they will do some damage. I don't know what can be done about that, but just wanted to mention it to someone. Carcharoth (talk) 16:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Notability

Double post. This one and the one above...

The other thing is about fiction and notability, or rather just notability in general. I read the thread you started on that (about WP:N rising to the level of WP:V), and I remembered a thought I've had several times. Possibly too paranoid, but I've sometimes thought that it is possible that certain groups, annoyed that their "non-notable" articles got deleted, have decided that if theirs were deleted, then others will go with it, and are engaged in a massive gaming of the system by relentlessly pushing the notability bar higher and higher and then aiming at various areas of surviving "fancruft". Am I being too paranoid or is that a possibility? I think Misplaced Pages is susceptible to meta-gaming in this way - and it is something that needs to be guarded against. Somehow. Anyway, as above, just throwing the thought out there. Carcharoth (talk) 16:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Very nice analysis at the WikiProject Comics talk page. Doczilla (talk) 17:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I know I have certainly not always agreed with you, and I know I opposed your ArbCom candidacy. But when I said you were "sometimes brilliant", it is that kind of contribution I was referring to. A wise, and well-thought through challenge to a "truth" which can be in need of some shaking-up. Sjakkalle (Check!) 15:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/IRC

This arbitration case has closed and the final decision may be found at the link above. Giano is placed on civility restriction for one year. Should Giano make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, Giano may be blocked for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling. All parties in this case are strongly cautioned to pursue disputes in a civil manner designed to contribute to resolution and to cause minimal disruption. All the involved editors, both the supporters and detractors of IRC, are asked to avoid edit warring on project space pages even if their status is unclear, and are instructed to use civil discussion to resolve all issues with respect to the "admin" IRC channel. For the Arbitration committee, Thatcher 04:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Groupthink

Using another login to get around 3RR might be a very bad idea Phil. --Basique (talk) 23:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Especially with this still out there Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Phil Sandifer. --Basique (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

It was just an observation, with no opinion whatsoever. I expressed no opinion. I had no opinion. You're a great editor and I would hate to discover something like that to be true. In fact, had you not been such a strong editor whose work I've thought so well of (see my remark higher on this page from less than two weeks ago regarding a great analysis you'd made), I probably wouldn't even have taken an interest. Honestly, I made the observation only to see if Basique wanted to discuss it more, but then a very long time passed before Basique replied. I didn't want to put it in the form of a question because a question calls for discussion that might not need to occur. I wanted to leave Basique room to let it go if Basique so chose or to discuss it more if that was where Basique would like to head with it anyway. So I made the one matter of fact observation that remains an observation regardless of whether it means puppetry or not. That was some time ago but nobody responded back then.

There is one other reason for putting it in the form of an observation rather than a question, but that has to do with something that is not directly about you. I'd gladly tell you by email but not in public forum. Doczilla (talk) 00:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

And now I've rambled too much. Doczilla (talk) 00:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, though, RfA aside, I would love to discuss this with you non-publicly. Heck, I'd be glad to give you a phone call. (If you do email me, let me know on my talk page because I don't normally check that email unless I know I need to.) Doczilla (talk) 00:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I just now noticed Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Phil Sandifer. (Yes, it's right above my remarks, but I didn't notice it earlier (I mean notice it today, not about noticing it over a month ago). I was focused on relations with you, not B.) So I certainly understand why this whole issue is suddenly such a serious concern to you.

My wife just asked why I looked amused. It was because the two remaining oppose votes made me think, "Well, now I don't have to worry about whether or not my upcoming answer to a question is going to make someone cast the first oppose vote and spoil my 100% support rate." As weird as that sounds, the thought obviously amused me enough to show on my face from across the room. Doczilla (talk) 01:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Very seriously, though, there is one reason I would really like to tell you via email if possible. Doczilla (talk) 01:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Real life beckoned, but now I'm back at the computer. Before or while reading my message when you get it, you might want to compare these to ] for reference. Doczilla (talk) 05:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Email this user didn't work. Maybe you couldn't keep waiting. I understand if that's the case, but my wife really needed me off the computer. Oh, I really hope I get to explain to you how ironic this is. Take care, Doczilla (talk) 06:05, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I'm about to finish a different post, and then I'll go compose the email. Doczilla (talk) 06:17, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. And I especially mean the part about the Stock Exchange. Doczilla (talk) 06:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Doczilla's RfA

.: Oh, no! There goes To-ky-o! Admin Doczilla! :.

File:Godzilla(01)reverse.jpg

Thanks for !voting! Thank you for !voting in my RfA which resulted in the collapse of civilization with 92 (94?) support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral. Blame jc37 and Hiding for nominating me, everyone who had questions or comments, everyone who !voted, everyone who tallied the numbers correctly, and WJBScribe who closed without shouting, "No mop for you!" Seriously, your response has overwhelmed me. I am deeply grateful.

     "The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot." - Michael Althsuler

Doczilla RAWR! 07:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Misplaced Pages:Association of Member Investigations

Misplaced Pages:Association of Member Investigations, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Association of Member Investigations and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Misplaced Pages:Association of Member Investigations during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 08:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Association of Member Investigations

The poject was a great idea, but as noone showing interst in the project, even you, the creator of the project have not edited the project page for a long time. So I am nominating it for deletion because it unnecessarily taking space in wikipedia. However I will like to see the project restarted, so you can restart the project, that will be very good. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 08:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Comics & Notability

Hi Phil - following your invitation on the Comix Scholars Mailinglist, I'd like to ask you to explain me something about Misplaced Pages: I'm working on notability guidelines for articles on comics in the German WP, and I noticed that the English guidelines for comics (I guess that would be WP:Notability (fiction)) are very vague. So how exactly do they work? Are there more (formal or informal) notability guidelines for comics somewhere that are more detailed? E.g. is there a sales figure threshold? What are the main arguments about the notability of comics? I know that the English WP is not as strict about notability as the German, but I guess there must be some sort of restriction. --Martin de la Iglesia (talk) 15:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Injunction

Would you please reconsider the closing of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Adam Mayfair? The way we have been handling these is to add Template:FICTWARN to the discussion page and relist the discussion whenever the 5 days expire. There is a tracking category for these discussions, so any decided action by ARBCOM can be manageably acomplished, or the template can be changed to describe the outcome of the injunction. Thanks, JERRY _contribs 00:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Adam Mayfair

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Adam Mayfair. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. JERRY _contribs 01:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Association of Member Investigations

The project is a great idea. Can you restart the project. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 11:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I have restarted the project. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 06:19, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Happy thoughts

I have nominated Happy thoughts, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Happy thoughts. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Wold Newton character lists in three places

Phil Sandifer...I was doing a bit of clean-up of my subpages, and after doing a search I found two others had a subpage for Wold Newton characters. Why don't we just merge them into one to keep this from fragmenting? You can use my space if you wish, since it looks like yours has gotten some criticism. It would take a while to make sure that there aren't any duplicates, but it can be done. Just let me know on this talk page what you want to do. The list of the three Wold Newton character lists are below. - LA @ 19:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• User:Lady Aleena/Wold Newton
• User:Piecraft/Wold Newtonverse characters
• User:Phil Sandifer/Wold Newton

Fashionable Nonsense

I've undone your reversion of my {citequote} additions to Fashionable Nonsense. Yes, the quotes are from the book, but they need page number citations, IMO, since they are almost all somewhat controversial statements that really should be cited in order to facilitate verification by anyone interested to do so. I plan to cite them myself when I get the chance, assuming someone else doesn't do it first. - dcljr (talk) 17:48, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. My copy of the book got recalled at the library, so I don't currently have one handy. Phil Sandifer (talk) 20:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hidden from History: The Canadian Holocaust

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Hidden from History: The Canadian Holocaust, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Hidden from History: The Canadian Holocaust. Sancho 15:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Six Feet Under

What to put at Six Feet Under was discussed at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#Redirect question. Around 500 links were changed from Six Feet Under to Six Feet Under (TV series) to prepare a disambiguation page. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Question about a subpage

Is this page deleteable per this MfD or is it one of the pages kept "for historical value"? Though it doesn't contain any vandalism, on the surface it seems to pose a problem vis-a-vis WP:NOT#FORUM. Thanks, Black Falcon 23:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Six Feet Under Question

This is just a question: Why do you use Six Feet Under page as a disambiguation page? Schould not a disambiguation page have "...(disambiguation)" in it's name? Lykantrop 13:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Not necessarily. The page history of Six feet under shows that I linked to Misplaced Pages:Disambiguation#Page naming conventions when I moved it from Six Feet Under (disambiguation) to Six Feet Under. Phil Sandifer later moved it to Six feet under. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. That is what I wanted to learn...--Lykantrop 06:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

PVP

I'm curious - would you please explain your reasoning for re-rating PVP from TOP to High? There should be at least one Webcomic of top importance in the Comics list, and by any stretch of the imagination, PVP Online is that comic. Please see my reasoning in the discussion Talk:PVP Top Importance? on the talk page; I feel your edit is misplaced, and you may only be considering "print" comics in your judgement, wheras webcomics are considered a significant part of the comics industry in this day and age. I look forward to hearing your input on this issue, either here, my talk page, or in the article discussion section. I am dissapointed though that you did not discuss your change first when there is an already existing discussion on the issue. Timmccloud (talk) 22:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

RfC

I've started drafting a user conduct RfC that you might be interested in here. If you'd like to participate in drafting it, please feel free. Cla68 (talk) 03:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)