Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:08, 13 May 2008

Smert' spamionem! This user is a member of WikiProject Spam.

I check in most mornings and most evenings, and occasionally some days during the day. I am on UK time (I can see Greenwich Royal Observatory from my new office). If you post a reply at 8pm EST and get no reply by 10pm, it's likely because I'm asleep. My wiki interests at the moment are limited. I still handle some OTRS tickets.

I am under considerable personal stress at the moment; my father died and I have a lot of other stuff going on in RL including a new job as senior engineer for enterprise storage and virtual infrastructure in a Fortune 500 company. Great job, lots of shiny expensive toys, big responsibility. But Misplaced Pages is still one of my top hobbies, and I come here to do what I can. I respond much better to polite requests than to demands. People who taunt me with "I dare you to block me" may have cause to regret it, as may I. Don't even think of trying to drag me into one of the many cesspits this project offers, I will likely choose only those disputes where I don't actually care too much. Not coming to your party? It's because I've decided it will make me unhappy. Sorry about that.

Above all, please do not try to provoke me to anger, it's not difficult to do, so it's not in the least bit clever, and experience indicates that some at least who deliberately make my life more miserable than it needs to be, have been banned and stayed that way. Make an effort to assume good faith and let's see if we can't get along. Guy (Help!) 22:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

• Please see User:JzG/Harassment links.

Were this admin to act in a foolish, trollish, or dickish way, he is open to being slapped with a large trout.

the internets is populated by eggshells armed with hammers

• Bored? Looking for something to do? Try User:Eagle 101/problem BLPs.
• See my winter cycling tips - feel free to suggest more!
• My take on the Durova incident.

Note to self

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Istria&diff=192329190&oldid=189359747

question about a user using his main page for a mock up article on Technocracy movement

Is that a good idea..? or should it be done that way? This user is making a site on his user page of a mock copy of what he says is a future article. Is this not confusing or would be for people stumbling on it from google or elsewhere ? I added the disclaimer on the top of the users mock up. Was that a good idea ? Should not this mock article be done in a sand box instead of a page that could.. until I put the disclaimer on it be misconstrued for a real wiki article? http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Firebladed/newtincdraft User:Firebladed/newtincdraft - Misplaced Pages, the 💕 Please act and inform accordingly as to appropriateness and policy. I will mention this to a couple other people for feed back.

This is what I added at the top... This is not a real wikipedia article. It is a mock up or practice article. In no way should it be confused for an actual wikipedia article although this subject herein may google up as such. This disclaimer is made in case there is any confusion on this point. This editing project is an attempt to write a better sourced article elsewhere. It is a draft and no doubt contains multiple errors which are in the process of being worked out here in sandbox form. skip sievert (talk) 00:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks JzG for sorting that out. skip sievert (talk) 14:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

An ifd

Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion/2008 May 8#Image:Virgin Killer.jpg. Thanks, SqueakBox 19:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

You can't be seriously suggesting that we give in to a right-wing extremist Christian conservative group's moral panic. We didn't delete the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons or the Depictions of Muhammad despite mass e-mails and death threats from Muslims - so it's A-OK to offend them, but we can't tick off the "Moral Majority" wingnuts? Absurd. I don't disagree with you often, Guy, but the image is not child pornography by any objective legal standard and there is no reason to delete it. FCYTravis (talk) 21:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I also have to wonder if this isn't an attempt at retaliating for the fact that we purged most links to WorldNetDaily as an unreliable source. FCYTravis (talk) 00:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

It is an image of what appears to eb a legal minor, and we should not keep such images for gratuitous purposes. Guy (Help!) 07:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

No, we shouldn't. But this isn't gratuitous. It's the primary album cover for an encyclopedic album by a major band. For God's sake, millions of these have been produced and distributed around the world. It's hardly as if we dug this out of some 30-year-old dusty archive. The same cover on the same album is available for sale today from Amazon.com FCYTravis (talk) 09:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I wouldn't call myself a "right-wing extremist Christian conservative", possibly the first description fits me but the other 3 do not, not that am I aware of. As I said elsewhere, we cannot compare ourselves, an educational charity manned by volunteers, with Amazon, a commercial organisation. While I realise it is the internet not ourselves who have republished this image I expect us to keep to the high standards of an educational charity. Thanks, SqueakBox 14:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi again, you know my block history really pisses me off, i find it really embarrassing that people can see it, particulary that civility one. Blocked for personal attacks and harrasement. Its so unfair, it doesnt represent what happened in a balanced light at all. It makes me sound like a monster. Is there a way of appealling to have things removed from your block history? Please reply at my talk page, cheers. ;-) Realist ('Come Speak To Me') 16:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, ok, shame, never mind, its up to me to prove that i am civil then i guess. Lol, how did i get myself into that mess, nevermind. ;-) Realist ('Come Speak To Me') 16:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Revert

I had to revert you here. Please see my edit summary for an explanation as to why. Thanks, Qst (talk) 17:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Post-chronicle removal

I can understand why you removed the Post-Chronicle links as being an unreliable source... but I think you should've replaced them with {{fact}} tags instead. That way other editors know what needs to have fresh sources found for them. Tabercil (talk) 20:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

• It's not as obvious as that, I think. Some of them were cites for widely-available information (e.g. death dates); a few for information that should not be there at all, and I removed, some were redundant with a second adjacent source, and some for material that is covered within sources cited elsewhere ion the paragraph. I'm sure that some would indeed need sourcing additional to the sources already there, but past experience indicates that taking out an unreliable source and tagging {{fact}} results in the unreliable source being put straight back. If you have a good way of fixing that, I'd e happy to hear it, but it's not easy to get rid of hundreds of links to unreliable sources without making it a full-time job. Guy (Help!) 21:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

If you feel the sentence/paragraph is false, the proper way to go about this is to remove the entire statement. Removing the reference just leaves the statement uncited - which is against Misplaced Pages guidelines. The references are there to support the statement that precedes it. In short, you're leaving behind a huge mess for us editors to clean up. Someone will read the unreferenced statement, mark it as {{fact}}, force an editor to re-research for a reference.... See what I mean? Let the editor who is way more familiar with the subject matter decide if the reference is unreliable - not some bot-like editing like you're doing. Groink (talk) 21:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Very good, now go back and read what I wrote. Pay particular attention to the bit which discusses redundancy. Oh, and please don't give me "sourcing 101", I have been around the site for a little while now. Guy (Help!) 21:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

ANI

I have posted the following at ANI: . You've had some tangential involvement here. Please chime in if you think appropriate. David in DC (talk) 23:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Your input requested regarding reliable sources

Any insights you might offer to this discussion would be helpful and appreciated.  : ) --MPerel 03:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

On a repeated spammer

Hello,I recently reverted edits by 59.152.98.158. I have been tracking this anonymous user for a while,as he has made edits from another IP: 59.152.99.184. I have managed to trace this user to this user page: user:hatashe.I have also made a request to blacklist the link he keeps adding. Got any advice? - Amog | 09:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

• Mediawiki talk:spam-blacklist or WT:WPSPAM would both be appropriate venues to discuss this, I will go to the blacklist talk. Guy (Help!) 10:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. That guy was getting on my nerves. Amog | 13:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

FYI

Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Allegations_of_state_terrorism_by_the_United_States Inclusionist (talk) 05:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• WikiProject Spam members
• Misplaced Pages OTRS volunteers
• Misplaced Pages administrators open to trout slapping