Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:28, 17 April 2009

This user is a native of Hong Kong.

This user is a citizen of the United Kingdom.

This user lives in France.

This user has been on Misplaced Pages for 19 years and 22 days.

Another styletip ... Overlinking Make wikilinks only where they are relevant and helpful in the context. Links can be distracting and may slow the reader down. Redundant links (like "the tallest people on Earth") clutter the page. High-value links will stand out more clearly in the absence of low-value links. Read more ... Add this to your user page by typing in {{Styletips}}

Template:Imagemap

[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]

Arilang say Hi

Thanks for your message. Yes, we now kind of form a small but highly motivated group, we are all interested in China related articles. You are welcome to join us. Arilang 09:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Please add content

You may like this article:User:Arilang1234/Sandbox/List of offences that attract jail terms in China Arilang 16:48, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Badagnani RFC

Hello, Ohconfucius. Eugene2x (talk · contribs) files WP:Requests for comment/User conduct on Badagnani (talk · contribs). Since you've known him for a long time and you filed this, your input on Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Badagnani would appreciated. Thanks.--Caspian blue 00:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Bulibasa image

Already left the same message for Olahus. Is it possible for an editor in Romania to access the book in question to see if there is additional info. about this image? Should be easily accessed in any academic library over there. Photo would be a good addition if it could be salvaged and I think the book as a reference could be a good source for several articles. Regards. RashersTierney (talk) 13:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what you are talking about. Are you sure you have the right guy? Ohconfucius (talk) 15:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Was trying to leave a message for this editor, User talk:Kenshin. For some reason clicking on his 'Leave message here' redirects to your page, which is why you were inadvertently sent the message twice. I'll try to let him know in order to resolve. Probably a cut and paste of code that needs tweeking. RashersTierney (talk) 16:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I took the liberty of editing his talk page to achieve what he clearly intended. Issue should be resolved. RashersTierney (talk) 17:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Vote sub pages

Good idea with the sub pages - thanks for sorting them out! Ryan Postlethwaite 22:54, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

RFC on date-autoformatting and the linking of date fragments

These issues have been the subject of an ongoing ArbCom hearing, and a further RFC (after those held in November at MOSNUM) is under way to settle important details.

Which ever way you feel, it’s important that the current RFC capture full community opinion. You may wish to participate. Ohconfucius (talk) 13:08, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Baidu meme

Well, it looks like I need your friendly help at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Baidu 10 Mythical Creatures. Thanks. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 00:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh for chrissake

Stop spamming. Bad idea. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:47, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Very much so. In particular in combination with accusing others of canvassing. --Amalthea :  Chat  10:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement notice

Per custom, you have been mentioned at WP:AE#Ohconfucius yet again. seicer | talk | contribs 14:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Userboxes

I appreciate the userboxes. I've got them posted here. Thanks again.SteveB67 (talk) 17:26, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Species details

Where did you get the species details for Grass Mud Horse from? Was it from Baike? -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 06:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

• Alpaca, and I got details for River Crab from Chinese mitten crab. Ohconfucius (talk) 06:40, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh by the way, don't try to get too carried away with the infoboxes. As they are fictional, we might have issues with some users, who may interpret them as Uncyclopedia-related material. Try to avoid AfDs. Regards, -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 09:16, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Duprat06.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Duprat06.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Misplaced Pages can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:37, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi!

Just for future reference, it´s Gobi Desert, not Gobe Desert. Thanks for working in List of cryptids. Regards. --Againme (talk) 17:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

InterWK

Well, I don't see any problem in having the same Interwiki on 2 different articles, especially if they discuss similar topics. Just look at "Kenkan" and "Manga Kenkanryu". -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 06:14, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Linking

Hi. When you say "linking", I assume you are referring to say 1930 as opposed to simply 1930. Thanks for letting me know. I guess old habits are hard to break, but I will do so.

Btw: Could you review Pamela Chan, an article I created, and confirm its notability (it was tagged as non-notable). Thanks!Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 16:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Logo dcil.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo dcil.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 01:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Apology

Since I just apologized to Greg, I'm figuring I should do the same to you. I'm sorry I called you names the other day. I was mostly angry at Greg and not you, and you just got caught in the crossfire. It was inappropriate and I'm sorry. --Sapphic (talk) 00:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you. It is most graceful. Ohconfucius (talk) 01:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Plain text Date templates

I am not quite sure where you stand on date templates, but you may recall that I was advocating plain text date templates in February on MOSNUM. You asked me if they took any sides on the linking/ autoformatting issues and the answer was basically no- and the only reason for my interest in them is in emitting metadata via KML and microformats. I personally don't like to see wikitext mucked up with a bunch of arcane templates, so I figured that plain text date templates would make them a lot less user hostile. Anyway, although it sometimes seems incredible to me that people would oppose easy to read dates, there is an imbroglio at MOSNUM over the issue. MOSNUM recommends {{death date and age}} that requires numeric syntax. The MOSNUM guidance was briefly changed due to my assumption based on the february conversations that recommending plain text flavor of the templates was uncontroversial. Anyway, the original text was restored because a lot of people felt the change was not done properly, but the trouble is there is a rather entrenched set of folks that neither want the numeric templates upgraded to also handle plain text dates, nor to allow the MOSNUM passage to also allow use of the plain text versions of these date templates. So basically the defacto situation is that plain text dates are banned from these templates in perpetuity and its open season on any use of plain text versions of these templates. I wouldn't have a leg to stand on in an ANI dispute. This is a situation for which there was never any consensus at MOSNUM. The plain text option didn't even exist until very recently, so my argument is that there has never been a consensus against plain text dates or this de facto outcome. I know you may be against the idea of any date templates, but you may have an opinion on the subject that may come from a different direction than we have considered so far. You might like to take a look at it here. Thanks. -J JMesserly (talk) 07:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks for your note. I will get to it, but need some time to read through the exchanges and the proposal. Ohconfucius (talk) 08:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Perhaps if you are busy, this can be deferred. I have been reviewing the arbcom workshop thread and and found further proposals regarding MOS process there that if approved would change this discussion entirely. For example, maybe the Anderson faction would weaken enforcement strength of MOS guidelines. I share Tony's view that would be gravely mistaken, even though such a weakening would favor some short term goals of plain text dates. Maybe a further explanation why I think that is so is pertinent to the arbcom workshop discussion. Anyway, the plain text thread is of considerable length so if your schedule is busy, perhaps you should defer your consideration of this. I wanted to get the opinion of the participants of the February discussion before I proceeded with an RFC, but perhaps it is better to wait for for the arbcom ruling. I have little experience with these processes. Do you have any guess on how long it will be before a ruling is made? -J JMesserly (talk) 18:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

You're not an asshole

I'm sorry, I wasn't directing my bile at you, it's just that you just keep getting in the way when Tony, Greg, or H tweak me. Your sarcasm does irritate me a bit (it's the lowest form of humor, IMHO) but you're never actually mean-spirited and you never resort to the bad-faith tactics (entirely false quotes, misrepresenting facts, taking quotes out of context to alter their meaning, etc.) that the others do. If those three were gone, I'm sure the rest of us would've been able to work out a better solution to the dates issue, months ago. Again, sorry. Please continue trying to be the voice of calm. --Sapphic (talk) 14:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

So with you out of the equation, it must have been towards myself that Sapphic's usual and predictable bile was directed. "If those three were gone..."—laughably ironic in the current circumstances.  HWV258  05:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Comments at User talk:Sapphic

I am confused by your comments above. They are rather obfuscatory, but it seems as though you are implying that I have behaved inappropriately in declining his unblock request. If that is the case, perhaps you could explain your objections in more plain language, and perhaps I could explain my rationale to you so that you can understand more fully my deep reasoning for acting as I did in declining his unblock request. If you weren't calling me out, then perhaps you could be more clear in explaining exactly what you meant. I really would like to clear this up, as there seems to be some level of misunderstanding. Either I am misunderstanding you, or you are misunderstanding me, or a little of both is going on. Please respond so we can clear this up. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your apology. Just to explain a little more about my reasoning; admins are not psychics or clairvoyants. We cannot know for certain that two accounts are run by one person or two; but when the evidence is clear that EITHER it is one person or two people working together in such a way that they must be closely colluding to disrupt, and where other options are unlikely, then it doesn't really matter which is actually true. Both are so disruptive the merit the same blocks, and it isn't necessary to distinguish between the two situations in order to issue a block. Given that new accounts were created and showing up to "defend" the user in question, I thought that evidence enough that some chicanery was going on. I don't particularly care whether this guy was creating the new accounts himself, or whether he coerced his buddy to create the new account for the sole purpose of defending him, neither is a defendable situation. See this ArbCom Precedent which essentially established the principle... Again, thanks for your apology on the situation. For what it is worth, I am still willing to hear a reasonable explanation from both Sapphic and UC Bill which would give cause to unblock both accounts. However, the sequence of events surrounding this situation has not given me hope yet. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Arbitrary date format change

Please stop changing the date formats in articles from international yyyy-mm-dd format to a dmy format without explaining why you did so on the talk page. If you want to do it correctly, use {{date|yyyy-mm-dd}}. That way the date will display properly for each user's region settings. For example, {{date|2009-04-17}} displays as 17 April 2009 for you, and likely different for me — how it's displayed depends on your settings. Thanks. =Axlq 16:12, 17 April 2009 (UTC)