Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:28, 6 February 2010

Archive 1 12/2008 01/2009 02/2009 03/2009 04/2009 05/2009 06/2009 07/2009 09/2009 10/2009 11/2009 12/2009 cfwar 01/2010 02/2010 03/2010 04/2010 05/2010 06/2010 07/2010 08/2010 09/2010 10/2010 11/2010 12/2010 02/2011 03/2011 04/2011 05/2011 09/2011 10/2011 11/2011 12/2011 01/2012 02/2012 03/2012 04/2012 05/2012 06/2012 07/2012 08/2012 09/2012 10/2012 11/2012 12/2012 01/2013 02/2013 03/2013 04/2013 05/2013 06/2013 01/2014 02/2014 04/2014 05/2014 06/2014 GGsockfarms 12/2014 01/2015 02/2015 03/2015 04/2015 07/2015 11/2015 01/2016 11/2016 02/2017 10/2017 12/2017 11/2018 08/2020 11/2020 04/2021 05/2021 06/2021 07/2021 08/2021 09/2021 10/2021 11/2021 12/2021 01/2022 02/2022 03/2022 04/2022 05/2022 06/2022 07/2022 08/2022 09/2022 10/2022 11/2022 12/2022 01/2023 02/2023 03/2023 04/2023 05/2023 06/2023 07/2023 08/2023 09/2023 11/2023 05/2024 Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III.

A request, please

Your PRODs seem for the most part to be correct, but the sheer numbers are overloading the system. Can you pretty please, slow down? Teh kitty need be be pet... Bearian (talk) 06:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

How many prods can be in the daily q before it's overloaded, please? Hipocrite (talk) 12:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Since you can't be bothered to answer this question and you have edited my talk page again, I'll assume you don't really care. Hipocrite (talk) 10:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

No, I do care. Sorry this has taken so long, I've been trying to help you all - deleting the crap, but rescuing the stuff I could, and even creating a new stub. To answer your question, I think the community can handle about 200 to 225 per day total at WP:PROD and WP:AFD. I answered the question elsewhere, by the way, but I can't find the diff. I think the mass Prodding has gotten out of hand. This is one example; a cursory Google search would have discovered that Péter Medgyessy was in fact the leader of Hungary. I nominated four test cases of Pete Williams (journalist), Ric Wake, Peter O. Price, and Corey Jones. The first was probably a mistake, but it's taken a long time for anyone to source it, and it looks like a snow keep. I reversed myself on the second one, and sourced what I could. The last two were rescued by other users. Bearian (talk) 03:03, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Directed

By a kind of advertising banner at the top of the site that something along the lines of "There are major changes being proposed to living biographies, click here to join the discussion." So I clicked "here" and got to the page where I made the comment. Jasonfward (talk) 17:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Do as I say not as I do

I find it difficult to know when your comments are serious because of your screen name. Have other editors had a problem with this? Are you sometimes being intentionally hypocritical and/or ironic or is it my imagination? ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

No, no, yes, sometimes. Hipocrite (talk) 17:35, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I think we need a user:Hippocrat. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:40, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Wait... what if he is just being sarcastic about the no's and yes's? I can't think anymore! Ignignot (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Rajendra K. Pachauri

I left an inquiry for you at Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. --208.59.93.238 (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

My talk page

What do you have against primates and canvas? - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 10:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Come now Hipocrite, what have you got against bears? - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 11:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Other than the fact that they are godless killing machines, of course... MastCell  19:01, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

What do you have against seals? - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 02:18, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: TBSDY

I'm really hoping that he considers what I've said and takes it to heart. Sometimes I've recieved advice, rejected it, and then after a nights sleep realized that it was good advice. That being said I do think I've done what I can to resolve this particular dispute. I haven't researched what led up to this disagreement, but if this talk page behaviour does continue I would have to certify. I really hope that's not needed though.--Cube lurker (talk) 21:45, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

That was unwise

Touch my talk page to edit anything but your own comments and I'm filing an incident against you. You were warned about editing user space pages of other editors, and while I was OK with removal of the recall category as I'd forgotten it, I'm not cool with you removing images. I also believe that you said you were going to leave me alone? I suggest that you carry that out, forthwith. Up to you, if you decide not to then not much I can do except I'll probably just start removing your messages from my talk page. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 01:07, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:BLP

You said You are not to speculate on the motives of identifiable living people on wikipedia. then might i suggest you stop this as you are obviously speculating on the motives of an identifiable person on wikipedia. --mark nutley (talk) 15:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

If you throw more shit on the wall, some might stick! Get out of here, you are unwelcome on my talk page. Hipocrite (talk) 15:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for deletion

Hiprocrite, I am referring to the article about an alledged hacking incident. I have requested that this article be deleted because:

1. There is no evidence such an event took place
2. Even is such an event took place, the content of that article would be highly prejudicial to the individual who hacked the data.

Please could you help me raise the appropriate request for deletion in line with wikipedia policy! Isonomia (talk) 15:39, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Your problem with the article appears to be the title, and not the content. Please read the header of WP:RM. It details the procedure. I will not help you file an AFD for the article, because it will not be deleted. Hipocrite (talk) 15:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

arbcom enforcement

did you put this edit in the wrong section? it ended up in a request about Verbal. --Ludwigs2 22:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

No, it's in the right section. Hipocrite (talk) 22:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

it's about blp stuff - sorry, I guess I just don't get the reference. but if that's where you meant to put it, ok. --Ludwigs2 22:54, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Flagged Revisions

I see you signed the FR petition. Could you explain what that's all about? Would it mean that an admin would have to approve an edit before it could become part of the default revision? Thanks. JPatterson (talk) 14:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

It means for articles that have flagged protection turned on (which would be mainly high-value targets, like biographies of people), a trusted editor would need to verify any edits were not vandalism before those edits appeared to the general public. Hipocrite (talk) 15:11, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

A question for you

I appreciate your view in my RfA, and I hope I can learn from it. My answer to question 10 is based upon the policies I've researched, and I won't claim to know them all. Is there a policy/guideline you could point me to that supports your position? --otherlleft 21:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Probably not. I suggest if you can block someone from editing the entire encyclopedia, you can certainly block them from editing one article. That you write "Topic and page bans are only warranted in cases on longterm abuse and should be issued by the Arbitration Committee," is merely parroting what some random policy page somewhere says, and is not nearly as complete as what I'd want from a model answer. Hipocrite (talk) 21:16, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Understood, and thank you. I will stand by my position that a topic ban is more complex and shouldn't be decided unilaterally; I'd be more comfortable issuing an appropriate block to stop the behavior and having a larger group make that determination. I appreciate your confirming that I wasn't forming an opinion which was against policy.--otherlleft 21:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Concerns

I'm concerned that your recent comments are getting increasingly frustrated. I'm sure everyone would like the atmosphere to become less bleak. Perhaps you should try to reign in your anger at the other "side" - when your anger becomes transparent, it causes people you disagree with to stop working with you, and rather against you. If you need examples, I can certainly provide them, but please consider. JettaMann (talk) 16:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Really? I'm concerned. Could you show me some examples of my anger showing itself? I'd like to work on that. Thanks! Hipocrite (talk) 16:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Right here in inch given, MILE TAKEN your frustration with others is showing and you were in fact reprimanded by someone there. My suggestion is to take a deep breath and try to think about these issues in a cool, detached manner. JettaMann (talk) 16:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

That's a good point. I was quite angry about that. I would note, however, that I've recently realized that my previous bunker mentality was unhelpful - you can see that in various discussions - specifically at User Talk:Lar and in my collaboration with Nightmote, rewriting an entire article to solve a whole bunch of problems. But, thank you for pointing that out. Hipocrite (talk) 16:53, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, when William Connolley incorrectly said that the graph showed satellite temperature data , then attempted a little jibe at me, did you reprimand him? JettaMann (talk) 17:00, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I didn't review that. However, I don't see why my giving other editors advice or not has any bearing on the good advice we gave eachother. I'd further note that I haven't reprimanded anyone, because there's not a power dynamic where anyone can be "reprimanded" on wikipedia, except at the very end of dispute resolution. Hipocrite (talk) 17:04, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, you were a part of that conversation in the link above about the graphs. Curious that you didn't feel the need to discuss this with someone who so obviously was taking an unkind (and unwarranted) dig at another Misplaced Pages editor. Perhaps you could use some introspection as to why that is. JettaMann (talk) 17:06, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I wasn't really part of the conversation, as I hadn't participated in it. In fact, I didn't really read it. I saw what topic you were all arguing about, looked at the article, and did what I thought was right in the hopes that doing it first and trying to fish out who really cared might work. I think, actually, that I crossed the bunker and made an edit that you agreed with, right? Hipocrite (talk) 17:09, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

More or less, although at that stage in the discussion we were talking about leaving the IPCC but placing the pure satellite data that Dr. Ball prefers right next to the "adjusted-amalgamated" graph of the IPCC. JettaMann (talk) 17:15, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh, right, I forgot. I made an edit that no one likes. That makes me right, dosen't it? :) Hipocrite (talk) 17:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The User Hipocrite just made another wishful concern on my edits. --DuKu (talk) 17:07, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

It's true. I gave you some advice about not calling things vandalism that are not obviously vandalism. You should definently take my advice. Hipocrite (talk) 17:09, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Question about banning

I've been thinking about your question to me on my RfA, and your position that admins should be proactive about bans. You work in much more contentious articles than I do, so I can appreciate this being important to you. I'm not intending on changing my response there, as WP:BAN only supports admins enforcing bans, not placing them, but if the policy changed I certainly would. Have you brought this up as at Village pump, or considered doing so? I'd be interested in participating in that discussion. --otherlleft 17:06, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

It was raised a bit ago, misunderstood, and shot down. It needs a breathair. Hipocrite (talk) 17:09, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. Please let me know if and when it comes up again.--otherlleft 19:27, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:DOLT

Yes I know all about that. So where is the legal threat? – ukexpat (talk) 18:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

"Never unblank biographies without asking why the IP might be blanking it. Remember, you could be personally responsible for re-publishing libellous content. Not good." Hipocrite (talk) 18:15, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Protection

I've requested the talk page be semi-protected to deal with this guy Hipocrite (talk)Scjessey (talk) 19:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I wish we didn't have to, but it appears that's the only way forward. It's a shame he's unable to contribute productively to debate. Hipocrite (talk) 19:22, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Even if he could contribute productively, that wouldn't excuse evading a block by shifting IP address. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:27, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, the first step in contributing productively to debate would probably be registering for an account. Hipocrite (talk) 19:27, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Incivility increasing

On the bright side, at least they stopped talking in lists. :) A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 01:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not convinced it's increasing but in my view things are slightly improved. Not ideal, but you have to consider the starting point... I just wish the admins would model the behavior they claim to desire instead of doing things like referring to one side as a "cabal" that is "socially inept". Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Civility

Yes, because this is civil. Telling people that they're disruptive and tendentious really is very civil. So civil, in fact, that I think you should comment on Scjessey's talk page telling him how well he handled having someone disagree with him. I'd also like to apologize for insulting him without any provocation at all. You've changed my perspective on life. Macai (talk) 02:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

So, to summarize, your response to my telling you to be more civil is to say "he did it first?" Rodger dodger. Hipocrite (talk) 02:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

More or less. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Besides, I don't see you crawling up Scjessey's ass about his lack of civility. Why is that? Don't single me out if you want me to take your criticism seriously. Macai (talk) 03:28, 6 February 2010 (UTC)