Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:04, 22 February 2010

Timtrent is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.

Archives
Up to 21 June 2006 Up to 14 September 2006 Up to 13 December 2006 Up to 31 August 2007 Up to 27 December 2007 Up to 7 February 2009 Current Archive

In the event that this page is empty - which will be interesting and unusual in itself - then everything is archived. You are welcome to potter through the archives :)

Don't be so uncivil

Firstly there is no Simple Misplaced Pages article for poop deck, and if there were it would not be a viable alternative to having a well-written article for the topic. It's not complexity that marks a good article, it's clarity and effectiveness of communication. The first sentence in that article doesn't manage any of those, it is esoteric and conveys very little information. It seems to have been crafted more to disappoint than to inform, for reasons unique to the subject matter. Simply because you are not aware of the difference between Simple English (a controlled language designed to teach English to foreigners, who you have charmingly characterised as dummies in your summary) and clear English doesn't mean you have to act on your ignorance with offensive flippancy. —what a crazy random happenstance 13:25, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I find that I have nothing to add to my edit summary. The article is concise. The edit summary was civil. "Dummy-friendly" was your phrase. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Simply being concise doesn't mean it's clear, and the leap from dummy to Simple English, targeted at beginning English speakers, was yours and yours alone. —what a crazy random happenstance 02:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

If you were correct then I would agree with you. Do you often start fights? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:37, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

No, can't say that I do, but rarely do I find an edit summary so obnoxious that I feel as though I have to comment. I don't wish to get into an argument over this any more than I imagine you do, so I'll let you be, but it couldn't be harmful to not only think before you commit edit summaries that could others could take exception to, but also be a tad more open to the opinions and concerns of others when they raise them. —what a crazy random happenstance 14:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I would like to thank you for giving me valuable advice. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

There you go with that flippancy again, you must be charming to hang around. Ok, well, see you around. —what a crazy random happenstance 05:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

There is no pleasing you, is there? You pick a fight, and, even when thanked, you still throw punches. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 07:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Altered Speedy Deletion rationale: James Cornish

Hello Timtrent, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have deleted a page you tagged (James Cornish) under a criterion different from the one your provided, which was inappropriate or incorrect. CSD criteria are narrow and specific to protect the encyclopedia, and the process is more effective if the correct deletion rationale is supplied. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Thanks again! GedUK  21:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I refer you to the answer I gave you earlier. Please do not give me standard messages. Fiddle Faddle (talk)

yes but ...

you have to admit, he has a cool pic on his user page.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

sad, but true. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:22, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Tim Thornton

Many thanks for removing the tag, and a fair point about eponymous articles. Timwthornton (talk) 15:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Sturmey-Archer

Please do not add advertising or inappropriate external links to Misplaced Pages, as you did in Sturmey-Archer. Misplaced Pages is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Misplaced Pages. Thank you. Rgds, --217.42.180.86 (talk) 22:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I think that you need to learn what vandalism is before making accusations. My actions will stand up to community scrutiny. Will yours? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Philippines–Romania relations has been nominated for deletion again here

You are being notified because you participated in a previous Afd regarding this article, either at Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Argentina–Singapore_relations or at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Philippines–Romania relations, and you deserve a chance to weigh in on this article once again. --Cdogsimmons (talk) 00:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Nigam Arora page

I would like to help improve this page. Please let me know your opinion as how best to add citations.

Do you know Nigam Arora? If yes, you can help improve the page based on your knowledge.

John williams 7 (talk) 22:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)John Williams

I have no idea who this person is. I have strong doubts that he is notable. Please look at {{cite web}} and {{cite book}} and use the cite button to insert citations. Read WP:RS and use only reliable sources. Look at the areas where citations are needed. At present the article is likely top be nominated for one of the deletion routes. It looks like an advert. Please read WP:NPOV Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Just curious

If you do not know Nigam Arora, what is your basis for your opinion that he is not notable. Are you in his field? People in his field know his accomplishments well.

I am all for improving this page and other pages on Wikepedia and would not mind working with you in this regard. My background is change management and engineering. Will you be kind enough to disclose your background? Such disclosure will allow meaningful exchange. What other pages have you made similar comments? I have reviewed numerous other biographical pages and it is clear that this page on NIgam Arora is superior to a vast majority of other comparable pages. I have not seen your comments elsewhere.

In any case, I will be working to add to this page over due course of time. Your input is welcome

John williams 7 (talk) 22:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)John Williams

My background is 100% irrelevant to any edits I make to any article. I chose to take an interest in the article for random and arbitrary reasons. I edit wikipedia to improve random articles, to create random articles, to suggest improvements and to improve articles, to rescue articles from deletion and to suggest non notable articles for deletion.

Since you feel that my background is relevant, I have been everything form a computer programmer to a CEO and a management consultant. None of these roles is at all relevant.

No other article is relevant either. That other articles exist and are better or worse than this one is an invalid discussion point. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

please cooperate

Please reply to my previous message so that we can have a meaningful interchange. Instead of replying and discussing, you have taken the unilateral step of nominating for deletion improperly. THis is highly improper since you know that I am still working on adding more content.

Please immediately remove the deletion tag, at least temporarily until we are able to discuss. Failing to do so will confirm my suspicion that you are acting on some personal vendetta against this person —Preceding unsigned comment added by John williams 7 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Please do not be uncivil. The tag cannot be removed now until the process is completed. I do not like your assertion. It borders on something that the admins here would consider investigating. I now propose to ignore it, and, unless you apologise, to do my best to ignore you.

Additionally please learn how to use section headings on talk pages. Everything is not a new sectionFiddle Faddle (talk) 22:55, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Please disclose your real identity

Please disclose your real identity .