Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:57, 13 May 2010

2010 #1 country hits

• Please help us. NOWucme(NOWudont) _{talk 2 me} 03:58, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Can you give me some background? SlimVirgin 04:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

For the last decade on the years in country music pages, when a number one song is written or co-written by a well known country music artist, that artist is given credit in the note next to the song. With this weeks current song, it was cowritten by well known, number one country artist, so I added it to the note as always. User:CloversMallRat has now decided that it isn't important, and keeps removing it, while I feel it is important, and in trying to keep consistency, I keep adding it back. Another user agrees with me, we have not conducted a poll. NOWucme(NOWudont) _{talk 2 me} 04:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, I'll take a look tomorrow. SlimVirgin 04:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate it. NOWucme(NOWudont) _{talk 2 me} 04:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

eritr

litenin-ta!:)--pl.note:i'v]>typin=v.v.hard4me!>contactme thruMSNpl.if unclear

Talk:Animal rights#Changes to lede - removal of political jargon

Ive commented at the talk. -Stevertigo (w | t | e) 00:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

And FYI there is now an ANI thread under the heading "User:SlimVirgin on animal rights". —DoRD (talk) 00:54, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Request for review of List of Carpenter named articles

Hello,

Would you be so kind to review and comment List of Carpenter named articles which is pending a deletion review [ http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Carpenter_named_articles here.] I would be happy witha merge back to the way it was with partial listings. But any comments welcome. Jrcrin001 (talk) 03:19, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I am seeking help.

You've helped me before, so maybe you can help me again. There's this user named Bread Ninja who will not leave me alone. We got into an edit war on Phantasy Star Universe that started on January 21st, 2010 and ended on February 17th, 2010, which Bread Ninja started with his/her edit here. Anyway, we both received a 3RR warning, and since then no more trouble between us happened. Well, it started again with this edit by Bread Ninja on April 27th, 2010, which I reverted on April 29th, 2010. He's now been harassing me on my talk page again, so I banned him/her from my talk page, though he/she didn't listen. With all that said, since you're an administrator, I was wondering if there were any way to block certain users/IP addresses from said person's talk page. Well, sorry for the rant, and I hope you can help. Also, if you're interested, here's the history of the Phantasy Star Universe article. - Donald Duck (talk) 16:26, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I left BN a note about posting on your talk page. SlimVirgin 16:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Oh, and by the way, this is Zhang He. I was renamed again. =) When I created my account, I was actually Eugene Krabs. - Donald Duck (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The person has taken my edits personally, giving obscene reasons for his edits whenever i revert his edits. I try to talk to him, but will not listen. though really it's all for the efforts of helping him, he still does not go into reason, thinking back on it now, Eugene krabs is also a user i remember that fell into a few problems before without me that had been mentioned a few times in wikiprojects. despite that, i just want him to understand, it's not personal, and i do wish this is something small, but i happen to revert his edits quite a few times and do not want to get reported for edit war, so i try talking to him before i make the third revert. there is third party disputes, but as i remember, donald duck happened to ignore the third party last time, so i can't think of anything elseBread Ninja (talk) 17:14, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

One of the issues seems to be whether Vivienne is a character. It seems Donald thinks she is, and BN thinks not, is that right? Are there any sources out there that can help with this? SlimVirgin 17:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

not exactly, we both know she isn't in the game, but donald insist to be kept because he claims the section is for the series rather than the game itself, but i told him the article is for the game only so no section should be for the series only. instead of agreeing he gave an obscene reason why he stopped putting Vivienne back.Bread Ninja (talk) 17:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I would agree that, if she isn't in that particular game, but only the series, she shouldn't be included in a list of characters in that particular game. She could perhaps be mentioned in some other list on the page (list of characters in other games in the series). Donald, can you give your reasoning for wanting her in the list of characters for this game? SlimVirgin 17:56, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

You should have left a talkback on my talk page. =). I just noticed this. Anyway, I gave my explanation to B.N. plenty of times; he/she refused to listen. Take a look at the history of Phantasy Star Universe for my explanation. It was basically the same each time I reverted him/her - Donald Duck (talk) 18:07, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The question is whether this article is about one particular game or about the series. If it's about one game, the list of characters in that game shouldn't include characters not in the game. However, you could have a separate section listing characters in other games in the series, characters that don't appear in this particular game. Would that seem like a reasonable compromise? SlimVirgin 18:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I actually did that, but it was redirected to "Phantasy Star Universe". - Donald Duck (talk) 18:24, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

No, the article is not about the series, it's about the game only, i already told him if he wanted a list of all the characters in the series he should put it in the character section but was ultimately removed and called for WP:HARASS, but then i warned him about WP:HA#NOT and still insisted on it, by this i can already tell he didn't read one word of what i said.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:20, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

it was redirected due to not meeting the general notability guideline.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I mean a separate section within that article. A section called "Characters" with two subsections: "Characters in this game" and "Other characters in the series." That would give you both what you're looking for. SlimVirgin 18:33, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but that wouldn't be right. I'm not looking for both worlds, I'm looking for whats right. it doesn't make sense to include characters that don't appear in the game in the article that didn't include them, its best to move them to their respected articles, there is an article of each game of the series. as i said before.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:36, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

How many characters are there that might be listed for the series, but not for that game? SlimVirgin 18:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

There are currently two that i know of, and I'm sure there are more that Donald knows of.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

If there are a small number, it would make sense to mention them in a separate section. Compromises need to be sought for disputes like this. SlimVirgin 18:43, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

the characters that i know of are already mentioned in it's respected article, and any other new character can be moved as well to it's respected article. Plus the characters that i know of appear in a sequel/spin off that is not directly related to the first game and are the main characters. the reasons for keeping it in the article would be confusing. i would understand characters that only PSU and PSU-AotI characters in there due to it being an expansion version, but any characters of PSP-PSP2 shouldn't appear because they have a separate list of main characters and those characters aren't related to the first series directly.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:48, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Another suggestion is that one of you could create a List of Phantasy Star Universe characters, so long as there are sources for it, and list it summary style at the top of the characters section in that particular article. SlimVirgin 18:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

That could work, though really, a table is not the way to make a character list, instead summary of the characters is good and it wouldn't get AfD so fast.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of lists, but in a case like this it might be a good compromise. I agree that the table idea is not so good, and each entry would need to be sourced in some way. SlimVirgin 18:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Anyways, i fear mainly about future edit wars. so discussing with him without constantly reverting is the only option i have, other than third party, but he wont listen to third party. plus taking my edits personally. i know it sounds all minuscule, but last time i almost got reported for an edit war. i want my record to stay clean.Bread Ninja (talk) 15:25, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Request for review of Contessa Brewer page history after semi-protection]]

Can you please review the article for Contessa Brewer which was modified after it was semi-protected. Someone is sure quick to undo things that trigger their POV. If a mainstream media person says something, they said it. What exactly would need cited unless the person was quoted out of context which she was not in this case.

Contessa seems more protected then Jimmy Wales.Woods01 (talk) 23:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Woods, the edit was unsourced, which was why it was reverted. Supply a reliable source, keep the tone of the writing disinterested, and all should be well. SlimVirgin 00:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

FAR feedback, thanks!

Thanks for the help at FAR, SV: see User talk:Dana boomer#FAR.2C general stuff and guidance. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

re Bishop Hill (blog) AfD

The result was "no consensus", which of course defaults to keep - but is not quite as definitive as that result - just in case there is any question regarding the removal of the notability template. Also, since the article falls under the remit of the Climate Change Probation I have a notification template for your attention.

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Bishop Hill (blog), is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Misplaced Pages:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:45, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your helpful edits to the article. Cla68 (talk) 22:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd be interested to know why you've restored content that has been discussed at length before and for which there is no consensus to include, and why you've not discussed any of your changes on the talk page? I refer specifically to the Delingpole reference, but there are problems with the other material you added/restored. Please see Talk:Bishop Hill (blog)#Edits by SlimVirgin. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:54, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I've replied on the talk page. SlimVirgin 00:14, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the Climate Change Articles!

I am watching your edits at Bishop Hill with interest. Good luck and I hope you are able to improve some of the CC articles. Speaking from my experience, I find that the subject matter is so sensitive that many editors will interpret attempts to clean up a page, or simply improve the quality of copy as supporting one view or the other. I'm pleased to see a new face there, especially such an experienced one. Thepm (talk) 01:25, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Thepm, but I find it unlikely that I'll last the pace. If The Daily Telegraph has turned into a fringe source, then I'm afraid it's abandon hope all ye who enter here. :) SlimVirgin 01:32, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Please (seriously) don't give up so quickly! If you feel this way, imagine what a -relative- newbie (like me) feels :) Thepm (talk) 01:40, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Protection of the page Martuni (town)

Good morning. You've protected this page as Khojavend according to the claim of User:NovaSkola. There is a big discussion in the Talk page in which this user have not participated. However there is a discussion in this page NovaSkola twice moved the name of article during the discussion. There is no consensus yet. You've protected the version of NovaSkola accrording to his claim. So I think that this user must be blocked, as he twice moved the name of article during the discussion even not participated in it and the article must be protected on the previous name. Regards --Ліонкінг (talk) 06:19, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Will take a look. SlimVirgin 06:21, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Attribution

Hi, Slim. :) I was looking at the Misplaced Pages:Words to watch RfC this morning. It closed before I could get to that point. Well done. :) I just wanted to remind you, though, that when you copy content, even if heavily modified, from one Misplaced Pages page into another, you need to attribute with a link to the source to meet the terms of CC-By-SA and GFDL. I've taken care of attribution at Misplaced Pages:Words to watch for the sources I saw, but if you know of any others that have been merged into that page, please add them to the list. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl 12:09, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot about that. Thanks for the reminder. SlimVirgin 03:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Reduce clutter

I've just see this where you removes the template {{cite news}}. A better way of "removing clutter" or metadata as I call it from the running text is to move the reference down to the ref section like this. See also Misplaced Pages:LDR#List-defined_references and Template:Reflist#List-defined_references. Thanks for the involvement in this quit difficult area (some of the Climate articles). Nsaa (talk) 01:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw what you did with references there. I'm not too sure how to use those, but I'll take a look at it later. SlimVirgin 21:29, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Dave Hill (professor)

I notice that you have initiated "semi-protection" of the Hill article. I have no particular interest in Hill and simply arrived there to insert his election result.

I notice that what you call "vandalism" is an IP user repeatedly trying to draw attention to an unsourced claim in the article, stating that Hill was removed from his post due to his left-wing views. The IP has posted several times (in the article itself) material that is appropriate for the article's talk page: but being an IP presumably s/he doesn't know what the talk page is for.

My point is that if the added remarks have to be continually deleted as unsourced, so should the offending paragraph in the 'original' article, possibly inserted by Hill himself, that says 'arguably' Bognor sacked him for his politics.

Interested in your view. Sussexonian (talk) 11:03, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look and get back to you. SlimVirgin 21:27, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any diffs of the edits you feel were legitimate? This is the kind of thing the page was protected against. SlimVirgin 03:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

The edits were legitimate as comments that should have gone on the talk page. If you look at the "vandalism" which was reverted on 30 April, and that which was reverted on 6 May, you will see that a user has made comments, seemingly with personal knowledge, to question an assertion in the main article. If these comments had been put on the talk page then hopefully someone would read them and removed the unsourced part of the main article that says "For a time, arguably barred from teaching student teachers because of his left-wing politics, ...".

So the solution is to remove that part of the article which reads as if DH himself wrote it. Nothing should be added in this section without sourcing. Sussexonian (talk) 07:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I see now, thanks. I've left a note on talk requesting that it be sourced or removed. SlimVirgin 07:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikicookie

Many thanks, Brandmeister! :) SlimVirgin 21:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Nicholas Beale

FYI, there is a DRV about Nicholas Beale at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2010 May 8. Cunard (talk) 21:38, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate your quick semi-protection of the Apollo 13 article. Let's hope the vandals are deterred by inaccessibility. Your talk and user pages have some cool features! Regards, Yopienso (talk) 06:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Feel free to let me know if the problems start up again when the protection ends. Cheers, SlimVirgin 06:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Status.

Is there any way to have your status automatically change from online to offline if there's no activity at night for 30 minutes? Every now and then I fall asleep before having the chance to do all my night things, such as brushing my teeth, shutting my PC down, etc. I need it only for night, though. Most of the time I fall asleep earlier than usual it's anywhere between 10 to 11, so I need something that if there's no activity from me for 30 minutes after 10:00 P.M. at night that my status gets changed to offline automatically. - Donald Duck (talk) 14:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Please don't revert (unmarked) without explanation

Please don't just revert-n-run at the CRU incident stuff, it is deeply unhelpful William M. Connolley (talk) 17:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

William, you removed from an infobox what the event was about by adding a parameter that wasn't in the box. It's difficult to know what else to do with that but fix it. SlimVirgin 23:15, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Nonsense William M. Connolley (talk) 09:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. You removed what happened from the infobox, leaving the reader none the wiser. That's why I undid your edit. SlimVirgin 22:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Perfect Game

I edited the MLB Perfect Game page to include the box score and play-by-play of the May 8, 2010 game, and it was removed (used the Baseball-Reference site that others have also used in that page). Why? TyVulpine (talk) 23:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

If it's this edit you're referring to, it looks fine, so please feel free to restore it. I apologize if it got caught up in reverting the vandalism. SlimVirgin 23:12, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Jane Velez Mitchell

Thank you for your help with this article. After the protection block expires, what should I do if anonymous editor returns to vandalizing the article? If you check his editing history, he has been warned about his edits in which he referred to one administrator as a "douchebag". I'm afraid he'll be back to vandalizing the page after the block expires.--XLR8TION (talk) 02:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

If he keeps on vandalizing it, we can keep on protecting it, or we can explore range blocks against his IP addresses. SlimVirgin 02:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Now he is vandalizing my user page. He/she seems like a very angry individual and put a 3RR warning without evening signing it on my user page. I have warned him/her to stop but I am sure he/she will erase my warning and continue to vandalize the velez-Mitchell article and my user page.--XLR8TION (talk) 23:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

He posted that on your page before the article protection so let's wait to see how things go. SlimVirgin 23:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

He just vandalised my User Page today using an IP address of 208.100.204.162.

Anonymous editor seems to be both disgruntled and homophobic. Is there anything we can do to block this vandal?--XLR8TION (talk) 22:05, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I've semi-protected your user page. SlimVirgin 09:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI

As a follow-up to our discussion some while ago... I left it alone but no admin or bot RFCs have gone live since we spoke... So I still think it's an unnecessary waste of vertical space: Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment/User conduct/UsersList#Segregation. –xeno 12:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean about the admin or bot RfCs, Xeno. SlimVirgin 22:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

moving posts

I see that you have moved my message off your user talk page and to a Wikispace talk page.

In the past, I have seen people violently protest the moving of comments. Are they correct and you are wrong? I think that you are right. Moving of comments with a notation that it was moved from a particular page is ok.

Let me know. Misplaced Pages has a culture, much like other websites and forums have their own culture, that I seek to understand and follow. Since you are a long time administrator, this suggests that you do have experience in these things. Thank you. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 17:33, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Suomi, it's fine to move posts from your own talk page to article or project talk when the post is about the article or project page; it's always best to post to article/project talk page in the first instance, unless you think the person might not notice it or there's some personal aspect to the post. Moving posts within talk pages is fine too, though if someone objects you should move it back. Hope this helps a little. SlimVirgin 22:50, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks like Aetna needs protection again

Same vandalisms, new user id's..... see: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aetna&action=history

Thanks, Danieldis47 (talk) 01:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Done, three months this time. SlimVirgin 01:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks. Danieldis47 (talk) 02:22, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

CMT

Sorry I disappeared. Dad died completely unexpectedly 3 weeks ago so real life has been way too busy to think of anything else. In reality I'm not sure I would ever be able to keep up with Eugene, who seems to have plenty of spare time and the patience to wait his chance. Any changes made will be swiftly undone as soon as others take their eye off the article as it is a real mission for him. This is one of wikipedia's weaknesses. Sophia ♫ 21:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I left a note on your talk page. Just want to add here too how sorry I am to hear that, and that I'm wishing you all the best. SlimVirgin 02:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

WilliamBayliss1.jpg

local file File:WilliamBayliss1.jpg is being discussed for deletion at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:WilliamBayliss1.jpg. Any chance we can confirm this was published before 1923? --John Vandenberg 01:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Will take a look. SlimVirgin 01:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Spinoff

Thank you for unprotecting User:Spinoff. I hate to bother you, though I was probably not clear enough when I posted the request, but I want to post to User talk:Spinoff, not User:Spinoff. I would have made that the header for the request, but there wasn't a template for it (that I could find). Would it be possible to unprotect that page or should I ignore the usurp guidelines and post it on the main page of the user? Thanks again! ▲ MANATH The Mage Singer (talk) ▲ 02:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I see King of Hearts has now unprotected the talk page too, so you should be okay. SlimVirgin 02:30, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I wouldn't have noticed that. Have a good day/night, Slim. ▲ MANATH The Mage Singer (talk) ▲ 02:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Yr background in climate change

I'm always interested when an experienced editor comes along and gets involved in the climate change article space, and even more interested if it's an admin. I'm interested to know if you have a science background, and from where you are deriving your views of climate change. Thanks. ► RATEL ◄ 06:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I have no view on climate change, Ratel, and so far as I know I've never made an edit that might betray a view. SlimVirgin 06:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok. If you're not a scientist but curious about this topic, an easy introduction is via mp3s, such as the ones you can listen to here. ► RATEL ◄ 07:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but the issue for me is how to write articles in accordance with Misplaced Pages's policies. There's no need to focus on the details of the subject matter to know how to write an article about a blog. Less focus on the issue and more on how to edit would help all round, in my view. If I had an mp3 on the latter I could give you a link too. :) SlimVirgin 07:37, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages's policies would indicate that we not give equal weight in scientific articles to fringe theories. That's why evolution trumps creationism, and why climate change science, in which there is remarkable consensus amongst the relevant scientists (over 97% agree on the main points), should trump sceptics. But because the broad public do not like what the scientists are telling them on this issue, there has arisen a popular movement to discredit the science (esp in the UK and US), and the article about this inconsequential blog, written by an accountant, is one such example. It's saddening to see admins support and encourage the spread of this shit in the encyclopedia. Something for you to ponder, perhaps. Cheers. ► RATEL ◄

Deucalionite / 71.172.192.37

This probably settles it - he is, as predicted, not willing to heed any restriction. If you need more proof that this is in fact the banned user, I'd have to dig out the earlier instances of disruption from the same IP range. I wouldn't be claiming this if it wasn't 100% certain. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:19, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. Some initial data is at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Deucalionite/Archive, which lists a few of his early sock IPs. Among IPs that were socking immediately after his main account was blocked are

• 96.225.115.193 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 71.172.185.15 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 71.172.189.73 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 71.172.186.134 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 96.234.84.74 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 71.172.198.157 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 96.225.105.246 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 96.225.111.243 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 96.225.112.168 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 71.172.198.20 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 96.225.107.179 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• 96.225.105.150 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

The behavioural profile is also quite unmistakable (including the obsession with formal minor edits, adding project tags to image pages, etc.) About the present edit to Arvanites, I removed that passage on content grounds, because it gives WP:UNDUE weight to an outdated and trivial study. The summary and sourcing isn't strictly speaking wrong; in fact, I wrote the paragraph myself a longish while ago, in an attempt at compromising with D., who had been insisting on a much worse POV version based on the same source (prior talk here). Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any diffs that show the 71.172 range making the same edits as the banned editor? The problem is that the CU was declined, and I'm not getting New Jersey for any of those IPs (I'm not getting any location at all). SlimVirgin 14:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

No time to dig up more detail diffs right now, but there are plenty. I can get you some later on if you insist, but until then I recommend you could just take my word for it. BTW, there was in fact a CU, on the first request, which came out as "possible/likely", explicitly implicating this IP range. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

A link to that CU would be helpful, or any diffs showing that the 71.172 range made the same or similar edits as Deucalionite. If I'm blocking or semi-protecting over what he's claiming is a simple content dispute I need to be able to show that he's a banned user. SlimVirgin 14:15, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm seeing a NJ location (Bayonne, NJ for 71.172.192.37 and NJ for several others) for the 71.172 range of IPs. --RegentsPark (talk) 14:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, that's helpful. Can you show me where you found it? I tried a couple of sites but I keep getting the address for the ISP. SlimVirgin 14:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Here. --RegentsPark (talk) 14:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks, RP. SlimVirgin 14:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Here for another. Patterson and Bayonne are close to each other. --RegentsPark (talk) 14:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Slim, the CU link is right on the SPI archive page I linked you to, the first of the two cases (Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Deucalionite/Archive). As for comparable edits:

• POV edits about "Greek" vs. "Albanian" ethnic attributes, especially about Souliotes and Arvanites: Deuc. ; IP:
• POV edits regarding prehistory and Byzantine identity of Greeks: IP: , , , ; Deuc.: , ,, ,
• related to the above, an obsession with "Minyans": known Deuc. sock ; Deuc.: ; IP: ,
• fixation on "minor tweaks" to references (everywhere in Deuc.'s contribs and in the recent IPs)
• tagging image talk pages: Deuc. ; IP: , ,
• adding DYKs to a Wikiproject showcase:
• Edit-warring over the same passage of text: Deuc. ; IP:

Sufficient? Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for putting these together. I have to go offline shortly, so I'll look more closely later, but at a glance it looks like enough. That IP's currently blocked for 24 hours anyway. SlimVirgin 15:42, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for stepping in at the Misplaced Pages:General_sanctions/Climate_change_probation/Requests_for_enforcement#LessHeard_vanU LHVU affair. While it is understandable that an editor would be unhappy with LHVU’s action, proposing sanctions is really over the top.SPhilbrickT 17:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks, SP. I've only dipped my toe in the water, but it's clear there are serious problems. Not sure if I have enough interest in them to stick around, though. SlimVirgin 09:35, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I half-seriously wonder if there ought to be a process for sysops to draw straws; short straw has to monitor Climate articles for a couple weeks. Automatic barnstar for the duty, and rotate to the next "lucky" sysop.--SPhilbrickT 12:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the Cabal....

See (towards the end). Apparently William is a paid stooge, I'm just a stooge, and you're both "a fascinating story" and "connected" with WMC and me. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 22:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI

You previously commented on a prior ANI thread involving this user. Please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Pedant17_disruption.2C_after_two_RFCs. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 01:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

"Media Matters" RS/N

The parameters for use of "partisan" or "biased" sources within BLP articles is currently being addressed within an RS/N on "Media Matters". In that RS/N, I recently commented...

Until this recent diff, WP:BLP read as follows...

If an editor appears to be promoting a point of view, insist on reliable third-party published sources and a clear demonstration of relevance to the subject's notability.

I'm not sure just what rationale supported this deletion (the edit summary reads "tightening some more, removing repetition, wordiness, overlinking"), but it is the ONLY Misplaced Pages "Policy" on BLP I've found that provided some buttress against the wanton introduction of POV biased, quasi-RS content into BLP's. I believe this is a dreadful policy deletion and Misplaced Pages will be the worse for it.

As you were the editor who deleted that particular verbiage and as you are obviously deeply involved in the formulation of WP:BLP policy, I thought you might be able to provide some valuable insight to the current discussion. Any contribution or consideration you might care to contribute would be appreciated. Thanks JakeInJoisey (talk) 04:43, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jake, that was removed as part of an effort to tighten the wording of the policy, because it had mushroomed a little. The reason I removed that particular sentence is that we have the same sourcing requirements whether we feel an editor is promoting a point of view or not. SlimVirgin 06:08, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

No

Re : your request is rejected. Now, please stop edit warrring and join the conversation on talk instead of blind reverting William M. Connolley (talk) 13:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

William, you were accused in a mainstream newspaper (rightly or wrongly) of using Misplaced Pages to undermine scientists and others you disagree with. Singer was one of the names mentioned. Two weeks ago I'd have said that allegation was nonsense, but I've seen some troubling editing from you in the last few days (since I started looking). Why, for example, do you want to stress "retired" in the first sentence when the next says he's a professor emeritus?

It's in your own interests that you take extra caution when editing BLPs to make sure you write in a disinterested tone and use good sources, or even stay away from them for a period. Taking pages off a watchlist for six months can do wonders for perspective. SlimVirgin 13:11, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Why, for example, do you want to stress "retired" in the first sentence when the next says he's a professor emeritus? - oh good grief. Emeritus *means* retired. Professor emeritus. So let me throw your question back at you: why do you feel the need to edit matters that you clearly don't understnad? William M. Connolley (talk) 14:29, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, William, I'm aware of that, and I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't try to patronize me. :) That's why I asked the question. Why do you want to repeat that he's retired twice in the lead? SlimVirgin 14:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, OK, I see. In that case: because an American atmospheric physicist specializing in planetary science, global warming, and ozone depletion doesn't work. He isn't an "atmospheric physicist", He is a "retired AP" William M. Connolley (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't say that. And I'm not sure why you're discussing it here. SlimVirgin 15:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

That is what it said when you reverted . And we're discussing it here because this is a conversation between us, that others don't need to read. Otherwise it would be on the article talk page. Like your original, rejected, request William M. Connolley (talk) 15:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Please read this exchange and reflect on whether more efficient communication would be worth a try. SlimVirgin 15:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

That isn't an answer William M. Connolley (talk) 15:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)