Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:11, 21 April 2011

Welcome!

Hello, CodyJoeBibby! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Footwarrior (talk) 15:22, 1 April 2011 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Misplaced Pages • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content Miscellaneous User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

April 2011

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you are reminded not to attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Murder of Meredith Kercher. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. Footwarrior (talk) 15:23, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four halfwidth tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:52, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four halfwidth tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:22, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Please be aware of Misplaced Pages's policy that biographical information about living persons must not include unsupported or inaccurate statements. Whenever you add possibly controversial statements about a living person to an article or any other Misplaced Pages page, as you did to Murder of Meredith Kercher, you must include proper sources. If you don't know how to cite a source, you may want to read Misplaced Pages:Referencing for beginners for guidelines. Thank you.TMCk (talk) 14:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles or any other Misplaced Pages page, as you did at Murder of Meredith Kercher. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Misplaced Pages policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. TMCk (talk) 15:30, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Murder of Meredith Kercher. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.TMCk (talk) 15:30, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I feel these warnings are unnecessary and an attempt to bully this editor. I was under the impression that all BLP concerns had been addressed, and that the multiple edits were people making sure that they were addressed correctly or making sure it was citing correctly. However, because it seems that TMCK is reverting into obstructionist form, I will not edit the content in dispute for at least a day or until all objections are addressed in the talk page (even though no objections have been raised, to my knowledge).LedRush (talk) 18:37, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The warnings are unnecessary? How? The content has been repeatedly re-introduced in the form of an edit war and the burden of proving the reliability of the sourcing has been neglected. Proper observation of WP:BLP should not be confused with "bullying" and "obstructionism". SuperMarioMan 19:17, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Since LedRush reverted back in the same violations I'm not surprised by his comment here although stunned about his lack of knowledge when it comes to BLP.TMCk (talk) 19:25, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I am sad that our brief love affair is over, and you are back to your personal attacks and obstructionist edits.LedRush (talk) 19:41, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Who said it's over? It's not over if you don't want it to be so let's enjoy our different views. Cheers, TMCk (talk) 19:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, he reintroduced the language that was removed. Then, he deleted the objectionable info when people actually stated WHY they thought there was a BLP concern, rather than just claiming one as a pretext to delete something they didn't like. That is not a reversion, that is addressing the issues as they come up. 3RR and BLP warnings should not relate to these types of edits (edits responsive to others' stated issues with introduced texts).LedRush (talk) 19:41, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

You should check the time of the warnings.TMCk (talk) 19:53, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm quite stunned by the level of bullying I've seen on this Misplaced Pages topic from various users including TMCK, FormerIP and SuperMarioMan. Extraordinary. Who put these people in charge of the article? It's a disaster for Misplaced Pages's credibility if a cabal of editors can censor an article to this extent.— Preceding unsigned comment added by CodyJoeBibby (talk • contribs) 15:42, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages has some very strict rules when information about living people is added. You'll usually see editors using BLP when talking about these as the Misplaced Pages policy page on them is at WP:BLP. (Confusingly, editors use BLP to refer to the policy page and as shorthand to say living person. Usually the meaning is clear from the context though.) Even more so than other articles, information about living people needs to be notable and have reliable sources. It explicitly says to remove contentious information that is unsourced or poorly sourced. If there isn't concensus that the source is reliable (and in this case, there clearly is not), it should stay off the main page until the issues are resolved. Self-published sources are somewhat discouraged on Misplaced Pages, but under BLP, they are not allowed unless published by the subject of the information. So a blog by Albert Einstein that said Joe Snuffitelli wore a terrible toupee could not be used on Joe's page to say he wore a toupee or that it was a terrible toupee.

Yes, Misplaced Pages has a lot of policies. If you haven't though, please take a moment and look at the WP:BLP policy. As much of the MoMK page falls under it, I think it might help you. BLP is taken EXTREMELY seriously on Misplaced Pages. It's not censorship, it's editors making sure that articles are where they should be. If something can't be adequately sourced, then yes, it won't get added to the article. It's up to those that want to add the information to find a good source for it. There are times that you can get folks to help, but claiming censorship and cabals doesn't encourage people to help you out. Just as you want others to assume you're acting in good faith (WP:AGF as it's called around here)), you need to do the same about others. Ravensfire (talk) 21:13, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I kind of resent being spoken to as though I'm some kind of moron when it comes to possible libel/defamation issues about living persons. For your information, 'Ravensfire', I have a law degree from Oxford University, so i think I am considerably better informed about such issues than you will ever be. How do you like that? CodyJoeBibby (talk) 22:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I still don't see the BLP issues (other than as it relates to mental health). Also, Cody made edits responsive to specific suggestions and comments on the talk page about this issue.LedRush (talk) 21:17, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

If it's about a living person, it's BLP. The Dempsey piece is a self-published source, which you can't use. The Oggi article has one yea, one nay on RSN, but even then we need something specific to tie it to the case. Saying a witness is hard of hearing is acceptable if it was something raised at the trial and/or affected the trial. If we start seeing multiple sources all independantly noting she is hard of hearing, the notability goes up. (Note the independant part - if 4 sources all comment on it, but based on the Oggi story, that's not independant) Innuendo should not be a part of a Misplaced Pages article, and without something to show that this is a notable issue, that's what this appears to be. Ravensfire (talk) 21:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

(@ Cody) Ravensfire isn't being demeaning rather s/he is being very careful and actually doing you a great service. We have a distinct culture here and Ravensfire is being very careful to describe in detail for your benefit the way things work. I think every editor here wants you to stick around and are trying to keep you from making mistakes or getting blocked. We see your frustration and each remember what it was like to be new to the scene and are trying to help. Every person on this page cares enough about you to be here. I would just suggest that you slow down and take the time to read each of the links and TLAs being posted as they are designed to help.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 23:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I regret making that comment directed at Ravensfire. I didn't mean it. I feel like I've spent so many hours struggling against impossible odds to achieve justice. But what can one person do against an organised cabal? Nothing. CodyJoeBibby (talk) 23:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

It isn't that organized and certainly not against you. Imagine Parliament without Robert's Rules of Order. :) As a newcomer, you just happened to wade into one of the most contentious articles in the place. It probably doesn't help that you are seeing experienced Wikipedians quibble with one another on your talk page as that is likely to create confusion. Remember that nothing that happens here on Misplaced Pages will really affect the outcome of the appeals process. It shouldn't anyway (saying that after seeing that an Italian judge asked people to read up on the subject...I guess sequestering isn't part of their process). Get some sleep and don't let any of this bother you tonight.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 23:55, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Formatting on the talk pages - please indent your posts

CodyJoeBibby, first, keep challenging people on talk pages when you disagree with them. That's usually how articles improve. People (me in this recent case) will hopefully respond and discuss, and eventually the article gets better from it. The discussions can get pretty long and invovled though, and some conventions have developed to help keep talk pages a bit more organized. The big one is indenting posts. Prefixing each paragraph with a colon (:) will indent the post.

Like this

If you use multiple colons, the paragraph gets indented more.

Two colons

Three colons

The convention is that when you respond to someone, you should indent your post one more than they did. This helps identify who you are responding to. If others responded to the same comment, put yours at the end of that "thread", like this.

Post you want to respond to

but someone else did first

then someone responded to that person

and still more

You would respond here

The idea is that the indentations help identify who you are responding to and give some order to the thread. If the indentations get too long and push posts too far to the right for you to read easily, you can outdent your comment, to bring the thread all the way back to the left. I usually use the {{od}} outdent template, putting {{od}} at the start of my post. This is what it looks like

With my comment here

Let me know if this is confusing, and I'll be glad to help more. Hope you find this helpful! Ravensfire (talk) 17:06, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I was just going to make this same comment. Thank you ravensfire. The lack of indenting is making following the conversations very difficult to follow.LedRush (talk) 18:33, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Ravensfire. As you know I'm a n00b. I'll start doing that.

Please be careful about this

Cody, please be very careful using language like this: "If anyone wants to call him a liar on Misplaced Pages or anywhere else I'm sure his lawyers will be very interested. " There's a no legal threats policy that is absolutely, 100% enforced. It doesn't say don't make legal threats, but that if an editor does, they will be blocked from editing. This is because you cannot edit with someone who uses threats of such action to intimidate other editors. If you wouldn't mind, please strike out that part of your comment. Ravensfire (talk) 16:23, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I have already read the policy and i believe my comments did not breach it since I myself did not threaten to do anything. I merely referred to hypothetical actions which third parties unconnected with myself might or might not take. You can't pin anything on me for that. However i have removed them entirely of my own volition. CodyJoeBibby (talk) 18:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

That was a smart thing to do. --John (talk) 18:31, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Would you mind not posting irrelevant comments to my talk page please John. If you have something to say then say it or don't post at all. CodyJoeBibby (talk) 18:36, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if I wasn't clear. What I intended you to understand was that you mustn't make legal threats like this again in the future. It will lead to an indefinite block, though not from me but from another admin. So removing them was a smart thing to do. Hope that is clearer. --John (talk) 19:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Cody, to be blunt, my perception is that you're trying to use the threat of possible legal action to pressure other editors. That's pushing NLT - see the perceived legal threats section. Especially doing it on the article talk. If you think someone is pushing limits, you can leave a polite comment on their talk page. I do appreciate you removing the comments, even though you think they were acceptable. I think you've got good promise as an editor, and there is such a hard-line taken on NLT that not even coming near it is the best option. Thanks. Ravensfire (talk) 19:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

It's not clear at all John, since no threats were made. It seems like you're the one making threats. However no such references will be made in future by me. CodyJoeBibby (talk) 20:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Talk page edits

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments. Such edits are disruptive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Hipocrite (talk) 14:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

That was an occurrence of a page edit conflict and not an intentional act on Cody's part. I have seen this repeatedly in ANI threads where admins appear to overstamp admins...it is a software glitch. Such threads are simply restored and we move on.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 14:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

if any further false accusations are made against me by this user i will take the matter up with administrators. CodyJoeBibby (talk) 14:51, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Per your denial on my talk page and here - here is you deleting my comments and replacing it with yours, if by accident or on purpose. Hipocrite (talk) 14:51, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hipocrite is correct that your action took out his comment. I would suggest to both of you to calm down. Please read No Angry Mastadons (Cody read this essay, please).
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 14:56, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did on User talk:ErrantX. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. SuperMarioMan 21:43, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Cody, you are way out of line. Someone may just as well ask you not to edit there again...and then ask you to go edit Spice Girls or something else designed to denigrate your editing abilities. Your career here on Misplaced Pages will be short-lived if you keep that up. You are beginning to exhaust the patience of those who are trying to help you.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 21:56, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

And again. Seriously, now - this is getting tiresome. Do not leave further attacks or insults. Thanks. SuperMarioMan 22:00, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Do not threaten me, SuperMarioMan, and do not claim that i have insulted anyone or attacked anyone when i have not. Do not post on my talk page again. CodyJoeBibby (talk) 22:15, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Cody, these guys are right. You need to start editing more constructively and less aggressively. You are only doing your own arguments a disservice by engaging these other editors with personal attacks. Of course, I would like to see SuperMario warn some of the other instigators, instead of praising them, but that is how WP works. Some editors will instigate (or push your buttons), and when you react, others will block or ban you. The difference for you is, you don't even need the prodding or instigation sometimes. I promise you, your views will be better received when given civilly. The way you are heading, you will be rightfully blocked in a short time. The article will suffer for this.LedRush (talk) 22:22, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your input LedRush. Perhaps the Star Trek comment was out of line but it was hardly abusive or rude. It wasn't serious, I mean good grief. However I respect your opinion and will act accordingly. I assume similar warnings are being issued to the people who have been threatening or insulting to me today. CodyJoeBibby (talk) 22:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I have warned Hipocrite, FormerIP and TMCk in the past, but because they see me as a biased editor, further formal warnings on their talk pages are unlikely to produce good results, and I intend to warn them in that regard only in response to egregious or continued attacks. It wouldn't be a bad idea for other editors, perceived to be more neutral than you or me, to make such warnings, especially to Hipocrite, which appears to be an SPA devoted almost entirely to personal attacks. LedRush (talk) 23:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I used to love referring to this site for information about anything from dinosaurs to golf balls, but it seems that some topics are controlled by nutters. God knows what the Holocaust or Israel/Palestine talk pages are like. Not to mention 9/11. CodyJoeBibby (talk) 23:10, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Personal attacks...

You have been warned multiple times by multiple editors to avoid making personal attacks and yet you persevere, such as in this case. Please, consider this your final warning; if you persist in this kind of behaviour, I'll have no choice but to report you to WP:ANI. Salvio 14:25, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I viewed my comment as an opinion not an attack but I am new to the Misplaced Pages community. I'll have to ensure I'm more familiar with the rules as I don't want any trouble. I have already apologised to one of the people I have differences with. I hope that will be an end to the matter. Respectfully, CodyJoeBibby (talk) 14:35, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, as far as I'm concerned, the matter is closed; please, just try to comment on the contributions and not the contributor and to avoid ad hominem and you'll be fine. Cheers. Salvio 14:52, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Notice of intent to take article to WP:ANI

Because of continued resistance to expanding the details in the Kercher article, and numerous users being frustrated, I am planning to take the article to the WP:ANI noticeboard to see what can be done. Your username will probably be mentioned, so I thought to ask, now, if you had time for this soon. Without revealing any of your personal plans, is there a "best time" for such a discussion, such as starting on a Thursday (for 7 days), but not on a Monday or such (or would you prefer to not enter the discussion)? At WP:ANI, shocking levels of personal attacks are permitted, so beware that people might be allowed to insult you there, but also, you can claim someone is purposely trying to derail progress, without that being considered a violation WP:NPA (such claims are only allowed within WP:ANI discussions and such). In my experience, talking with some people does no good, because they see discussions as weak resistance to be pushed aside by empty promises of better behavior. Kindness is always taken for weakness, and hence, stronger actions must be used with them. There is an essay of WP:COMPETENCE, which can be used to merely show a person is unable to function, at a productive level (repeating the same off-topic policies) with other users, while not being "proven" to have evil behavior, but rather as causing WP:DISRUPTION (a behavioral guideline) among the other editors trying to improve an article. This message is just a friendly notice, and if you wish to ignore the proposed WP:ANI discussion, then feel free to let this pass. -Wikid77 00:11, 21 April 2011 (UTC)