Revision as of 09:05, 16 May 2013

User:Boing! said Zebedee/Userboxes/Topblurb

Archives

2013 - Q2 • Q1 2012 - Q4 • Q3 • Q2 • Q1 2011 - Q4 • Q3 • Q2 • Q1 2010 - Q4 • Q3 • Q2 • Q1 2009 • 2008 • 2007

April 2013

Advice sought

Hi Zeb. I wonder could you advise about this: & etc., which seems somehow contrary to MOS. I have opened a discussion at that editor's Talk Page. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:57, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

WP:NOTCATALOG seems to apply. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:20, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry I haven't had a chance today to take a look, but on first glance it does look a bit excessive - I'll try to have a closer look and offer some thoughts tomorrow. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

No worries. The editor seems open to discussion. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:47, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

p.s. we're up to 62 bare external links now. Just don't want him to waste any more effort if they are deemed inappropriate. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry I really haven't had time to look at this so far. I'm not sure bare links will actually be a waste of time in themselves, though there may be more references than necessary there. They really just need to be formatted properly, but they're better than nothing, and maybe someone will come along and fix them up some time. They should also be at the end of each sentence/clause rather than in the middle. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:40, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll direct attention to your statement here if that's ok with you? I am surprised. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure - but I should say that I'm not really an expert on the subject, it's just my feel based on my experience. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

If you want to suggest anyone else, I'll gladly go and pester them. Sorry for using you as a "one-stop-shop". Martinevans123 (talk) 18:59, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Dennis Brown is a very knowledgeable and helpful chap - often pretty busy, but usually happy to help. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Good thinking, Batman. I'll drop him a note. Cheers. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Deletion of Institut auf dem Rosenberg

Many thanks for your insightful commentary as to why, the Institut auf dem Rosenberg page should not feature on the english version of Misplaced Pages. However, you have failed to enlighten me on how to make the page sound 'less as an advertisment,' and more as an article.

As a fellow writer, I have put in enormous effort to write a true picture of Rosenberg. I tried to include other views about the school, such as its hefty pricing (the one negative comment online), however the comment I found regarding the price exists only in form of an online commentary, which Misplaced Pages does not permit as a source. I have also looked at all references about Rosenberg online and have included all of the ones found online. Finally, I looked at the entries of other boarding schools, and based my article about Rosenberg on those already existing.

I would like you to note that I have invested a enormous amount of time to produce this article in my own free time and have put it together with outmost intergrity, being a journalist myself. I am open for comments and changes to my entry, however, I am puzzled why other entires of boarding schools are deemed to meet the integrity standards eventhough the quality of the article and sources is much poorer than the one you asked to be delted about the Institut auf dem Rosenberg. You will see that they are all shown in a positve light, some of them dont have single source!!! Many are online since many years. I cannot help but feel there is a certain capriousness to this. Again, any suggestions from your side are welcome. (LKK343 (talk) 12:19, 4 May 2013 (UTC))

Hi. I'm afraid a lot of the article was written in an overly-promotional style - more like the school's own PR than a neutral, factual, description. For example, sentences like "Rosenberg is among the world’s most prestigious schools and is the only luxury boarding school in the German-speaking part of Switzerland." and "The Institut auf dem Rosenberg paves the way for students, who often come from entrepreneurial family backgrounds, to take over leading businesses around the world and prepares them for roles in science, arts and politics." really do not belong in a neutrally-written encyclopedia article - and that's just the lead! Basically, what you would need to do is remove all the superlatives, all the praise, all the puffery, leave out the trivia - and just write it in a disinterested factual style, supported by independent third-party sources. I have provided you with a user copy of the deleted article, at User:LKK343/Institut auf dem Rosenberg, so you can work on it to bring it to a less promotional standard. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:37, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your input, I appreciate it very much and will review the article under these suggestions as soon as possible. I agree that naming Rosenberg as one of the world's most prestigious schools is redundant to the substance of the entry, however, would like you to note that it is indeed the only luxury boarding school in the German part of Switzerland. Switzerland is known for its many boarding schools, institutions, and education, however most of them are located in the French-speaking Western Switzerland. This is why I wanted to make the distinction. Having said that, I do not mind for this sentence to be deleted either. I hope you have the time to have a look at an amended article, which I hope to post next week. Many thanks again. (LKK343 (talk) 12:46, 4 May 2013 (UTC))

Hi. I'd be happy to have a look over the article in your user space when it's ready, before you move it back to main space, if you'd like me to. Also, I see what you mean by the "only luxury boarding school in the German part of Switzerland" - maybe if you could think of a different word than "luxury" it might be better? Anyway, good luck with it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:24, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Rajput

I am not able to revert D mavi should they make any further poor edits at Rajput in the near future. I am trying to explain on their talk page but have no idea if they are seeing the messages or not. - Sitush (talk) 11:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, I have it watched. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:48, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, he's way over 3RR, so I've blocked - I'll leave the revert to someone else. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

RegentsPark did that bit. Thanks, both. - Sitush (talk) 17:50, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

SPI

Hi, Thanks for the comment on the spi, Is there any way of getting it removed tho as It now appears on Google (something I didn't want to happen), I was hoping my stupid actions of CSD would've paid off but sadly not lol, Thanks, Kindest Regards, –
→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 16:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, hi, I hadn't realised who the deletion request was coming from. It's not usual to delete SPI reports, but I guess it might actually be OK to do a CSD:G7 delete on it - I've been bold and done it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:01, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow thank you ever so much :) You've made my day so thank you! Much appreciated! :) –
→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 17:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Deleted Metro United Way

Can you please explain why Metro United Way was deleted? When similar nonprofits have[REDACTED] profiles: United Way Worldwide and Blessings in a Backpack. Thanks.

Melody MurphyMelody Murphy7 (talk) 23:00, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. The article was written in way too promotional a style of writing. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Your Nickname

Your nickname, makes me think too much about it, where does it come from, is it random or what, I think it's the fact that it sounds like its from a cartoon for kids, It's a really good nickname but why "Boing! said Zebedee" it makes no sense or logic.

Zebedee was an almost human creature in a yellow jacket with a spring instead of feet. He always appeared and disappeared with a loud "boing" sound and usually closed the show with the phrase "Time for bed." - The Magic Roundabout

(talk page stalker)Nothing to do with Jaspert Carrott, then? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, perhaps a bit of his influence too ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense now, sadly I cant watch that show (The Magic Roundabout) because i'm not in the provided area. PBASH607 (The One Day Apocalypse) (talk) 22:03, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I expect this will help. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:32, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

• Ha! Now that's classical humor, though most modern people will not get those jokes an all or find them funny in general. I found it hilarious and classical, Thanks a ton! PBASH607 (The One Day Apocalypse) (talk) 22:56, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Adam Norman

Hi, I am not sure why this page was deleted. This person is the CEO of a well known company that receives media cover globally in the form of magazines, TV, radio and more. Was there something wrong with the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EctoMedia (talk • contribs) 06:18, 8 May 2013‎ (UTC)

There was no indication given in the article as to why he is sufficiently important to warrant a Misplaced Pages article. It was also written in too promotional a style - we don't want marketing fluff like "unlike anything the industry has seen before" here. Ultimately an article about a person would need to satisfy the notability requirements at WP:N, so please have a read of that and feel free to try again when you are sure you can provide proper support through reliable sources (see WP:RS too). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:27, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of ectomuscle

Again, a company that traders globally, receives media coverage every month in multiple countries. The reasons stated were copyright which we have full permission to quote from the website? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by EctoMedia (talk • contribs) 06:18, 8 May 2013‎ (UTC)

I didn't delete it, but I can see it was not deleted as a copyright infringement - it was deleted mainly because it was pure promotional marketing fluff, and partly because there was no indication of why the company is sufficiently important for a Misplaced Pages article. (There was a copyright problem, and there are proper procedures you would need to follow to release the material so it can be reused by Misplaced Pages, but that's not really relevant as the material is wholly unsuitable for use here anyway). You are not allowed to advertise or promote your company here - Misplaced Pages only accepts neutrally-written articles about notable companies, almost always written by disinterested third-parties. Please see WP:NCORP for the notability requirements for companies, and have a look at the conflict of interest guidelines at WP:COI too. Finally, your username is a problem - Misplaced Pages accounts are for individuals only and cannot be named as if they represent a company or organization. I shall leave you a suitable message on your userpage suggesting what you should do. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:38, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

No edit summary revert -

I have to disagree with your edit summary/revert explanation. Reversions of edits done by IPs where there is no edit summary are done quite frequently. I see it all the time by other editors, including experienced, long-time editors. Now, if you're saying there's no policy stating no edit summary is not enough of a reason to revert, I might agree with you. Then I'd ask where I could find that policy. Winkelvi (talk) 03:22, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. If you have a read of Help:Edit summary, you will see that an edit summary is described merely as good practice, but not as a mandatory requirement. Reversions of contentious unexplained changes, especially reversions of unexplained removals, are indeed done frequently. But there needs to be an actual reason to believe the change itself is not desirable, rather than just "no edit summary" - especially with a pretty uncontentious-looking addition where it is plainly obvious what it is and why it was done. On the whole, your enthusiasm is admirable, but I do think you're being a bit over-zealous with this article in your desire to have it deleted - and I would urge you to just step back from it a bit now and see how the AfD discussion goes. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:35, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and I should add that it is nothing to do with the change being by an IP. IPs have exactly the same editing status as users with named accounts. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Out of curiosity I inspected the edit. It added value to the article. I would not have reverted it. IP editors often make edits with no summary, and that is fine. My practice is to inspect them, see the value and consider my action based upon that. But I tend to inspect those of new editors, editors with redlinked talk pages, and IP editors anyway. Most of those edits are good edits. Some are not. This one was a good edit (0.9 probability), so I do not see the issue with either the reversion or the need to discuss the reversion. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:34, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, the irony. I forgot to leave an edit summary! Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hehe :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, not leaving an edit summary when talking about leaving edit summaries -- funny as well as ironic.

Reverting the IP user because of no edit summary had nothing to do with being over-zealous or believing the article needs to be deleted. I'm hoping there's no insinuation that I am trying to sabotage the article. Thanks for the further explanation of the non-policy on edit summaries. It's appreciated. Winkelvi (talk) 22:23, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

But I tend to inspect those of new editors, editors with redlinked talk pages, and IP editors anyway. Most of those edits are good edits. Some are not. - you obviously do not watch caste-related articles, where the reverse usually applies! - Sitush (talk) 23:14, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I watch some in that area, and I agree that the reverse replies. It seems that there are areas where partisan support of an idea is more important to transient editors that NPOV (etc). This appears to be related to a sad lack of education in some geographies coupled with a belief that local aspects are more important than a global view. That the language of this version of Misplaced Pages may not be their first language doesn't help. None of these things are the fault of the people making the partisan edits. I imagine it will change over the next century or so. At present the things that are held as dearly held beliefs outweigh the importance of a more rigorous view. Such thing stake time to change.

If we take a broader view of it , though, this is a statistically significant anomaly, one that is difficult for experienced editors to work with and continue to assume good faith, but is, in reality, just an anomaly. When more experienced editors make the same mistakes, that is a kettle of fish of a very different colour, though. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 06:44, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Mike Watts

Hello Boing! said Zebedee. You've deleted this page. I have little experience with WP:SPI, but I'm sure User:Wattsy11123 (creator) = User:Djwattsy112 = Category:Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of SebastainTorres. What do you think about it? --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 14:52, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah yes, that looks pretty blatant, thanks - I've indef blocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Italics in article title

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar should not be an italicised article title but I have no idea why it is or how to fix. If I do a normal page move then I am fairly sure it will not fix the format problem - is there some sort of hidden template or what? Any ideas? -And, no rush - next year will do. Sitush (talk) 14:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

The {{Infobox court case}} template automatically sets the article title to italic (as do some other infoboxes), and you need to specify "italic title = no", which I have done. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

You are way more clever than your namesake, and me :) - Sitush (talk) 15:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

"Time for bed" -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:17, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

• News and notes: Candidates nominating for Foundation elections; Looking ahead to Wikimania 2014

• Technology report: Foundation successful in bid for larger Google subsidy

• Featured content: WikiCup update: full speed ahead!

• In the media: New Misplaced Pages for Schools edition; Anders Behring Breivik's Misplaced Pages contributions

• WikiProject report: Earn $100 in cash... and a button!

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 18:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

User talk:69.41.173.145 - Refactored unblock decline

Good day. I notice you altered the unblock request decline I posted on the talk page of the IP above. I was curious as to why. If my response was insufficiently informative or something along those lines, my mistake. - Vianello (Talk) 19:33, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, no, I hadn't even seen yours. We were just both declining it at the same time and we collided - the software does sometimes allow that to happen without giving an edit conflict. I've reverted mine now - yours looks fine. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:40, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

That was my other main guess. Just thought I'd check in case I'd bungled something without meaning to. I've never seen edits merge together like that from simultaneous edits. Thanks for being on top of things! - Vianello (Talk) 19:42, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

ANI

Please remember to notify User talk:Sol1 that they are mentioned at WP:ANI. I believe there is even a boilerplate template that can be used. Please also drop by that discussion. Apteva (talk) 23:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, dammit, I intended to do so but I got dragged away and I forgot - thanks for the reminder. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

• News and notes: WMF–community ruckus on Wikimedia mailing list

• WikiProject report: Knock Out: WikiProject Mixed Martial Arts

• Featured content: A mushroom, a motorway, a Munich gallery, and a map

• In the media: PR firm accused of editing Misplaced Pages for government clients; can Misplaced Pages predict the stock market?

• Arbitration report: Race and politics opened; three open cases

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 02:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Modi is getting out of hand

Narendra Modi is getting out of hand. This edit summary and stuff by that user on the talk page over the last 24 hours or so is already pushing the limits, imo. We were doing quite well in keeping a lid on things there - accusations of a dodgy lead that has caused reports at BLPN, ANI and a RfC aside - but it is going to get very heated soon if this style continues. I've left a note about the edit summary but wonder if it should be revdel'd because of the Indo-Pak, Hindu/Muslim & plain old Hindutva nexus? If needs be, the actual content could be reinstated, - Sitush (talk) 08:13, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

It has got worse, so I've taken it to ANI. - Sitush (talk) 09:05, 16 May 2013 (UTC)