Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:08, 8 July 2013

This user wants to see everything in its place. Green Line for Barnstars, Archives, Other Stuff
Barnstars/Kittens/et al My Cheatsheet - My Sandbox - /My Sandbox 1 - /My Sandbox 2 - /My Sandbox 3 - /My Sandbox 4 Archive I: 2006-2007 - Archive II: Jan-March 2008 - Archive III: March-Dec 2008 - Archive IV: 2009 - Archive V: 2010 - Archive VI: 2011 -Archive VII: 2012 - Archive VIII: 2013 Link to Newsletters I Need to Read

Gender bias task force

Hi Carol, something here you might be interested in. Best, SlimVirgin 00:19, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

SOTO

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

This is your only warning. You may not remove valid RS account of Soto's remarks at Moscow. Please read the cited source concerning Soto's Moscow remarks and undo your removal of the validly cited account of Soto's statements. You may use talk to state your views, but you may not remove valid RS content without prior consensus.
SPECIFICO talk 03:13, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Per this diff - There was no 3rr. And one revert of material no one has touched before is not edit warring. So it's really WP:BRD - and you skipped the discussion part, as you so often do. (The past removal by two editors of the Milton Friedman sentence which you did discuss and is now at WP:BLP is not related to this edit.) Please read policy more carefully.

Moreover, if one believes a newer source is more accurate in WP:BLP it's a perfectly fine edit. Now I have put back your explicit mention of remarks in Moscow despite it being less credible. See edit. If you remove a second time accurate info that makes it clear what his views are now (whatever they were in 2001), you are in an edit war.

Also see removing or putting back material that is in line with BLP policy, including regarding Misplaced Pages:BLP#Balance of positive material and criticism.

Also note per various edits of yours, quoting WP:BRD, "If one skips the Discussion part, then restoring one's edit is a hostile act of edit warring and is not only uncollaborative, but could incur sanctions, such as a temporary block." And I've noted several cases on several articles where you have done problematic edits of materials others have reverted without bothering to respond on the talk page. I've also commented on this on talk pages, regarding policy quoted above; next time I'll quote it on the article talk page too. CarolMooreDC - talkie talkie🗽 03:18, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Section header

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Misplaced Pages.

Please stop your disruptive behaviour. Your behaviour is verging on harassment. Misplaced Pages prides itself on providing a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing edits potentially compromise that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing.

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.

You may not continue these behaviors with impunity.
Consider taking a break from editing Misplaced Pages for reflection.
SPECIFICO talk 03:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Not well founded template messages. I suggest, and urge you, to ignore. Simply delete this section. And then follow my suggestion for an WP:IBAN. – S. Rich (talk) 03:40, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

That'll teach me to give explicit "generally speaking" frustrated comments, removed at this diff with apologies to User:Goethean who took personal offense. CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 03:43, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Though obviously three warnings is a bit excessive! CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 03:58, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I've made some remarks on SPECIFICO's talk page. They apply to the both of you. – S. Rich (talk) 04:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Or some might say all three of us CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 04:53, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, but SPECIFICO ain't sending me any kisses. If only the two of you would exchange some Wikilove. But all I see is . – S. Rich (talk) 05:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, what's the main page listing all those Smileys? Sorry if I get more annoyed by people who announce they intend to discredit people and then make all sorts of disruptive edits trying to do so. I'm just a whistleblower at heart and am never happier when I'm publicizing ill deeds of those who refuse to collaborate in happy wiki fashion because they think we are little more than cultish scientologists. per this diff response to this diff. Or am I being too thin skinned? But as Scarlett O'Hara said, tomorrow is another day... CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 05:34, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Jeez Carol! Don't you get it?? Steeletrap has been out of the picture for some time now. Bringing up old edits from an inactive editor is just adding more bullshit to the fire. Cut it out. By implying that current editors are cultist wackos, using this purely ad hominem and inappropriate comparison, is not publicizing "ill deeds". It is an uncivil, non-AGF attack on your part. Stop it. – S. Rich (talk) 05:50, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

The point is he agreed on Scientologists point. And edits with that attitude. And I think it's disruptive. But if you don't want what you consider uncivil talk, why bring up touchy subjects in the first place?? This why if there are to be IBANs they need to be three way. {No Smiley} CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 05:54, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

OR noticeboard

Please stop your disruptive behaviour. Your behaviour is verging on harassment. Misplaced Pages prides itself on providing a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing edits, such as the one you made to WP:No_original_research/Noticeboard#WP:OR.2FSynth_argumentation_in_biography, potentially compromise that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing.
SPECIFICO talk 17:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

At this diff: Frankly I've seen blunter language taken to ANI and gotten held up. See also Misplaced Pages:Neutral_point_of_view/FAQ#Dealing_with_biased_contributors.

Rewritten to make the point that if you would give a policy based argument maybe this would be over. Refusal to discuss issues when two editors make a point is in itself disruptive. (And LawrenceKhoo hasn't bothered to respond either.) The discuss in BRD is to stop people from getting ticked off and is what collaboration is all about. Refusal is edit warring. Maybe I need to leave that on your talk page. But trying to be more constructive. CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 17:31, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Skousen

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Please read the source. Not synth. Skousan is making the connection in the cited source. Please replace the text you deleted. Do not revert properly sourced content. Thx. SPECIFICO talk 03:01, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Again, you make a false accusation. This is part of the whole ongoing discussion of WP:OR which two editors have objected to. In the past I corrected the Skousen quote which was totally inaccurate per the source. See talk discussion. I also objected to the new Skousen WP:OR and tagged it.

However, I reverted it for the first time yesterday here because you added even more absurd WP:OR re: Salamanca school. If you and LawrenceKhoo really believed you were in the right you would have defended your position at WP:BLPN and WP:ORN. But he ignored the notices put on this talk page (since he doesn't participate in the article talk page) and at notice boards you only came up with disruptive issues which editors at Editor's Assistance already told you were irrelevant. And continued WP:Disruptive editing on this and other articles. This is your second false charge. See User_talk:Carolmooredc/Archive_VIII#SOTO. I think I've given you more than enough warnings on all of this at this point. CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 17:19, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Rothbard

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

Use talk. Simple way to have the world know your concerns without disrupting the improvement of the article. You should be confident you know what is said in the cited sources before you state your view. For example, which source says that Murray is more notable as an economist than as the progenitor of the anarcho-capitalist school of thought, American right-libertarianism, and the Mises Institue. Please give a careful read to the policy. "even if you believe your view is correct..." You may not edit war. SPECIFICO talk 18:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Re this diff Wholesale reversion of something you, Specifico, know darn well is controversial is what is edit warring. CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 18:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Please review applicable policy and guidance. Please read each of the cited sources. Avoid SYNTH reasoning. BTW, 4 editors agree on the anarcho-capital thing and one lonely you disagree. Lew Rockwell didn't eulogize MR as an economist, in fact who did? He was notable as a political theorist, controversialist, and organizer of minds and men as the Founder of Right Libertarianism. RS: Rockwell. Please undo your ew and contribute additional sources if you wish to contend MR is more notable in economics than political theory. SPECIFICO talk 18:52, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

BTW, FYI, knowing Murray-- he would not have been pleased to be called an 'economist' before a political philosopher, though he would be pleased that I noted his association with Mises in the lede. SPECIFICO talk 19:15, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't know who two of these four alleged editors are or what their reasoning is. And these last two entries belong on the talk page. CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 19:47, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

The fact that you're not familiar with the edit history and do not recall the comments of other editors suggests this would be a good time to review all relevant article, talk page, and source materials relevant to your revert. In the meantime, please undo your edit-war revert and feel free to copy conten-related text to the article talk page. I will not comment further in this thread here. Please review the warnings. SPECIFICO talk 20:20, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive . Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Misplaced Pages, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. SPECIFICO talk 19:49, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

This is a warning, do not clutter up the RfC at Rothbard with personal remarks or other off topic content. The Ives example was cited to refute your contention that the lede must call a person by the occupation by which the person earns a living. It has nothing to do with OR. Please undo your off-topic remark. SPECIFICO talk 19:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

RE; this diff. Whether comments are based on policy positions or just personal opinion or even bias is the essence of such discussions. Please see WP:V and WP:RS. CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 02:33, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Members of the European Parliament 1999–2004

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Members of the European Parliament 1999–2004. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

SPECIFICO

Many thanks for the notice. After the multiple bogus edit war warnings and wikihounding, yeah, I am very interested. --Abel (talk) 14:06, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Bad week to do an ANI with people vacationing etc. and the issue being complicated. But already had one issue go stale, so thought I better do it anyway. Misplaced Pages doesn't seem to be able to deal with complicated issues any more and a lot of things that used to get responses don't. Editor drop off really taking its toll. Or maybe they all hate one faction of Austrian libertarian types :-( Among other theories. Frustrating. CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 15:52, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

DC meetup & dinner on Saturday, July 13!

Please join Wikimedia DC for a social meetup and dinner at Vapiano (near Farragut North/Farragut West) on Saturday, July 13 at 6:00 PM. All Misplaced Pages/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please see the meetup page. Hope to see you there! Kirill  00:09, 6 July 2013 (UTC)