Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:58, 29 July 2013

Misplaced Pages is a project to create and improve an online encyclopedia which is as accurate and as useful to its readers as possible. It is not an MMORPG, a debating society or an experiment to create the ideal online community. Activities which do not, in some direct or closely indirect way, contribute to that goal are a waste of the project's resources and should be minimized as much as possible.

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Regarding Swimsuit Burqini

Just received your message, Could not reply because I wasn't a member.

Your message was " Hello, I'm Beyond My Ken. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Swimsuit because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Misplaced Pages as a "soapbox" are against Misplaced Pages policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Misplaced Pages. Thank you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:28, 11 April 2013 (UTC)"

We tried to edit the picture of the burqini as this was a fake copy of the Ahiida Swimwear , Aheda Zanetti Ahiida®, Burqini®, Burkini®, Hijood® are registered Designs and registered Trade Marks properties of Ahiida Pty Ltd therefore can we have this image removed and replaced of the correct swimwear Not sure how to add an image but if u can add a picture but if u can change it to the 4 ladies running , which can be viewed on www.ahiida.com

Awaiting for your reply — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahiida Burqini Swimwear (talk • contribs) 03:49, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not really understanding what you're asking for here, or what "a fake copy of the Ahiida Swimwear" means. The image you're referring to, File:Burqini.jpg was originally posted on Flickr by Giorgio Montersino at this location with a CreativeCommons license which was compatible with our policies, so it was ported over to Wikimedia Commons at this location. If you are saying that Giorgio Montersino is not the copyright holder of the image, then you need to take that up on Wikimedia Commons. Present evidence that you own the picture to the Common OTRS teams, who you can reach at this noticeboard. (The Commons is a sister project, not part of English Misplaced Pages, but under the aegis of the Wikimedia Foundation, just as we are.)

If you are saying that you own the rights to the trademark "Burqini", you will have to present that evidence to OTRS as well, but I'm not certain that they will be able to help you, as we routinely use trademarks to describe various things. (There is no legal prohibition against the non-commercial use of a trademark.) If you are saying that the image is of a Burqini-type garment, but not yours, then I think it's possible that we can change the description in some way to avoid identifying it as your garment. If you are saying that the article of clothing is a real Burqini (that is, made by you), but the picture is not yours, there's nothing that can be done about that, as there is no legal bar against taking pictures of items of clothing. I do not think you will prevail in that request - you cannot control what image we use.

In any event, there's no particular need for me to be involved in this. I hold no position of authority or responsibility on Misplaced Pages or the Commons, I'm just a common volunteer editor, like thousands of others. You really should take your inquiry to the OTRS people at the Commons, where the image is located, and start things from there. Best of luck. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Incidentally, we don't allow usernames which are company names, nor do we allow promotional editing or editing with a conflict of interest. Please keep these in mind for the future. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

To the best of my understanding, this user is representing the company that makes the product described in Burqini, and is claiming that the picture in that article does not depict one of the products his company makes. If this is true, then the image probably should be replaced with a more accurate one, just as we wouldn't want to have a picture of an AMC Gremlin in the article Ford Pinto. Ahiida Burqini Swimwear: like BeyondMyKen said, we don't allow companies to operate accounts on wikipedia. If this account is used only by a specific person at your company, you should rename it something like Aheda Zanetti Of Burqini Swimwear to make it clear exactly who you are. -- LWG 14:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

In light of your correction spree on ANI...

Thought I'd drop this off. ;) Best, m.o.p 06:54, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

And I thought I'd drop this off. :/. With the best intentions in mind. ·Add§hore· 10:53, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

M.o.p., thanks. I haven't taken a close look at it yet, but I will. Addshore, I'm sure you come here with the best of intentions, but - what was it someone said about the road to hell? In any case, take a hike, please. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:07, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Wheel warring

Just so you know, it is never wheel warring when an admin reverses another admin because of a clear consensus at a discussion in a proper forum. That is the proper way to reverse an admin, and all our actions are always subject to reversal by consensus. Technically, when I use the admin bit, I'm supposed to be doing exactly what the community would vote to do if it were brought to a discussion. That is where judgement is important for admin, we are supposed to be able to guess what a consensus would be, and do only that. Spartaz already closed and reblocked, which is exactly what should have happened, since he is completely uninvolved. It would have been improper for me to close and/or reblock because I've had several email contacts with CC, and I've taken Nijonjoe's actions to Arb before (it wasn't personal, I actually like the guy even if I disagree with him). In situations like this, we always want a closing admin to be miles away from "involved", as to not create any new controversy. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:01, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Dennis: Thanks for the explanation, it is appreciated. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:04, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments at ANI

But your comments were not based on fact, where they? Where is the SPI that backs up your belief? You saw an IP making their first edits at ANI, jumped to the conclusion they must have an account they were not editing from (for whatever reason). Where was your AGF? Where were your facts? GiantSnowman 11:30, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh come off it, GS, you've been around long enough to know that many, many banned, blocked or discredited editors use IPs to get their rocks off editing Misplaced Pages, and you should further know that when a brand-new IP wanders into an AN ot AN/I discussion it's almost always a case of sockpuppery. Not every edit is equally worthy of AGF, nor is every editor. And speaking of AGF, I'd like to assume a little more basic intelligence from you than you are exhibiting just now. As I said on the 50dot editor's page, keeping sn open mind is a fine thing, but not so open that your brains fall out. Dig? Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:41, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

• • And it was not my conclusion that "that the IP has been editing from IPs for years" - I merely asked how you knew they hadn't been. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Where's the proof they have been? Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:44, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
      • Ken - yes, of course, I'll admit that almost every time I see an IP posting at ANI my ears prick up, and questions get asked; but I assume AGF until evidence points otherwise. Gut feeling (even if it is 99% right) is not cold, hard evidence. PS you have been here long enough to know that asking for proof someone is not socking is not how we go about things here. GiantSnowman 11:46, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
        • (ec) @BsZ: Um, what is your quote from? Because, sure as hell it wasn't from me.

          In any case, the only facts I, or anyone else has, is this list of contributions. Take that, fold in as much AGF as your Cuisinart will hold, and what you've got is this list of contributions. To reach any further conclusions you have to lift your head out of the AGF sinkhole, and actually evlauate the edits, because other evidence ain't gonna be forthcoming. Now you can certainly sit back and play Candide and take everything at face value, but in that case remind me not to engage you as my advisor in negotiating with with North Korea. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:44, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

          • @GS: Don't ignore that pricking up of your ears, that's called experience, and it's worth as much as (if not more) as the wyou would receive. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:07, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
          • (edit conflict) Was this not you? - "BSZ's, that the IP has been editing from IPs for years is barely creditable". I'm simply saying that there are proper ways to express your suspicion that someone is socking, and unilaterally demanding that they identify to you and removing their comments when they do not is not the way to do it. Anyway, you do seem to be inordinately attracted to getting involved in pointless arguments and dishing out petty insults - I'm not playing any more, so I bid you goodbye -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:14, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Ken, I don't ignore it, simply place it to one side - on Misplaced Pages it's called AGF, in real life it might be called "innocent until proven guilty." GiantSnowman 12:28, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

• I have to agree with GS and Boing! here. Very often, I will see someone that I am sure is a sock, and I will either quietly research them, or report them to SPI, but I won't make a claim unless I have filed at SPI. It isn't a matter of your conclusions being right or wrong, it is a question of your methods. Just as we would tell anyone else, don't make a claim if you haven't stuck your neck out on an SPI report. Otherwise, it tends to cause drama. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:45, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, folks, I do appreciate it, since you're all respected Wikiipedians (and Dennis is perhaps the AGF-iest editor I've run across in my almost 8 years here). I won't defend my comments, because I don't believe they need defending, since I think they lie well within the normal range of accepted and usual WP behavior. I'll simply remark that it is my belief that sockpuppetry -- even more than vandalism and editor retention -- is one of the primary problems weighing down the project today, and remind everyone that AGF is not a suicide pact.

Like "innocent until proven guity", AGF is a conceit which -- outside of official actions and procedures, where it remains in effect until proper processes have been carried to their fruition -- only lasts until there is some evidence which casts doubt on it. That evidence can be as simple as the "prickling of the ears" mentioned above when looking at a "brand-new" editor's history. I do think that AGF is essential to the smooth running of the project, but I do not think that ignoring facts -- even undeveloped and nascent facts -- on the basis that AGF must reign supreme is a good thing. Nor do I see that legitimate suspicions must be quelled until such time that there is sufficient evidence to open an SPI -- we all know well what happens to SPIs that are not well supported, and all sorts of bad things can happen in the interim between the first drop of evidence and the accumulation of enough to file a case. As someone who has, in the past, been harassed by a sockfarm (and may be currently as well), I understand in my gut the danger of not speaking out when the occasion first arises.

(Damn, I guess I did defend my comments anyway, at least in a general way.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:41, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

(BTW, Dennis, I mean "the AGF-iest" as a compliment.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:18, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Off-Broadway

Off-Broadway League. Also scanning here.

Disambiguation link notification for April 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Frisky Dingo characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Secret Service (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:10, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Merger/move proposal

I have proposed a "merger/move request" between List of U.S. state partition proposals and List of proposed states of the United States, because I feel there is considerable overlap. If you are interested participating in the discussion, please feel free to do so here. Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 22:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Your photo of detail at Nat. Arts Club studio building

Greetings, BMK (I knew "Ken" meant knowledge because I grew up in the UK).

My co-author, Dennis Berry, & I would appreciate the use of your photo of the detail over the door of the National Arts Club studio building. The Kindle edition of our mystery book, Eye Sleuth (think Miss Marple on steroids) will have various pictures. Yours of the detail would be great for Ch. 29 (the photos will be in an appendix at the back of the book). I enjoyed looking over your other photos. I lived in NYCity for many years & recognized many of your photos. If you're interested, you could check our site, www.murderprose. Thanks again for offering use free of copyright - we will, of course, give correct attribution.

Sincerely,

Hazel Dawkins — Preceding unsigned comment added by Summerday22 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Please be my guest. If the resolution isn't sufficient for you, I can take another easily, since it's in my neighorhood. (Next week, though, I'm out of town for a while.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 59th Street (Manhattan), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sutton Place (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:21, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Pointer

I raised the issue at WP:BLPN#Photos of private people doing embarrassing things. Please participate in that discussion. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I will. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Why the reverts?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Why did you revert every single one of the bot's edits earlier today, without explanation? (example) Please explain. —Theopolisme (talk) 11:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Cleanup tags are ugly and distracting for the reader, albeit sometimes necessary given the state of an article. Your tag was totally unnecessary and the "invitation" should have been handled in another way, on the talk page, for instance. Cluttering up an article with frivolous tags is not a helpful thing to do, and doesn't aid in building an encyclopedia, which is what we're here to do. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:06, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

This should have been handled by bringing it up at the project talk page or one of those seemingly countless noticeboards, not by simply unilaterally reverting an approved task. Theopolisme (talk) 21:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Actually, it should have been handled at your end by getting a consensus from a general discussion afrea, such as the Village Pump, to do it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:18, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

The addition of the template to articles entirely not my thinking--I simply automated it. The project has been discussed and approved numerous times at the Village Pump, Talk:Main Page, and elsewhere. Theopolisme (talk) 21:23, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Consensus was attained to use Template:TAFI on WP:TAFI articles, which occurred through discussions. Rather than unilaterally removing it from articles, please discuss the matter on the Project's talk page if you disapprove of it. Thank you for your consideration. Northamerica1000 04:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Ah, no, I don't think so. I can't see that any WikiProject has the inherent authority to clutter up articles with unnecessary non-clean-up tags. Any "consensus" to do so should have come via a community-wide RfC. Clean-up tags are - at the very best - a necessarey evil (if they are that), but adding totally unnecessary and frivolous tags to an article is not only detrimental to the reader's use of the encyclopedia, it opens an entirely new frontier for WikiProjects to decide to tag articles using their own criteria. Please stop re-adding these tags, for which there is no proper consensus, and which are a very bad idea. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Please check the talk page for links to a proper "consensus". And please stop reverting unless you have actually seen those. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

The only proper consensus would come from a community-wide RfC. The discussion on this page is closed. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:06, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Are you kidding? Try going through the village pump and main page archives. Ryan Vesey 05:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

King of Hearts: "or Northamerica1000 and TheOriginalSoni, it may be a good idea to revisit the discussion and bring in the whole community by posting on WP:CENT, WP:VPP, etc. Personally I keep an eye on a lot of things here, but I never heard of such a discussion myself, which kind of indicates that it was not advertised well." Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:19, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. Epicgenius 19:36, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I've asked for it to be oversighted. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:38, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Merry Andrew (clown) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Merry Andrew (clown) is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Merry Andrew (clown) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Hesperian 00:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Moving day

Hi, can we talk through the objections explicitly on the talk page? The repeated habit of not explaining is upsetting other editors, above, I see. Tony (talk) 11:10, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

WTF are you talking about? The only editor "upset" about this article is you. Go find something else to bitch about. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Warning: you have breached the civlity policy in your comment above, and the three-revert rule. I have invited you to discuss the differences between the versions, but you have refused to. Again, could you please explain on the article talk page why you are breaching WP:MOSNUM by changing "am" to "AM", and WP:MOSDASH by converting range dashes to hyphens. I ensured that two versions ago the days were linked in the "See also" section. It is important that the matter be resolved calmly and with politeness. Tony (talk) 13:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC) PS Very happy to edit collaboratively with you. Tony (talk) 15:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

"Very happy to edit collaboratively with you" Then WP:DTTR, and don't edit war over a bunch of fucking hyphens. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd really like to be on good terms with you. I'm trying. Could you try too? I've obviously offended you at some stage in the past. Tony (talk) 09:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Fifth Avenue (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Union Square and University Place

Church Street (Manhattan) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cary Building

Henry Street (Manhattan) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Heath

Spats (footwear) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Drum and bugle corps

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Reverted Edits on Broadway theatre

Hi, you recently reverted my edit to the Broadway theatre article. I'm unclear of the rationale for this there was no edit summary for this reversion, but my changes were explained in my edit summary. I'll reiterate it here for your convenience: the only thing I changed was un-linking "Theater District" as it was already linked in the previous sentence (see WP:OVERLINK), and changing its spelling to reflect the spelling of its article (see Theater District, New York). Let me know if you have any questions about this. Xiaphias (talk) 01:55, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:59, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

The Standard, High Line

That one's good, too. I thought the night-shot was a bit more dramatic, but appreciate that this one may be more illustrative. Pburka (talk) 16:53, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

The night shot was interesting, and might be usable with a bit of cropping and lightening up, but I thought this one was more straight-forward - not that there was a lot to choose from. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, I've adjusted and cropped the night shot and restored it to the infobox, moving the other shot down into the article. As is often the case, there's a tension between what makes a good photograph, and what makes an image that is functional for us. The original night shot photo was certainly a much better image per se, but I think the cropped and slightly lightened version is more functional for the article - I hope you agree. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:15, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Epicgenius

I don't want to get into the content on any articles you have discussed, but the WP:cleanstart discussion was brought to my attention, and I think you might be misunderstanding policy a bit. No one is required to tell you, or me, what previous accounts they have had. Forcing someone to publicly state their previous accounts is pretty much against WP:AGF. It is wise for them to tell a CU in case it comes up as potential socking, but there is no requirement they do so. I will leave the content discussion to you guys, but I do think you were a little over the top in the way you demanded he tell you his previous accounts. If you think he is socking, you can file an SPI or email myself, another one of the clerks, or a CU with any info you have, but demanding they disclose previous accounts on their talk page, and threatening them with a block is, again, a bit too far. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 22:15, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Dennis, thanks for the note, I was just about to leave one on your talk page saying that I was aware of the discussion that KumiokoCleanStart began there.

I am cognizant of what WP:CLEANSTART says, and aware that there is no advance requirement to disclose one's intention to start clean, however, the policy also makes it quite clear that an editor who is starting over has an obligation to avoid topics and conflicts that they were involved with before, and the only way to determine if a supposed clean start is doing so is to know who they were before. There is also the question of whether an editor who claimed to have been editing "for years" with other usernames is now editing under a new name to avoid scrutiny, or to evade a block or ban. Again, the only way to determine that is to know what the previous names are. Now, I did not (and would not) insist that an editor make these names public, which is why I suggested that he do so to a trusted admin, something that was worked fine in the past.

I didn't think then, and do not think now, that these requests are "over the top" in any way, shape or form. I am certain that you would have handled it differently (read: better) -- and just before KumiokoCleanStart stuck his nose in and muddied the waters I was considering asking you to take a look at the situation -- because you are a kinder, gentler editor than I am, but I entirely disagre with you: nothing I did was unwarranted by the situation or the editor's behavior.

In any case, the editor in question has now backed off from his claim of using multiple usernames, and I'm inclined to believe him, until evidence arises to indicate otherwise. I've also generally disengaged from him, since dealing with him was becoming a terribly annoying time sink, given his poor judgment and rash edits. In my mind the entire question is closed, and KumiokoCleanStart's running to you is just another example of why he's now a detriment to the community and should have remained indef blocked - he improves nothing and creates unnecessary drama wherever he goes.

Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

BTW, just one important point: I have never "threatened" anyone with a block - what would be the point in doing so, since I cannot carry out the threat? I have, however, on innumerable occasions, pointed out where the continuation of editing behavior is likely to end up in a block. This is quite a run-of-the-mill thing to do, since all final warning templates, and may lower-lever ones as well, carry some version of this language. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:39, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not here to get between you and Kumioko nor debate the dysfunction in that relationship, but your methods of addressing the editor were really over the top. I say this as a friend and not trying to be mean, maybe you didn't realize how strong that was, but it really was too strong. Honestly, since you have no evidence of wrongdoing, it bordered on badgering him. I'm not saying this to "sanction" you, just giving you information on how it looks to outsiders. Users aren't required to be honest on their user pages, after all, so he can say he created all 4.2 million articles there for all I care. And if it is socking, it is actually much easier for us if you silently bring it to the attention of an experienced clerk or admin. That way behavior doesn't change, and no drama happens. To address the last concern: Please do not ignore this, this is a very serious matter, and could lead to your being blocked from editing if you do not respond. is part of what I'm saying, it is still passive-aggressively threatening. It is telling them bad things will likely happen if they don't comply with your request. It isn't a good way to phrase things in a case like this where there is no proof of wrongdoing. Vandals and obvious actions that are blockable, then using the "b" word is appropriate, but not where it isn't know if there is a violation. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 22:48, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Dennis, I hope you know that I respect you, and I appreciate your warning, but, at the moment at least, I continue to believe that your characterizations of my actions are much too strong. Because it it you, though, I will let it sit for a couple of days, and take a look at the discussion again to see if I feel differently about it at some distance in time. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:52, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

That is all I ask. I'm not saying it is blockable, or a crime against humanity, just very sub-optimal. All I can ask is that you let it steep a bit and consider my concerns in a day or two. Thanks. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 22:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Blue Velvet (film) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to American Philosophical Society may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:38, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to MacDougal Street may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:36, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:15, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Willis G. Hale may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:47, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:57, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration case "Race and politics" opened

An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 21, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm 01:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Reverted your edit

I reverted your edit at that user's talk page. I once fell for his bait as well and couldn't stop myself from posting my opinion of him on his talk page. It caused drama. The only person who will get problems from such posts is you, and the only person who will find any satisfaction in such posts is him. Please, I understand what you did and why, but please don't repeat it. Let him dig his own grave without dragging anyone else down with him. Fram (talk) 10:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll not undo your edit again, but I sincerely hope that you will do so yourself. No matter how justified, personal attacks are usually more actionable than months of trolling and disruption. Fram (talk) 10:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Fram, I have reverted my edit, but there was nothing in it that was a personal attack - far from it. It was, in fact, a sincere expression of wonderment about the actions of an editor who appears to have lost touch with reality (and that's the best possible spin I can put on it.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:24, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Something like " are you fucking delusional" will be read as a personal attack and a rhetorical question anyway, no matter the intention. That his RfA is pointy, disruptive, ... and that he has made countless personal attacks (and policy errors and other very problematic edits) over the last few months will for some people have no importance whatsoever, and the edit will, without any of the context, be used to attack you. It isn't worth it. Fram (talk) 10:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. I guess I was just bowled over by his chutzpah. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

As expected, this link is already used by him to defend his comments at the RfA, even though that link is a reply to that very RfA. Rather circular, but not surprising. Simply ignoring it all is the best solution. Fram (talk) 13:53, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

David Gordon (choreographer)

You reverted my attempt to disambiguate Henry IV in David Gordon (choreographer), but leaving it as just Henry IV is far less accurate than pointing it one of Shakespeare's two plays. Please try to find a better way to disambiguate the Henry IV link. Thank you, PKT(alk) 11:47, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Please read the ref. The production referred to was of both Parts 1 and 2. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:55, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

So, please find a better link. PKT(alk) 12:02, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Regarding images on 'Stripper' page

I removed those images because I felt they detracted from a surprisingly thoughtful discussion of various dimensions of stripping, and to make that information more accessible to people who might be uncomfortable viewing it.

Also, an image to demonstrate what a 'fully nude dancer' looks like is hella unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbuford (talk • contribs) 19:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I've just left a message on your talk page. The question of removing the images has been contentious in the past, so, unfortunately, your personal judgment can't control here without a consensus from other editors. The best thing to do is to discuss your concerns on the talk page, where you'll also find the previous discussion. (BTW, I know what the Empire State Building looks like too, but we do have pictures of it in our article.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and as I mentioned on your talk page, a reading of Misplaced Pages is not censored is going to be helpful to you as well. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:06, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Second Bank of the United States

Dear Beyond My Ken - Thank you for your thoughtful and USEFUL edits to the bank article. I'm working on a related topic - Panic of 1819 - which has some crossover sources.

Enjoyed your user page comments and personal history on Wiki. I've had some of the same experiences e.g. resorting to other user names to evade harassment, I created "36hourblock", to commemorate a gratuitous disciplinary assault by an partisan administrator. That's the only user name I've worked under for years. I will definitely visit your page when I need some insights on Wiki guidelines and such not.

Fraternally, 36hourblock (talk) 22:58, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Pith helmet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The Telegraph

Second Bank of the United States (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William Strickland

Washington Street (Manhattan) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Penitentiary

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 22:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

re:Hala'ib

Unfortunately, your information totally incorrect, first: Hala'ib is an article talking about the city not about Hala'ib Triangle there is another article.
second: Hala'ib city is not dispute area because Egypt full control and administrate it since 1995 and there is not military conflicts or Political negotiations on it.
third: Officially it is Egyptian City due to political boundary set in 1899 by the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium and also in CIA map and United nation maps the city located in Egyptian boundary.
fourth: the Neutral point means (reliable sources - not bias) , not means (stand in the neutral zone and pleasing all parts) . I didn't write personal opinions , I correct the information depend on reliable sources , your role asking me about sources or references , not revert or refuse any edits! this is 💕 you are not the owner or judge ! You actually violate Misplaced Pages behavioral guideline due to WP:DWIP and this WP:AGF
Finally: I'm not new user in Misplaced Pages, I use it and edit since 2004. thanks --»» Ibrahim.ID 04:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Point 1 is incorrect, Hala'ib is, in fact, in the Hala'ib Triangle, and gives that area its name. Point 2 and 3 are the Egyptian view of the dispute with Sudan over the Hala'ib Triangle, and point 4 does not justify making contentious edits in favor of one side in a political dispute. The article as it stands is neutral and balanced. Please leave it that way or I shall have to bring your non-neutral pro-Egyptian editing - on it and other articles - to the attention of admins for their disposition. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

please first: Ignore my nationality, I only write in wikipedia as a human with neutral and objective thoughts. you treat me as a biased person ! in Point 1: I think you have poor knowledge about it, Hala'ib Triangle,is big area contain a lot of cities Hala'ib is one of them, the city actually under full Egyptian administration since 1995 and there is no military conflicts or Political negotiations.

please read this articles: Abu Musa that said Iranian island but in fact it's dispute area with UAE. Kargil and Srinagar is known as Indian Cities although it located in disputed area of Kashmir , Ceuta is Spanish city although the dispute with Morocco . What do you say about that ?? is that is the neutrality ?

If you want to discuss this Talk:Hala'ib, If the discuss failed, it may leading to Dispute resolution
but actually you cannot prevent me or threat me from edit any articles . I will put all information with neutral sources, I think any further reverting form you will be understood as (disrupt Misplaced Pages to illustrate a point) and targeting me ! »» Ibrahim.ID

The discussion has already taken place. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The Majestic on CPW

Hi,

I noticed you re-added "The Dakota" to the list of twin-towered apartment buildings on Central Park West on "The Majestic" building page. As someone who grew up on Central Park West, I believe this information is incorrect, I'm not sure where you are getting it from, as the Dakota is not a tower, or towered building, at all, let alone a twin-towered one (it is only 9-11 stories tall, and has a peaked & gabled roof that rises to three peaks on each side, with the center peak being the highest on each side) and I have never seen it referred to as one (the tri-towered Beresford is often lumped in with the other four, but I don't believe I've ever seen the Dakota referred to as twin-towered; it would be accurately grouped with those four, The Beresford, The St. Urban, etc. in any number of other potential groupings (most prominent buildings on Central Park West, most prestigious buildings on Central Park West, etc.)

I'm still new to this & haven't figured out how to cite references yet, but here's one link that mentions the four twin-tower buildings on CPW: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/09/realestate/streetscapes-eldorado-90th-street-1929-art-deco-twin-towers-central-park-west.html

If that's not an adequate reference, just Google twin towered apartment buildings central park west and any number of potential references should turn up in the search results. Rick Wrinklebottom (talk) 02:13, 22 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rick Wrinklebottom (talk • contribs) 02:11, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

You were right and I was wrong, sorry about that, I should have checked before I made the edit. I'm a New Yorker, but the Upper West Side is not my normal stomping grounds. My apologies. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Zulu Baker Caine.gif)

Thanks for uploading File:Zulu Baker Caine.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:46, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Restored image to article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:53, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your attentiveness

Thanks for your attentiveness. For the record, I had followed protocol and notified him, although I was fully expecting that he would delete the notification. --Orlady (talk) 00:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

No problem, just trying to be of assistance. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Be my guest ;) In ictu oculi (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

And another thanks

Thanks for checking and restoring the items on Buttram's page. The items seemed random and I didn't know if they were a holdover from the long term problem editor that we had with that page. Hope you are well and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 01:07, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I am well, thanks, although busy in RL: my wiki-time has decreased drastically this week. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:42, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

New York County Board of Supervisors

I'm really not willing to get into an edit war over this, so we'll just have to suffer the loss for no good reason. Suffice it to say that the board was, in fact, a legislative body, as intended by that category. In the course of my recent research on Elbert A. Woodward, I read the minutes of board meetings in which officers were approved, etcetera. One of the proposals that came along during Tweed's reign was to abolish the board. Could you please restore that? Thanks. Greg Bard (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Just left a note on your talk page. Give me a few hours to get access to my library, and if I find you're right I'll gladly revert. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:10, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Incidentally, the basic criteria for a legislature is that they are elected and vote on and pass laws. Appointed bodies which adminsiter laws or which publish regulations etc. are not legislatures. You may be right about the NYCBofS, but approving officers doesn't clinch it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:13, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

It's true, just appointing people is not inherently legislative. But the Board of Supervisors was a legislative body. It wouldn't be called a "County Board of Supervisors" in New York State if it wasn't. Greg Bard (talk) 18:22, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I did some research on Google Books, and you appear to be correct, so I've reverted back to your version. Sorry for the trouble. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:24, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Uriah P. Levy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Independence Mall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:48, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

AAFM - FYI

As noted here, the following has been posted online and a rough facsimile was emailed to the functionaries email list earlier this week, and then forwarded to the Foundation legal department.  Frank  |  talk  04:05, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Powel House may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:36, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to United States Navy Seabees Bridge may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• looking south from Stone Bridge.jpg|View of the ] from the pedestrian bridge]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done

Orphaned non-free media (File:Man who fell to earth ver1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Man who fell to earth ver1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Your revert of The Man Who Fell to Earth (film)

Dear Beyond My Ken,
You may have been irritated that a poster you added to this article in 2010 had been replaced, but that was no cause for reverting my edits.

"Your" poster was a homemade homage poster, as several posters at impawards are. No official poster would only have the name of the lead actor and the film title, without any references to the production company or the distributor. The one I had added is the official poster, used throughout the world when the film was released.

The only defence Misplaced Pages has for publishing non-free film posters, is that they serve as visual identifiers of the film in question. This means that a published poster by default should be one that people remember seeing. If a single editor prefers one poster over another is irrelevant. As you yourself point out in your philosophy: "Misplaced Pages exists for the people who use it or who will potentially use it, not for the people who edit it. Every edit should either improve the factual accuracy of Misplaced Pages or make it easier and more useful for the reader. Any edit which does not serve these goals is a waste of time and energy, and quite possibly counterproductive." It was for this very reason I replaced the previous poster, as that poster is unknown, while the one I uploaded is the one people remember - perhaps not in he British quad format, but the artwork is easily recognisable.

Also, in your eagerness to revert quickly, you reverted all other changes and corrections I did at the same time.

I have now reverted your revert, as your reasoning for reverting can't be defended. What's more pleasing for the eye, is both a question of individual taste and totally irrelevant for Misplaced Pages. Best regards, Thomas Blomberg (talk) 10:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

What's pleasing to the eye is no more "irrelevant" than what's well written. Two statements, one of which flows well and reads better and the other of which is clunky and hard to read, are not "equal" even if they both convey the same information, and we, as editors should choose the better of the two. When there is disagreement, then other editors are consulted and a consensus is sought -- but that doesn't abrogate our individual responsibility to choose the better sentence and the better image. Now, I'm perfectly willing to entertain the idea that the image that was there is not an official poster (although you present no evidence for that except your own personal analysis), but that's an entirely different argument from saying that it doesn't matter which of two images are more visually pleasing or effective - it very much does matter, since we're here to serve our readers in whatever way we can, and presenting second-class images is not helpful.

In any case, in an abundance of goof faith, I accept your argument that poster that was there is not official, but Ihas replaced the quad poster you put up with a regular poster, which is more easily accessible to the reader. The graphics are the same. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Lincoln Memorial

According to this: http://wikitravel.org/en/Washington,_D.C./West_End, West End is a proper noun; you may be right, if this West End is not part of the National Mall

That's referring to the West End of the city, not to the mall. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:54, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. It should be lowercase. Motios (talk) 01:33, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

World Socialist Web Site

Hi Beyond My Ken, I see that you've deleted references to the World Socialist Web Site (WSWS) from a series of film reviews (presumably following Nixin06?). I'm restoring those references. The WSWS was determined a noteworthy news site by the community (though non-neutral), and has been called a significant minority voice when qualified as such. In that context, your assertion that the the WSWS is an "unknown source" is clearly incorrect.

I understand your objection to what you call Nixin's political opinions, but that accusation is a double-edged sword: by following Nixin's edits with non-neutral edit summaries you open yourself to accusations of your own biased POV. Otherwise, I agree with all of your philosophy as written on your talk and user page, and am grateful for your contributions to the site. -Darouet (talk) 15:29, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Bullshit. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:54, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

There is no indication that those film reviews, or that reviewer, are notable. They do not belong on WP. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 16:20, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

The fact that the website has some notability does not mean that the film reviewer does and I can only agree with the assessments here and the one provided by Betty Logan here Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film#V for Vendetta .28film.29. MarnetteD | Talk 16:27, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I've added my own two cents to that discussion as well. Betty can correct me, but it doesn't seem that she was advocating that we keep or remove Walsh's material: she doubts the WSWS should provide film reviews (I disagree with her there) but writes "that it seems to be held in sufficient esteem to provide political insight", and suggests it be kept with other political commentary, or political comments removed altogether. Because the film is political, that would seem unnecessary. Erik writes that the WSWS should be an acceptable source and if we use google books as a standard, Walsh is also referenced in various books. As I pointed out in the discussion above, his numerous interviews with film makers suggest some importance, if common sense does hold some water here. -Darouet (talk) 20:40, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

His article only shows one passing reference sourced from Google Books. If there are more, you should add them to his article, which is seriously undersourced. Oh, and there's no point in continuing the discussion here, let's centralize it on the Film Project talk page thread. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:47, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Ken for your civil note. I'll improve the Walsh article if I can. -Darouet (talk) 21:36, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

P.S. as Betty Logan points out, Walsh's reviews are aggregated on Rotten Tomatoes. I would have considered his reviews notable due to his interviews and references to his work elsewhere, but Betty does state that RT is a basic litmus test for notability concerning films. -Darouet (talk) 22:18, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Public School 9

(delete the following when done; it has no archival value)
Hi. I'm not trying to be a WP:DICK about the principal, but the general rule for "notable people" articles is that either the person has to have a Misplaced Pages article, or you have to provide a citation from a reliable source showing their notability. School principals are not automatically notable, so you're going to have to find a source in order to add him to the list. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:51, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

No biggie, I'll drop it. I have no particular interest in the article, other than having originated it — and I live within 300 yards of the building. I do not know Dr. Kaiser, but he is notable, if for no other reason, because his is still alive after 119 years, 140 days. Poor guy … he survived all these years only to get digitally-deleted.

NYC public schools are peculiar for the complete absence of institutional identity for individual schools. By contrast, articles on private schools, a few public schools outside of NYC, universities, and colleges list principals, head masters, presidents, overseers, and regents regardless of whether there's a linkable article. The architectural significance of Public School 9 is but one aspect. I am the one who initiated (and wrote most of) the C.B.J. Snyder article. Synder had been cited in other articles, yet no one removed his name for the lack of link.

More to the point, the opening sentence for Public School 9 is misleading. Public School 9 is not a building, it is a school — one that preexisted the building on W 82nd and one that still exists today. One could make a strong argument that renaming the article would enhance it; to wit: Former Public School 9 building.

WP notability is a guideline for article topics (biographies, and the like). The mere mention of a person's name (e.g., authors, composers, athletes, spouses, head masters, criminals, race horses, architects) does not have to meet the notability criteria; rather, it simply needs to be relevant and useful to the public and other researchers. — Eurodog (talk) 16:11, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

The article should bear this name: Public School 9 (historic building) — Eurodog (talk) 16:15, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

One could also make the argument that the article should be merged back into the one about the existing school. — Eurodog (talk) 16:19, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll try to keep quiet after this, but here's another point; under your criteria, several names on this link — UT Austin presidents — would need to be removed. Eurodog (talk) 16:27, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

If you were compiling a list of the high school's principals through the years, that would be different, but a single principal on a "notable" list implies something about that particular principal that justifies their being immortalized on a list of notable. Also, just generally, I would say that university presidents are more notable (in the context of the university article, not "notable" in the sense of deserving a stand-alone article) than are high school principals.

As for the building vs. the school, that's a perennial problem when the building is historic, and is also a problem when the school housed in the building changes name, or is replaced by another school, or a single school is replaced by multiple schools, as has happened to many of the larger NYC DOE buildings, now called "vertical campuses". There's no general solution that I know of, since each instance has different parameters. I'm not sure there's enough info to sustain a stand-alone article on the school, as opposed to a combined school/building article, so maybe the solution is to change the lede to define the article to be about both. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:15, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Okay! I'm working with you. I'm late for something. Can you take a look at the mult image template I inserted and figure out how to fix it? The text does now float below it. I'll be back online late tonight or tomorrow morning. If you would like to discuss some of this offline, email me thru the system. — Eurodog (talk) 18:12, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I converted the multiple image into a gallery, formatted it for size, and moved the plaque out of it and down, where it canbe displayed at a size the reader has a chance of being able to read. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:20, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

After thinking about, I like your idea of changing the title of the current building article to "Public School 9 (historic building)", since the current P.S. 9 bears no lineal relationship to the school described in the building article. So I'm going to go ahead and do that, since it can always be undone. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:10, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

St. Ann's Church (Manhattan)

I'm wondering if you have seen the talk page there, where I made some comments, and whether you have any response to them. Thanks. Vzeebjtf (talk) 00:16, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your expeditious and excellent rewrite. Vzeebjtf (talk) 22:02, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Glad I could straighten out that tangle. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:16, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Metropolitan Life building image

Why the shouldn't I replace a blurry, black and white, grainy 100+ year old image with a newer one if it's free? What objection is there besides "the old one was good enough"? I don't see a reason to keep reverting my changes. RocketLauncher2 (talk) 16:55, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Because the building is historic, the article already has a number of images showing how it looks *now* and we should also show how it looked *then*, and the historic image shows the *entire* building from an angle it's difficult to get now. The choice to put that image there was made after careful consideration, please respect that. Newer is not always better. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:47, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Legal threats

Please don't shoot me; I'm the messenger. In case you've not seen it already at Talk:American Academy of Financial Management, I'm here to let you know about this page; it seems a thoroughly frivolous complaint, but it still might be worth your attention, since you are named in the complaint. Nyttend (talk) 00:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I am aware of it, and it is, indeed, not worthy of concern. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:52, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Newmarket

Ken, you should have looked more carefully at my edit before undoing. I corrected a misspelling ("continously") and changed "fire house" to one word to be consistent with its spelling elsewhere in the article (and with my dictionary).--BillFlis (talk) 19:35, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:36, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Montauk Manor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palm Beach (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Vertical spacing

Looking at the latest spat on vertical spacing (found on Bishonen's talk page), I invite you to comment at WT:MOS. It turns out there is a uniform CSS method way to increase the spacing above the first navbox in all articles. That should alleviate lame edit wars, if a reasonable compromise can be found on how much spacing is needed. Curb Chain has already commented there. 86.121.18.17 (talk) 06:34, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I will do so when I have the time for considered opinion, most probably on Monday. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:36, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Please join the discusstion on WT:MOS. This is your opportunity to give input to the community to convince everybody that your custom spaces are a good idea. --91.10.19.240 (talk) 19:30, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I will. I am recovering from a very tiring job and am just doing maintenance editing at the moment. I should be able to join in tonight. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:33, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Hello, I'm from BLT Architects, the architects who have been working on the restoration of the Strawbridge's & Clothier Department Store Building in Philadelphia. I would like to use your photo (http://en.wikipedia.org/File:Strawbridge_%26_Clothier_Building_main_entrance.jpg) for some of our marketing materials and would like to talk to you about what kind of attribution you would like. You can email me at lcharleson@blta.com or call me at 215.563.3900 ext 209. Lcharleson (talk) 13:43, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Why?

Hi Beyond My Ken, why --Samək 23:03, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Please see WP:OVERLINK. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:08, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Visual Editor

Hey Beyond My Ken

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Beyond My Ken changes other's talk page comments. Thank you. Dusti 14:15, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I was aware of it through the new notifications system. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:30, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I note that the IP who started the thread has been blocked 72 hours for harassing me, and that consensus (aside from those who have had completely independent disagreements with me and would comment against me if I were applying to be a chicken flicker) is that the thread started by the IP on WT:MOS which I removed (after it had already been removed earlier by another editor) was inappropriate and abusive. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:44, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

The AN/I thread that Dusti kindly notified me about was the third one instigated by the IP in recent days. Just for the record, here are the three closing comments connected with them, all by admins:

• No matter how many times the IP (and the other related IPs in the past) say "this is about BMK's conduct" doesn't change the fact that this is about white space. I've read the entire thread, and nothing is going to come of it except more repetitions of "this is about BMK's conduct". Saying the same thing over and over and over again doesn't make it so. No administrative action is required.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:46, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
• If the biggest problem we have on Misplaced Pages is whether or not somebody who is "in pretty much every other aspect a competent, clueful and valuable contibutor" should or shouldn't be taken to the stocks over a blank space on a page, then Misplaced Pages is in mighty fine shape. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 16:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
• As for this incident, it is difficult to blame someone for removing a post that obviously didn't belong there. Regardless of how anyone feels about anything else, that reversion was reasonable. It did not belong on that page in any way, shape or form, and the IP placing it there was disruptive. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 14:42, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:04, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

And, for good measure, the decline of the IPs unblock request:

• When you're told you're wrong, and that consensus is that you're wrong, forum-shopping to try and obtain action against a specific user is indeed harassment. All of your edits from this IP are indeed continuation of that same harassment - we don't have time/space for this type of behaviour - it's a collaborative project (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:43, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:13, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

I know we've been on opposite sides of the Dakota debate, but I did want to say thanks, sincerely, for your attempt at reading a consensus and acknowledging the existence of both names in your recent edit. My issue was purely procedural, which I'm sure you recognized; so I just wanted to come and express my appreciation for your being openminded and honorable overall. With thanks, --Tenebrae (talk) 19:40, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your note, which I assure you is appreciated. I did indeed think that the edit I made was a good reading of consensus and might be an acceptable compromise to all. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

That's very gracious of you, and I feel bad that we got off on the wrong foot. Editorial content and editorial style are separate issues, and your care, thoroughness and attention to detail enhance New York City articles tremendously. I didn't want there to be any doubt of my respect for your work itself, and I do apologize for my part in any contention between us. And on this particular issue, I think we seem very much in agreement. I don't work on New York articles often, but when I do, I look forward to working with a knowledgable and responsible editor such as yourself. With my best wishes, Tenebrae (talk) 16:47, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Harlem Courthouse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gables (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:37, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Glamor or glamour?

I change the spelling of "glamor" to "glamour", and you reverted that change. Based on your revert note, "American subject, American spelling", you didn't mean to revert the changes I made in the same edit, which included correcting a misspelled name in a couple of citations, expanding a bare <ref>"title", ''publication'', date, page</ref> citation into a full <ref>{{cite news | ... }}</ref> citation, changing several Misplaced Pages-deprecated curly apostrophes (’) to approved vertical apostrophes ('), hyphenating voice-over to make it consistent with the article title, etc. Consequently, I have reinstated those edits yesterday.

In consideration of your "American subject, American spelling", I looked up the spelling of "glamour" or "glamor". My spell-check is set to US spelling, and it flagged "glamor" with the wave red underline. I don't trust spell-check software as much more than a guard against typos, however, so I searched further. According to the Grammarist blog entry Glamour vs. glamor, "glamour" is an exception to the pattern of words that are spelled with "o" in US English and "ou" in English-English; "glamor" is a much less popular alternate spelling even in US English. I don't know how authoritative "Grammarist" is, but that seems consistent with other articles I viewed (without saving links).

Today I made another edit, changing wording in a couple of places and cleaning up punctuation a little.

Finally, in a separate edit, I am re-doing the change from "glamor" to "glamour", based on the Grammatist and other sources that say that's the favored spelling even in US English. Since it's the only change I made in that edit, if you still want to revert it you may do so without affecting other changes.

— Steve98052 (talk) 23:04, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

My mistake, apparently, although "glamor" is widely accepted in the US as well. Sorry for the error. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

No big deal. Grammatist does approve "glamor" as a secondary spelling, so your only real error was reverting the other stuff I made in the first edit where I changed the spelling to "glamour". I saw that you're a very productive editor, so I suppose it was just a matter of working too quickly. Keep up the good work.

— Steve98052 (talk) 00:47, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) According to the leading established dictionaries, glamor is chiefly AE and glamour is chiefly BE. Misplaced Pages use is governed by WP:ENGVAR. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:30, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

The thrust of American spelling, which favors "or" over "our", will most probably catch up to "glamour" eventually, and make it the clear preference in American English. I might well be wrong, but I can't think of another exception to the "or"/"our" divide between American and British English, and the pressure of that division will likely wipe out the "glamour" exception at some point. It doesn't seem to quite have happened as of yet, though. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:12, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Northern vs. southern Westchester

While you were correct about Nuits being in southern Westchester (I had gotten its exact location mixed up a little bit), you are not with Sunnyside. In the split discussion, I proposed using the municipal boundaries that are closest to the Cross Westchester Expressway (or rather the line drawn directly from the Duke's Trees angle (the western corner of Connecticut) to the Tappan Zee Bridge. Nobody seemed to object to that as municipal boundaries are at least fixed.

The only variation from that was Tarrytown, whose municipal boundary extends south of the expressway for some distance. And if we put Tarrytown's listings in southern Westchester, we'd end up having to put the rather small Patriot's Park in both lists because it straddles the Tarrytown-Sleepy Hollow village line.

All of its other listings are north of the expressway save Lyndhurst (which you didn't change). And while Sunnyside may use Irvington as its mailing address, it is just over the Tarrytown village line (indeed, we disambiguate it this way). Really, it's easier this way. Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Sunnyside is technically in Tarrytown, but historically it has always been considered to be part of Irvington (the same with Jay Gould's Lyndhusrt, although somewhat less so). It's only the historical accident that Tarrytown incorporated before Irvington (Dearman) that swooped those estates into Tarrytown.

In any case, I'm not sure the Cross Westchester Expreessway is a particularly good dividing line, as it puts much more territory into Northern Westechester than into Southern Westchester. As someone born in Tarrytown and raised in Irvington, I would put both Irvington and Tarrytown into Southern Westechester. (I'd be inclinded to be Sleepy Hollow there as well, but then it would make sense to put all of the Town of Mouth Pleasant into the south as well, as that doesn't make sense.) I'd put all of Greenburgh into southern Westchester, and not divide up the town between Northern and Southern. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:26, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Looking at the map of towns and incorporated areas in Westchester (at westchestertowns.com/htm/index.html), I'd be inclined to use I287 as a guideline, but not break up any town between Northern and Southern, so that Rye Brook, Harrison, White Plains, Greenburgh and Tarrytown should be in the south, while North Castle, Mount Pleasant and Sleepy Hollow would go into the north. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

If you look at how I divided the county by towns at the list talk page, I did pretty much that. I-287 is actually a better guideline in the west ... east, as I said, it's easier to start at the Duke's Trees angle and develop a town line along that through the area around Kensico Reservoir, Westchester Medical Center and Westchester Community College.

Irvington is in the southern Westchester list. If you put the Tarrytowns into southern Westchester the boundary gets very odd-looking, plus there's not a relatively even split of the amount of listings—southern Westchester may have less in area but is much more densely developed. That's the point of the split. Right now it's 87 listings in the north and 82 in the south. Daniel Case (talk) 20:56, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

OK, really no problem, just chatting more than advocating a change. I'll keep in mind that for WP purposes Tarrytown is in the north. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:56, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

And that's only for NRHP list purposes (Chester County, Pennsylvania, had to be split three arbitrary ways because of its 300+ listings, none of which (like Westchester once you exclude Yonkers) were concentrated in any one single community). We've talked about at some point, should the listings in both Tarrytowns grow further, giving them their own list. Daniel Case (talk) 05:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

File:George S Patton statue Ettelbruck 2007 crop.jpg

If you created this media file and want to use it on Misplaced Pages, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. Note, if you did create this file, you may want to upload it to Wikimedia Commons, which will allow the image to be accessed by all Wikimedia Foundation projects (which include the various localized versions of Misplaced Pages)

If you did not create this media file, please understand that the vast majority of images found on the internet are not appropriate for Misplaced Pages. Most content on the internet is copyrighted and the creator of the image has exclusive rights to use it. Misplaced Pages respects the copyrights of others - do not upload images that violate others' copyrights. In certain limited cases, we may be able to use an image under a claim of fair use - if you are certain that fair use would apply here, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list. If no fair use rationale applies, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

PumpkinSky talk 23:56, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:George S Patton statue Ettelbruck 2007 crop.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:George S Patton statue Ettelbruck 2007 crop.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 00:42, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Man from Planet X, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Area 52 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

OK as is. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Nikolai Lobachevsky

Hello. Please note that it's not good "Wikiquette" to revert without a good reason, just because you don't like the changes. --Omnipaedista (talk) 07:39, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I gave a good reason - your edit made NL's birthplace indecipherable to our readers, the vast majority of whom do not know Russian/Soviet Union geography. If you want to include this material, you must make it understandable to people who know nothing about the subject.Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Sandy Hook Proving Ground

Sorry I think I fouled up your fixes try to fix my own error. I'll wait a few minutes, and then revert both our fixes and try again, if you haven't fixed it by then. 83.70.243.109 (talk) 10:26, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I think I've cleared it up as far as I'm concerned. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:29, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

So I see. I'll see if I can put that missing photo in another part of the article. 83.70.243.109 (talk) 10:37, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. I hope it's alright with you. 83.70.243.109 (talk) 10:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

No, in fact it's not alright. The image is unnecessary. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

revert

It would useful to get a sense of your revert on the task wilderness battle article, noting that the book info is already in the info box - why the need for duplicated information - it seems not to make sense...sats 14:14, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

The infobox is a summation of information in the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Ouch

Hi BMK. I've seen a lot of weird "drahma" here over the years but that last thread at AN may be a record for overreaction. A nice thought was turned into something prurient without bricks, mortar straw or even cotton candy. I feel sure that the double entendre with this songs title would cause all manner of problems. Well anyway I hope that you are well and having an enjoyable summer. Cheers MarnetteD | Talk 19:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, something intended to be nice and cheerful was sullied by people with no sense of humor or, apparently, a sense of appropriateness. I feel bad for Drmies.

My summer is just zipping along, thanks. I just returned from Southern California, where I was helping my sister recover from an operation. The amazing thing is that, unlike many family-related events, it all went smoothly and pleasantly, and I had a nice change of scenery as well. Unfortunately, I had to return to extremely steamy and unpleasant NYC. It's weather like this that created the Poconos and Catskills as middle-class getaway spots, and caused the rich to build their massive "castles on the Hudson" to take advantage of cool breezes coming off the river. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Long Goodbye (film), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John S. Davies, Jack Riley and Jack Knight (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:37, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

User:LiquidWater

Some of your reverts of User:LiquidWater's edits have reinstated vandalism (I've reverted you there), some were neutral (I leave those). I won't mass revert in such cases. Materialscientist (talk) 00:55, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Clinton Hall

What is incorrect? Vzeebjtf (talk) 11:46, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Nothing. I was mistaken. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Q

What are other accounts of Altenmann? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vadim Kiev (talk • contribs) 04:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Not sure why you're asking me - did I say he had multiple accounts? Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

You sad that he is here since 2003 Vadim Kiev (talk) 05:17, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

He has been - his first edit was in November 2003. . Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:23, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

His talk page is sice 30 October 2012‎, where is previous? Vadim Kiev (talk) 06:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:38, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

See Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:45, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

See also Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:48, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

And Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:52, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

From what I've seen, Altenmann is a long-time editor who became an admin. He used multiple sockpuppets to influence discussions, was discovered, and was desysoped and banned from editing. He requested a lifting of the ban, which was granted by ArbCom after community discussion, but was restricted to one account. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:57, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

You helped me and admins. http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Vadim_Kiev — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vadim Kiev (talk • contribs) 21:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Not really. Altenmann and I had a disagreement, but I've not seen any evidence that since he was unbanned he's repeated the behavior that got him banned. I could be wrong, but as far as I can tell he's straightened out his act in that respect -- and, in any case, it has nothing to do with whether you've been edit warring our not. Your attempting to use his past history as a justification for your own behavior isn't a good idea. As someone on that thread said, you're not helping yourself. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Waiting...

(Note to self:) How long will it be until Betty Logan pipes up? Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Leslie Ragan

You removed my link. Can you tell me how to request that a page be created? Air (talk) 04:35, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I removed the link because it seemed unlikely to me that an article would be created, but I could be wrong. You can request that a page be created at Misplaced Pages:Requested articles, or you can write your own and run it by WP:Articles for creation. Good luck. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:44, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

On the Waterfront and other reversions

Greetings and felicitations. If you have a problem with one of my edits (e.g., On the Waterfront), would you please be so kind as to contact me to discuss it, rather than reverting it with a cryptic, uninformative comment, or no comment at all? Most of my edits are based on the Manual of Style or just horse sense (grammar, punctuation, etc.), and it is very frustrating to have you revert them without communicating your reasons for doing so.—DocWatson42 (talk) 07:25, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

No, I am not going to discuss with you every edit you make where your screw up the layout and formatting of an article because you are adhering slavishly to the MOS without considering what's actually best for the reader. MOS is not a policy, and should never be the reason for revert warring (as you have just done), it's a guideline and should be followed when it's best to do so, and not followed when the article would be better otherwise. I am always willing to discuss formatting edits on the basis of where they are good for the reader or not, but almost never willing to discuss edits with editors who follow the MOS like slavish robots, instead of editing like a human being, able to think and make decisions. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

To what specifically about the edit I made do you object?—DocWatson42 (talk) 11:22, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Salt Creek (Orange County) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Native American

Swing Fever (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Warren Wilson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Håvard Kleven

The PROD was contested, you should not have re-added it. GiantSnowman 10:52, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

My mistake. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:04, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

No harm done! GiantSnowman 16:13, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Diner (film) plot

Diner (film) I was watching that movie and I missed some of it so I tried to find the plot on WP. Plot was missing. It took me awhile to find it, but when I found it I noticed that the editor who deleted it never bothered to post a plot synopsis. -That was not my plot editing, I copied it because some other editor had deleted it and it was sorely missing. It was not perfect but really I think that it was better than nothing or what was there. A pretty skimpy page for a movie imo.Housewifehader (talk) 07:35, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Plot summaries on Misplaced Pages are intended to be just that summaries of the plot. not blow-by-blow descriptions of the story, which have the potential to infringe on a film's copyright. The plot section you reverted was excessively long and detailed, which is why I deleted it again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Azerbaijani picture

I am not sure why you removed the picture. As for context, they were protesting something Karabakh related. Isn't that always the case? Anyway, I think the picture serves the purpose of demonstrating the political activities of Azerbaijanis in U.S. politics. As such, it fits well in the article as a whole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by E10ddie (talk • contribs) 03:33, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

No context, no reason for the picture. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Apparently I'm involved in edit war that you yourself are involved in. So, here's the warning, in case you missed it:

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mary Tyler Moore. 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. Mfwitten (talk) 04:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Very cute, and totally expected.

If you think I'm edit warring, I invite you to report me to WP:EW. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:35, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

All you have to do is scroll upward to get a clear idea of who and what Ken is - most everything is beyond him. I'm getting a picture of a skinny pencil neck whose idea of a "heavy workout" (if he ever goes to a gym at all) is huffing and puffing over some forty pound curls on the latest "Roc-it" machine. You'll get nowhere warring with this guy. Misplaced Pages is his only life. Cryellow (talk) 06:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC)