Misplaced Pages

Misplaced Pages:Editor review/Dalbury

If you have the time, I would appreciate any observations you may care to provide at Misplaced Pages:Editor review/Dalbury. -- Donald Albury 14:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice to see you (semi) back

Between your break, and Bishonen's, and me getting Giano mad at me (it's getting better), it's been a desolate wasteland around here. Welcome back! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you much for the welcome! Goodness gracious, who put what in everyone's Cheerios while I was away? Can I assist in any way?

In other news, my pond has foot-long strands of filamentous algae, the Thunbergia grandiflora is growing into the Bambusa lako and the Bauhinia blakeana, and the heat index is 100 F today, so the semi-back puppy is semi-melted. How are things in your neck of the woods? KillerChihuahua 17:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The Cheerios are going to be fine, they've just been splashed around a little by some recent ArbCom activity. In my RL neck-of-the-woods, it's cooled down a bit after our own Oregon heat wave, and my policy of neglecting the yardwork until it reaches the level of a complete crisis continues :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of coming back....I've returned! ⇒ SWATJester Aim _Fire! 17:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back!!! All rested and ready and loaded for bear? KillerChihuahua 20:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

atheism page

Thank you for reverting back to POV sentences and weasle word descriptions, you obviously have no ownership issues and have obviously read certain policies. :) ]]] Somerset219 20:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Yap yap

Hello there semipuppy. Bishonen | talk 12:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC).

Hello there semiscaryJapanesehorrormovieperson. I have not forgotten the plague; I have not been able to get to the library (r/l is keeping me so busy I have not have time.) If you need my assistance or attention elsewhere pls post here; I am emphatically not keeping up with my usual watchlist. Thanks - KillerChihuahua 13:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Ignorance of the law

Depends on the offense. In this case, one presumes an admin is aware of the policy against unblocking oneself - its not an "oops" its a deliberate violation of the Rules. For a more extreme example, when one commits a crime one is usally not given a free pass the first time - one is aware it is illegal, one does it anyway - one reaps the consequences. To carry the analogy, an admin breaking this serious a rule is like a police officer breaking the law, which makes the case more serious, not less, because there is no recourse to the "ignorance of the law" defense, which if I recall correctly carries little or no weight anyway. One puppy's opionion. KillerChihuahua 20:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I have stated in numerous places that I was unaware of the rule or of the possibility that sysops could be blocked, period. Do you have any basis for disbelieving me? In any event, ignorance of the law is a valid mitigating circumstance where the conduct is not obviously criminal. In other words, you cannot claim ignorance of the illegality of murder, but you can claim ignorance of some less obvious criminal statute - something environmental, for example - and the judge may of course take it into account at sentencing. - CrazyRussian talk/email 12:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Replied on user talk page, repeated here:

I have tried to find a more polite way to say this, and failed, so please excuse my bluntness: Where have you been? How did you get to be an admin without realizing the rules apply to you also? How did you miss all the wheel wars? All the issues when admins blocked each other and so on? Your assertion that you did not realize you could be blocked concerns me far more than your unblocking yourself, because I am left to wonder what other policies may you be completely ignorant of? How can you enforce policy and mentor editors when you are yourself ignorant of those poliicies? I was wavering, but due to this astonisihing statement I must support the recall request. KillerChihuahua 12:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Replied on my talk. Good job kicking a guy when he's down - holy shit! - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

(after edit conflict) In what possible way could this be considered kicking when down? I fail to see how being civil enough to supply my reasons is somehow inappropriate. KillerChihuahua 13:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's a quote from Category:Administrators_open_to_recall (emphasis added): "Just ask, nicely..." - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I am very disappointed in you. - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:11, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

For what, expecting an admin to know the policies? KillerChihuahua 13:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

No! I have already resigned the mop. You could have saved your opinion until RfA2 or canned it altogether. It's not pleasant to have to go through a recall, and there is absolutely no reason to make grandiloquent statements to me about my extreme ignorance when those statements will have no bearing on anything whatsofuckingever other than to further diminish my self esteem? Is that not obvious?? Finally, please remember, the recall discussion is taking place on my user talk page BECAUSE I CONSENTED TO IT, and I had wrapped it up before your post. I remain extremely disappointed in you. - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps Rfa2 will go better if you realize that expectations are that an admin know and understand the WP:RULES. This is a valid "bearing" which has nothing to do with whether you've surrendered the mop, or your self esteem, which I would hope and expect would not be affected by statements about what an admin should be expected, as a matter of course, to be familiar with. How this has resulted in your increasingly agitated and profanity-laden statements that I have somehow attacked you and lowered your self esteem is beyond me. Perhaps you also lack the maturity which would allow you to accept constructive advice and criticism without taking it personally. You may wish to step back, calm down, and re-read what I wrote and try to consider it more impersonally. KillerChihuahua 13:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps I also lack the maturity. Thank you for your unproductive input. - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I stayed completely cool throughout the recall, but you have really got my juices flowing there, especially with your initial edit summary. *exhales* - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

ADC edit

Hi there. I was just wondering what you meant by this edit? What is WP:CONTENT? Laurence Boyce 12:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

That would be a typo, apologies. The second n should be an x: WP:CONTEXT. KillerChihuahua 13:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

straw poll on Herero Uprising (or whatever it's currently called)

Hi KillerChihuahua, I was wondering whether you might have time to comment on the talk page of Herero Uprising, where I tried to intervene in a edit war with a straw poll. Not sure whether that was a good idea (my first time ever trying to do this), but I think the poll could use some additional outside comment. I have no idea whether you have the time or interest in the subject, but if you do, perhaps you could comment (or even solicit other commenters). The page has been moved twice daily for a few days now, so someone experienced should step in, in my opinion. Thanks! --Birdmessenger 19:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Suggest you list on article Rfc, as there seems to be an impasse. KillerChihuahua 19:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. Will do.--Birdmessenger 19:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Good luck, looks like a heated dispute. KillerChihuahua 19:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!--Birdmessenger 19:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, my dear Puppy!

Thank you, my dear Puppy! :) and no need to apologize for not being around for a while, I'm just glad you had a good wikibreak ;) Thank you so much for the humorous pointers - I'll make absolutely sure to keep them in mind when using the buttons :P Seriously, that you've taken the time to visit me and congratulate me means a huge lot to me. As I am now in the ranks of the rookie admins, I'll make sure to visit you and bug you whenever I feel I'm about to mess up... which I'm afraid will be quite often! ;) Have a great weekend, dear KC, hope to talk to you pretty soon, hugs! Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 08:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Representing religious views

Hi there, regarding your thought of more representative coverage of religious views: I think the reason Christianity is over-represented is because English language Misplaced Pages contributors and readers do not reflect the world population, but a (primarily Christian) subset of it. I don't know what the numbers are for the religious makeup of the English speaking world, but I'll bet that they reflect the religious distribution you describe. Just a thought :-) Jon 07:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

They do. KillerChihuahua 09:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Upload Some Images

Can you upload some images for me? I know how, but I don't know how to make it so they don't get deleted License2Kill 01:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

When you upload them, make sure you fill in where you got them and the licensing. The licensing is a drop-down box on the upload page. KillerChihuahua 10:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

How do I find out about the licensing status? License2Kill 19:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it depends on where you get the image. Why don't we walk through one image? Tell me about the image you want to upload. KillerChihuahua 09:39, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00000297F.01._AA240_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg License2Kill 03:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

An album cover is fair use, but that scan is an Amazon image and it might be owned by them. Ask at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Album covers and see if you can get someone with more album cover expertise to give an opinion. KillerChihuahua 07:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Well sourced views

very long irrelevant post removed

Let's be fair here, and not resort to meaningless polemics.--204.108.237.194 20:55, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Please take this to the talk page of the article. KillerChihuahua 09:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I get the sense that

Just a bit of warning. If you revert the Paul Weyrich bio one more time, I will report you for vandalism. Pravknight 04:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

This is amusing. I've reverted once, and you put a blatantvandal template on my talk page? Go ahead, report me. This could be interesting. I should warn you however, I am an administrator, and if I see you misusing the template by placing bv templates, or any other type of vandalism warning, on other editor's talk pages due to content disputes, I will strongly consider taking action. I suggest you read WP:VAND so you can learn what is and is not vandalism. KillerChihuahua 09:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for posting the blatant vandalism tag because I am still learning the ropes around here, but I have seen users cited for vandalism for precisely what you have done. The point is your reversion isn't NPOV from my perspective. I see it as taking Mr. Weyrich's words out of context

very long irrelevant post removed

Once again, I apologize for losing my temper.

--Pravknight 16:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Our friend is at it again...

John Wayne vandal/troll/whatever he is has begun his personal attacks again.... Just an FYI. 75.2.50.195 01:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I blocked him again. KillerChihuahua 07:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Vivaldi

Can we move to close the Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Vivaldi? This user has continual removed material. Arbusto 20:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Arf!

Why, hello there, innumerate puppy! Bishonen | talk 20:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC).

We all have our shortcomings. :)

thanks for the hello - I'm not back yet, just popping in and trying to clean up a little. KillerChihuahua 21:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Begging for an assist

Could you or any other admins looking in here take a look at Unreal Engine technology pretty please? I was asked to help out there with a content dispute involving some nearly-completely non-communicative people who keep reinserting content that seems to violate WP:V and likely also the GFDL. I've tried some talking, little effect, but I've also been reverting, so I don't want to take any admin actions. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Unreal indeed. I took one look at the talk page and took the quick way out - I protected for the time being. If you disagree and wish to unprotect, I'll not object. Hopefully this will get some discussion going as opposed to the revert war - and you might want to suggest wp:auto in addition to v and rs as recommended reading. KillerChihuahua 20:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks; I've no desire to unprotect. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Dunc, etc.

I quote wikipedia founder Larry Sanger. " Second problem: the dominance of difficult people, trolls, and their enablers. I stopped participating in Misplaced Pages when funding for my position ran out. That does not mean that I am merely mercenary; I might have continued to participate, were it not for a certain poisonous social or political atmosphere in the project.

There are many ways to explain this problem, and I will start with just one. Far too much credence and respect accorded to people who in other Internet contexts would be labelled "trolls." There is a certain mindset associated with unmoderated Usenet groups and mailing lists that infects the collectively-managed Misplaced Pages project: if you react strongly to trolling, that reflects poorly on you, not (necessarily) on the troll. If you attempt to take trolls to task or demand that something be done about constant disruption by trollish behavior, the other listmembers will cry "censorship," attack you, and even come to the defense of the troll. This drama has played out thousands of times over the years on unmoderated Internet groups, and since about the fall of 2001 on the unmoderated Misplaced Pages.

Misplaced Pages has, to its credit, done something about the most serious trolling and other kinds of abuse: there is an Arbitration Committee that provides a process whereby the most disruptive users of Misplaced Pages can be ejected from the project.

But there are myriad abuses and problems that never make it to mediation, let alone arbitration. A few of the project's participants can be, not to put a nice word on it, pretty nasty. And this is tolerated. So, for any person who can and wants to work politely with well-meaning, rational, reasonably well-informed people--which is to say, to be sure, most people working on Misplaced Pages--the constant fighting can be so off-putting as to drive them away from the project. This explains why I am gone; it also explains why many others, including some extremely knowledgeable and helpful people, have left the project." Pproctor 00:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Uh, OK. •Jim62sch• 00:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm with Jim here - why precisely did you feel it appropriate to paste this very long quote on my talk page? Please be concise with your answer - thanks much. KillerChihuahua 06:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Cheers!

Thanks for the words of wisdom, mate! hoopydink 00:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

you are more than welcome, and let me know if I can ever be of help - KillerChihuahua 00:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Tupac Shakur

I was wondering why you reverted my edit. Origin does not normally indicate a birthplace but rather the location most synonymous with a person. I was only trying to make the infobox more easily legible, as to have the City, State on the same rather rather than having it wrapped onto the next line. Also, the Birth Name in the infobox should be changed because later on in the article it explains that his birth name was indeed Tupac Amaru Shakur and only a year after his birth was it changed to Lesane Parish Crooks out of fear that he might be associated to his mother using the same last name. I have no animosity towards you, I was just curious in your reasoning behind the revert. --Zimbabweed 17:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I think instead of "Birth name" it should say "Name" License2Kill 21:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Its determined by the template at {{Infobox musical artist}}. KillerChihuahua 23:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Nobel controversies

Why do you keep reverting without discussing on the talk page. In this last one, I looks as if I was changing what I had originally posted when you were also changing the same entry at the same time, apparently without reading what I had posted. See my notes on the talk page as to why this new posting meets all the requirements for WK:NPOV, etc. Not that the other one did not, BTW.

Also, what do you know about the history of conductive organic polymers? Or the history of science in general? Yes, I know that in the context of Misplaced Pages, this does not matter. Just asking.

Also, why pick on my posts, which, as far as I can tell, completely meet all the guidelines? If you haven't noticed, hardly any of the claims on Noble controversies have any documentation at all. Multiple clear violations of WK:NOR. If you look at the 'history" of the page, about the only documentation for the other claims was also provided by me incidentally. Being clearly singled out like this makes me worry about ulterior motives. If you are trying to make a point, you have already made it.

While there is not a "Cabal" on Misplaced Pages, there are clearly cliques. Maybe even multiple sockpuppets, an easy thing to do. I seem to have fallen afoul of something. Sorry if I have offend you and your gang by inadvertantly intruding on your turf, for which I heartily repent. Now please lay off and let me get back to the real work of editing this puppy. Otherwise, we are all going to keep going round and round. A waste of everyones time. Pproctor 16:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

1. Your additions have been thoroughly disputed on the article talk page. Until and unless you have some support, you are engaging in tenditious editing by continuing to add them. Currently, you have NO support. The onus is on you to post convincing rationale on the talk page for inclusion, not on me to repeat what has been said already.
2. Are you accusing me of being a sockpuppet? Of whom? Please request a checkuser at WP:RFCU or stop making such nonsensical accusations.
3. My "gang" is Misplaced Pages. My "turf" is Misplaced Pages. By adding spurious content against consensus, you are indeed intruding on my turf.
4. If by "lay off" you mean go away so you can keep edit warring against consensus, the answer is no. Cease your disruptive behavior. KillerChihuahua 16:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Not according to the various histories. They say my edits have been only "throughly disputed" by the same usual suspects who post over on e.g. Creationism and related sites with you, apparently because I attempted to inject a little NK:NPOV at Raymond Damadian. And this has happened over and over. As for "sockpuppets", a different IP number means nothing in the face of multiple proxy servers. So who knows, except if you meet the subject personally.

As Misplaced Pages:Concensus makes clear, such a concerted action by an organized group of editors is "not a concensus". It is also a forbidden practice to gang up or enlist others to promote a particular POV. It is not WK:tendentious editing to edit in the fact of such practices. So lay off Pproctor 16:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

You are a troll. You are making unfounded accusations and warning me to "lay off". I am giving you notice - any further posts of yours to this talk page will be removed. KillerChihuahua 18:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Tupac's Ashes

Hi KillerChihuahua - thank you for adding to the conversation about Tupac's ashes on the Tupac Talk Page. I think maybe you misunderstood what I was trying to argue. I do want to include a statement about the desire of Tupac's family to spread his ashes in Soweto next year. What I am suggesting is that we remove references to Nelson Mandela and the South African Government being at the event in 2007, as this information is simply not verifiable. Here is what I suggest the statement should read: "Family and friends plan to spread the remaining ashes in Soweto, South Africa, on June 16, 2007 which is Shakur's 36th birthday" which is verifiable by multiple sources. If you look at the Tupac Talk page, I have surveyed the South African media (I live in South Africa) and have found no mention of Mandela being at the event next year (or that he was even planning on being there this year) in any of the articles (8 of them). If you look at the Pretoria News article that you cited, it makes no mention of Mandela. What I think is happening here is one user has gotten an idea in his/her head of what should be in the article, and is searching for individual sources to verify his/her own ideas, which as we know, is a very poor way to conduct research. On the internet, one can find justification for just about anything. Rather we should survey many sources, and summarize the findings from these multiple sources, which is a much more reliable way to conduct research. I would appreciate your continued input, as this user has reverted my justifiable edits 3 times now, and has left less than civil comments on my talk page. I think the issue needs some input from a 3rd (and 4th etc) party. Thank you. - Jason Lionchow 08:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll respond on the article talk page - thanks much for the clarification. KillerChihuahua 09:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. Cheers, Jason Lionchow.

Baiting Nonsense

I really do object you the message you have left upon my talk page. You have no business interfering in a conversation between me and Guy Chapman. He left me a very provocative and extremely rude (however you interpret it) note and I responded accordingly. Chelsea Tory 14:45, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. You're on a wiki. All conversations are public and the public may indeed comment. Saying I had "no business interfering" is demonstrating a complete lack of comprehension of where your conversation is taking place. E-Mail conversations are private. Talk page conversations on Misplaced Pages are public. KillerChihuahua 19:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Of interest

see Comments regarding Sadi Carnot:

Ah, so you (User:Sadi Carnot) misused Admin tools, eh? (Yes, the protect tag is only for admins). This shall prove to be interesting, I think. (Name added for clarity)

From WP:PPOL

Administrators have the ability to protect pages so that they cannot be edited, or images so that they cannot be overwritten, except by other administrators. Administrators can also protect pages from moves only. Administrators have the additional ability to protect pages from being edited by unregistered or very new users.

These abilities are only to be used in limited circumstances as protected pages are considered harmful.

Admins must not protect pages they are actively engaged in editing, except in the case of simple vandalism.

Clearly an RfC is in order here, if not an RfA. I've contacted several Admins to get their opinion on how best to deal with your behaviour. BTW: KillerChihuahua, the person you reverted, is an admin. As I said, this shall prtove interesting, I think. •Jim62sch• 18:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Being an admin or not being an admin makes no difference so far as editing goes; however, Sadi's actions are a different matter. I hesitate to encourage an Rfc. I have warned him about misuse of the tag on the article talk page, and explained that even if he could protect it would be highly inappropriate to protect a page you had been editing and completely irresponsible to protect a preferred version. Hopefully, he'll get the clue. KillerChihuahua 19:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that, and I very much value your counsel in this matter. Thank you. •Jim62sch• 23:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I assumed that since I the tag saved on the edit that I had the rights to use it. Whatever the case, being that this page been reverted close to a dozen times, by multiple seasoned editors, someone should have put a lock on the page long ago so that we could discuss issue properly on the talk page. There are so many issues that are awry here, e.g. self-promotion, intelligent-design issues, divine intervention comments and edits, using multiple reference links to the same website over using standard article or textbook references, using months and 100s of kilobytes of talk page space to debate someone’s pet theory, using talk page space to argue that laws of science are false, etc., that this whole situation is making a mockery the Misplaced Pages science section. --Sadi Carnot 11:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Lambert

I don't get the the parallel to WMC. WMC never tried to get an article on himself or get himselft mentioned in an article. The article William Connolley was created by his nemesis User:Ed Poor.

I cede that the situation isn't much helped by User:Sadi Carnot, obviously he and Lambert have collided before.

Pjacobi 11:49, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Concur; either they've collided or Sadi simply strongly disagrees with Lambert's theories/work. That Sadi is misusing tags and attacking other editors does not help his case.

I merely point out that providing ones bona fides on a talk page hardly qualifies as self-promotion; if he's editing his own article then that is a separate issue. The parallel is not absolute; it is that attacking notable editors as self-promoters is harmful to Misplaced Pages, unless there is a clear case of self-promotion, in which case that should be addressed at the appropriate article: in this case, the Frank Lambert article. I can see where there would be a concern about undue weight; that can surely be addressed on the Entropy talk page without accusing Lambert or dismissing his publication list, yes? KillerChihuahua 12:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I now re-checked: Both Frank Lambert and Entropy (energy dispersal) have been started by User:Sadi Carnot. The latter, assuming good faith, to keep the main article article Entropy free from the Lambert-theory. Not a good idea.

What triggered my self promotion reflex wasn't so much Talk:Entropy but his campaigning against the AfD.

Perhaps judging prematurely, I'm not seeing a case of Conolly, but of Hewitt emerging.

Anyway, I'll be cautious regarding NPA.

Pjacobi 12:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Sadi apparently started the Frank Lambert article as a mild attack article, and your AGF conclusion regarding Entropy (energy dispersal) still leaves that as created as a POV fork. Even his initial Frank Lambert article states "His work has been discussed in some chemistry books." which shows that in spite of his campaign to present Lambert as wholly self-published on the web, Sadi is aware that is inaccurate. The entire thing smacks of a campaign to discredit Lambert, who clearly is notable and published and cited well beyond a self-published website and a professorship. KillerChihuahua 12:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Forgot to comment on the Hewitt parallel: if Lambert begins to edit war, adding content without strong support on the Entropy article or the Entropy (energy dispersal) article, then we can suggest to him that he limit himself to talk pages on those articles. He has made no edits to either Frank Lambert or to Entropy (energy dispersal), which would be the case if he were a Hewitt parallel. I show that in the last 500 edits to Entropy, Lambert has made 10 edits to the Entropy article. Sadi has made 76. This is not a Hewitt situation. Sadi may be in violation of WP:OWN on the Entropy article. KillerChihuahua 12:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment: KC, this is not a content issue. The tag issue is not vandalism; it was the first time I used it and did not know I was in the wrong. User:Frank Lambert has been trying to bias the entropy article, via argument Talk:Entropy page, with his personal views, for almost a half a year now, e.g. see the following archives:

Archive: Talk:Entropy/Archive2 , 165 kilobytes

Archive: Talk:Entropy/Archive3 , 116 kilobytes

Archive: Talk:Entropy/Archive4 , 95 kilobytes

He basically wants the whole entropy article written according to his perspective and theories; yet there is a clear consensus, e.g. Jheald, Yevgeny Kats, PAR, Nonsuch, Pjacobi, Byrgenwulf, User:Linas that his theories are not mainstream, and should not be included in the article. --Sadi Carnot 12:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. He has made ten edits to your 76. Listing other editors who may agree with you, and ignoring editors who do not, such as Dave souza, one of our best science editors, does not make you somehow right. This is not a case of mob rule. Consensus never trumps NPOV. You created a POV fork and an attack article, you have now attacked Jim62sch (a prolific editor with at least two Featured articles to his credit) and Dave souza, a very well respected science editor, and posted "facts" you knew were false on the Entropy (energy dispersal) Afd, and posted a content dispute on the AN noticeboard. That you have also misused a tag and been made aware of that does not even remotely affect whether your other actions and positions are appropriate or within Misplaced Pages guidelines. Red herrings are useless here. KillerChihuahua 13:03, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Spammer!

TLA Admin

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:TLA_Admin&action=edit

Keeps spamming his links on the Tupac Shakur page and the 2Pac TBA License2Kill 17:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC).

I see no contributions by this user since Oct 10th, when he was warned by HawkerTyphoon. Let me know if it starts up again - thanks. KillerChihuahua 18:39, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that was an old message but just added my name to it now License2Kill 20:07, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

reply on FYI

I replied on my talk page: User_talk:Reinoutr#FYI. Regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 17:50, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:Welcome back

Thank you. I had some vacation, Disneyland, Hollywood, China Town in L.A. and finally a day at Melrose Beach. Take care, Cheers! Tony the Marine 00:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

JA

Not clear yet; I'm keeping an eye on it. Jayjg 15:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

de Coucy

I reverted it because you moved En. III claiming that you were matching it with all the others. In fact, only one other had his name in that form (now fixed), and all the links on the Lord of Coucy page were to "X N, Lord of Coucy" forms. So I assumed it was just a lazy and thoughtless edit (btw, I moved VII and moved back III, not the other way around). Sorry if you got offended. My explanation is that, besides the fact that "de Coucy" is not English (should be "of Coucy" in English), the general guidelines promote the "X N, Title of Y" format. Regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

You're not addressing what I stated - I clearly said I had no problem with the edit you made, only with your edit summary. Now you tell me you "assumed it was just a lazy and thoughtless edit"?!? AGF much do you? KillerChihuahua 23:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

theory of truth

yeah... disregard my entry, at the time i was, as ALI G might say "WELL 'IGH ON SOME KILLA GANGA".Anon-o-man 21:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Um... ok, I think. KillerChihuahua 23:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Needs to Be Banned

User Robert2TLA is obviously a user coming back with a second username trying to use Misplaced Pages to add links to his site. He keeps spamming Pac's Life with his links and removing others in order to get people to his site. This is his second username and he has been warned before many times License2Kill 21:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I have left a standard {{spam}} warning. Let me know if Robert2TLA or 72.49.195.222 adds the link again. And don't bite so hard; he may be a fan who just needs to learn a little more about what is allowable on Misplaced Pages. KillerChihuahua 21:58, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

He has been warned before by another Misplaced Pages admin and this is his second account. He know's what he is doing, he's trying to use Misplaced Pages to advertise. Thanks for the quick response. License2Kill 22:06, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

NP, I can always block if he continues. I hope he decides to abide by the rules instead. KillerChihuahua 22:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:UW Thanks

Thanks for your offer of support and we will take gladly any help that's offered. Currently I'm trying to set in place means of getting this task done as quickly as possible, with then plans to turn it from a project to a policy unit. These warnings, etc have been a millstone around the neck of Misplaced Pages for quite some time, and I would like it to be out of the way in the next two to three months. So please book mark the WP:UW page including my Ideas and it's talk page, add them to your watch lists and keep an eye on it. But more importantly as an admin and someone who's been around here for a while, it's not the specifically the hard graft we need but your insight and thoughts are especially appreciated. Cheers Khukri 15:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for resolving that issue for me. :) :: Colin Keigher 20:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

You are more than welcome. KillerChihuahua 20:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)