Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:14, 9 October 2018

Watch it.

You made an immense unfair revert, attacking an IP editor of vandalism. Watch it. 2A01:110F:4505:DC00:B5A4:6D89:3A1F:3AE5 (talk) 21:14, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

It was vandalism, whether or not you post a threat on my talk page. "watch it"??? Really??? Get away from me, troll. Amsgearing (talk) 11:29, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

2018 NASCAR Camping World Truck Series

I recently reverted edits you made in the 2018 NASCAR Camping World Truck Series page because driver/team change information is not trivia. They may not be sourced, but we can work on finding sources. A simple check to the previous year’s page shows the importance of this section. As an inclusionist, I will find sources for this info and add it. The tenses should also still be current, as the season is ongoing. Thank you. Willsome429 (talk) 22:58, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Yeah I left a message on your talk page. Amsgearing (talk) 23:01, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

May 2018

Hello, I'm Shellwood. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Ron Stallworth— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Shellwood (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. It appears that you tried to give Ron Stallworth a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Misplaced Pages has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Misplaced Pages:Requests for history merge. Thank you. TheSameGuy (talk) 00:58, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Okay. I think I do need to go to Misplaced Pages:Requests for history merge - however, after reading that page, I have to confess I'm confused about what I should actually do there. As in, which page do I list as a request for history merge, how do I do it, etc. It's very convoluted and I don't want to screw this up more than I already have. Please help! Thanks. Amsgearing (talk) 01:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Cale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Summit High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Collaboration in German-occupied Poland

Please see the talk page, where an overwhelming majority (4 to none, 4 to 1 if I include the editor who inserted it into the article) is against keeping this sentence which clearly fails MOS:FIRST and WP:NPOV. The sentence is not stable, it was inserted about 5 days ago and I challenged it immediately upon noticing it (which didn't happen until yesterday). 5 days is not "long-standing consensus" by any measure. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 17:29, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about that, you are correct, I was looking only at the removal of the sources, and incorrectly assumed that the sentence had been there long before. Amsgearing (talk) 17:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

... about 10 past, anyway

Google didn't let me see that source. Naturally, I searched online for a alternative source for about half an hour. I almost ordered a copy of the Idiots Guide. I assume you can see it! Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Yep, no worries. I just noticed an anonymous IP changed that tidbit in April; surprised no one noticed. Amsgearing (talk) 19:56, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Thompson

I have a serious issue with the item around Thompson’s alleged “dislike” of black players and feel it constitutes WP:UNDUE. You have not addressed why you disagree. I will take it to a 3rd party if we can’t work this out between us Rikster2 (talk) 16:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Whoa, calm down there fella. Gimmie more than 30 seconds to reply next time, okay? I responded on your talk page. Amsgearing (talk) 16:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

sorry, I posted this before reading your last message - I think we are just talking past each other. Maybe slow down on editing the article? Rikster2 (talk) 16:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my sloppy prose

on the Pruitt article, you beat me to it. Cheers. soibangla (talk) 17:51, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

In popular culture section

I have reinserted all the cited material. However I am not in an edit war here. Btw I agree that some of the wording is sloppy, and not encyclopaedic, and I have no problems with you deleting any unsourced material. If you have any problems, with the provisional edit here, maybe we can talk about this briefly, and in good faith, on the Geordie talk page? Thank you. Easeswily (talk) 23:39, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm starting a discussion on the talk page. Amsgearing (talk) 03:30, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Misplaced Pages again, as you did at Geordie, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

Nice try, Easeswily. But you forgot to sign your post. And you also forgot to become an admin, which I believe is required before you can block me. Amsgearing (talk) 19:12, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

I am genuinely not edit warring with you. I reported you for section blanking, which you have clearly done if you look at the diffs. I offered you the opportunity to go to a 3rd party to discuss this you refused and reverted and section blanked.Easeswily (talk) 20:47, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

To try to resolve this I have gone here: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Geordie#Mostly_unsourced_In_popular_culture_section Easeswily (talk) 22:57, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

You're still ignoring my request to for you to list your other accounts. You're still ignoring WP:POPCULTURE. You're not editing in good faith. You're an editor who has likely been blocked before and is running multiple accounts, by your own admission. Good day, I'm done with you. Amsgearing (talk) 09:16, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Boston Celtics Radio Network, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WEEI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Josh Wilbur

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Chubbles (talk) 13:46, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Oscar Wilde Memorial Sculpture

Hi Amsgearing. Are you aware of WP:BRD? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:04, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Uh yeah. Now I am. I did try to correct what I saw as the issue in that section. Not sure why one article by a non-notable in a non-notable periodical was given 60% of the space in the "reaction" section. I agree that it's probably fine to exist there, but editing it down significantly seems to bring the section more in line with WP:UNDUE. If you don't see it that way, I guess revert me again and I'll start another discussion on the talk page. Amsgearing (talk) 16:17, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't wish to edit war, thanks. You should self-revert and, if you still feel as strongly about this, start the discussion yourself. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:21, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Ron Stallworth photo

Ams, I don't understand your photo deletion rationale. In what sense is the photo "unverified", and why would it be nonsensical to use a photo of a person from high school? It's from the high school yearbook that I was head photographer for, and it comes with a caption identifying him. I also connected on LinkedIn and got his approval to use it on his article; if he had any reason to think it was not an appropriate depiction, he didn't raise it. Of course, if you have a more recent photo that's PD or licenseable, we should use that, too. Dicklyon (talk) 16:15, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

October 2018

Your recent edits to Mehmet Oz could give Misplaced Pages contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Misplaced Pages itself. Please note that making such threats on Misplaced Pages is strictly prohibited under Misplaced Pages's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Misplaced Pages, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 16:06, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

That's ridiculous. Misplaced Pages's own policies state we have to be extra careful about BLPs. I'm not talking about bringing legal action against anyone. I'm talking about protecting Misplaced Pages from legal action from the subjects of BLPs. Amsgearing (talk) 16:07, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Mehmet Oz shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 16:11, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33

As a final note: every single one of your edit summaries was demonstrably inaccurate, and at least one looked like a deliberate deception, referring to sourced statements as OR. If you continue in this vein, I will ask that you be topic banned from this topic. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:14, 9 October 2018 (UTC)