Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:16, 4 February 2005

See User talk:172/Talk block 1, User talk:172/Talk block 2, User talk:172/Talk block 3, User talk:172/Talk block 4, User talk:172/Talk block 5, User talk:172/Talk block 6, User:172/Talk block 7, User:172/Talk block 8, User talk:172/Talk block 9, User talk:172/Talk block 10, User talk:172/Talk block 11. User talk:172/Talk block 12, User talk:172/Talk block 13, User talk:172/Talk block 14 for old talk.

Bretton Woods

Very (fine) explanation. Stirling Newberry 19:46, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) I type good some days.

Thanks for the kind words, and thanks for all the time you've put into the material on this site. I've just recently discovered wikipedia, and am now realizing how great of a resource it is, thanks to all of the hard work by you and others like you. I look forward to contributing as much as I can in the future. Seenyer 20:31, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

User:195.70.48.242

I have unblocked this user who as a survivor of Soviet totalitarianism is entitled to a rant or two, just as survivors of the Holocaust are. I don't intent to support him in vandalism or in trashing articles. While it is unlikely he will become a productive editor, he should get his chance. I note from his contributions that most have been in neutral areas. Fred Bauder 13:33, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

No one is entitled to intentionally cause disruption and personally attack users... A survivor of Soviet totalitarianism? We know that this user comes from Hungary, not the Stalinist USSR, a regime hardly more repressive than a number of (say) U.S. allies in South America. One is trivializing the Holocaust to compare it to simply living in, e.g., Hungary or Argentina in the 1970s or early 1980s, which I find quite personally offensive. 172 19:31, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

How can you compare living in Hungary to living in Argentina? Hungary was like a big concentration camp, from which attempting to escape was intended to be fatal, emigration was not prohibited in Argentina. Without the option to emigrate or change jobs without government approval, one is essentially a slave owned by the ruling oligarchy.--Silverback 09:45, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I really should take you off of my watchlist, 172, it is pretty upsetting to watch – I don't know how you do it. As for Mr. Bauder's comment, it is in very bad taste, I also find it personally offensive to seemingly exploit the Holocaust in this manner, for these ends (read: innuendo which is unecessary anyway) –especially– considering today's 60th anniversary for the liberation of Auschwitz (!) As an aside, I have known quite a few holocaust survivors, some very personally, and I could not concieve of any of them dirupting Misplaced Pages. I wish for Mr. Bauder to leave the Holocaust out of his 'red baiting.' El_C 20:08, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

172, please take a look at Misplaced Pages:Blocking_policy. It does not provide for blocking users for "personal attacks" or "trolling", the proposed policy at Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy/Personal attacks would provide for one day blocks, but only after warning the user. See also Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy/Personal attacks (old) which failed to pass. Fred Bauder 23:58, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

No, you take a look at Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy for disruption. The block was unambiguously warranted and will stay. You just have an axe to grind against the admin enforcing this policy, i.e. me. 172 00:05, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Further discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#User:172.27s_block_of_195.70.48.242 Fred Bauder 01:06, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

what is Misplaced Pages turning into?

Hi, this evening I revisited the article Shining Path for the first time in a half-year. Leaving aside the state of that piece -- it seems to have gotten worse rather than better in the intervening months -- I notice a new category, Leftist terrorist organizations, which itself falls under Terrorist organizations. I also see that Terrorists is still around. Do I really want to be a part of this??? -- Viajero 19:05, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Mediation

Mediation was recommended for us as part of your arbitration case. However, the mediation committee is rather short handed at this point. I would be happy to apply for mediation, but there may be a long delay. Fred Bauder 01:10, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

No. After dealing with your attacks for nearly two years, I see right through this. I will only consider making a direct request for arbitration. Fortunately, other users are beginning to see through your smear campaign: I am really quite taken aback by Fred Bauder's comment – I recall you have told him a few months ago about your family's horrific tragedies and murder during the Holocaust, and of all days he picks today to continue with such repugnent statements (ones, which as I noted, are not even key to the issue at hand and are stated rather as innuendo, innuendo which he well knows will upset you). He should know better –and he does– so considering all this, I view his comment with an especial severity and contempt. 172 03:45, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wikicite project page

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Wikicite To add a card catalog and citation features. Stirling Newberry 23:53, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Stalin / Fred Bauder / blocking

As far as I can see, Fred openly admitted that he is involved in the Stalinism dispute, in the camp of the 'ranter' you've blocked. But his observations were still judicious, and mainly focussed on blocking policy. As far as I'm concerned, I'm not keen on seeing ranting anons on my side of disputes, because all they do is make my position look stupid. You were mainly criticized for blocking without warning. Had you given the anon a warning or two before blocking him in case the ranting had continued, I don't think people would have fought over the block so much. I would strongly recommend blocking nobody, even the most obnoxious trolls, without fair warning, with the only exception of clear vandalism to article namespace.

On the content side, I don't know if you are actually defending Stalinism. Of course it will not do to say "Stalin was a criminal" in the article. But Stalin's responsibility for all sorts of atrocities must of course be mentioned, in an uninvolved tone, I hope you accept that, and it is only a question on agreeing on an unemotional way of putting it. regards, dab (ᛏ) 17:12, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

On the content side, I don't know if you are actually defending Stalinism. That's a disgusting comment. I will not respond to you any further. 172 19:45, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Surrealism

Could you review the talk page? I am RFCing both Boyer and 24. because there is simply no way to work on this article with both of them treating it as a personal web page, and their constant attacks and rants. In addition, Boyer is making edits to other articles based on his intent to promote his own work, including attacks on known scholars etc.My own POV is that both should be banned permanently, as their contributions, such as they are, are far outweighed by the problems the create. Stirling Newberry 19:17, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Gzornenplatz unblocks

172 - you are using the wrong justification to unblock Gzornenplatz. Refer to Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Wik2#Permanent_ban. There was one vote for and 5 abstains. Those abstentions were based on the fact that blocking for vandalism is covered by normal blocking guidelines. The issue about whether or not this means admins could interpret the severity of the vandalism to mean an automatic permanent ban, is an open issue. I imagine that we will have to rule on that very soon (as well as the Gz/Wik connection). --mav 19:30, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

OK - things are getting a bit clearer now. See these emails by Jimbo. and . --mav 19:51, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Gzornenplatz ArbCom case opened; Temporary injunction on blocking

"Admins are instructed not to block Gzornenplatz as a Wik reincarnation for the duration of the arbcom proceeding."

See Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Gzornenplatz#Temporary_injunction. Please add evidence at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Gzornenplatz/Evidence. --mav 21:34, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Image:Ceausescu2005.jpg

I'm not sure if we can claim fair use for a credited Reuters photo. What grounds are you citing? -- Curps 05:06, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hey

Look I changed the title to suit people's request. Other people including Jmbel has congratulated me on the change. Please stop screwing with the page. Your mad as it is. I made this change because people requested it. Please change it back.WHEELER 19:44, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Your original research will never be viable in its current form to be included in any article namespace-- culture defines politics, cultural imprint on politics, whatever. I will not move it back for now, given that the Vfd box on top of the page should link to the Vfd discussion. It does not do so when you move the article from culture defines politics. 172 19:48, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That's dubious. You can use subst and edit the notice to fix the link. I think there is no question that the change of title is an improvement, and WHEELER is allowed to try to meet objections while the article is on VfD. A move like this happens on about 1 out of every 50 or so on Vfd, in my experience. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:57, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Sigh. I'm not going to stop anyone from moving it back, but you can give a pig a bath and dress it up, and it'll still come out as a pig. 172 21:58, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Website

Very interesting. Thank you. First link was given by the anon IP address the same day H registered. SlimVirgin 02:06, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

New controversy

If you have a minute, please take a look at the article Anti-Polonism. Based on your recent involvement on the Polish-Soviet War article, I thought you might find it interesting, as it involves some of the same people and similar problems with unreasonable POV. Balcer 10:16, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)