Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by GB fan (talk | contribs) at 16:08, 31 October 2012 (You have been blocked from editing. (TW)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!Last edited: Last edited by:16:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC) GB fan (talk · contribs) Interested in becoming a regular contributor to Misplaced Pages? Create an account! Your host, 24.45.42.125 (24.45.42.125), may be shared by multiple users, so you might receive messages on this page that were not intended for you. To have your own user pages, keep track of articles you've edited in a watchlist, and have access to a few other special features, please consider registering an account! It's fast and free. If you are autoblocked repeatedly, contact your Internet service provider or network administrator and request it contact Wikimedia's XFF project about enabling X-Forwarded-For HTTP headers on its proxy servers so that blocks will affect only the intended user. Administrators: review contributions carefully if blocking this IP address or reverting its contributions. If a block is needed, consider a soft block using Template:Anonblock. In response to vandalism from this IP address, abuse reports may be sent to its network administrator for investigation. Network administrators or other parties wishing to monitor this IP address for vandalism can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Unconstructive; Mass reverts generally frowned on

Hi; noticed your mass revert of several referenced and justified edits in the Sandra Fluke article. Also noticed a short edit history, so am assuming good faith, that you may be unfamiliar with WP process. It is not generally a good idea to mass revert, especially when individual edits are justified, as there is no way to know what editorial judgement you are contesting. Indiscriminately hitting the "undo" button, called reverting, is called edit warring, and can result in automatic bans. For instance, the biography section that was edited was clipped to remove sections that are poorly sourced, and thus not allowed according to BLP guidelines. This should NOT be reverted unless you have a good source to justify these sections. Reverting minor edits, such as specifying that Fluke was a law student when invited to Congress, can be seen as disruptive also, and subject to banning. Am going to undo your reversion of my edits; don't mind if you then make JUSTIFIED, stepwise alterations - it is understood that editors may disagree. I would however direct you to the rather extensive discussions on Talk (where discussions of edits should take place) where NPOV compromises were made, and from which I took several stable (ie agreed upon) descriptions. Good luck, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. --209.6.69.227 (talk) 02:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but your changes were correctly reverted by someone else for adding bias. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 03:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Just to say...

I loved your edit summary here. Arc de Ciel (talk) 22:21, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 22:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Good work on the zombies

I liked what you did for p-zombies and physicalism, btw.—Machine Elf  00:15, 16 July 2012 (UTC) Oh ye of little faith... 06:41, 7 July 2012 (Needs citations, not your memory.)—Machine Elf  00:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, and please don't take my comment personally. I was encouraging you to bring citations, not discouraging you from using your memory. :-) 24.45.42.125 (talk) 01:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Not at all, I was admiring what you did for Qualia too... and lo! it's you: 06:40, 7 July 2012 LOL... well 125, all I can say is, I hope you'll WP:SIGNUP.—Machine Elf  01:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Please respond to http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Positivism#The_death_of_nuance 24.45.42.125 (talk) 01:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

A false accusation by someone caught in a lie.

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belchfire (talk • contribs) 04:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Belch, you're not being very honest. First, I caught you removing a dollar amount that the citation supported by lying about the citation. Second, you're accusing me of edit-warring when you've repeatedly edited against consensus. Please, even a shred of logic is enough to show that an article on political activism shouldn't be about unrelated philanthropy. So, in conclusion, I'm going to take your warning with a few grains of salt. Thank you. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 04:44, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belchfire (talk • contribs) 04:50, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

No, there isn't. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 04:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok, it is 'now', but it doesn't make any sense. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 05:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

(Just realized you were still on my watchlist.) In general, you're expected not to make multiple reverts on the same article even if you're correct, and even if other people are doing it as well. You haven't violated the three-revert rule (see here), but I understand fewer reverts can still be considered as against the spirit of the rule. Arc de Ciel (talk) 06:46, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, to clarify Lionel's comment - you should probably either defend your edits as justified, or agree to try and avoid similar situations in the future. I don't know enough about the situation to comment on which is better, though. :-) Arc de Ciel (talk) 07:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Arc, thanks for your input. As it turns out, I've been active on the article talk page, while Belchfire has lately just edit-warred against all four people who disagree with him and Collect. I'm pretty sure I didn't break any rules, although I have to admit that the three-revert thing seems really ambiguous. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 07:05, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, most Misplaced Pages policies, especially their nuances, are at least somewhat ambiguous (they're more broadly applicable that way). Arc de Ciel (talk) 07:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, I don't want to get involved in some huge debate, but I would think that, if you want people to follow rules, you need to make them clear enough so that we know if we're following them. Otherwise, you have to give us the benefit of the doubt. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 08:01, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

July 2012

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Misplaced Pages, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Focus on the Family with this edit, did not appear to be constructive, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:35, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your form letter or how it applies to me. Could you please me more specific? 24.45.42.125 (talk) 05:37, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I responded here. I have no objection to your removing this section and the warning it contains from your talk page if you desire to do so. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'll let it stay. I don't feel comfortable burying my own history, and there's no shame in the two of us resolving this amicably. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 07:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

IPs are people too

I always feel bad when I see IP editors getting Templated and Bitten repeatedly as if they are some inferior type of editor. I'm sorry for this, and hope you won't be too put off by it. ~Adjwilley (talk) 15:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you in principle, but in this case the bite marks have very little to do with the lack of a login. Belchfire (talk) 20:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Belchfire, you were part of the edit war, and looking at your talk page you have a history of edit warring as well. 125 has not been reprimanded, and furthermore the comments of the admin who protected the page appear to be in his favor. Arc de Ciel (talk) 07:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Some people learn; some people don't. It's up to our friend to decide which group he eventually falls into, but what I've seen so far is not encouraging. Let's hope I am wrong. Belchfire (talk) 07:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I suggest you re-read my comment. You are not currently in a position to criticize. Arc de Ciel (talk) 20:39, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, but I am. I took my medicine, and learned from the experience, and in this instance I stopped reverting before it became reportable. OTOH, Mr. IP here refused to read and learn policy even after it was pointed out to him; misrepresented the status of the discussion and the events in the article history at the ANI; and stated openly that he didn't care one way or the other if he got blocked. He basically gave the finger to the rest of the community. Now I've said that I hope this guy finds his clue and becomes a more collaborative editor, and I mean that. But until that happens, you are totally off-base trying to stick up for him. Good day. Belchfire (talk) 20:52, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Repeating bogus 3RR charges ad nauseum is harassment, plain and simple. 125 summarily dispatched the prosecution based on simple policy, not some alleged misrepresentation of content issues and consensus. As for the talk page remark, why would anyone care to sign up due to specious allegations on their user talk? The good doctor umpire might well have prescribed a strike out of the obligatory prelude to his false 3RR charges, so as not to mislead the casual reader... instead, he opted for uncivil nonsense about giving us "the finger"? WP:STICK—Machine Elf  01:05, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Belch, I'm here on my own free time to help out a few articles that are in need. I'm not interested in playing this like a video game. I'm doing my best to follow the spirit of the rules as well as the letter, rather than gaming them by stopping just short of being reportable. And unlike you, I refuse to lie about contents of a cited article to justify my edits. If, despite all this, I get blocked anyway, so be it. Remember, I'm here to help Misplaced Pages. If it won't allow me to help, that's its loss, not mine. 24.45.42.125 (talk) 23:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

October 2012

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. (WHOIS  Geolocate  Proxy Checker Current blocks XTools Global contributions) (RIRs: Africa America Asia-Pacific Europe Latin America/Caribbean)