Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Star Mississippi (talk | contribs) at 00:30, 12 April 2008 (→Live class: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

unu doi trei patru cinci şase şapte opt nouă zece unşpe doişpe treişpe

Middix deletion

Hi. I'm a little confused. This doesn't make sense to me... this vs. this. Am I missing something? I'm cross-posting on Tikiwont's page as well. -- Swerdnaneb 21:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I think I see the error of my ways, but it seems like some of these "web desktop" articles are straddling the fence between web content and software. -- Swerdnaneb 21:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

This is a tricky one, but a good question Swerd. At the time I deleted the A7 article, 'software' was not excluded from the A7 criteria. Since December, the criteria for speedy deletion has changed and articles about software cannot be speedied for lack of notability assertion. the_undertow 23:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks for the help! I'll quit speedy-nom-ing them. :) -- Swerdnaneb 01:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

<3

You rock. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 03:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Bureaucratship

Congrats on your successful Burro crate candidacy. Now, get your burro-cratness over to the bot approval page, I have a main page deleting, Jimbo blocking bot that needs the sysop bit turned on. K thx bai. ++Lar: t/c 11:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

So that means that you're not a Mariah Carey fan? Too bad, because that's the sole reason I supported your above nomination...well that and the reason expressed on the page. Dude, I'm disappointed. Mimi is the Queen!! <Don't tell me you're a Madonna fan....so help you God!!!>

What the topic said...and hi! Orane (talk) 20:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Whaddup?

Hokay, so I got a few minutes in to research, check my notebook for progress. I'll work on it more tonight and tomorrow. I got distracted... but I'm good now. I'm Lara! I remember! A'ight, ttyl. Lara❤Love 20:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the good faith defense you posted on the SSP page. I don't even know why I'm suspected really. But people can think whatever they please. I just wanted to thank you for the nice words. Rm994 (talk) 03:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem. I don't want to see any editor get discouraged, ya know? C ya. the_undertow 03:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I do. And at that point, I must admit I almost considered deleting my account and never touching another page. Thanks, though. I'll tough it out. Rm994 (talk) 04:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey look, you came out ok, yer not a sock, and most likely won't have to go through that again. Everyone, seriously, almost everyone gets 'bitten' at first. It's what motivated me to stick around though, because I wanted to show that I can hang and that I'll be around longer than the person who first bit me ;) the_undertow 06:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

zOMG

Teh anxiety! So check it, my sweet the_undertoes, last night was teh suck. Srs. I woke up every few minutes, really weird fucking dreams about wikipedia articles and wiktionary entries... I'm addicted, obviously, to a point that it's unhealthy. Regardless, I haven't puked since just before I went to bed, which was before I talked to you last. There's still a Spanish-American war in progress, but I think it's drawing to an end. However, McDonald's for lunch, cause teh intraweb told me to keep the fatty foods coming, so we'll see how that ends up. I've not had anything to eat since 3 slurps of broth last night before bed.

So okay, just met my Chinchilla's. They're so cute! Now to decide between Baxter and Ozzy or Tank and Diesel. Although we can't tell them apart... but, okay, time to go eat. I hope you're doing well. Just wanted to drop by and say o, hai. :) Lara❤Love 16:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

Didn't know you were back. F'kin kewl! Look forward to seeing you around. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 23:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Same, when I saw your name pop up and ANI I got excited. Good to have you back, Tiptoety 01:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The next six weeks I will be in limited capacity due to a miraculous graduation from college, however, after that, I expect numerous RfCs and ANIs that are a direct result of my actions. Fare thee well. the_undertow 01:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Stormfront (website)

Y'know, it's actually better to correct misspellings than to remove sections that have misspelled words. Glad you came around to it. --jpgordon 02:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You realize the irony here? You re-added the information despite the spelling errors. It's the burden of the editor adding the information to make sure it is grammatically and factually correct. And given the additions by the editor, the latter is unlikely. the_undertow 02:48, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, yeah, that's why I didn't restore it in the first place; but the reason I noticed it in the first place (Stormfront, of course, is on my watchlist) is that I only parsed end of your comment, "obvious spelling errors", and for whatever reason the first part ("irrelevant information") didn't register. Sorry about that. --jpgordon 03:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm also very uncomfortable correcting even grammatical errors when it comes to a source to which I do not have access. Basically if it's a good faith insertion, I will take the time to correct the grammar - I'm here to contribute, right? But in this case, I am hesitant because I don't see it as a good faith edit, nor can I verify the source or the content. I don't want to correct something, which amounts to endorsing it, if I can't be sure that the source is accurately utilized. Ya know? the_undertow 03:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh! I don't think you have an obligation to verify sources and such when you're correcting obvious spelling errors; why would anyone think that an endorsement? --jpgordon 04:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I think because if I'm correcting it, I must believe in its inclusion. Also, then it gets buried in the history and the recent addition may not be scrutinized. It's tough. These are edits made by a user who consistently adds the 'racism' category to white pride while actually and soberly removing the same category from Black Panthers AND Black Supremacy. When someone literally says "Black pride is not racist. It is a response to all the racism black people had to suffer through. White pride, however is; it is just a sanitized version of white supremacy" they really deserve to be topic banned for life. This user is way too POV to be touching these articles. He is incrementally making Stormfront and white pride completely negative subjects by using various sources at his discretion. the_undertow 04:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, and I'm not defending the particular section - as I said, the revert was a mistake based on my missing part of your edit comment. All I saw was "misspelling", and the content was obviously much more than that, and I assumed something odd was up. Anyway, responsibility for edits is a personal issue, and I understand your POV; I guess I spent so many years fixing bugs in other people's crappy code that "fixing" and "taking ownership of" (or, in this case, editing and endorsing) are entirely separate issues for me. --jpgordon 06:48, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I mean, that makes sense to me. If you suspected that the coding you were working on was going to be used in a virus, for example, you could see where editing and endorsing sort of overlap. Anyway, I'm off to sleep, so have a good one! the_undertow 06:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

False Vandalism

Thanks for sorting out the mistaken vandalism reports at User talk:67.171.175.42 / User:BlackPearl14
--Badgernet (talk) 10:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Maternity clothing

You may be aware that there is actually a thread at DRV. Otherwise you know now. BTW, I sometimes dream of the orange bar before I even wake up...--Tikiwont (talk) 15:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you made me aware of the deletion review, as apparently I was never notified, which is odd, since I was the admin who deleted the article. For anyone who is interested the version that was deleted was G11. The deletion summary was As of now it's G11. Recreation is fine as long as it avoids this criteria. Just because the item is a household product, does not imply that any form of the article is appropriate as copyvios and spam pages, regardless of title can be deleted. I did not salt the page, but urged its recreation, as it needed it from the ground up. There was no lead to the article, it was comprised of entirely original research (having this as the only source, and contained linkspam. I am disappointed that the DRV was not left open, regardless of whether or not I had a hand in reworking the article. The issue at DRV is whether or not I abused my deletion tool, and I would have liked the chance to see if others felt that I erred. Sometimes a house must be razed in order to put up one that is suitable, especially when the foundation itself is in question.

I have often taken articles like these, which I find at AfD, and with complete disinterest, bring them to an acceptable article, without resorting to deletion. the_undertow 21:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, the early closure may also not have been what the requester asked for. It wasn't what I had in mind with my initial general comment, where I didn't really address the validity of the deletion, even tough it may have invited it. Actually, I noticed later that 1) there was even an ANI thread and 2) the DRV had already been closed without action. So I contacted the closer commenting that the history restoration was still an open point, and that I personally didn't see it as blatant advertising, taking into account that the newbie editor felt bitten. The restoration was done, but I am sorry as it may now rather augment the impression of things discussed behind your back and without general discussion. So don't hesitate to get back at me or TexasAndroid if there remains anything left to clarify or say. In any case, I'll take that into account for further comments and occasional closures at DRV which is a delicate territory and I actually know of two fine admins who have left recently over DRV closures, --Tikiwont (talk) 09:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Now this makes me feel silly. So restoring the history was overly generous.--Tikiwont (talk) 19:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

It's totally cool. I think a few more weeks of Zoloft and my paranoia will go away. I would never leave over a DRV closure, by the way, when I go out, it has to be far more dramatic than that! the_undertow 20:43, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Srs. Lara❤Love 21:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

O Hai, my love. TIM POOR AIR UH LEO LEO LEE passify... the_undertow 21:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, well. It was actually the closers that left, maybe trying too hard to do the right thing. And I would probably leave over something far more trivial than that, such as e.g someone reverting a style change of mine per WP:MOSDAB. Cheers.--Tikiwont (talk) 08:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't be such a pussy. MOS? no wai. go big or go sock. the_undertow 08:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

WWHD

.......what!? haha. Thank you for making my day. нмŵוτнτ 13:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

P.S. The picture at the top of this page just described my life. нмŵוτнτ 17:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

*wipes tears* Get on IRC, dood. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 08:29, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Bathrobe Cabal

Hey how do I join The Bathrobe Cabal, or is it only for the privileged classes? I spend all day in bed Wikipeding,but I do not own a bathrobe. Do I still qualify, or I must buy a bathrobe first? Igor Berger (talk) 02:42, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey Igor. You have to go to WP:BATH and ask the members there. I have no affiliation with the Bathrobe Cabal. Cheers! the_undertow 03:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

wpW5

OK first there's nothing creepy, blame Carcharoth (I think) for telling me about auto-watch, and I have an RFO that I'm deeply pissed about not being acted on, majorly pissed-off, because of my watchlist.

You're correct that knowing everything is useless unless you act on that knowledge. The key is to acquire the maximum knowledge under reasonable circumstances, then act on what you've discovered. The impossibility of figuring out exactly how an article evolved into its particular state today, once I realized how messy history is, was pretty clear right off the bat - check my 27th edit, my 41st edit and my 46th edit.

And how long was it 'til I had a solution? Presented the possibilities to the community? Emphasized that the capability is available to anyone who asks? Asked where it could be useful? Tried to promote it to the wider community?

After all that, I have exactly one confirmed user, who is also (so far) an enthusiastic user. And then there's me - I can recall having seen something - "BRC channel", a possible page location, and oops, Earliest 26Mar08 06:26 - Latest 30Mar08 19:40. That's not creepy at all - I am an arms dealer, selling weapons in the form of search. Weapons are available to all.

What are you looking for in edit history? Give me the challenge. I'll solve it and give you the same tool to do it yourself. Bring it on. Franamax (talk) 04:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Yahel

Speedy kept the page, but protip: don't go to RFC/U. You're not the kind I'd see burning lower-case t's (meaning "time to leave"), but srsly, RFC/U is shitty. I mean, really shitty. Take it to RFM. Sceptre 22:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate the advice, but nah. This isn't about mediation - I want him topic banned. the_undertow 22:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Arbcom then. Skip RFC/U entirely. Sceptre 22:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Aww...you're too kind Chip. Good luck either way. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 00:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Live class

re: your comment here, it is unencyclopedic. It has been PRODed and someone removed it - as well as a merge tag. Feel free to try with AfD TRAVELLINGCARI_{Tell me yours} 00:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)