Misplaced Pages

User talk:SlimVirgin/History 2

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:SlimVirgin

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SlimVirgin (talk | contribs) at 23:38, 8 September 2006 (→Semitic). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:38, 8 September 2006 by SlimVirgin (talk | contribs) (→Semitic)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper.
— Robert Frost
_ Picture of the day John Henry Turpin John Henry Turpin Photograph credit: unknown photographer; restored by Adam Cuerden


*Please comment about the content of a specific article on the talk page of that article, not here.
*No personal attacks.

Continued violation of WP:OR on the Edah Charedis article.

Please moniter this. I don't want to have any 3RR problems. However, there are a couple of folks who are more interested in The Truth than Misplaced Pages policy over here, and have refused to provide sources for assertions that they are demanding remain in the article. Please help me out. --Meshulam 14:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

User:RyanGerbil10 abusing admin tools in vioaltion of clear WP policy

Hi SV, I could use your help here: User:RyanGerbil10 has been involved in an edit war withme and other editors at Battel of Bint Jbeil. Today, after the page had been reverted to his favored version, he protected the page in clear violation of WP policy which states that admins must not protect pages they have been actively editing. I hope you can unprotect. Isarig 17:20, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals TOC

I saw that you reverted the change I made to the TOC on this article. Was it doing something weird to the article, or was it a preference thing? I liked the TOCleft, 'cause the page is so long already it didn't need an extra 3 inches of white space. Anyhow, just curious. Thanks, Scientizzle 22:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I wasn't aware that the TOC commands can have browser issues. Thanks, Scientizzle 23:07, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

RE: 3RR/Islamophobia

As a matter of fact, I did not revert, just rewrote and added sources. You are kindly advised to check the applicable policies and the contents concerned. 81.58.29.91 12:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

This has got to stop

Please stop making personal accusations against me. I'm sorry but disagreeing with you is not editing disruptively! If you look at my contributions you can see that I am productive/constructive editor and several others would agree with this. I've brought at least two articles to featured status, and started a number of new ones, which have since grown. Finally, I would like to know what this recollection of me using a number of sockpuppets entails, since this is not in among my recollections. I've used another account in the past to prevent getting personal, threatening messages, but I've never edited the same article with this other account and my current one. So please stop with the false accusations, misrepresentations and blatant wholesale deletion of my goof faith attempts to collaborate with you. Nrets 13:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I moved the paragraph because as you mentioned it had to do with AR activism. In fact, you took that whole section, which I had managed to put into context from one article and stuck it into its own section, with zero context on a completely different article without any effor on your part to integrate it. Finally, you say I have not made pro-animal rights edits, yet I never see you doing the opposite. Any time anyone makes any edit that may even cast the AR movement in a negative light you work extremely hard to have that part of the article removed, failing to see anybody's POV other than your own, and call the editors disruptive. Nrets 18:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
SV - I share Nrets' sentiments regarding AR. You demonstrate bias, stubbornness, haughtiness and a pontificating persona. Your obvious high intelligence and excellent work have become sullied by your lack of objectiveness - boo for you. Smarten up.DocEss 19:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

i concur. xx little anna 23:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Some fair use images

Hi Sarah! You may want to look into the images used in New anti-semitism - several of them lack detailed fair use rationales and should, perhaps, be deleted. Graphical creations equating Israel with Nazi-Germany are a dime a dozen - a typical rally on events in the Middle-East will yield an example or two. Attaining an authentic piece under a free licence shouldn't be too difficult. Graffiti of the sort depicted in the article is also fairly common and probably not copyrightable in most cases so all we need is a freely licenced photograph. Haukur 14:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I was unclear - I was thinking of the other images in the article, not the one all the brouhaha has been about. Haukur 15:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
It's great that you've sent them an e-mail, let's hope that works out. Here are my concerns on the rest of the images:
  • Image:FrenchCemetery103004-01.jpg - Falls foul of counterexample 5 unless this is a very famous 'iconic' photograph. Maybe it is but then that needs to be explained on the image description page. In any case a detailed FU rationale is lacking.
  • Image:NewASMagenDavidswastika.jpg - This was what my "dime a dozen" comment referred to. Admittedly this was published in a newspaper but I'd argue that a picture of similar art from a rally would serve as well. In any case it needs a detailed rationale.
  • Image:Latuff cartoon Israeli soldier voting.jpg - This is one of those tricky non-commercial images which made it in before the relevant deadline. It will probably be deleted eventually unless fair use is claimed. Preferably we would have a freely licenced cartoon there, that should be possible, though not trivial, to obtain.
  • Image:OctopusNAS1.jpg - This one is marked as public domain "because it's a work of Nazi Germany". That's very dubious and must be explained more carefully. Most art from that era is not in the public domain.
Kotepho makes some more points here though I think that some of his criticism is misguided. While theoretically we could ourselves create this sort of art and licence it freely that sort of thing wouldn't be authentic and thus wouldn't make sense for us to use in these articles. Haukur 15:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
"not one we could simply copy, because the whole point is to show where it comes from" - I agree with that, that's exactly what I'm saying above, the images have to be authentic. All I'm saying is that they need to be correctly tagged and that we should use fair use images sparingly. I may take some of the images to IfD for more input, I just wanted to give you a chance to review them first. Haukur 15:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Israeli apartheid

This case has closed and the final decision has been published at the link above.

To summarize: Discussion of global issues which concern use of "apartheid" and all polls shall be at Misplaced Pages:Central discussions/Apartheid with subsidiary dialog on the talk page of affected articles. Based on the difficult and controversial nature of this matter, with the exception of Zeq (talk · contribs), who remains banned from editing the article, the principal participants in this dispute shall be granted an amnesty for past actions, but are strongly encouraged to engage in negotiations. All involved administrators are admonished not use their administrative tools without prior discussion and consensus.

- Mgm| 20:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

SpinyNorman

Hello Slim, about this user User talk:SpinyNorman. Do you not this that he has had more than enough warnings about 3RR on his own talk page, yet he continues to abuse this rule, not to mention attacking admin's like yourself. Banning is the only way to be rid of this pest. Gunter 11:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Now he's doing it again on the "list of the fastest cars by acceleration"... Gunter 11:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Long-Overdue RfA Thanks from Alphachimp

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA WP:100). I guess infinite monkey theorem has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Misplaced Pages.

With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my talk page or email me (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for you.

(Thanks go to Blnguyen for the incredible photo to the right.) alphaChimp 01:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

You're probably the most frequently personally attacked editor I've ever seen (see every thread on that website). Hang in there! You're doing great. :) alphaChimp 01:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


Block

Would you block Dahn (talk · contribs) and Khoikhoi (talk · contribs) for 3RR on Mircea Eliade article? --Peter IBM 20:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

They spoke one with another. Also WP:Civil is not the page that they have read yet. --Peter IBM 20:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

This person has deleted text outright. (S)he is also a likely sockpuppet. (S)he has made claims that were not backed by anything, and accused ithers of POV without ever indicating why. Dahn 20:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen Slim? WP:POV and WP:CIVIL are not the pages that this user is familiar with. --Peter IBM 20:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

What about WP:3RR of Dahn (talk · contribs) --Peter IBM 20:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

There are no restrictions when dealing with banned users. —Khoikhoi 20:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Editor Review

Hi! I've requested an Editor review and would very much appreciate your thoughts. Best, --Shirahadasha 20:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Your help would be appreciated

take a look at the 3RR report recently filed against me, regarding edits to Battle of Bint Jbeil. I believ this is a bad faith report, but would accept your judgement. Isarig 03:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Kate Jemson block

Katie Jemson (talk • contribs) is requesting an unblock. Looking through her contribs, she doesn't even have any User talk edits to suggest she is a sockpuppet of "T Turner/D Sanchez et al". --  Netsnipe  ►  04:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Netsnipe, please don't unblock. I've requested a check user. It's almost certainly the same person who was causing chaos earlier with several accounts. SlimVirgin 04:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Too late. I've just unblocked her AND emailed her about it right before I got your message. Apologies in advanced if Checkuser turns out positive. I'll keep an eye out on her activity in the meantime. --  Netsnipe  ►  04:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you explain to me why you would do that? You're not familiar with the case, the background, the IP addresses, or the other accounts. You referred it to me for review, and I am familiar with it. I have requested a check user, which takes time. And yet, within minutes of referring it to me, you unblock anyway, even though the blocking policy cautions strongly against doing this. SlimVirgin 04:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

It's confirmed by check user so I've reblocked. The IP address "Katie" gave you was a made-up one. Please don't rush in to undo other admin's blocks again. SlimVirgin 05:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I looked up the contributions for both T Turner and D Sanchez and I couldn't find anything in common. D Sanchez has no (main) edits, T Turner has 1. Both were blocked for talk page harassment and Katie currently has no talk page edits and 3 (main) edits. I also took a look at Ray Lopez and couldn't find a single connection in there as well. So what evidence am I missing from the picture? In hindsight I now know it was rather bad of me to override your block, but please note this is my second day as an admin, so my WP:AGF instinct is still way too strong. --  Netsnipe  ►  05:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, if it's your second day, I'll forgive you. :-) First, read WP:BLOCK. You're not supposed to undo other admins' blocks unless they're not available and it's an emergency. Second, if you pass it to the blocking admin for review, you must allow them to review it. Third, in this case there's evidence that you're overlooking, but I won't say here what it is because I don't want to help the person to be a better sockpuppet in future. Finally, if you're going to AGF, you must also assume it of the blocking admin, especially if the admin is experienced. It makes no sense to AGF of someone with four edits but not of someone with 40,000. :-) SlimVirgin 05:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Could you please email this evidence so I can spot this sockpuppeteer in future too? --  Netsnipe  ►  05:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

about 3RR

Hi SlimVirgin, after your comment i updated 3RR case's diffs, but i want to notice that he has a checkuser case too:) I'm waiting for someone to check. Cheers --Ugur Basak 11:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Folke Bernadotte

Hi SlimVirgin. I really would prefer not to. I accept your points that it's akin to rewarding behaviour, and I wish I would have refreshed my browser as opposed to just protecting the page. But I really think that all involved parties take a break from editing Folke Bernadotte, and I think that reverting versions would not be in keeping with that spirit. Sorry. I have to head to work now, but you're welcome to ask someone else to review. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 12:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

My apologies Slim, in retrospect I should have listened and reverted instead of rushing off. Got 2 e-mails showing me a number of tendentious Spiny reverts and an ArbCom case with him listed (as well as a synopsis of his reverts on this article). Upon review myself this AM, found many many more. Take care -- Samir धर्म 11:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Tagging living people as Jews

I do not know whether you have noticed a recent fashion in the biography pages of people whose life and work bore little or no relation to Judaism. Many of those people are still alive. The discussion in Talk:Grigori Perelman seems to have become quite heated, and might nevertheless be generating some light; it seems there is little specifically Perelmanian about it, however.

Could you take a look at the topic entitled as above in the policy section of Misplaced Pages:Village pump? It would be good if people with much more experience in Misplaced Pages than I have talked this over once and for all. Yours, Bellbird 16:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


Thanks

Thanks for your supportive comments today, they have been appreciated in what has been generally a very spiteful day. I've seen a lot of people in a new light, and lost all respect for many admins to whom I had previously been indifferent. I can see now clearly what changes need to be made here, and how they should be realised. Thanks a lot Giano | talk 17:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


Do not vandalize

SlimVirgin, please do not insert POV information into the Jews for Jesus article. That is tantamount to vandalism. That article is not a forum for the airing of your personal theology. Thanks.ParadoxTom 01:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

What are you doing on the article anyway, "slim virgin"? What drew you there? It's an odd corner to show up in....and immediate start edit warring.

Justforasecond 02:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


Semi-Protection

Could you please semi-protect my userpage? I feel threatened by the indefblocked User:Leprechaun (who I know in real life) who is threatening to attack my talk page with his Ip.  Jorcoga  09:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Gratias tibi agimus

We, the people of the ID page, gathered in order to prsent an NPOV article, thank you profusely. Signing for all, &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 10:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello Slim -- hope you are well

I was surprised and a little disoriented by this reversion. Am I missing something? The points seemed relevant to the discussion, even if the person's CAPS key was stuck. I'm not trying to second-guess you, just hoping for a discussion. Why would that be inappropriate material for a talk page? BYT 13:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I would have deleted the comments myself even if SlimVirgin hadn't. Discussion pages are not chat rooms to express one's personal feelings about the subjects of articles, they are for discussing the editing of the articles. The potential troll factor was doubled by the user's plea for others to join in the thread, and tripled by the fact that it is the user's first and only edit to Misplaced Pages. wikipediatrix 14:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I understand your perspective on this, but it seems to me that the fact that we was a first-time user might also point us toward the approach of reminding this user that his observations need to be tied to a specific editorial issue on the article. We've all seen conversations on talk pages go much further afield from a specific edit than that did, I think. WP:BITE counsels "listening actively," and I think that's not inconsistent with bringing someone up to speed on the rules. My first post on a talk page didn't connect to a specific edit, either. I didn't know it was supposed to. BYT 14:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Brandon, I'm well, thank you. As Wikipediatrix says, talk pages are for discussing articles. The user I reverted was offering his personal opinion, as if in a chatroom, and I didn't get the sense that advising him about the purpose of talk pages would have helped; on the contrary, I felt it would invite more of the same. :-) SlimVirgin 14:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
OK -- thanks for letting me know what you were thinking, I do appreciate it. BYT 14:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

User_talk:Tobias Conradi

Can I trouble you to review User_talk:Tobias Conradi and offer an opinion as to whether, as CBDunkerson seems to believe, my protecting the page was unwarranted? Thanks. Nandesuka 17:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Cquotes

What do you think of them? I feel they make the material easier to read. Is there policy on this? IronDuke 00:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Apologies for questions yesterday.

It turns out that among some here such marathon editing is not impossible for one individual. --Ben Houston 07:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Jew Year's Eve

Hi SlimVirgin: Take a look at this please: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jew Year's Eve. Be well. IZAK 17:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Semitic

I have read the page semitic yet I'm still confused by it and a debate I heard on TV yesterday. To what exactly does the term 'semitic' refer? The TV claimed the term refers to not only Jews but Arabs and all peoples descended from those in the middle eastern region. I always thought it referred only to Jews (as in 'anti-Semitic'). Do you care to wade into this quagmire and help clear it up? DocEss 17:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I think I'll leave this to you. I know how much you enjoy quagmires. :-) SlimVirgin 23:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)