Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 94.136.35.108 (talk) at 19:12, 21 February 2010 (→Seregain: rvt harrasment/lie by likely sockpuppet - seems to have the exact same single-minded agenda here). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, HiLo48, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Longhair\ 07:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

You are invited to participate in WikiProject Scouting, a project dedicated to developing and improving articles about Scouting and Guiding. You may sign up at the project members page, or sign up for our newsletter. More information General information Main project page Main project talk Scope Announcements Deletions Merges and renames New articles Requests Todo list Article showcase Country and region articles Portal Style Scouting-related articles Processes Article incubator Article maintenance Non-English article names Using images Media rationales Using references Indexes Resources Categories Templates Userboxes Project organization Coordinators Members Member recognitions Assessment V1.0 Scouting project statistics V1.0 Scouting quality lists V1.0 Scouting daily logs V1.0 Index Peer review Adopt-an-article Task forces Girl Guiding and Scouting Philmont Scout Ranch v t e

--Bduke (Discussion) 09:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Further

Further to my response at my talk page I note that both Longhair and Brian have come to your page to welcome you. Both are great participants here and you have some fundamental links to get you started in terms of understanding. If you need more help please ask at any time.--VirtualSteve 07:31, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

--VirtualSteve 07:43, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Bidgee (talk) 08:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

• You've asked for a discussion - please feel free to chip in with Bidgee at my talk page.--VirtualSteve 08:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Warragul edit

Hey HiLo48, I took him off the list as he didn't see notable as only being a professor and it was unsourced. Feel free to add him back again though, try and find a reference and perhaps list what he has contributed to, i.e. research in a particular area. Cheers Slabba (talk) 08:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

David Hodgett

Well, the disambiguation page does say that "registrar" is a keeper of records, and that's about as much as I know. The page was created as part of a sweep to have articles for all current Australian politicians, and my source was the Victorian Parliament's member bio. It says that he worked as a registrar for various immigration authorities, and when I created the article I was unsure as to which would best suit, so I left it as the link to the disambig. I agree this isn't ideal, but it's the best I could come up with, not being overly familiar with immigration procedures. Frickeg (talk) 22:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Scouting elections

You are receiving this notice as an active member of WikiProject Scouting. To change your status as a member, please edit Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Scouting/Members.

Rlevse is retiring as our lead coordinator; see Stepping down as ScoutingWikiProject Lead Coordinator. Election for a new coordinator will be held after the new year. If you are interested in nominating yourself or another editor, please add the name to Project coordinator election.

Yours in Scouting
---— Gadget850 (Ed)  16:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Tony Abbott controversies section

As requested: Talk:Tony_Abbott#Proposal_to_remove_controversies_section --Surturz (talk) 09:23, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Table in australia article...

You should really bring that up on the article talk page. thanks --Merbabu (talk) 11:30, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Helpful hint

Hello HiLo, I see that you're concerned about the recent IP edit warring on Left-wing politics. Have you seen the warnings and notices for user talk pages? You can start with a level 1 template, assuming good faith, and work up from there. Hope this helps.--Pondle (talk) 13:25, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

FAR - BSA membership controversies

Boy Scouts of America membership controversies has been nom'd for FAR at: Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Boy Scouts of America membership controversies/archive2 — Rlevse • Talk • 15:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Wow, talk about obfuscation!

Followup. When the BSA let the non-lawyers talk, things get a bit odd. For instance from the previous BSA president, Rick Cronk, in an interview in 2006

Question: Turning to God in the scout oath, does one have to believe in a Christian God to be a Boy Scout?

Answer: There must be hundreds of Gods out there. God in the oath refers to a supreme being of some sort – it's a moral or ethical or spiritual orientation. We don't care if it's Mohammad or Buddha or a rock in Japan. We ask the kids to take the Scout oath and what they do on their own time is up to them.

It is embarrassing that a president of a national youth organization with Muslim, Buddhists, etc. members isn't aware that considering Mohammad as God is blasphemous for Muslims, that Buddhists don't consider Buddha to be a supreme being nor is there a supreme being and followers of Shintoism don't consider a rock in Japan to be a supreme being. It is perhaps more understandable that he doesn't realize some Christian theologians would argue that God isn't a being supreme or otherwise (the word 'being' puts limits on God that shouldn't be there). --Erp (talk) 03:27, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

We really don't want to know does fit; I will point out that the Girl Scouts of the USA are generally more accepting (and have been pilloried by some on the religious right wing for that). You might find the thread at http://www.escouts.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=12540 interesting. It mostly deals with the issues from the UK Scouting Association point of view (generally ok on gays, split on atheists). The BSA can be slow to change, it wasn't until 1974 that the last official vestige of racial discrimination was removed (Mormon run troops did not permit blacks to be senior patrol leaders). --Erp (talk) 04:17, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

In response to your statement:

A simple statement of what BSA's policies are would be valid content in a Misplaced Pages article, if they were clear. Such content would obviously sit in the BSA article. The fact that they're not clear is the reason the Controversies article is so difficult to manage.

The religious and gender polices are quite clear and are codified in the Rules and Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America. Both policies have been in place from the origin of the BSA; the religious policy has changed only to make it gender neutral and clarify the position on agnostics, the gender policy has changed to allow girls into Exploring in 1972 and allow women in all leadership positions in 1988. The homosexual policies arose only during the 1970s, have never been in the R&R and have varied over the last 30 years. My speculation: excluding homosexuals was never an issue when homosexual conduct was illegal; see LGBT rights in the United States. The US laws protecting religious and gender rights are well set while laws protecting homosexuals are a patchwork. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  22:47, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

If you want to convince me the policies are clear, in responding to these comments of mine, you need to be 100% exact and precise.

Again, the religion and gender polices are clear cut. As I noted earlier, the policies related to homosexuals are nothing but clear and have changed radically over the last 30 years. As to whether there exist atheist or homosexual members in the BSA, I have no answer. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  01:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

To butt in if I may, the religious policy is far from clear, as is shown from the quote at the top of this section. The policy seems to require a belief in a God, but the BSA allows Buddhists to belong and they certainly do not have to believe in a God. I do not think the BSA accepts some Buddhists and rejects others. I think they believe Buddhists think Buddha is a God, but that is quite mistaken. Buddhists do not believe "in a supreme being of some sort". --Bduke (Discussion) 02:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I think Buddhists are in for two reasons. First, early Buddhist communities in the US often took on some of the trappings of the Christian denominations (e.g., Buddhist Churches of America) and as Bduke mentions many Scouters don't know much about Buddhism. Second and more importantly two countries (one a founder member) in the WOSM are majority Buddhist (Sri Lanka and Thailand) and Thailand with over 1.2 million scouts is one of the larger Scouting organizations in the world. Those two countries use 'duty to my religion' in their promises which neatly sidesteps belief in a supreme being. --Erp (talk) 02:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

You might want to look at http://www.bsa-discrimination.org/ . The writer sometimes draws conclusions not supported by the evidence but it is fairly complete. Another source is the Scouts_l mailing list for active scouters which though the three Gs are banned (girls, god, gays) does discuss religious issues, search for things like buddhists, wicca, ... to get a feel for practice. Neither count as really reliable sources for wikipedia. --Erp (talk) 04:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Images?

Hi, you wouldn't happen to have any images of the desalination plant or north-south pipeline? I read that you visited the site and thought you may have taken some photos. I'll probably be visiting one or both sites this year so I'll eventually grab some photos. Nick carson (talk) 02:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. They have used that tactic before during rallies at the site, but I'm not sure if they use it when there are no planned rallies. Nick carson (talk) 02:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

The USA

In reply to: Why not THE USA? That's how I've always said it and written it. HiLo48 (talk) 23:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I learned that in class (in France, even though I am an English native speaker) and remember losing points on a test because of that mistake. However, after quick research I cannot seem to find why that would not be acceptable. In fact, even on the USA Misplaced Pages page it-self, it is written twice times the USA. Therefore, I can only suppose I (and the teacher who taught me that) am (are) wrong. Sorry for the inconvenience. Have a good one! Xionbox (talk) 23:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Peter Evans

Hello! Thank you for creating the article Peter Evans (Melbourne radio personality). I've moved the article to Peter Evans (radio personality), since Evans is the only radio personality with that name on Misplaced Pages. I've also tagged Peter Evans (Melbourne radio announcer) for deletion, since it contains the same content as the "radio personality" article. I assumed you wanted the article to be at "radio personality", since that was the second article you created. I hope these edits were non-controversial.

In the future, if you'd like to change an article name, you should use the "move" tab at the top of the page (near the edit tab, next to the history tab). That way, there aren't two different articles. Happy editing! Liqudluck✽talk 06:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem. It was an easy fix =] Liqudluck✽talk 00:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

I've asked a question. Minimac94 (talk) 16:51, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

You're Too Fast!!

Argh! You beat me to this! Keep up the good work :) Set Sail For The Seven Seas 341° 52' 0" NET 22:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Accusations of breaching civility

I would ask you to stop accusing users of "misrepresenting my arguments, or even finding the need to inaccurately rephrase them, are also not behaving very ethically." your statment here ] clearly states (that in you opinion) that the good faith guidelines of Misplaced Pages have been appallingly breached. You have also (again) acused users of agenda pushing ] as you reapetedly did here ]. I would ask oyu to stop this to and assume the same kind of good faith that you would wish to recive.Slatersteven (talk) 18:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

"What it views as"

If you or any other editor wouldn't allow that phrase to be used here (say, between "put an end to" and "discrimination"), then neither does it belong here. Please see WP:WEASEL. Seregain (talk) 11:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but your personal views are irrelevant, as are mine. Please follow WP policies and guidelines. Trust me, the whole "what it views as"/"claims to" weasel word has been hashed and rehashed here and elsewhere on Misplaced Pages many times before. You just aren't going to win this battle. Seregain (talk) 16:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your personal attacks

I have been very civil and polite towards you in trying to help you understand the whole weasel words issue.. This comment was completely unwarranted and, honestly, is very reminiscent of a run-in I recently had with another editor. Further attacks like that will result in your behavior being reported. Neither one of us wants that. Seregain (talk) 17:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

February 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Focus on the Family. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Myki

Warnings

Users can remove anything they want from their talk pages, because it's assumed they've been read. You should revert your restoring of that 3RR warning, which in fact was not a valid warning for the reason I just stated. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 08:27, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Never mind, I did it for you. Meanwhile, the IP below "doth protest too much". Beware. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 08:49, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Seregain

Just a heads up on this user. He seems to be a stalker you it might be best if you not engage him directly and instead let admins deal with him (not sure if you saw his latest AN/I comments, but apparently he's been targeting at least 2 other users besides me on other sites, lying about them and trying to "prove" that they're all connected somehow.) If I were you I'd file a checkuser request against him at WP:SPI since he seems likely to be a sock or a banned user himself (I tried to file one myself tonight, but anons aren't allowed to). Thanks.--94.136.35.108 (talk) 08:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

BTW, I just removed a troll post by a likely Seregain sockpuppet (User:Aunt Entropy. User was uninvolved in this, but just as Seregain logged out, he/she showed up making the exact same type of posts and lobbying admins to ban me repeating Seregain's unsubstantiated claims. I'll see if I can get admin involvement here. If you want to request checkuser against these two, then feel free. Thanks--94.136.35.108 (talk) 19:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)