Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.194.239.60 (talk) at 03:03, 22 April 2011. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• Archive 1 7/2004 – 10/11/2007
• Archive 2 10/11/2007 – 12/31/2009
• Archive 3 2010

Thanks for your support, and goodbye... for now.

I sincerely thank your for your support in defense of White Argentine, but it was not enough. This site is invaded by intelectualoid !@#$ (Andy the Grump, GiovBag, etc.) so I'll move for greener pastures. I'll concentrate my efforts in my own website Razas del Mundo, and I won't waste them here where they are not considered valuable. Thanks for everything, you have made my Wiki-experience a little less forgettable.--Pablozeta (talk) 02:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I just found out about the deletion minutes ago. I expected it.

I modified your comment above; it's either that or I'd have to remove it, because I really buy into WP:CIVIL.

Good luck, Pablo. And please stay away from that Hitlerite website (I honestly can't remember its name and that makes me very glad) that let you upload the article's content. Hasta luego. SamEV (talk) 02:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Believe me when I tell you I'm not pro-Nazi and that Metapedia (that's the name of the Hitlerite site) was definitely not my first choice. But, what else can I do if that was the only site that welcomed my work? Any way, I have created copies of White Argentine in every wiki-site that I could find, so nothing is actually lost, just the place of one copy. Thanks for your advice.--Pablozeta (talk) 15:16, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Frankie Muniz

I see you added back the Google books comparative link in the Frankie Muniz article. So I looked through all those books and sure enough some of them say Ridgewood and others say Woodridge. So how do we know which one is correct? I assume we're not going by the number of sources found for each place. Is there some definitive source? If so then that's the only one we should use. If not then perhaps we need to leave a note in the article explaining the confusion. Actually even if there is a definitive source we should still leave a note explaining the situation. Just having someone compare Google books doesn't really make the point very well (for instance, I don't know which ones to believe). Thanks. SQGibbon (talk) 07:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I figured it couldn't hurt to show that most sources say Ridgewood, since apparently it wasn't enough that the source already cited says it. The other editors of the article, with the obvious exception of the pro-Wood Ridge editor(s), found the comparison useful. I'm not really involved in the article, though, so do as you sincerely think is best. SamEV (talk) 21:52, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not that interested in the article either but it keeps popping up in my watchlist and this point in particular. So do you know which is the correct name? SQGibbon (talk) 16:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Quick update, I don't know why it didn't occur to me before but I looked up both city names on Misplaced Pages and only Ridgewood is listed. Doesn't mean Woodridge doesn't exist but it's pretty good evidence. One last update and one last "duh" moment. New Jersey's website only lists Ridgewood. I think perhaps the best option would be to just list one or two sources and leave a hidden note that there is no such city as Woodridge. SQGibbon (talk) 16:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, wait a sec... we're both wrong. I never questioned Wood Ridge's existence, but here's confirmatiion that it does exist: . I've just noticed that filmreference.com says "Wood Ridge" and that highbeam.com says "Wood-Ridge". Those two sources have been cited in the article since before I added the Google Books search results last April. Too bad I didn't bother verifying what the article already stated, because I could have discovered that the highbeam quotation had been tampered with, changed to "Ridgewood". I added the comparison precisely because of the lack of a definitive source; again, it seemed like something useful to throw into the mix. But I think we should definitely name both places ('born in Wood Ridge or Ridgewood') , as you recommended at first, because they're supported by sources. SamEV (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Nuts, when I went to this page, I searched it for "Ridgewood" and "Woodridge" and only came up with the former. It did not occur to me that "Wood-Ridge" would be the name. So yeah, until we can find a definitive source (I guess an interview with him) we should list both and leave a note. SQGibbon (talk) 22:19, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't want to reply until I'd acted on what we've resolved, but I didn't think it would take this long for me to get around to that. I hope it's all settled now. SamEV (talk) 04:28, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey

Hey old friend, how you been? Well if your not too busy I was wondering if you can help me with a project? Please respond, thank you, AJona1992 (talk) 02:27, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Jon.

I'm sorry, but I am indeed very busy. I'm been barely editing at all for weeks.

Good luck. SamEV (talk) 08:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh ok well thank you though and I meant "good old friend" :) AJona1992 (talk) 14:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Participate in White Latin American's AfD

Please, participate in this discussion by adding your opinion and arguments why it should be kept, or why it should not. --Pablozeta (talk) 17:14, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Puerto Rican People

Same editor who was been vandalizing Domminican immigration to Puerto Rico is vandalizing Puerto Rican people article. Can you warn used and help file a vandalism complain with the site?--XLR8TION (talk) 18:56, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Something needs to be done, I agree. Let's see what happens first with the edit warring report you filed. SamEV (talk) 02:26, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Fuckk u