Misplaced Pages

• Please click on Click here to start a new discussion thread below to start a new topic.
• Please post your new comments at the bottom of the comment you are replying to.
• Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
• Please indent your posts with ":" if replying to an existing topic (or "::" if replying to a reply).
• I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to.
• I prefer a clean talk page and will delete old messages after a reasonable period of time. The history tab will show you a complete list of all past comments if you are interested. All comments are appreciated, especially criticism and corrections.

Here is a great list of things to know and remember about this online encyclopedia -- it came in handy to me when first starting to edit Misplaced Pages and I still refer to it when necessary.

Start a new discussion thread

Break

One of the first steps in dispute resolution is disengagement. Even temporary disengagement can help. I am suggesting that both you and the other editor take a three-day vacation from the Mortenson topic. There's no breaking news and if something happens then other editors can handle it. It's not that you need to be punished, it's just that there's a unhelpful pattern which might be resolved most easily by a short mutual break. Would be be willing to do that?   Will Beback  talk  09:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. I was thinking last night before I quit editing it that I should take a break from it for a few days anyway. Lhb1239 (talk) 13:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I know you're facing an uphill struggle but continue regardless. Good to see such dedication. I might even say I'm proud of what you're doing. Kudos to you. Qwrk (talk) 18:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Qwrk. It does feel like an uphill battle at times. Frankly, I think the rush to judgement and calling for blood with people like Mortenson who have done such good and make errors in judgement speaks to our society as a whole. Sadly, those who recognize "wait and see" is preferable to "hang 'em high!" are in the minority. Such is human nature, I suppose. And do feel free to step in at any time, you know. Personal friendship with Mortenson or not, it would be good to have your opinion on the talk page be heard/read at the very least. Take care. Lhb1239 (talk) 21:09, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

G'day Lhb1239. Well, exactly for your cautious and thoughtful approach in this regard I thought you truly deserved the third barnstar that I handed since starting my Misplaced Pages career. It's refreshing and comforting to see there's still people out there abstaining from a "hero to zero" mentality. I will chip in my 2 cents where and when I deem appropriate, no worries. And keep up the good and positive spirit. Qwrk (talk) 21:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Done.

I set myself to it and penned a new section. Did take some precious time though, but it's worth the cause. Qwrk (talk) 16:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Jackie's infobox

Longhouse

I have started a discussion regarding the Pacific Science Center longhouse on its talk page. Owen (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I think that's a great idea. :-) Lhb1239 (talk) 18:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Apology and Clean Slate

LHB1239:

I apologize if I have offended you in the past, months ago, when I put some unhelpful and untrue information in the Greg Mortenson article. I understand you have passion for the subject of the Greg Mortenson article and understand that you are concerned about the point of view being changed. If what I have done has offended you in the past, I sincerely apologize. But recognize that my contributions today are not offensive. They are reasonable.

I would like to make reasonable contributions in the future to the article but feel that I am getting pounded every time I contribute. Please, let's bury the hatchet from a month ago and look forward to the future. I'll make contributions here and there, and they will be good ones. If you have concerns, feel free to bring them up on the talk page, but I would like you to consider that they aren't automatically "bad" but reasonable contributions to the article. I don't plan on contributing a lot, just now and then.

I have retired my old username, and would like you to respect that. You cannot close an account on Misplaced Pages, but I changed both the password and e-mail and cannot login to the account and cannot recover the password. It's retired. Please let it die peacefully and quietly.

Thank you. 98.203.237.77 (talk) 15:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate your effort at reconciling here and will honor your desire to "bury the hatchet". I don't have a "passion" for the subject, but I do have a passion for fairness and truth. None of the allegations against Mortenson have been proven, in fact, information continues to come out that shows he has been unfairly accused. Krakauer's hands are not clean on the issue and he may have to end up eating crow over the affair. Regardless, my concern lies in the fairness and NPOV of the article, nothing more. Accusing me of being a Mortenson fanatic was over the top. Still, since you have apologized and wish to start again, I will be happy to do that.

As far as your old username, I think I remember reading something somewhere here in the Wiki about getting the account scrubbed -- something about "right to disappear" or along those lines. You might want to talk to an administrator about that. But you will want to get another account going if editing here is something you plan to continue doing. I was able to see where you were editing from (I'm assuming you work there) because of a feature available for identifying IP editors called "Geolocate" (it's near the bottom of the user contributions screen in blue type). Using an IP can have it's advantages, I suppose -- especially if you don't want to be tied down to an account name -- but it does have its disadvantages (like being able to identify your ISP, etc.) Aside from that, it's my experience from reading and seeing what others with more tenure and experience in Misplaced Pages say about IP editors that IPs are not thought very highly of -- especially if the person behind the IP is using more than one IP. If you want your edits to be taken seriously, getting an account name again is preferable.

Alos, when you edit biography of living persons articles, do remember that references are a must -- this is one of the biggest things I look for when someone has edited a BLP on my watchlist. In non-BLP articles refs are important but not as much as in BLPs. Just something for you to watch out for. Anyway, thanks again for the effort to straighten things out. There are a lot of rules here, but it is possible to learn them even if just a little at a time. Have a great day. Lhb1239 (talk) 16:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

LHB, my apology and olive branch was sincere. Please let sleeping dogs lie. Please.98.203.237.77 (talk) 17:51, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

In the past twenty-four hours, I have not posted anything related to other editors on Misplaced Pages. I hope you will see that as showing the sincerity of the olive brach that I extended to you. WhereTimeStandsStill (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

New account

LHB1239,

I've created a new account for me to use on Misplaced Pages. I'll only use this one when making Misplaced Pages edits and will not make any from anonymous IP addresses. As a courtesy, I'm letting you know of my new account so you know who the new guy around the article is.

Thanks.WhereTimeStandsStill (talk) 20:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Dude. You need to check this out with an administrator. As I read Wiki policy regarding sockpuppets, you have just created a sock account. Your old account still exists, regardless of you saying you no longer have access to it. Has nothing I've said to you over the last 18 hours sunk in regarding policy and behavior? Please get the attention of an administrator promptly about this new account. If you don't, I will and it may not work out too well for you. Just sayin'. Lhb1239 (talk) 20:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

If the editor stops using the old account then there's not a violation of ].   Will Beback  talk  21:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I think you are incorrect about this. In reading the article on sockpuppetry, I see the following:

"Editors who want to use more than one account for some valid reason should provide links between them on the respective user pages (see below), with an explanation of the purpose of each account or of the relationship between them. If so desired, the user and user talk pages from one account can be redirected to the other."

And this: "Clean start under a new name: If you decide to make a fresh start, you can discontinue the old account(s) and create a new one that becomes the only account you use. Clean-start accounts should not return to old topic areas, editing patterns, or behavior previously identified as problematic, and should be careful not to do anything that looks like an attempt to evade scrutiny. A clean start is permitted only if there are no active bans, blocks, or sanctions in place against the old account. Discontinuing the old account means it will not be used again; it should note on its user page that it is inactive—for example, with the Retired

If anything, he should go for the clean-start option, in my opinion. I don't really care one way or the other, but it is my observation that he is kind of not really getting that there are rules of conduct. For those of us who do our best to keep within those boundries, it's more than a little irritating to see others do what resembles thumbing their nose at the set boundries. Lhb1239 (talk) 22:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Clean-start is a different thing entirely - it's used when someone wants to put the past behind them and sever all connections to their old identities. This case is more like a simple name change. The user has not hidden his identity so it doesn't violate WP:SOCK. I agree that it'd be helpful to connect the accounts on the respective user pages.   Will Beback  talk  22:40, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

If you read what he's written regarding his anger over me referring to his old user name, I think it's a clean start he wants. For whatever reason, he doesn't want to be connected to the old name. I figured it would just be easier to try and get an administrator to do a name change -- and that's why I suggested it to him -- but maybe clean start would work better for him. Like I said, I really don't care one way or the other, I'm just trying to help the guy because he seems to be kind of clueless when it comes to Wiki-rules and the like. The thing to do would be to ask him, I suppose. Even so, connecting the accounts so there's no confusion later on seems the most honest thing to do. Lhb1239 (talk) 22:50, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The username is perhaps the least of the issues. At least he's using a stable identity now.   Will Beback  talk  23:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

JBKO's Infobox

Hi there :) I see the debate over JBKO's name has begun anew on her discussion page - I posted a comment there to the other editor, and suggested a vote in hopes of resolving the issue. Please provide some input whenever you get a chance - thanks! FrostySnows (talk) 23:30, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Revert warring

Reverting once is part of BRD. But if there's a need for more than one it's probably time to start a talk page thread. Please set an example of good editing practices.   Will Beback  talk  23:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)