Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TopGun (talk | contribs) at 12:58, 10 July 2012 (→Arbitration...). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33 Archive 34 Archive 35 Archive 36 Archive 37 Archive 38 Archive 39 Archive 40

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

User:Magog the Ogre/to-do

Now Commons tagging

Hi! My bot have been tagging files with Now Commons for some time now but now it is finally done. Files that was marked as non free on en-wiki on the time I made the list was skipped and I also skipped some other categories that might mark to many files that is not ok for Commons. Sadly many bad transfers have been made making it hard just to press the delete button. I'll help check/fix the files soon so you do not have to do them all. --MGA73 (talk) 12:28, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

While I have you hear, I will let you know about these bot errors: . Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the bad news :-D It is hard to avoid errors in the migration-mess and I noticed that your bot also have some problems. It is not wrong but the "|migration=relicense|migration=relicense|migration=review" does not look nice...

So far I have only seen my bot make a few errors and they all relates to files that end up in Commons:Category:License migration needs review. So the problem should be limited.

The best would probably be to fix CommonsHelper so it makes less mess in the first place. But it would also be good to have a bot cleanup automatically (your cleanup and my cleanup).

Do you have a list of "errors" that CH makes? Last time I asked Magnus to fix CH it was done within a few hours. So I suggest we try that. --MGA73 (talk) 10:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Are you kidding me? I've made multiple requests and Magnus has ignored all of them, even the disgustingly simple ones. Yes, I have a list the length of my arm. Magog the Ogre (talk) 10:28, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Hm... Perhaps my request was very easy since it was done so soon... If you put the list somewhere I can look at it and we can start with the easy fixes. --MGA73 (talk) 19:25, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you want them by IRC, by email, what? Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Any way you like :-) --MGA73 (talk) 17:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

NowCommons files can be reviewed. I tried to make it possible to review Move to Commons files also. But it did not work as planned. Perhaps you can find the problem? Template_talk:Copy_to_Wikimedia_Commons#Make_human_review_possible. --MGA73 (talk) 20:28, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Another question

Does this edit comply with WP:NPOV and WP:DUE? Would like third opinion.. Mar4d (talk) 17:47, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

And also this.. don't want to use the rollback button too early everywhere. Mar4d (talk) 18:22, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Yup. That did it. Blocked for a week. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:37, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I am also going to revert this misplaced edit. It would be plausible to note that the template in question (Template:Pakistan separatist movements) was created right after a similiar one I created has been renominated for deletion for the third time by the same user (and whose talk page is proving to be futile for constructive discussion). Apart from double standards, this is a clear exposition of WP:BATTLEGROUND and WP:POINT. Before I leave you alone, I'd like to say one more thing which I actually came here for ..... it would have helped if you had discussed your concerns about this article on its talk page after prodding it, or at least having done the courtesy of leaving a message on mine or TopGun's talk page about what you believe makes it a "POV-pushing nightmare." Mar4d (talk) 03:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I like to express myself succinctly; my opinion is that a reading of the article will speak for itself. It looks like a bit of a hatchet-job with the purpoes of making Indian forces look bad. It provides absolutely no balance whatsoever to the allegations, which it presents as fact rather than allegation. These problems should be obvious to anyone reading the article. In light of this, I don't believe I should have to state this. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:30, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I have commented on DS's block here; I thought it appropriate to let you know. Salvio 15:23, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I cannot fathom how you've come to the conclusion that someone should not be blocked for POV-pushing. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:52, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Rape in Northeast India for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rape in Northeast India is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Rape in Northeast India until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. KTC (talk) 21:54, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Mtc review

Hi. Perhaps you could help me fix User:MGA73/movetocommonsreview.js so that it will also work on {{Mtc}}. See Template_talk:Copy_to_Wikimedia_Commons#Make_human_review_possible for further info. --MGA73 (talk) 22:32, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I think I did it. However, I am far too lazy to check it myself. Please let me know if it works. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you... It worked when I added a "(". Yeah... Cool... Thank you. --MGA73 (talk) 21:03, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

I Protest

Would you mind if you could take a minute and review this AfD closure: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/I Protest. The discussion has seven users favouring keep and three favouring deletion. It has been non-admin closed as "no consensus." Note: I've already consulted the user who closed it (here) before coming here. Mar4d (talk) 09:03, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

So you want it closed as keep? Isn't that just a bit silly that the closure be overturned although the result is the same? The article hasn't been deleted. Even if it closed as keep, it can still be renominated in 6 months. There is nothing gained by having Magog the Ogre spend the time reviewing it or by you chasing the issue until it gets changed. It's a waste of time and there are better things to do.--v/r - TP 13:35, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The fact that it has been kept or it can be renominated in 6 months is not my concern, the subject here is the closure of the AfD. I do not believe that "no consensus" aptly summarizes the discussion that took place, either numerically or in terms of the opinions of all users involved. There has to be a clear indication for it to be classed as such, which I cannot find. Mar4d (talk) 15:05, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

I understand, but what practical difference will it make? I think this is something to just let go.--v/r - TP 15:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

After doing some research, I see that Misplaced Pages:Non-admin closure allows for non-admin closure in cases of "Clear keep outcomes after a full listing period (stated in the instructions to each XfD, this is usually seven days), absent any contentious debate among participants." Whether this case fits or not, I do not know. In any case, I recommend taking the issue to WP:DRV, so as to avoid the admin-shopping. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift response, shall see to this issue over there then as per your suggestion. Also, one more thing I've noticed.. regarding TopGun's block.. why has he been given a one-week block as opposed to a 24 hour or 48-hour one, especially since his last block also was not a week long either (it had been reverted). Is there anything to explain this escalation in the log? Mar4d (talk) 13:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

You'll have to ask the original admin to be sure. But in this case, he's been blocked multiple times, and after this many blocks (some of which were not undone), one week seems appropriate. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:59, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Homesoil18.jpg

Can the higher resolution original image be deleted? I hope this is possible. Cheers, --Artene50 (talk) 09:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I've tagged it; it should be deleted in about a week. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:02, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

• Best Wishes for the help, --Artene50 (talk) 09:05, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For making sure a claimed blank image was in fact blank :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

PD Signature

Hey, Magog. I want to ask you about this image and 4 others of Girls Generation members. They are signatures and should be in PD. Some signatures from South Korean are also on Commons like this and this--Morning Sunshine (talk) 14:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi! They are PD in the US, but possibly not in their home country, which means that Commons is not willing to house them, but English Misplaced Pages is (unless precedence is undone). Unfortunately, when it comes to matters like signatures, there are far more people who are unaware of or don't care about the rules than there are people who try to clean up after them, so it's quite common to have a lot slip through the cracks. Those are just some examples. You might consider starting a deletion request. Keep in mind - it's not that they're necessarily unfree in South Korea, it's that, as a community, we're not familiar enough with South Korean law to know whether they are or not. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Jimmy Hendrix.JPG missing description details

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

Additionally, I'm not sure the license is correct Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Not sure why you're telling me about it; I only reverted a copyright violation on it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:39, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: Ron B. Thomson, File:Great Ex Telescope Telescope.jpg

—Preceding undated comment added 14:29, 3 July 2012‎ (UTC)

OgreBot help, please.

Was able to turn this File:Blondie1977.jpg into a PD file a while back. There's apparently some software creepie that won't let me add the larger photo. If you'll be kind enough to move all of this to Commons, I'll add the larger photo when it gets there. Thanks, We hope (talk) 12:46, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what your problem is, but I transferred it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks-was getting some sort of error message when I tried uploading the larger photo here. We hope (talk) 14:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hounded again

Told you about this one..never edited before I think but we've to go through every thing and get a pattern... now not only he has created retaliatory articles right after I created Pakistan Zindabad he created Hindustan Zindabad which I felt ok with and even contributed to, and then he goes with creating another one which is now at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Pakistan Murdabad‎. This is clear cut battle ground editing even noticed by neutral editors there. As soon I start editing after a week all my edits being reverted in some cases without even reading the article.

And another one who has much more history and was last advised to stay away has hounded me to a completely unrelated domain along with this one. . It's getting crazy and you should see through without ambiguity this time. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:04, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Now this is really funny. I guess you only notified Magog about the so called "hounding" earlier, and now you are citing an well-sourced article to be an WP:ATTACK page. I guess you only said in a TfD that deletion discussions are not for clean up. Right? ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 13:07, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Related

Magog, would you also like to take a look at some useless trolling that's been happening here. Very funny stuff :) The user is wasting time there and fails to engage in any meaningful discussion, as can be seen by their irrelevant comments. Mar4d (talk) 13:50, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

If you feel there is general misconduct, try WP:RFC for this content or WP:RFC/U for this user. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that is a general issue. It's related to above subsection. If you read the text, there's a feel that the reverts are being made just to revert. --lTopGunl (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Even if Vaibhav was filibustering the discussion in bad faith, this is an incredibly difficult thing to gauge, and the same is just likely to be true of you and Mar4d. I didn't see any actionable behavioral problems. From my perspective, it's just two sides with a content dispute, who (taken as a whole) apparently really suck at dispute resolution. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

That does not justify an appearance at the Rape in Bangladesh war article... also the DYK.. that's funny because these are my first two nominations. --lTopGunl (talk) 14:47, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

TopGun, they think that you're introducing non-neutral edits. If they revert them, they are following the letter and spirit of WP:BRD. Just because you an edit an article does not mean no one is free to undo your edits under the guise that this would be "hounding." Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:02, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

BRD is never followed when I'm the one reverting to status quo (which is the case mostly). So they're not following even the letter of BRD. I don't mind if they edit my articles.. but as soon as I start editing.. every article I edit, they appear on and revert me.. that's very obvious. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

So which is it? You're upset that they're reverting your articles per BRD or you're upset that your BRD edits are being undone? Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

That my BRD edits are being undone ofcourse and that my edits on new articles are being undone creating useless disputes where ever I choose to edit, going on even DYK to oppose me... --lTopGunl (talk) 16:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

So you're upset that your BRD edits are being undone and you are upset that people are BRD'ing your edits? Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:32, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think BRD means to follow my edits to any new articles and use BRD as an excuse to stop me from editing at all... and then further baiting the 1RR to revert me for the second time for sure effectively turning it into a 0RR. If some one already editing that article reverts per BRD, that's another thing... or even a new editor who is not in a pattern of following me. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, it is quite difficult to me to gauge things like baiting and stalking versus... cleaning up after someone. That's too difficult of a judgment call for me to make: sorry. I suggest filing an RFC, bringing the issue to ANI, or trying Arbcom again. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

AN3

Had an edit conflict with you.. didn't know it would be edited that fast before I could complete my comment... I'm off from there.. better this way. --lTopGunl (talk) 14:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

You have been making controversial edits, citing the B of WP:BRD, and when the page watchers revert you, you cry foul and terms it as hounding. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 14:38, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with that assessment by Vaibhav. And as you know, I have no dog in this fight, so my opinion comes as a bystander. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:47, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Revert?

You should not have reverted per WP:The Wrong Version. Even the pre dispute version is not that.. there was slow edit war before on it.. the pre dispute version was something else... check again if you want to revert to a predispute version. You've also removed the perpetrators which were re added after agreement of all editors. --lTopGunl (talk) 14:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the alleged perpetrators can be added. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 14:45, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Also you may like to add {{Pp-dispute}} to the articles. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 14:56, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Where are these perpetrators? I only reverted back one version. And I am not going to change back to another preferred version. Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:00, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Perpetrators are the "Indian security forces", check your edit - it's a small diff. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:19, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

My edit is identical to the one previously added by Vibhijain, except for a BBC link: . I see nothing about perpetrators. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:42, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Transition region.jpg

Hey, Magog,

You're taking a pretty radical approach to copyright with the business. I'm disgusted enough with the rampant deletionism here that I haven't been very active in a few years, and I won't waste time fighting with you if you push your deletion through - but you should look at my comments about what constitutes a photograph, copyrightable art, and a government work. It doesn't get much more non-copyrightable than non-creatively produced image data made by a NASA project. zowie (talk) 05:19, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Y Will do. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:32, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Involved

Hi - please don't close discussions you are clearly involved in - Youreallycan 17:52, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I am "involved" as far as I am an administrator adjudicating the discussion. Do not undo my close again, or I will block you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:53, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Yea - come on then - Youreallycan 18:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

You sure? I'm about to do it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:05, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Lol - Youreallycan 18:07, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Y Done Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:10, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents - please stop - Youreallycan 17:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration...

So you just chose to shoot the gun from my shoulder when you lost your temper.... or was there something I did not see? Because nothing has been done on those loads of reports and I wake up in the morning, see you two in a row and an arbcom filed involving me. Anyway, there are two more users involved: DBigXray and Vibhijain and another topic involved: Afghanistan... mind adding them to the list? --lTopGunl (talk) 13:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Well DBigXray and Vibhijain have never been blocked for being disruptive and edit warring, neither have they been reprimanded by the involved or uninvolved admins. Just because I have participated in the discussions and received a Threat from TopGun does not mean their name needs to be included in the soup. --DBigXray 13:27, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Same is the case with me. Unproved allegations does not makes on involved in a dispute. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 13:31, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Guess that proved my point ...I'll add them later if you don't, but better that you do as you started it. --lTopGunl (talk) 14:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Link for unaware onlookers --DBigXray 15:46, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

TopGun, you are welcome to ask that Afghanistan be included by adding your own statement. Future Perfect at Sunrise already did so. Also, I find your characterization of my arbcom request as only because I lost my temper to be a gross exaggeration: this request has been brewing for a long time. Also, frankly, it was not "shooting over your shoulder" (for a number of reasons). Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't say it was "only because of it"... it has been brewing since long but I didn't see anything else. Alright, I'll add the editors and the topic. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

• Pages automatically checked for accidental language links