Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:00, 23 May 2005

Archives

• Arhchive 1 – 3 January 2005 - 20 April 2005

BEEFSTEW: well, OK, but let's not go overboard...

...I don't think there's any point in fine-tuning the language of BEEFSTEW. I hope your change wasn't prompted by any dispute over whether some particular article scored on point D or not. BEEFSTEW is just a very rough-and-ready guide intended to discriminate between real articles that have had some serious, good-faith diligent effort, and lazy vanity substubs.

I have no doubt that pitbull school inclusionists will score the same article differently than I would. Dpbsmith (talk) 10:07, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, well one of the things I feared about BEEFSTEW, which actually took place in the case of Dr._Michael_M._Krop_High_School, was "BEEFSTEW bloat," i.e. a systematic effort to add mediocre-quality material to school articles in an attempt to meet every possible BEEFSTEW point. An article with a BEEFSTEW score of 2 is a lousy article, but an article with a BEEFSTEW score of 8 isn't necessarily very good. Really, though, and speaking personally, I have no problem with articles about schools as long as there is really a group of editors who actually care about these articles and are willing to put in real work in order to bring them up to some minimal standard of accuracy and quality. My objection is to the substubs, the vanity, and the articles that present essentially the sort of tabular database information you can get from www.greatschools.net. I think what we're getting now is mostly syntheses and paraphrases of material from the schools' own websites, but I can live with that. Dpbsmith (talk) 12:40, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oral sex

Thanks for your comment, but I make it a point to avoid getting into revert wars so I won't be doing a revert to restore the picture inline--somebody else will have to do that, to demonstrate to Luke that it isn't just me. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:18, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oh, looks like Davenbelle did so. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:33, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Names of large numbers

Thanks for your recent work. I just wanted to explain: I created the section on the "standard dictionary numbers," and I did so for a fairly specific reason. In a way, it's grotesque overkill. But it does seem be an effective way of keeping nerdcruft out of the article, or at least making a crystal-clear distinction between "real" words, that words like "googolplexian" and "trigintillion" are not real even if someone has them in a list on a website, or if they appear as the output of a program for giving English names to indefinitely large numbers. Dpbsmith (talk) 13:42, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Re Chambers: up to you. (I personally don't think I'd bother unless it shows any interesting difference from other dictionaries in terms of which words are included). But please do keep this article on your watchlist. I've noticed that this article and Binary prefixes and a few others like it are constantly subject to editing by people who, I think, want to show off their belief that they "know" the names of bigger numbers than any that appear in the article. There was a problem a while back with constant re-creation of articles on "nonabyte" and "doggabyte," for example. I think it's just an extension of the time in elementary school when everyone competes to see who knew how to count to the highest number... "yeah, well I can count up to a thousand," "yeah, well I can count up to a million skillion jillion!" Dpbsmith (talk) 14:05, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Further to that: I and Wiktionary:User:Paul G put a whole load of "-illion" words into Wiktionary a while back (gazillion, kajillion, jillion, and so forth). I omitted fazillion, because it fell below the usage threshold that (to me) indicated that it was a word. Someone else, completely independently, later added it, and we're currently discussing, over in Wiktionary, whether it's a word. One of the points brought up is that there is a very large number of possible words that people can make up fitting this pattern. And people do, indeed, make them up. ☺ Uncle G 15:20, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

Reference desk

Never underestimate the power of a distributed readership. There was bound to be someone who remembered that exact article, and in this case it turned out to be me. Glad to be of help! JRM 14:16, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

Another I Lasson sockpuppet on Mike the Headless Chicken

Agesilaus II has now appeared redoing the previous nonesense put up by Agathocles of Bactria Brookie 19:32, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Wikiproject Graphical content problem

I basicaly am trying to create an "Click at own risk" image. --Cool Cat 09:59, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Fine I put it to VfD. I wont troble wikipedia with any more projects as they all got torn apart without any discussion could be made. --Cool Cat 09:59, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

3 Questions re Arbitration on Jeb Bush article

Hello and thank you for your help and offer to help on the arbitration matter. I have three questions:

1) Is this part of the template below something I am supposed to complete, or someone else is supposed to complete?

"Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

If not, then explain why that would be fruitless"

The reason I ask is because if I am required to complete it, then, I will. If not, then, I won't.

2) I notice two of the ten people on the committee seemed to have already rejected my request. Are they suppose to wait until (a) the above template is complete, and to (b) read a statement (not yet submitted) by the other party, before they make a decision? It seems to me that both (a) and (b) would be necessary, but maybe I am wrong about that.

3) Also, do ten people actually weigh in on this, with rejections or accepting the request I made, or is it just those two people who already rejected my request? I will return here to your talk page for any clarification you can give me on this process. If I should have written this on the arbitration page, please let me know and I will copy and paste there. Thanks, SummerFR 17:01, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thryduulf,

I am still posting tonight my efforts to have a dialogue with Bartloft tonight, but -- can you translate for me what is happening here right now with these committee members' comments posted so far? I don't understand the following:

1) Is the 500 word opening statement supposed to be the place where one presents an entire case? I thought it was a summary and the opening statement, limited to 500 words. Or, is it just whatever number of words you want, like BartLauf did, to actually present a case right away? Is there actually a hearing AFTER the 500 statement or not? I thought there would be, and that specific evidence is presented at that time. The harassment against me was really horrific. Yet, in reading these committee comments, I am feeling like this is what Cuba or Communist China must be like. And I am not trying to be funny here. I am truly shocked.

2) I am the one who brought the case AGAINST someone else. Yet, this committee, so far, seems to want to ignore my complaint, and make this a case against me. Is this arbitration committee ALSO allowed to retaliate against me, for bringing a request for arbitration? I never heard of such a thing. It seems, based on those comments against me by some on the committee, they are voting on a complaint not filed (against me), and not brought by Bartlauf -- a respondent who is VIOLATING the 500 word statement policy.

3) I also requested three committee members to be removed. Does that also not matter? Does anything I say about the actual facts matter at all? So far, it seems not. SummerFR 02:38, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

re: keep/delete schools

See my user page for my thoughts on the keep/delete schools issues. If you think I'm not aware of something, please leave me a message there. I've been researching the keep/delete subject myself, and hearing other's viewpoints on the whole situation would be very welcome. - Pioneer-12 15:21, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Typos

Hi, Thryduulf. I saw your comment regarding typos—yeah, I wasn't positive what to do with "liscence" since you also had written "Dual Licensing" (American spelling), but since you had said you were English, I corrected the "liscences" to the British spelling but left the American spelling alone. — Knowledge Seeker দ 17:04, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Self-destructive subcultures

FYI: I have deleted User:Thryduulf/Internet/Self-destructive subcultures (proposed) after it went on VfD without any further comment.... I think that counts as consensus. :-) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 02:59, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

If Thryduulf did not nominate the page himself, then I object to this deletion. If I had known that it was on Vfd I would have objected there. Deleting pages in people's personal space.... that seems rather nonsensical. People have a right to their opinions. If Thryduulf wants to have this page then he can have it, and if he wants it deleted then it should be deleted. Even if the page is full of garbage it should be kept; it is his right to fill it with garbage if he so chooses. Vfd is for the general encyclopedia, not censoring people's personal views. Only violations of copyright or things not acceptable under the First Amendment--such as outright lies and threats to violence--should be deleted from one's personal space against one's wishes. (The English wiki is based in America, so the First Amendment "freedom of opinion"/"freedom of expression" should apply. Even if it doesn't, Misplaced Pages seems to share and respect the First Amendment values.) I would have liked to read about "Self-destructive subcultures". The topic sounds interesting, and I've done research on subcultures in the past. Also, pages should not be deleted based on the opinions of one. One person is, categorically, not a consensus. - Pioneer-12 03:59, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Now, watch it turn out that Thryduulf nominated the page himself. Heh. If so I withdraw my objection.

It was good to get my opinion out there, just in case. - Pioneer-12

Yep, I nominated it! Thryduulf 07:05, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Xiong

Hi there! Because the RFC about Xiong seemed to deal mainly on his disagreements with Netoholic, I thought it best to start a new RFC to see if people have comments on Xiong's behavior that do not relate to Netoholic. Please give your thoughts and/or opinion on that at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Xiong. Radiant_* 08:26, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

TfD

Thanks. This may be something that falls through the cracks. However if someone is using the template mechanism on one of his own user subpages in talk space or whatever, TfD may not be the most appropriate response. You could ask him to stop, for instance. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:12, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ah. Sorry, dunno how it ended up on your user page <red face>.

I was referring to your comment on my talk page:

TfD

Your comment on the userspace policy proposal, "There is no existing bar on TfDing a user template." is not backed up by the precedent of the Keepschools template in userspace. The top of TfD starts "This page is for deleting things in the Template namespace". Thryduulf 13:44, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Never mind. :) --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:40, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Rabbit Fire

I agree with you on how stupid it is that this page exists so I'm adding a delete tag. freestylefrappe 03:10, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

Dab style

I've created a draft project at Misplaced Pages:Disambiguation/Style for comment. I'll announce it on Village Pump, but I'm directly notifying people who have commented lately. —Wahoofive (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Incorrect template removal on Audi A8

You removed the template {{Audi}} from Audi A8, declaring that you removed an inappropriate stub template. That is not a stub template.

An anon IP user removed the stub template just before you got there. —Morven 17:24, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Personal Attacks

Please refrain from posting personal attacks against other users - many people consider accusing others of being a deletionist constitutes such an attack.
If you continue then you are liable to be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages until you can be civil. Personal attacks also severly hamper any cause you are trying to promote by alienating others against you. Thryduulf 16:01, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

It is clear from the user page User:Pcb21 that this individual's inclusionist leanings are not sufficiently extreme to be upheld as orthodox. To paraphrase President Bush, "You are either with us, or you're with the deletionists." Indeed, your defense of this individual and threat of blocking only prove your own deletionist sentiments. You must be destroyed. I will now vandalize your user page. 205.217.105.2 16:58, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Śiva typo stuff

You're really helping me with this. I just would like to thank you. -- Subramanian 04:16, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Category help

Brookie here - thanks for the post on my query - it's sorted now! Kind regards Brookie:the wind in the grass 07:25, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Watch/Deletion debates needing votes

This section of WP:W hasn't seen any use in the month since its creation... do you think we should keep it? Yours, Radiant_* 08:11, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

WP:RM

For your Yoghurt vote to count you need to move it to Talk:Yoghurt and remove it from WP:RM. But before you move it please consider that in this case the Primary Author http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Yoghurt&oldid=484796 used Yogurt in the article. Philip Baird Shearer 09:10, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Disappearance of Jeff Q

Hi, Thryduulf. You may have noticed that I never did get back to working on several song lists projects, like your commendable effort on User:Thryduulf/Geonamesongs. I've essentially abandoned my work on the song lists, mostly because I find the effort in maintaining them much less than any value I'd hoped to get from them. (Which is not to say that I don't think they're valuable in general — just not to me anymore. It has, perhaps, more to do with my personal life and reevaluation of my priorities than any comment on the lists' intrinsic worth.) If you've been holding back taking votes or making changes at least partly because of my lack of participation, please don't. Misplaced Pages, like any wiki, is a compilation of work by the willing and able, and I'm just not making the grade anymore on this topic. I apologize for leaving you folks hanging. — Jeff Q (talk) 21:38, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

triple-triplicate

On Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical) you asked about the "-ication" (actually, you wanted "-ifciation") word for nine. From "nonuple", I'd guess that the answer would be "nonuplication". I suppose you were just joking, but I wanted to know too. So now I'm off to look for an opportunity to use that word. One-dimensional Tangent 19:58, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Wikimania; interwiki links

It looks like the links you made worked just fine, to me at least. Just thought I'd let you know. — Knowledge Seeker দ 08:53, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm...] gives cy:, which seems to work for me. Maybe you could try it again? — Knowledge Seeker দ 16:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sock puppet/Proposal

Hi there! I've reworded this a bit per everyone's comment, and would like to get support to make this a guideline and allow it to be used. Could you please indicate if you agree? Thanks, Radiant_* 12:28, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

David Gerard

This jerk abused his authority, violated Misplaced Pages policy by using his authority to clear away his lackey's opponents in the middle of a content dispute, and deliberately lied about me claiming that I am a sockpuppet. I stand by my statements. ElKabong

User:24.60.128.48

Hi Chris: It seems to me that you are being rather harsh on User:24.60.128.48 even though I can see that their refusal to respond is frustrating. I have sourced some of the information that s/he added and I think that is more appropriate than reverting their changes. I was particularly concerned to see you reverting a spelling correction and demanding source. If I were that user I would feel hectored at best and bullied at worst. I dunno ... all the good stuff you do and I break months of silence to lecture you ...! --Theo (Talk) 10:53, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I need no apology. Would you like me to keep an eye on this IP? --Theo (Talk) 15:17, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

KaintheScion Rfc

I had to revert him several times over the past few days, mainly over that one statement by David. I know thta pages can be protected from vandalism, but does policy pages ever need protection in situations like this? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 14:49, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Zscout is a lying POV-pushing jerk. And I would appreciate it if you would direct problems you have with me, to ME, rather than throwing baseless accusations at an innocent user. Unlike Zscout I have certain principles and morals, and watching someone innocent be attacked is not something I will stand idly by and accept. ElKabong Firstly, your behaviour and that of KaintheScion are basically identical, and it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt by David Gerard, who the community trusts to have access to the relevant technical information, that you and him/her are the same person. Secondly, making personal attacks against another user on my talk page in a message about directing problems with you to you directly, is a good example of the pot calling the kettle black. Thryduulf 15:53, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

David Gerard is a liar. He fabricated the so-called "evidence", in a scheme to aid Tony Sidaway in violation of Misplaced Pages policy on using admin powers to gain an advantage in content disputes. Nothing more, and nothing less. ElKabong