| Revision as of 07:47, 9 December 2007 editThe Evil Spartan (talk | contribs)Rollbackers16,194 edits →borderline anti-US rhetoric: sorry← Previous edit |
Revision as of 08:13, 9 December 2007 edit undoThe Evil Spartan (talk | contribs)Rollbackers16,194 edits archiving, retiring (again)Next edit → |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
<!-- Template:Archive box begins --> |
|
Please don't contact me, I'm quitting. Too much effort, not enough worth it. ] 09:23, 30 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{| class="infobox plainlinks" style="width: {{{box-width|238px}}}" |
|
::What...what happened?--] 15:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|<div style="padding-top: 4px; text-align: center">{{{image|]}}}'''<br/>]''' |
|
:::Dont worry about it, it's all good. Thanks. ] 17:29, 10 October 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
</div> |
|
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:NRSV Catholic.jpg== |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. |
|
|
|
* ]<br/> |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|}<!-- Template:Archive box ends --> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{retired}} |
|
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->] 03:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== We'll miss you == |
|
|
|
|
|
I think you were a great editor and sysop. You are always welcome to come back. --] 17:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
==Orphaned non-free media (Image:Boo - Mario.jpg)== |
|
|
] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, it is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). |
|
|
|
|
|
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Orphaned --> ] 15:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Flea (Chrono Trigger).jpg== |
|
|
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. |
|
|
|
|
|
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->] 11:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
*A draft userspace article has been created. Please see ]. ] 21:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==HELP== |
|
|
Many thanks for the tips. Does ''Presse papier'' mean ''cookies'' (my system is in French) ?--] (]) 07:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Sterling History username block== |
|
|
|
|
|
I blocked because of to UAA. It's in how it's used as well as how it's named. I see a change of username is in progress. ] (]) 21:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
I blocked the above IP recently as being part of a weird POV vandal spree (originating from Australia, apparently), but when I saw in the edit history that there were many good edits from the IP as well I shortened the block considerably. --] (]) 22:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Palestinian People == |
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry for the late notice but I should let you know I undid your removal of sourced info regarding Arab leaders who have made statements similar to Golda Meir's statement on the nonexistence of the so-called "Palestinian people." |
|
|
|
|
|
My reasoning is that only posting Meir's comment, without the historical context showing that it is a common statement by leaders in the region, is an attempt to paint Meir as a racist and therefore violates the NPOV standards. |
|
|
|
|
|
If you have suggestions on reformatting it, please be my guest. I'm somewhat new and don't know quite how to do all the formatting especially since some of the documents are things like UN records and decades-old newspapers that are publicly available but not available as web links. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Please == |
|
|
|
|
|
do not revert non-vandalism without a proper edit summary, as you did on ]. I have re-added my comments - they are legitimate and well-intentioned. ] (]) 06:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Sure thing. How's ? ] (]) 06:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
Thanks. My error... and I apologize for misunderstanding... missed the remark as I was working on anti-vandalism and it just looked like a page blank. But your point is quite accurate. |
|
|
|
|
|
I have attempted... and ''think'' I have succeeded... to resolve the copyright issue. Please have a look at let me know if you feel I need to do more. ] 01:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:In fact, it still appears to be an almost word for word copy, if not direct word for word copy from that website. I've marked it under the copyright problems page for now. It will need a total rewrite. If you think you can do this without worrying about plagiarism, feel free to remove the tag. ] 01:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
I saw your note on Ryulong's talk page, and I know that you opened the last RfC on Ryulong's blocks. I opened a last week, but it doesn't look hopeful right now so far as acceptance goes - the consensus seems to be that another RfC may be required since it's been so long since the last one. If I opened another RfC, would you be willing to co-certify? ] ] 02:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:I certainly think this will have to be discussed on RFC. 5 people have already rejected the proposal. ] 03:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::If I am around, I will sign it. If you look at the original list of people who signed the position, I believe you will find at least one other person who will sign. I also suggest you keep it real simple. Doubtless people will come flying in with accusations of a witchhunt, even if you have legitimate concerns; you will wish to do all you can to make sure those concerns are not legitimate. I would stick to keeping the blocks of people who edited Power Rangers/Anime articles (there are unfortunately a lot), failing to assume good faith, blocks of improper length without any warnings for users who likely are just making newbie mistakes, failing to use proper block summaries (I have been aghast at some of his blocks in the past, only to find out they were socks), and never coming before the community with controversial blocks. I'm thinking you could add to that many deletions out of process (look at the astounding number of times he's deleted an image for failing fair use guidelines, without waiting the required one week: always Power Rangers related) and being far too quick to push the block/delete button (equal number of times where he reserved himself); however, with these last two, you will undoubtedly incur the wrath of people claiming it's process-wonkery, so you may want to take care. ] 03:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Meleniumshane90== |
|
|
He says I'm guilty of edit warring!? I realize I can be heavy handed, but edit warring? I don't think so... --] 04:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Reply about User:Varockguys== |
|
|
|
|
|
I did not realised that the user was a vandal, I only saw the user creation on recent edits and put <nowiki>{{subst:welcome}}</nowiki> on their talk incase they did not know the rules as at the time their page was empty. ]] 08:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Fair enough. Just stating it might be best to check in the future (] can come in handy for that, if you don't have it installed yet). Thanks for the contributions. ] 08:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, I copy and pasted this article from my sandbox, WHERE I WROTE IT, to it's current place. What could be wrong with that? ] (]) 23:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Yes, but there were significant contributions from ]. ;) I apologize if you two are the same user. ] 03:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::Yeah, he did add some subsection headings. However, now the article Anarchism in Cuba has a history that will make it look as if many different articles have occupied that article space, since it was in my sandbox, where I write articles. This seems like a bigger issue to me. But I'm not gonna sweat it. It was just a hassle. ] (]) 05:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Image:ALE-NYY-Insignia.png == |
|
|
|
|
|
This image has been deleted from Commons before, by ]. —] 03:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Mistakenly; see ]. ] 03:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== 3RR noticeboard == |
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please explain to me what blocking would accomplish in the matter of ], bearing in mind blocks are not punitive? ] (]) 09:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Well, it's probably a bit late now. However, in the past I have often seen people violate 3RR with the full knowledge that the page was about to be protected, and that they wouldn't be blocked. In this manner, protecting the page ''and'' blocking someone serves the same purpose as just blocking someone: it gets the message across that 3RR will not be tolerated. A long time user who engages in this behavior, IMHO, knows perfectly well that admins usually don't block in such instances, and is liable to do it again if a block is not instantiated. As I said, I believe this is nearly as preventative as just blocking outright. ] 03:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Username change == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi cat. Now that it has been brought to the community attention that there is another user who's name is ] who predates your name change, I believe that your username is confusingly similar to this one, and may run afoul of ]. At very least, please consider implementing the ideas at ]. ] (]) 08:37, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Done, is that enough? --<small> ]</small> <sup>]</sup> 12:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::That looks good to me, it's just an unfortunate situation when two editors in good standing have very similar user names. I think the disambig clears the problem now. Thanks for your co-operation White Cat. ] 15:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I suggest a similar disambig on the other users page with his consent. It may appear like a COI if I made the request myself. --<small> ]</small> <sup>]</sup> 15:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I've been bold and added the message both to his, and clarified the one on yours. ] 21:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, I've watchlisted it. The vandalism hasn't reached a very big level, so I didn't protect it. ''''']]]''''' 21:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Eddie Rendell == |
|
|
|
|
|
Dude, you're kind of a pain in the ass. If this image bothers you so much, why don't you e-mail my home state's gov't and ask them to verify it? I already did this work once, I shouldn't be asked to do it again. ] (]) 04:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:It has nothing to do with me trying to be a pain. Please follow the instructions on the template given you. We cannot simply take someone's word that something is in the public domain without some sort of proof. ] (]) 04:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::Then why don't you do the work of contacting them? I e-mailed them once, now it's someone elses turn. ] (]) 05:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:::If you still have the email, you will see, on that template, that you can forward that email to OTRS. That will suffice. ] (]) 05:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, happy to have your input on post-abortion syndrome. I think the article has plenty of room for improvement in terms of organization, sourcing, balance, etc. Unfortunately, things were not going particularly productively. I appreciate your efforts to articulate the concerns in more constructive terms. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 16:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Thanks for your effort to improve the introduction. What is your opinion of the which I submitted which describes the source of the term PAS, the APA's rejection of it, the popular understanding, and the scope of this article? I feel it is much more balanced and more clearly describes the scope of the article, but most of the editors have refused to even discuss it.] (]) 04:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::I actually think that's a really good introduction. It would be good if you could change things piece by piece though; large scale edits usually get removed at revert warring. ] (]) 04:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Block Warning == |
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding your block warning, I'm pretty new to Misplaced Pages and the first few weeks were unproductive effort to insert material only to have it cut for insubstantial reasons, and I'm getting a chance to learn of the policies through MastCell, and now you, giving me warnings. |
|
|
|
|
|
Before discussing the block, am I supposed to answer at your talk page (as I have here) or mine? I'm assuming you don't regularly watch mine, so I'm answering here at yours. |
|
|
|
|
|
As I understand it, a block is only if one reverts more than three times per day. I haven't. Is there more I should know? |
|
|
|
|
|
I have made dozens of minor edits over the last month adding new material only to see it deleted with flimsy excuses. MastCell's latest argument regarding WEIGHT is just another excuse for censoring peer reviewed studies. (See my post at the |
|
|
|
|
|
I learned long ago that when faced with bullying tactic, one should never back down but should stand up for one's rights. As I understand it, I have a right to edit this article and post it -- up to three times a day if I have the stamina for it. |
|
|
|
|
|
I've made real contributions to this article all cited to factual, peer reviewed articles. My re-organization of the article is also an improvement that allows better delineation between the controversy and the studies, but again no one wants to discuss it because they are happy with their purged article...which as you observed, is slanted to insistently drive home the point that there is nothing to this "anti-abortion myth." |
|
|
|
|
|
What are the rules that expose me to being blocked for reverting to what is at least arguably a very good contribution? It even retains all of the previous content (much of it which is still very poor, inaccurate, and just wrong) but it clearly in a better organized fashion. Plus it adds (and restores) verifiable information. Why should I waste my time getting permission for every mini-edit just because MastCell wants me to? I see that as just her way of obstruced my material...especially since she has made no concessions that all peer reviewed studies are reliable, or that past purging was wrong, or that ANY of my edits should be supported. |
|
|
|
|
|
Also, I'm doubtful that the number of other editors is as many as they seem. My gut feel from the edits and sequence of events is that 131.216.41.16 and MastCell, and perhaps IronAngel, are the same person. No proof, but the same arguments, style, and inserts. So I'm inclined to believe a lot of what I'm seeing is a false "consensus" which has one goal: Keep Misplaced Pages as a source which will deny any validity to "post-abortion syndrome." |
|
|
|
|
|
If MastCell is trying to work together in good faith, why not use my expanded article as the starting point for changes? |
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously, why should I play their game and what are the rules that would subject me to blocking and not them? I'd actually welcome arbitration, but am not familiar with initiating the process and it looks like they encourage other avenues first, which is why I sought out other editors for comment.] (]) 04:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:In fact, I believe this is where you are confused. First off, I am unable to block you myself, for various reasons, I gave the statement as a warning, not a threat. However, please understand that ''edit warring alone'' is enough of a reason for blocking a user. Please see ]. Administrators have often stated that 3RR is not a fence, an excuse to revert exactly 3 times in 24 hours and do so indefinitely. In any case, I have reviewed the article history, and I find it unlikely there is any sockpuppetry going on. ] made no reverts, and Mastcell is an administrator who seems to be editing in good faith. One of the other three being a sockpuppet is entirely possible, though unlikely, IMO. ] (]) 05:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==borderline anti-US rhetoric == |
|
|
What are you talking about, out of curiosity? ] (]) 06:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Well, I was reticent to post this, because it would make me look like I'm following the very kind of nationalism I'm trying to oppose, but the statement read: |
|
|
* This Admin does not just want de-sysoping she needs banning completely for all our sakes. ''Thank God she is not in the US military in Iraq''. Giano (talk) 19:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:*Please maintain civility. I believe Durova did serve in the military, so that last sentence may be a bit too low. Please keep the discussion on Misplaced Pages alone. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 19:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::*How on earth is saying that low, and how on earth an I supposed to know what someone called Durova does in RL? ''There is a whole world ourside of USA I suggest you explore it!<'''Giano (talk) 19:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
This seems like a blatantly anti-American statement, and I would hate to see, say an American make that kind of statement about French people. And even if it's only somewhat incivil, it is not the kind of temperament for someone who will be acting as a de facto judge on many nationalist disputes. ] (]) 06:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Thank you so much for your response. I was really surprised and taken back by you digging up Giano's edit diffs. I really appreciate you taking the time to do this. |
|
|
:My views have often been called "anti-American", thats why I was curious. |
|
|
:Now a ], a view which most people have no interested in: |
|
|
:Don't worry, Misplaced Pages will continue to become less and less "anti-American" as the "purges" continue. |
|
|
:I have taken a couple of sociology courses and there is a sociological idea where organizations become more and more conservative and "main stream" as they become older. As Misplaced Pages becomes more mainstream American , people like me will be pushed out, subtly and forcefully. |
|
|
:I hazard to guess that the admins which controlled Misplaced Pages 3 years ago, where much more radical than the admins today. |
|
|
:I bet if you took a survey of admins on wikipedia today and compared it with three years ago, today more of the admins would be conservative and hold more traditional values then those of admins three years ago. |
|
|
:The future on Misplaced Pages for users like myself and Giano are bleak. |
|
|
:On the other hand, I have seen a Misplaced Pages "purge" of far right views. |
|
|
:Don't worry, in the next five years, Misplaced Pages views will look more and more like America's (and your) views. |
|
|
:Personally I hope eventually, in the distant future, Misplaced Pages's views will look more like the world's views, but I am not holding my breath. |
|
|
:] (]) 07:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::People have every right to an opinion, however, being non-neutral is enough of a sin in my mind to not quality for Arbcom, even if you consider this "purging" (you might notice I have right-wing editor immediately above who used the same word for his point of view). Sorry. ] (]) 07:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
