Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:12, 6 February 2008

Archives

Archive 1 ☺ Archive 2

Welcome!

Hello Svetovid! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 12:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC) Getting started Misplaced Pages tutorial • The five pillars of Misplaced Pages How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Attribution • Neutral point of view • Notability Conflict of interest • Autobiography Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Citing sources • Footnotes Image use policy • Copyrights • Fair use External links • Spam • Vandalism Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry What Misplaced Pages is not • Deletion policy The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The "perfect" article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Slovak Paradise National Park

Nice work. Tankred 03:55, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

On May 30, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Slovak Paradise National Park, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for that Svetovid. This article was kindly nominated by Bbik. In the future feel free to self-nom like the majority of our entries. It certainly is ok, and we definitely could do with Slovakian stuff on DYK more often. I actually went to Bratislava for a day....back in ol 2001. See you around, Blnguyen (cranky admin anniversary) 02:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Dinesh D'Souza removal from Sam Harris article

Hello

 I saw that you removed a short reference to Dinesh D'Souza's book in the Sam Harris article. 

Would you explain why D'Souza is "not notable here"? It is unclear to me what distinguishes his criticism from that of others mentioned in the section. I'm also not sure why you say there are "no sources", because I did provide the title of the book that contains the criticism, and the book itself is the source. If I were to provide page numbers for the parts that disagree with Harris, would this be an adequate source? RebelChrysanthemum (talk) 03:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

You need sources that it is notable. Just writing about somebody doesn't make the fact automatically notable in that somebody's article.--Svetovid (talk) 10:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

By this standard, everything in that section should be deleted. None of those critiques have sources to defend the idea that they are notable, merely a source that shows where the criticism was written.

If a source could demonstrate that D'Souza's book sold a substantial number of copies, would this, by your own personal standard, be enough to make his book notable? RebelChrysanthemum (talk) 02:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

My "own personal standard" isn't what matters here. There are guidelines and policies. Other criticism there isn't notable either then, or it's a matter of consensus on the talk page.--Svetovid (talk) 10:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Then why did you not delete all the other criticism then? What, in accordance to guidelines and policies, distinguishes Dinesh D'Souza from all the other critics mentioned in that section? RebelChrysanthemum (talk) 01:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Then maybe we should until it's not discussed on the talk page and consensus is reached.--Svetovid (talk) 09:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You still have not answered one of my questions. What distinguished Dinesh D'Souza from the other critics, causing you to delete him and not the others? RebelChrysanthemum (talk) 14:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Other criticism was added when I didn't watch the article, and I assume that it was a consensus among editors (at least in the form that nobody removed it).
However, I agree that the section should be rewritten or completely removed and any worthy material moved to other sections to criticize concrete opinions and ideas.--Svetovid (talk) 15:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Elephant Seals article

May I please ask you to avoid giving me orders and be more polite? May I please also ask you to take a part in this discussion.Thank you--Mbz1 (talk) 00:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

May I please ask you to be less sensitive? Just because someone doesn't use please in every sentence followed by thank you, it doesn't mean they are not polite or want to give orders.--Svetovid (talk) 09:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

And sorry if that seemed rude, but after I spent considerable time changing an article from a gallery with text into a more concise and readable one, it does not make me happy to see that someone just reverted it back.--Svetovid (talk) 09:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you for your responce. I have nod add any image to the gallery, I replaced one of my images with another my image. May I please ask you if you are going to discussthe top image>? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:52, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Names in Slovak cities articles

Well, haven't I said that? Your solution may be logical, but as you see, there'll be always someone who'll reinsert or revert then back, and you didn't have to wait too long. And using reverts just because of this is a fairly silly way to get in danger. Shortly: not worth the trouble. MarkBA 12:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but those silly nationalists need to be ignored.--Svetovid (talk) 13:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Discovery-logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Discovery-logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

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 "my contributions" 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 22:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

It was made into a version with transparent background so delete it.--Svetovid (talk) 22:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of 10tacle Studios Slovakia

A tag has been placed on 10tacle Studios Slovakia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Pgagnon999 (talk) 02:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sunset. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. —— Ryan 13:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I haven't made more than 3 reversions and am aware of my current number. Instead, can't you lock the article so it won't get vandalized again?--Svetovid (talk) 13:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, you made 1, 2 and 3 reversions all within the last 24 hours which violates the three-revert rule. Second, most (if not all) of your edit reversions weren't reverting vandalism as you claimed. Why not use the article's talk page to discuss the article rather than seeing it upon yourself to keep reverting perfectly legit edits and in doing so taking ownership of articles. —— Ryan 17:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I said I made 3 reversions and that does not violate the rule: "An editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, on a single page within a 24-hour period." Please read and understand the rule before you try to enforce it.
Anyway, an editor is trying to insert his image despite the fact that editors always replace it with a higher quality one. That editor is changing IPs to avoid the 3R rule so if there is someone "taking ownership of articles" it is obvious it is not me.--Svetovid (talk) 17:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Terry Pratchett FA nomination

Terry Pratchett has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Sent it to a 'review' by mistake! I'll submit it later today - I'll check all the links first, seems wise. --Matt Lewis (talk) 15:14, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

To Svetovid, Stephenb, Arwel Parry, Nate1481 (per ]).

There's not been much discussion I know, but I thought what the heck- I've nominated it, lets see what feedback they give. I'm interested in what they say about the sub articles. I think it can get, with their advice, to FA. --Matt Lewis (talk) 14:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

3RR

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Squash Racket (talk) 13:12, 6 February 2008 (UTC)