Misplaced Pages

Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper. — Robert Frost

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

Flower of Chivalry

re this 3 revert rule infringement, is there any possibility that the anonymous IP addresses were actually not 'Flower', but someone else? I mean, could they be associated with 'hmib' instead? or do they resolve to the area that flower is editing from? If you don't know, is there someone who could look into it before I ask 'Flower' ? Any advice? It will be a lot easier to advocate for the user, if I can be sure he's lying, or if I can be sure he's not. It kinda looks like it could be a frame, judging only by what I know of the original conflict between the 2... since flower is apparently blocked right now, I think it might be difficult to get a fast reply from him. Thanks, sorry to trouble you. Pedant 18:17, 2005 July 12 (UTC)

With the amount of personal attacks and crap he (FoC) is throwing around, he's long overdue for a ban. If I did indeed impersonate as such an unsavoury individual and do some kind of orchestrated framing... I have better things to do.

This is not the first time Flowerofchivalry resorted to such tactics to circumvent 3RR policies. The last time he did Mark confirmed the anonymous IPs as Sprint IPs. I do not know what he did to find this out, but IIRC there are apps that allow you to see where the IPs originate from. Flowerofchivalry claimed somewhere that he lived around the Berkeley area, or somewhere, in CA. I live in Olympia, WA. If anyone knows how to determine the location of a certain IP address, please help out. The IP addresses in question are 68.124.90.72, and 204.210.33.122. However if those are Sprint IPs God only will know where the real user is. This page has the IPs from FoC's last attempt. There is also the possibility that he is editing from school or work. As a token of good will, my WAN IP is 24.17.141.99, it should be static and my ISP is Comcast. (If I suffer any DoS attack shortly after this, I'll know who it's from). I'll ask Mark what he used to determine those IPs' origin.

To be honest, I am also somewhat surprised that FoC resorted to this underhanded tactic... a second time. What I'm even more surprised of, Pedant, is that you casually dismiss the possibility that FoC committed this offense and blame it on me without a single scrap of evidence... from your English skills I'm confident you're not FoC's sockpuppet or anything, but please take a look at his track record first before accusing others. You might know him from real life or whatnot, but please approach this objectively. Thanks. -Hmib 19:53, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

I've replied to your email. Sorry about the delay. Hope it helps. -Hmib 01:21, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I have replied to your latest email. Good luck. -Hmib 02:26, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, Pedant. I reversed 68.124.90.72 to adsl-68-124-90-72.dsl.sndg02.pacbell.net, 204.210.33.122 to cpe-204-210-33-122.san.res.rr.com, and 24.17.141.99 to c-24-17-141-99.hsd1.wa.comcast.net just for your information.--Flowerofchivalry 07:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I replied all the e-mails. Hmib and Mark wasted you and my time using the false accusations, again and again. --Flowerofchivalry 06:56, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Just who is wasting whose time is not yet known.

Playing the devil's advocate here, is it possible that the 219 (I think) anon user that kept on vandalising articles and accusing FoC of being a 'fucking jap' is the one responsible? -Hmib 18:26, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Hammesfahr

Ciao bella, good work on Hammesfahr. Have you read his "diagnosis" of Terri Schiavo? If you haven't, you ought to look it up. It'll give you good insight into his methods and why he's held in so much contempt by the medical community. -- Grace Note

That's as may be, but if he is practising "alternative medicine", one ought to take care about allowing his opinion to be stated qua "neurologist". Practitioners of alternative medicine are often derided by scientists not so much for political reasons as because they do not practise the methods of science. As his diagnosis does quite clearly show, Hammesfahr indulged in a kind of interpretive medicine in diagnosing Schiavo. I'm not a neurologist, of course, but I think those that are have questioned his report on that sort of basis. -- Grace Note

Measurement units

Hi, Slim, you might want to see this. Ciao. Maurreen 05:40, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Who/Whom

'Who' is used as the subject, 'whom' as the object. I don't understand your revert

Help with page move

Hello SV. GCcarty has done a cut-and-paste move of Mount Erebus disaster to Air New Zealand Flight 901. I wonder if you could help to merge the page histories . Sorry to be a bother. (P.S. Thankyou very much for the barnstar!) -- FP 09:04, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks VERY much, it's looking great. But I think the intention was to move the whole page to Air New Zealand Flight 901. (Which name do you think is the most appropriate? Perhaps I can ask for naming advice on the New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board.) -- FP 10:23, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Diatribes

You made a very good point, Slim:

obsessive diatribes against the blocking admin, or against the editors involved in the dispute that led to the block, not a good thing to be on the receiving end of

Can we deal with this by then (1) giving them a clear Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks block and then (2) protecting their talk page? (If we had to continue talking about the block - everyone but them of course - we could do it on an unprotected subpage.) Uncle Ed 17:50, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Revisions and Disputes

Hi, it's Joey. Do we always have to propose edits and revisions on the talk page before implementing them into the article? I'm asking primarily due to the RCorrie article. Jeus 20:48, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Ah, I see now. I'll try to have some more restraint next time (instead of falling into edit/revision wars). Jeus 21:04, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Question: What do I do when someone refuses to even *look* at my edits, and insists on reverting pages dozens of versions into the past? I'm talking about the Israeli terrorism page. I'm not breaking the 3RR, as far as I can tell, and I am using the talk page (both of the site, and of the person I disagree with), but I'm not making any progress. Jeus 23:22, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I have mentioned to Guy that he must adhere to policy on this front. El_C 23:25, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

TOCright proposal

Hello. Since you were part of the discussion of the Template:TOCright template once it was moved from VfD to the MoS, you might be interested in the draft proposal currently posted there. We appreciate any comments and suggestions you may have. -- Titoxd 23:20, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Israeli terrorism

You seem to have just reverted the page to your preferred version, and then protected it. Before you take such steps, I suggest a careful reading of Misplaced Pages:Protection policy, particularly #2: "Do not protect a page you are involved in an edit dispute over." and #3: "Add {{ protected }} (or {{ vprotected }} for vandalism) to the top of the temporarily protected page and make mention of the protection in the edit summary". - Mustafaa 00:38, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Might I ask why you made the page protected? It takes two to start an edit war; favoring one side while dismissing the other side (and Then making the page impossible to edit or revert) seems...wrong, somehow. I hardly think there's a need to lock the page down into one person's version -- that sort of makes "discussing it" on the talk page rather moot; why try to change it if it's still dependent upon someone's overriding opinion? Jeus

For how many days do we vote over disputed pictures? (I'm talking about the one with the girl. It's on IFD at the moment). EDIT: Nevermind. I found it. Jeus 00:47, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

While I sympathize with your concern for correct characterization of the death of Rachel Corrie, I note that you reverted the page three times before protecting it. I find it almost impossible to characterize that as involvement solely as an admin. See also m:The Wrong Version. - Mustafaa 00:51, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I had already looked, and was seriously considering reverting back to the longer version when I noticed you had protected it. Both versions are flawed (why include bulldozers but exclude AI's quotes on killing children?) - Mustafaa 01:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Image:Americanflag.gif

Also, Image:Indonesianflag.gif and Image:Spanishflag2.gif. The license from their site doesn't seem to release them into the public domain. Thanks. :) kmccoy (talk) 00:44, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Gaza Strip

Thanks - I really appreciate it! Ramallite 03:23, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Arabian Gulf protection

Hey there. I wanted to notice you that I unprotected the Arabian Gulf page. Protecting an article "long-term" is pretty much as anti wiki as it can get, we should rather watch out for vandalism and simply revert that as to hinder everyone in editing a page. --Conti|✉ 09:34, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

Such fun

Misplaced Pages is such fun that sometimes I get too wrapped-up in one endeavor and neglect another. Parallel edits? Yes, if you think it's time, once again, to "build a case". Apply, lather, rinse, repeat. "Shampedia"? -Willmcw 10:37, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

User:Uthar Wynn 01

Hi Gadfium, I just went to block the above indefinitely, but I notice he's negotiated a shorter block with you. My perception of this user is that he's a troll. He has repeatedly added nonsense to Terri Schiavo, material that constitutes vandalism e.g. these edits , he's vandalized a user page with the edit summary "spelling fix," , and when I blocked him for 24 hours for it, he e-mailed me in a very contrite, reasonable way, asking to be unblocked early. When the block expired, he went straight back to Terri Schiavo and continued his vandalism, admitting to another user that he knew he was adding nonsense, but that it was "true nonsense." Would you have any objection if I made the block indefinite? SlimVirgin 15:39, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

I've promised to give him a chance, but if he goes back to his old ways then I would have no objection to your blocking him indefinitely. With both of us watching him carefully, he should be aware that he's on thin ice.-gadfium 19:55, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Comments from A ghost

Slim (or is there something else you prefer?), I noticed that you were involved in a dispute with a number of Users whom I respect. As a member of the Talk:Terri Schiavo/Mediation effort, I'd like to invite you to join us there. I'd like to understand more of your recent involvement with the article(s). My instict is that something went horribly wrong during my recent abscence, and if we're going to fix it I'm likely to need your help.

Although Duck, Fuel, Gordon and I all make our share of mistakes, I consider these editors my friends. It hurts to see them at each other's throats. Oh, and Duck quit. I'm trying to fix that. But editing his User page postmortem maybe bad taste. I understand you find that comments distasteful, but they are his. Please revert your edit.--ghost 20:09, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Re:Your comments:

Slim, I understand some of your concerns about the editing that surrounds the Terri Schiavo page. I am, by nature, a concensus builder. Most people are not. You are partially correct that something was and is wrong. That's why I requested Mediation, and Uncle Ed's been trying to help. Recently, that effort lost momentum, and I believe that led to the set of incidents you found yourself in.

The fact that any User has a strong POV means nothing about their status as an editor. In fact, those with strong POVs maybe more valuable because they bring something others cannot. And the number of edits a User or an Anon has/hasn't made is equally irrelevant. They are Users and should be treated as equals. To do otherwise undermines the principle of the project. We need people who know alot about subject we might not know or care about.

Finally, Users view their User Pages as personal space. Personal space is sacred in human culture. If Users can't vent there, where should they? And do we have the right to invade that space? I understand your concerns about personal attacks. They don't belong in the articles, and must be avoided in Talk pages. But your rights end at the tip of my nose. And mine, yours. Deletions in the User space of others should be avoided at (almost) all costs.--ghost 21:11, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I greatly hesistate signing up for a zero-tolerance anything. For the simple reason that it sacrifices the need for common sense on the altar of some noble priciple. Principles, no matter how noble, are not as important as people. The dispute over what some have called personal attacks, and what others consider a refutation of erroneous facts, is a good example of this. These editors you've labeled inexperienced don't initially seek to undermine the work of anyone. A zero-tolerance policy would suggest we jettison scientific professionals who are following the standards of peer review in their fields. Not everyone plays with others as well as you and I might. And some professionals are taught not to.

You and I seem to be very close to agreeing on alot. Where we differ seems to be in how we give others the benefit of the doubt. And I mean all others, even the ones that cus us out. (BTW, FuelWagon and I have gone round and round before. My respect for him is based on the quality of his work. Not his behavior.) What worries me is that not enough effort is given to examining the Man-in-the-Mirror. We all need to do this more.--ghost 22:59, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Slim, I know about the abuse. I've been the target before from both sides. On Talk:Terri Schiavo and elsewhere. I am working to fight it from a different approuch. One of inclusion, rather than enforcement. I have to disagree with you about its on two key counts:

1) "Taking your lumps" is part of the risk we open ourselves too whenever we enter into any public debate. I am also concerned about editors being intimidated and was (prior to my absence) working to get those voices heard. But it's unrealistic to expect the world to follow our personal standards of conduct. And imposing those standards on others is immoral.

2) There are some people who don't see this behavior as inapproprate. Having worked in the hearts of major cities, the language and behavior here is tame. If we find it offensive, then it shows us the need to put ourselves in the other persons shoes. And in those shoes, the behavior you've identified is not only appropriate, it's demanded.

I look forward to working with you as well. But we cannot allow ourselves to become that which we fear. I propose we demonstate how to do it the right way by embracing the editors on both sides, and guiding them forward. Exclusion is not the way.--ghost 04:15, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

BTW, I saw you edit of your edit on Duck's User page. Thanks, it shows character.--ghost 04:36, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Re:PVS Intro

That was a recent edit. (It occured while I was absent) You may want to look at this version which was what had been agreed on on Talk. The Talk page does work, but sometimes those efforts get unwound by others.--ghost 05:23, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Protection requested

Hi Slim! I like your page a lot; it has some fascinating information and good advice. I'm writing to you for help protecting an Misplaced Pages page. Without going into detail, a user has taken the stance that I am the same person as an anonymous IP (registered in Hong Kong). While this is simply untrue (as a reasonable comparison should make clear), the user has continued to attack he and I on his user page. I tried every avenue to resolve the situation to no avail. As some people won't listen to reason, I've decided not to let it bother me as I believe the facts speak for themselves.

Having said that, I made a mistake in trying to resolve the "sockpuppet" dispute. In an attempt to be very honest about my editing locations, I disclosed both my home and work IP addresses to the user making the allegations, a moderator, and the user in Hong Kong who is alleged to be me. Subsequently, the person going after me placed redirects on both IPs to my personal profile (RJSampson). I didn't change the redirect on my home IP (I truly have nothing to hide), but as I have resigned from my present job to start a new one next week, I erased the redirect on the work IP (66.179.35.4).

I informed the Legal department here of the situation and how Misplaced Pages works, and they're not too happy with me, to say the least. They told me to put a disclaimer on the user page of the IP address stating them as the registrant. I did so. (On a side note -- The user who made the mistaken sockpuppet accusation seems to be having a field day with this). Is there anyway that my former work IP page can be protected from future edits? I would like very much to separate as amicably as possible with my employer, and I thought it would do no harm to ask a moderator for help.. If I can show the Legal dept that the page cannot be edited, I'm sure that would help my transition between jobs go smoothly. RJSampson 18:02, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. The lawyers are finally satisfied! RJSampson 18:02, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi again Slim. Once again, I appreciate your help. It really seems to have upset the user I mentioned in the above message, as I had to remove the following text from the now protected IP talk-page:

"I have never heard of such a stupid thing in my life! User:SlimVirgin you are being played by this User:RJSampson. I can't believe you are allowing someone to copyright an IP address like this. You've made a bad decision and set a bad precident! Have you ever read some of the BS that this guy has been writing ot just to me but to other users? Maybe you should, he lies. Carr 19:38, 15 July 2005 (UTC)"'

Clearly, this person has it out for me personally, and quite badly at that. And I would invite you to read any of the "BS" that user is referring to, if you're concerned about that statement. I just want to assure you I was being perfectly serious and certainly not "playing" you, and I strive to always be honest. This user does not appear to know the correct meaning of "copyright" as it were. Anyway, I feel bad that me asking you for help has incurred attacks from that individual upon you as well, but we are grateful for your assistance. RJSampson 20:35, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Request for Deletion of Username

Hi again... I'm so sorry to keep bothering you Slim. I need to request a deletion of the user ProfitlineInc. It was apparently created in anger for the sole purpose of mocking my request for protection. Yikes, this guy really hates me. I had no idea things would escalate this way, and I'm sorry you're having to deal with this. RJSampson 20:35, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Hey, no fair. I wanted to block him. Oh well, off to clean up his mess... -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:44, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Request for page protection

There is a user on Neofascism and religion who keeps deleting material without engaging in a serious discussion. Could you review the situation and consider locking the page until there is a more constuctive and detailed discission? Thanks. --Cberlet 02:52, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

ProfitLineInc and User:66.179.35.4

Why did you protect the discussion page for an IP belonging to ProfitLineInc? People have a right to discuss someone who runs around attempting to trademark information. — Rickyrab | Talk 03:46, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

OTOH, there seems to be a vandal afoot over there. Never mind. — Rickyrab | Talk 03:50, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

User:Mansour

Greetings,

I dont mean to be meddling in or anything, but regarding Mansour's latest reply to you that "either show me the racial insult or shut up", the comment he specifically made was:

"Torke tabloye taze be dorun reside cheghad zer mizane", which appeared on 05:20, 13 July 2005 (UTC) on Afghanistan's talk page.

The first word of this sentence is referring to my ethnicity, an Azeri Turk. The second word is a (negatively) adjective that describes the first word. The insulting tone of it along with the rest of the sentence can be verified by any Wiki Administrator who speaks Farsi. Regards.--Zereshk 05:25, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

hehe, you *ARE* truly pathetic Zereshk, as I have pointed out to you before. You know damn well that the term "racism" or "racist comment" doesn not apply in Iran in the same way that it applies in countries with true racist history, such as USA and many European countries. The fact that you are using your familiarity with the English language to get a cheap "winning point" out of a lost game, tells us how weak and pathetic you are. In absolutely BEST of circumstances, you can associate "turk" in Persian slang with "ethnicity" but if you really grew up in Iran as you claim you did, you know damn well what it is. And especially "torke tablo", which you are an epitome of one. Given your pathetic edit history of "all image and no substance" I repeat, it's hard to imagine a lower self-respecting Iranian than you. You were born to be a wannabee-western and as such, Iranians like you deserve to be jew-slaves like how most hard-working, tax-paying innocent Americans are today. In the best of circumstances, you will be a second-class American. You get it bright sparkle? Mansour 08:41, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

SlimVirgin,

I hope you are witnessing all these relentless attacks. Mansour also has been attacking others, and is using other aliases and anonymous signatures in the revert wars here and there.--Zereshk 18:51, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Greetings,

I hate to keep bothering you on this. But I think Mansour's latest post is illustrative of his intensifying behaviour. See here. He is using an anonymous account. Even if the anonymous user is not him, I would still prefer to report this. Regards.--Zereshk 11:26, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Comment requested?

Have a big bright yellow flower day. Cheers, -Willmcw 08:33, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Hare

Wonderful picture of R.M. Hare, a hero of mine. Thanks! icut4u

RfC

I missed the RfC. In my fairly recent experience FuelWagon and Duckecho are becoming somewhat proprietorial about Terri Schiavo and adopting tactics more appropriate to a flame war. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:57, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to pay slightly more active attention to the situation. I resolved to keep an eye on Duckecho a few weeks ago, because his extreme reaction rang warning bells, but I've been involved in other stuff and didn't really keep an eye on him. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 04:58, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Page protection

I think that Pan Am Flight 103 should be protected because others users are ignoring our advice about reducing the article size. I'm very serious about reducing the article size. Others are not listening to it. SNIyer12 03:32, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Making RfC for Germen

I'm putting together an RfC for Germen's behaviour on the Islamophobia article and associated pages. Since you have been involved in disputes with this user before I was hoping you might be able to contribute to the draft before I publish it on WP:RFC. I also need a user to second the RfC and confirm that attempts to mediate with Germen have been attempted. I'm not sure if you qualify for this, but if you do your contributions would be most welcome. Axon 12:20, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

FuelWagon apology

SlimVirgin, I launched a number of personal attacks against you that were peppered with profanity. It was indefensible behaviour on my part. I am sorry. I was an ass. I did not protest the resulting block against me because I deserved it. And I promise you, such behaviour will not happen again. I hope this apology will find your honor fully restored. I am sorry. FuelWagon 18:50, 18 July 2005 (UTC)