Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:56, 1 August 2008

"Surely no-one disagrees that flinging essay links around as if they represented policy is a good idea; wanton essaylinkmongering is rarely productive."

A useful comment for administrators like Gwen Gale who are so found of hammering newbies with "don't template the newcomers." --Blechnic (talk) 02:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Tierra Redonda Mountain

My fault - I did a copy-vio check, not a content check, so forgot to remove it during my complex sequence of button pushes! Fritzpoll (talk) 22:39, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

It just gets weirder

A vanity page proudly displaying barnstars from a single purpose sock puppet account. Now that takes the cookie. --Blechnic (talk) 00:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Your message

If you don't want people to think you quit, take that "retired" banner down. That's for people who've actually called it quits and aren't editing anymore. It's a little hard to square with your level of activity. Daniel Case (talk) 01:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Whatever. I really don't want to get into it with you. Your response to my response on WT:DYK when I explained how I reviewed that article was all you needed to say. I had expressed some hope when you first stalked off that you might actually lend some help instead of shouting from the sidelines. To my pleasant surprise, you have actually been doing that — keep it up. Let's keep our discussions focused on spotting plagiarism and not each other's motivations. Daniel Case (talk) 03:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

And on further reflection, I realize that was unnecessary and I apologize. I will be striking it through on the talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 03:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Re Carol Spears

Both the admins (including me) who previously opposed the community ban have commented that they are no longer opposing, per the discussion you recently started at ANI. If you wish to repropose, with links to the previous discussion, I will support and hopefully quickly have the editor banned. LessHeard vanU (talk) 14:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Re Madame Zingara

It is now a completely non-factual article. We are not a restaurant. We are a travelling dinner theatre. We are not fixed in one location. We travel around the world. The information we put up regarding our various shows done in our past were all referenced with citations. It has none of our history in it. Madamezingara (talk) 10:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Ummm... My friend, did you really just give a last warning to an indef blocked and banned account?

I'm about to protect the page for abuse by the account holder, but I think you should refactor your warning first - it looks a little hollow, truth be told. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 19:54, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay... I shall now protect the page, with your warning that she will be blocked left on the page.

Have you ever seen Life of Brian, where the Centurion threatens the condemned man who is insulting him? "What you going to do, Bignose? Not crucify me?" LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:Cyanophage

By continuing to remove an extremely useful overview of cyanophage publications, how exactly does this improve a page? Yes it is not ideal, but if people are to continue to improve this page then they need to understand what cyanophage are and what they do. This is provided in the titles of these publications, yes is need refining and distilling to provide an overview. But the basic information is already there. Removing this information is not exactly useful —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.37.58.183 (talk) 14:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

moving

You seem to have messed up some of my edits in process by the move of PRUPRIM. The move was correct, & I should have first done it myself, but please check the times on the edit histories. I've redone the edits, of course. No lasting harm DGG (talk) 15:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

POV indian IP

Hi good news 72.138.120.177 has been blocked for 31 hours. You, myself, Total film and Shshshsh have had to continuously revert him. If he returns to it again then he will be blocked indefinately soon enough ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ 17:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

huh?

what'd I do? There's no way you're already responding to the ReqArb I jsut made agreeing with you, I JUST posted it. ThuranX (talk) 06:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, the Wilhelmina Will stuff. gotcha. ThuranX (talk) 06:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image manipulation experience

Impressive. And truly out of curiosity, what is your opinion on the false colored pictures from SEM's? -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 12:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree about colored SEM pictures. Mainly because they are patently false, and I don't think they are used frequently in the scientific community. My feeling though about scientific uses of images on WP is that they probably wouldn't get much use, not because our editing standards are too lax, but because the specimen is usually not identified or controlled to the level that is required for many publications. Personally, as long as the image isn't data in itself (documenting the result of some experiment) then I feel non-deceptive manipulation is fine. Maybe you disagree -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 15:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The good, the bad, the indifferent ... the fun

Indeed. I know. When I taught at the University of X, I reserved my fiercest punishments for the plagiarists. They got zeros, and little mercy, and if they lost their scholarships, tough. Some people just don't get it: I still find it baffling that some people think plagiarism is OK. On a more pleasant topic, check out this, which contains some perfectly wonderful free stuff, including the classic paper on the Monterey (scroll to 273) and even better (since the Bramlette is pre-plate-tectonics -- hard to imagine such a time existed) scroll to 301. Good stuff. I read them both, realized how many technical terms I'd forgotten, felt disheartened, and then went and did something else. I really don't want to get it wrong; it's too easy to screw up in areas where I'm not credentialed -- hell, it's even easy to screw up there. I've made, and mostly fixed, ghastly mistakes in 17th century music where I allegedly have a doctorate (allegedly, since I'm just pixels on a computer monitor, not a person or anything). Anyway I'd love to do more writing on the earth sciences. I'm still banging out all those articles on oil fields in Kern County, which for some reason I find fun. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 05:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Please revert

• I replied at my talk page, but in case you haven't seen it before you see this: Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_guide#Responding_to_others.27_statements is where it states that you're supposed to reply in your own section. - Penwhale | 08:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
• I restored your passage that I removed here to under your own section. - Penwhale | 08:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Another universe?

Not sure if that's a comment about our non-intersecting edit patterns, or the fact that I'm blunt about how I responded to OR's comment that you and I are associated. ThuranX (talk) 14:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for recusal

Blechnic, the tone of your recent posts is a bit concerning. In particular, this, followed one minute later with a post to a featured picture candidate I was running, and nine minutes afterward a complaint to the checkuser clerk who removed your threaded post at RFAR. Similarly, this, although self-reverted, only to be followed shortly afterward by a second complaint to the same arbitration clerk alleging favoritism, then the removal of my post with what appears to be an unpleasant edit note and 21 minutes later, an oppose at one of my featured picture candidacies. This sequence creates an appearance of impropriety, particularly in the way your words personalize a neutral procedural request into the appearance of an actual dispute. As I have said before, I bear you no ill will. Yet your own posts are rather palpable about expressing the opposite and could give neutral observers the impression that your opposition may have been to the nominator rather than the candidacy. So until whatever grievance you have against me blows over (I don't quite understand it), I respectfully request that you recuse yourself from participation in the featured picture candidates I nominate. With respect, Durova 08:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)