Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:02, 14 August 2008

That was the year that was: archive of talk from 2005 and 2006

Year II: archive of talk from 2007

Thanks

Thanks for beefing up that somewhat-controversial section of A.N.S.W.E.R. with some sources. Greatly appreciated it. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for noticing. I've since added another source, and I think there are more, though I'm not altogether certain when it gets to the point of overkill. But in any case, nice to meetcha, SchuminWeb. IronDuke 20:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Cyrillic

Honey, for you to say that you can read Cyrillic is like anybody saying that they can read Latin because they read a language written using the Latin alphabet. :)~

--72.76.80.58 (talk) 22:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather you at least bought me a glass of Syrah before you start calling me "honey," if you don't mind. That aside, I think the word "characters" is implied in my post, don't you? Or perhaps you struggled with its meaning to a far greater extent than I had previously guessed. If so, profound apologies, but glad you were able to piece it all together finally. Cheers, darling. IronDuke 00:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sweetie, this is an encyclopedia...we must be precise. Besides, you didn't imply "characters." My point was, and is, transliteration is not enough. How do you know the document isn't written in Bulgarian, or any other language written using the Cyrillic alphabet? --72.76.80.58 (talk) 01:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

We don't have to be quiiite so precise on AN/I, I don't think. And if the word "Cyrillic" didn't imply "characters," by what formidable leap of logic were you able to determine it? Perhaps because it was mind-numbingly obvious? And, if you actually knew anything about reading Cyrillic, you'd know one of the beauties of being able to do so is that you can transliterate many different languages. Erm... doy? But let's not fight any more, shall we, Любимая? IronDuke 19:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Любимая?? -- are you making a pass at me, sugarplum? Besides, Я думал, что мы имели хорошее обсуждение, не борьбу. BTW, what are the other "beauties" of being able to "read Cyrillic" other than what you said above? --72.68.30.90 (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

When I make a pass at you, you'll know it, свийтчикc. As for other beauties of being able to read Cyrillic characters (took me a second to figure out what you were talking about), why, being able to have this very discussion springs instantly to mind. PS: you should get an account. IronDuke 00:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

User page

I'll keep an eye on it and protect it if it happens again. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

My RfB

I wanted to personally thank you, IronDuke, for your support in my recent RfB. I am thankful and appreciative that you feel that I am worthy of the trust the community requires of its bureaucrats, and I hope to continue to behave in a way that maintains your trust in me and my actions. I have heard the community's voice that they require more of a presence at RfA's of prospective bureaucrats, and I will do my best over the near future to demonstrate such a presence and allow the community to see my philosophy and practices in action. I hope I can continue to count on your support when I decide to once again undergo an RfB. If you have any suggestions, comments, or constructive criticisms, please let me know via talkpage or e-mail. Thank you again. -- Avi (talk) 16:43, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

My request for bureaucratship

Dear IronDuke, thank you for taking part in my RfB. As you may know, it was not passed by bureaucrats.
I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your concerns about my candidacy. Unfortunately very few of the opposes gave me advice on points I should improve upon (bar the examples of incivility), and I ask you now, very humbly, to visit my talkpage, should you have any concerns about any of my actions here.
I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. ~ Riana ⁂ 07:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-03-18 Second Intifada

Just notifying you, that as you have been involved in the discussion regarding the Second Intifada article, which is now the subject of a MedCab case, I'm notifying you of this as you may wish to partake in this case to discuss a resolution to this dispute. Feel free to leave a comment on my talk page. Regards, Steve Crossin (talk) 23:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

This Irishman, Englishman, and Scotsman walked into a bar. Then they shot each other.

So, what, you wanted a joke about my concern about high levels of hostility? :) Relata refero (talk) 00:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

See, now that's what I call a quality post. Thanks for sharing, and congratulations for being the first one to actually take me up on my offer. It's way past my bedtime now, so you will have to wait for me to correct share my thoughts with you on your other comments. IronDuke 01:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Reliable sources noticeboard

Sorry, I posted that message to the wrong place. In answer to your (presumable) query: I don't consider that I'm in a dispute with you. I'm not taking any view on whether or not you should use the source in question. I've given you my honest opinion on the narrow technical question of whether it would qualify as a reliable source per our criteria. I've explained my concerns about your "petition" on my talk page, and I've asked you to accept that I do have the authority to ask you not to repost it. -- ChrisO (talk) 02:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the calm message. Please see my prior response on your talk page. (Perhaps we should centralize this discussion?) IronDuke 02:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:RSN#The Nation article re: Daniel Pipes

The reason I did not participate in the revived discussion is that I didn't become aware of it until it had already been closed. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay. IronDuke 00:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

The discussion was "closed" immediately after I posted to it, without my point (that McNeil got facts wrong in sliming Pipes, and cannot in the face of that be considered "reliable") being addressed. Did Relata refero have some authority to perform the closure that I need to respect? Andyvphil (talk) 12:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm very high up on the "Misplaced Pages food chain". :) Relata refero (talk) 14:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

No, of course, he did not. It is a difficult issue for me: I can see Relata's point in that the only person objecting to McNeil was me, and I was no longer contributing. On the other hand, given that I had effectively been banned from speaking freely on the page, it may have been a bit precipitous. You are certainly free to un-close it, or star a new thread. I would like to continue the discussion, but I'm in the middle of sorting things out with the admin who threatened me: I am hopeful that matters will soon be cleared up. IronDuke 22:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Since you ask

Well, lets see. Looking at my contributions, I see I commented at the AfD on Ouze Merham immediately before that, so I must have followed the contribs of someone from there. Looking at the overlap between the two pages, I'd guess either Eleland or Jayjg. Does that help? Relata refero (talk) 22:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

If someone is following you about, and his or her editing is accompanied by tendentiousness, personal attacks, or other disruptive behavior, you should certainly report it to AN/I. Relata refero (talk) 11:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Vry creditable. In my experience, though, demonstrating intent tends to be difficult, and its the above, more objective clause which usually trips up wikistalkers, so I'd keep an eye out for evidence of that. Relata refero (talk) 22:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You're lucky. In my experience that leads to another admin coming and disagreeing with the first admin, and everyone's commenting on my talkpage and I can't get any work done because the orange strip is always across the top of the screen... Relata refero (talk) 22:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, grasshopper, it was a long time ago and under a different name.... Relata refero (talk) 23:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

What, you didn't assume I read the manual? No, we haven't run into each other that I recall. Relata refero (talk) 23:16, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

By popular demand -

- :-) Scarian 16:40, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Reply to your question

I rarely email, I tend to keep things out in the open. DHMO posted an entry into his blog here. He makes some irrational comments about a cabal and other crap, which means nothing to me. He does take the immature, naive, or possibly irresponsible view that White Pride is somehow an acceptable racist code-word, as opposed to less acceptable words such as White Supremacist. Unfortunately, because he is either immature, naive, or possibly just is a racist, he's wrong. Using Misplaced Pages as his source (give me a break), he claims they are different. Using a reliable and verifiable source from the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, who watches out for this crap, they say that White Pride is most definitely racist, anti-semitic and unacceptable. Anyways, racism can be subtle, so who knows. OrangeMarlin 00:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

heads up on voting

I've started a nomination process to delete Allegations of Israeli Apartheid. http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Allegations_of_Israeli_apartheid_%288th_nomination%29#Allegations_of_Israeli_apartheid

just letting ya know! Wikifan12345 (talk) 03:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

An ArbCom case you might be interested in

I have commented on one of your recent actions here. You may wish to make a statement of your own. Canadian Monkey (talk) 02:48, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Joseph Smith

Thanks for looking in. It's a bit much when content disagreements lead to people being called a monumental jackass, but that's the way it goes sometimes. Maybe your comments will quiet things down. - Juden (talk) 00:39, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Happy to help, hope you are right. I agree that comment is past unhelpful. IronDuke 00:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

You might want to review Juden's contribution history and their quality. I know of few editors that are as unhelpful as he is. As an aside, when you play mediator you might actually want to review the full history of all involved. Juden has fringe POV and aggressively pursues it; he does not know the meaning of neutrality. Your little bit of vamping only encourages him to continue in his more than unhelpful manner. Sometimes it is appropriate to call a spade a spade or even a jackass. Misplaced Pages is not improved by the strict application policy to people who abuse the very reason why Misplaced Pages exists; that is a misuse of policy. Maybe reviewing what we are not would be helpful here and then bring that conversation up with Juden. That would be an activity where an actual improvement to Misplaced Pages might be accomplished. Now that he thinks you are his avenging angel, he may listen to you, but I seriously doubt it.

Having been around just a while, reviewing my history, you will note that I do not tolerate fools easily. Those who purposely go out of their way to destroy Misplaced Pages by making it their personal little blog should be blocked indefinitely. Just because we are a public encyclopedia does not mean that we should continue to coddle these types of editors. I am not sure we need to continue this conversation further. --Storm Rider 03:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

You raise some interesting points. Is it, given the nature of certain personalities who edit Misplaced Pages, sometimes necessary to call people "jackasses?" No. Not at all. No grey area here. Simply don't do it, full stop. I'll note two more things. 1) You provide no evidence of Juden acting inappropriately, only your assertion. 2) At the moment, and using only the evidence available on my talk page, it is you who are acting in an aggressive, insulting, and unhelpful manner. I think you should reconsider your approach here. IronDuke 01:38, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Eric Robert Rudolph

Thanks. This is the second BLP concern that has been raised; the first one I declined because that was the subject of the dispute. However, two concerns = undo for now. Thanks for the heads-up, and best wishes, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I set it to automatic expiry after three days. That solves the problem of admins forgetting about it etc. I'll review the situation and reprotect if necessary. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 17:10, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Refactoring others' comments on talk pages

Hi, I noticed what you did here. Please don't refactor others' comments on talk pages again or you are likely to be blocked. Thanks for your understanding. --John (talk) 23:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Adding comment below previously posted elsewhere for record-keeping purposes and ease of reading IronDuke 23:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid your thanks are premature. Your calling Kauffner's post "retarded" is well outside the bounds of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. I was entirely in the right to remove it -- contrary to your assertion, we do indeed "do that here." Any admin who blocked me for soing so, provided it was part of a pattern of misbehavior, could potentially be desysopped. I notice you declined to replace the word you used. That's good, although the word you used to replace it still fails WP:CIVIL. Still, I appreciate your reducing the vitriol of your comment. IronDuke 23:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism Inappropriate POV terminology on Hamas page

Dear IronDuke, Thanks for your message. I am not the only editor who considers inserting the POV political label "terrorist" into the Hamas article to be vandalism. There is no agreed definition of "terrorist" and this is a political label used to tar one's enemies. Many Palestinians, for example, consider the Israeli army to be a "terrorist" organization, but I am not sure that would fly in the lead of the article on the Israeli army. I think it is much better in such cases to avoid such POV language and stick to accurately decriptive language. So I have no problem at all with the assertion that Hamas is "known for numerous suicide bombings and other attacks directed against Israeli civilians and Israeli security forces" because that is precise and descriptive, not emotive, POV and political. Thanks. --Tirpse77 (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I added a note on the Hamas talk page. I said I am happy to back down from describing the insertion of the word "terror/terrorism" as vandalism, but I maintain that it is totally POV and inappropriate for the reasons I stated. Hope that satisfies your concerns. --Tirpse77 (talk) 16:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I wanted to thank you for the nice Anthony Cordesman quote on the Nahum Shahaf page. Besides being relevant and such, I like it. Tundrabuggy (talk) 00:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I very much appreciate your saying that. And thank you for creating the article. I agree, there is something rather nice about the quote, quite apart from any partisan unpleasantness the topic tends to generate. IronDuke 02:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

RfC on Elonka

Hi IronDuke, I wasn't sure if you were aware of this RfC on Elonka WP:Requests_for_comment/Elonka but knowing your involvement in the al-Durrah article I was sure you would want to know. I hope this is not seen as canvassing, but I believe those who may have a special interest in the article should somehow be notified of it, and I have taken it upon myself to notify a few people who have been involved. Tundrabuggy (talk) 16:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I was previously aware of the RfC, thanks. IronDuke 21:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Elonka RfC

Hi Bainer. I was wondering if you had an opinion about whether ChrisO's RfC was properly certified? I have no strong opinion, except that it should be made crystal clear whether it is or is not okay: otherwise I fear there will be a good deal of additional drama if/when the result (assuming there is any) is set aside if it was improper, or there might be attempts to deny or disparage legitimate results if it was in fact done correctly. Is there a good board here to sort it out? I'm not sure the talk page of the RfC is the best place for it. Advice appreciated. IronDuke 23:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The question revolves around whether the certifying users have actually attempted to resolve the dispute through other means (ie, talking to the subject) and failed in those attempts. The importance of the certification requirement is to prevent unnecessary escalation of disputes; it's a low hurdle to pass, but an important one.

I think the problem here is that Ned Scott has signed in the certification section, and mentioned attempts to resolve the dispute, but has then forgotten to add diffs to back up his certification in the section above. I see Jehochman has posted some diffs on Ned's behalf, but they don't seem to relate to the substance of the dispute as ChrisO has outlined it.

Perhaps you might want to remind Ned that he has forgotten to post diffs. --bainer (talk) 02:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I have done so, but he does not agree with my assessment (see this thread). I don't know what, if any, action should be taken now. IronDuke 22:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

OBL

I just wanted to apologize in advance if it seems as if I am being argumentative. That is not my intention and I hope you can understand. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but no need for apologies. These discussions make articles better. IronDuke 21:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Well done!

Your post at Elonka's talk page is excellent in my opinion! ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 20:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the positive feedback. IronDuke 21:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, sorry to bother you, but in light of the responses to it though, may I suggest you unindent it, i.e. remove all the colons from it so it goes to the left margin, in order to avoid seeming to be replying to any one particular comment? Or you could add a few words to it to that effect. Some people may not have time to read the later comments clarifying the situation. Thanks. See Misplaced Pages:Talk page#Indentation. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 21:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Already done. Thanks for the heads-up, though. IronDuke 22:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe there's a misunderstanding here. Of course I'm not insisting that you format your comment in any particular way; however, you seem to be saying that you changed it as I suggested, yet your last edit here merely fixes a spelling mistake and leaves the comment indented as if it's in reply to Durova. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 22:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

There may well be a misunderstanding. As you suggested, I added a few words to the effect that the comment was not directed at Durova here. IronDuke 22:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Please stop

Ceedjee, you seem to be graduating from a violation of WP:NPA to violations of WP:STALK. I really need you to leave me alone (no more insults, restoring insults, following me), and I need for that to happen now. Thanks. IronDuke 14:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

Please, be sure I don't follow you. I have the WP:AN and WP:AN/I in my follow up and I checked the threads were I was talked about. No more, no less.

About the other thread, I never insulted you either. If you feel that, please, accept my apologies.

The threatening tone you take with me right now show there is a misunderstanding. I apologize for that. This is my mistake.

If I cross you on a talk page, I will try to stay away.

Ceedjee (talk) 14:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)