Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:55, 6 September 2008

Blocked for 3RR

Quartermaster chiming in on Obama article and Rezko edits (as well as other stuff)

You come across as an exquisitely honest editor regarding the Obama article. You're a good shepherd. I will tread lightly per your suggestions. Have a barnstar.

		The Anti-Flame Barnstar
		Thanks, Mom! Quartermaster (talk) 20:06, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

NOTE: Discussion about you on ANI.

Please check this out and comment. I can't really understand what this is about. Thanks! =) --mboverload@ 02:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

You are mentioned in an Obama incident report

HereTalk:Barack Obama/Article probation/Incidents#Noroton - courtesy notice. - Wikidemo (talk) 10:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Obama Image

I apologize for not using the talk page to come to a consensus with you. I'm not a frequent contributor of Misplaced Pages, so I don't use the user talk page all that much. As for the Obama probation, I must've missed the part which specifically mentioned that all Obama-related articles are under probation -- I reread to confirm.

Still, I believe my contribution is valid. I do not see how my contribution was original research. The facts I stated may be verified from multiple sources, and I believe the events mentioned are common knowledge. The only opinion specifically expressed in my contribution was not mine and was paraphrased from a reliable source, The Politico. The opinion may be critical, but that is valid content for a biography of a living person which the article falls under.

As for undue weight, I believe that instead of deleting contributions, other contributors should add to the article since to me it appears that the article is relatively short and lacking in content. If contributions are reverted because they only add a small piece to the bigger picture then the article will not be able to grow. From what I've seen, great Misplaced Pages articles are created from multiple small contributions.

--Amwestover (talk) 21:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I've revised my contribution to the Cultural and political image of Barack Obama article and would appreciate your opinions and contributions.

--Amwestover (talk) 16:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

AN/I report re. Weathermen / terrorists

An AN/I report has been started here concerning the WP:TERRORIST dispute at Weatherman (organization) and the events described at Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation/Incidents#Scjessey and Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation/Incidents#Noroton. Your user name has come up in the discussion. This is a courtesy notice that you and/or matters in which you participated on one of these pages, are at issue in the AN/I report. Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 02:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

September 2008

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): I'm not seeing edit warring at the article, and I believe this was a simple mistake after reviewing the contribution history of Scjessey and the filer of the original 3RR report. Wikidemon CENSEI is not completely innocent in this whole matter, and these type of reports and tenacious/gaming editing practices is becoming tiring. That said, I don't think that ceasing editing at Barack Obama is necessary, but please be aware of the sanctions that are in existence and save wholesale reverts for blatant vandalism. Cheers, seicer | talk | contribs 04:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC) Request handled by: seicer | talk | contribs 04:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I have left a note directly with the blocking editor suggesting that the block is a mistake and that the editing in question was routine, uncontroversial article patrol. The 3RR report itself is an over-the-top act of wikigaming by a problem editor. Wikidemon (talk) 00:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, Scjessey, as peculiar as this is, to eliminate any possible argument for the ongoing block will you kindly signal that you will not do more than 3 reverts per day on the main page, even unrelated uncontroversial ones, until and unless we clarify per the terms of article probation that this is okay? Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 01:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I've been away from Misplaced Pages for a few hours, and this block has come as a complete surprise to me. I agree that this is a highly dubious piece of wikigaming, and this is clearly confirmed by the reporting editor's attempt to ensure the block remains - an agenda-based 3RR report, basically. Oh well. No real harm done. -- Scjessey (talk) 01:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

RfC on Weathermen, Ayers, Dohrm, Obama, and "terrorism"

Please note that I have created an RfC to discuss the matter of whether, how, and where we should use and cover the designation "terrorist" describe the Weathermen and their former leaders. It is located here: Talk:Weatherman (organization)/Terrorism RfC. The intent is to decide as a content matter (and not as a behavioral issue regarding the editors involved) how to deal with this question. I am notifying you because you appear to have participated in or commented about this issue before. Feel free to participate. Thank you. Wikidemon (talk) 20:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

De-escalating the emphasis at the Weatherman RFC

I just removed the boldface from my quote of WP:TERRORIST over here. Why don't you remove the box around your comment, and then I'll remove the box around my comment below that, and we'll set a better example for the rest of the discussion. Deal? -- Noroton (talk) 17:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

3RR

Be aware, I got my eye on you. CENSEI (talk) 20:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)