Misplaced Pages

User talk:Middayexpress: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:53, 17 November 2008 editSamEV (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers16,886 edits comment← Previous edit Revision as of 15:26, 17 November 2008 edit undoCambridgeBayWeather (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators253,207 edits Page moveNext edit →
Line 86: Line 86:


Middayexpress, I am convinced that if you stop the page moves and we discuss it some, this can all turn out fine. I responded to your message on the article's talk page. ] (]) 10:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC) Middayexpress, I am convinced that if you stop the page moves and we discuss it some, this can all turn out fine. I responded to your message on the article's talk page. ] (]) 10:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

:OK so the page is at ], with the talk page attached, and all double redirects to the article and the talk page now point directly to that page. And I think that most of the redirects, ] and ] now have several edits meaning the page, with history, can't be moved there without administrative help. Please no copy and paste moves. ] ] 15:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:26, 17 November 2008

Welcome!

Hello, Middayexpress, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 17:43, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Somali/Bantu

According to this Article, the Somali immigrants in Lewiston are mostly ethnic Somalis, but there are Bantu as well. Furthermore, even though widely used in the media to refer to the "Bantu refugees" from Somalia, the term "Bantu" is not entirely correct in this case since Bantu is originally a linguistic term including more than 400 ethnic groups with around 200 million people in Central and Southern Africa. For the Bantu of Somalia, the more specific term "Somali Bantu" should be used. Therefore I propose that the article about immigration to Maine and the section in the Lewiston article be renamed to "Somali and Somali Bantu immigration". Béka (talk) 12:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

sxb leave the Somali page pics alone, there is no qabiil influence whatsoever, Qassim is not hardly notable world wide, the rest are. Somaliwarrior (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Somaliwarrior (talkcontribs) 21:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

sxb if you have the means produce one large pic (like mine) with one internationaly known Hawiye/non-darod, if not leave this one on for the time being. Somaliwarrior (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


the idea is that we show well known (internationally) somali figures, not a bunch of politicians. i see you're excuse for removing Barre was that he is highly divisive character, ironic then that you add Abdullahi Yusuf. Why replace two darood figures with two others if your reason for editing is too many daroods? You remove two great heroes in Bille and the Mad mullah and you put in two politicians of the same clan (mj), one of whom is highly 'divisive' himself and is president of a highly 'divisive' transitional government.

I think YOU need to respect the page and not transmit your qabiilist attitude on to the page. Somaliwarrior (talk) Somaliwarrior (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 22:26, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I added Barre not you, you added Yusuf and Abdirashid Ali Shermarke both Majerteen, both pale in comparison to Siad Barre when it comes to contribution to Somali history.

This isnt about who is good and who is evil, this is about famous Somalis period. Get that through your thick head.
Secondly, unless you can get pics of the Mad mullah a statue will be in its place.

I'd appreciate it if you left the page alone. If you can manage to produce your own collated image then by all means do so, but stop this stupidity of uploading daroods to YOUR liking and justifying it with merely one non-darood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Somaliwarrior (talkcontribs) 22:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

You fool, dont try to point me towards wikipedia rules when you are so blatently un-neutral. You havent explained why you've added 2 majerteen darood politicians, and abdullahi yusuf is a) highly divisive and b)has not contributed one thing to Somali history. And the feelings of the somali people when they read the article are immaterial, this is an information page not a newspaper article. Misplaced Pages deals with facts. You will either spare the page from your vandalism or you won't, just know that i'll see you banned from editing this article. Somaliwarrior (talk) 23:01, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you perhaps Duke from SOL? Somaliwarrior (talk) 00:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Somali people. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 02:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I am posting the same message for you that I just left for User:Somaliwarrior: : I haven't gone through the edit history but at least one of you, possibly both of you are already in violation of the three revert rule. My opinion is that you should work it out on the talk page. I don't know much about Somali clans beyond what I've read on Misplaced Pages, other than knowing there is some enmity between Hawiye and Darod clans. If this edit war represents some kind of attempt to come out on top, then you are hereby advised to do it some place besides Misplaced Pages. Thank you. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 02:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Consider this your final warning. I've removed the picture until the two of you can decide on something less contentious. Please use the talk page (Talk:Somali people) to figure this out. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 02:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
I can appreciate your reasoning, but edit warring is not the way to go about this. Please work it out at Talk:Somali people. If the two of you can't agree on a neutral image then I think it's better (for Misplaced Pages) to leave it out. If he reverts again, then you can report him at WP:AN/3RR. Thank you. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 02:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
I've left comments at Talk:Somali people. Please keep in mind "it takes two to escalate." Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:28, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Khadija_Qalanjo.jpg

Replaceable fair use
Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Khadija_Qalanjo.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 09:59, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit war over Arab World

Please stop revert warring with other editors over the content of Arab World, and instead discuss your concerns on the talk page. Misplaced Pages is at its very best when editors work collaboratively to build consensus on a topic, while edit warring serves no one. If the reverting continues on this article, I may be forced to protect it. --Kralizec! (talk) 12:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Stop reverting the false information on Somaliland

You have been warned previously by moderators. Please stop reverting false information.

Igor akb80 (talk)


Can you please return the document Egypt to its Original state before Troy 07 inserted his evil ideas in it; I’m new here and I don’t know how to change it. --Great Sphinx (talk) 18:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you're affected. I kept Putty's figures and added figures that only yourself and Putty disagreed with. Putty was blocked; not my issue. However, if the 6% figure is allowed (it's older than NY Times), then so should the others. I will not revert your edit right now, but there needs to be an explanation. I am ready to discuss that with you; however, I will not allow Putty to use socks like Great Sphinx to canvass users so that they go against me. I'm not an "evil editor" like Great Sphinx said. ~ Troy (talk) 19:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. I believe that as I pointed out there, Putty's sources were unreliable as well (sources like Looklex encyclopedia is, I'm sorry to say, no better ...but I haven't removed them they Putty removed sources. Many of the "interviews" added by Putty and stuff like that is not "reliable" but counts as sources; similarly, I believe that mine do). Also, if the 6% figure can be included, so can the New York Times—NYT was dated '93, the Egyptian Govt' census was around '86. I have given ample proof that the estimates vary, we all agreed upon that. Thus, the very point of the proposal was to allow for other figures on the main page via better incorporation. Since you have reverted it, you realize that you do hold some responsibility in this as well, so I'd like to see if you have anything else in mind. There—and I know you can't deny this—is a way to properly incorporate such things. ~ Troy (talk) 21:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a bundle! I would still like a way to properly weight things, but at least there's more reasonable efforts. If you do have any suggestions on how to avoid those incidents altogether, I'm all ears. I'm not that particularly interested in a revert—discuss—revert again type cycle for dealing with content disputes like that. ~ Troy (talk) 23:35, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Somali Britons

I don't understand why you keep reverting the changes, the sources are reliable, especially the one from the BBC stating that 70,000 Somalis live in London, which would suggest an even higher population in the whole UK, I don't think even counting every single Somali in the UK myself would please you! Stevvvv4444 (talk) 13:38 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

You may be interested in the claim that is at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Edit war and false information war going in Somaliland article. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 20:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Somaliland map

As you see, all maps of Somaliland in this article are unreferenced, are homemade and are inaccurate. On Image:Somaliland.png I presented borders according government of Somaliland (same as on Image:Map of somaliland border claims.jpg), and this border is presented by doted line (in cartography used for disputed borders). Image:Somaliland.png is phisical map, and don't duble Image:Map of somaliland border claims.jpg (politcal one) nor Image:Somaliland map regions.png (political). This phisical map is placed in "Geography" section and is very suitable for it. On Image:Somaliland.png Somaliland is presented as region (in the same way Somaliland is presented in infobox's map Image:LocationSomaliland3.png. So, you should remove all maps or leave all maps - other way will be only your unjustified POV. Aotearoa (talk) 08:07, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I've taken a good look at the map you've created, and you're right: Somaliland is presented as a region of Somalia in it. I was for some odd reason under the impression that you showed Somaliland bordered by Somalia itself rather than other regions of Somalia. I sincerely apologize for this mischaracterization of your map and sloppy oversight on my part. The map, though indeed "homemade", is quite nice and, as it turns out, fairly accurate to boot. Again, apologies! Kind regards, Middayexpress (talk) 08:55, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
I've thought about presentation areas od Somaliland (according to gov.) that are under control of Putland or Maakhir. But there're no reliable sources, and situation in that areas is very changeable. Aotearoa (talk) 09:19, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Page move

No problems. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 00:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Middayexpress, I am convinced that if you stop the page moves and we discuss it some, this can all turn out fine. I responded to your message on the article's talk page. SamEV (talk) 10:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

OK so the page is at Immigration of Africans to the United States, with the talk page attached, and all double redirects to the article and the talk page now point directly to that page. And I think that most of the redirects, African immigration to the United States and Black Americans of African immigrant origin now have several edits meaning the page, with history, can't be moved there without administrative help. Please no copy and paste moves. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 15:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)