Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:45, 24 November 2005

/Archive_1 /Archive_2 /Archive 3

The anon at the Olsen twins article

Hi. I've noticed the discussion initiated recently by the anon at the Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen talk page. I'm not writing about the changes you made in the article (since you confirmed the stuff on the ImDb). But 2 things caught my attention there: First, when the anon, in his very first sentence, wrote that he "expect to see changes immediately". He's been vandalising the article for weeks, or months, and now that he can't do it anymore, he's giving ultimatums in the talk page. That goes to show what that guy is all about. And here is proof that this is the vandal (or one of them, anyways): in his last edit in the talk page (today) he again altered someone else's comment on the talk page — I've reverted it (that's the second thing that caught my attention). He cannot claim that he didn't know that this was not allowed, since the talk page has been vandalised many a time (most likely by that very person) and in every revert, at least three different users (myself included) have warned that comments on talk pages are not to be touched. Blocking him might prove somewhat difficult though, since he uses some sort of "ever changing" IP address (the last set of numbers constantly varying), but something needs to be done about this anon. Regards, Redux 02:34, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hello again. Thanks for answering. Your actions in the article were well-thought. I have not heard of an active vandal such as this one ever being talked out of being a vandal though. I have a suggestion to deal with this: we block the talk page as well (maybe for a shorter time than the article is going to be blocked), but we create some sort of copy of the article and the talk page in the Sandbox, or maybe as a temp page, and insert a last message in the talk page asking him to discuss and make the changes he thinks should be made there. This way, we wouldn't be alienating him, and if there's any chance of "converting" him, we might just accomplish it. If not, he may ignore the copied page, but even if he doesn't, if he starts vandalizing the clone article, it won't make much of a difference, and we won't have to waste our time reverting him. I know you have reserves about blocking talk pages, but in this case, as long as this person has something, anything that he can vandalize in that article, he won't let go. This time he almost got away with it, since he did it when he had just made his own comments there. Also, I believe that if we take the Olsen twins away from this person he just might let go and maybe even mend his ways. This appears to be some sort of hardcore fan, which may also indicate that this may be a child, or an early teen. If we don't do that, he will keep attacking the talk page, even if he sometimes makes comments, just as he had done for quite some time with the article itself. How about this? Regards, Redux 03:17, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I'm sorry to bring this to your door again. For some reason that I simply cannot grasp, some other Admin unblocked the article. And there it is again: the anon deleted the filmography, changed without justification a series of details. It's all over again. What I really can't understand is this other Admin (not you, of course). He simply came and unblocked the page, without any comment in the talk page or justification. Did he not read about the constant vandalism?? I believe the Admins have some sort of forum where they discuss specific Admin stuff, right? Well, something's gotta be said about this. If you won't do it, please direct me to the proper forum so I can complain about this guy. This was just down right preposterous. And, of course, could you block the page again? Regards, Redux 21:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for answering. The problem with the anon's edits is that he is trying to enforce what we can only assume is his take on the data. The information I've inputted in the article, which isn't all that much, really, I've collected researching websites, and most importantly, cross referencing no less than three sites, to make sure that it wasn't just one person's idea of the facts. This was a while back though. When you change information, however, it's simple procedure to say why, maybe name sources, at the very least in the edit summary. The anon never did that, in fact he ignored repeated requests to do so if his edits were not to be reverted. He couldn't care less. He only started talking when we blocked the page, and even so just to say "this and that is wrong and I expect to see it changed immediately". He constantly deletes material from the article (the filmography being the most recurrent, but not the only front of his attacks at all), again without a word. This person is not willing to work together or compromise with anyone. As I have said, it's probably a kid who is a diehard fan of the twins, or someone with serious issues. I had said that blocking the page for days, or a week, would not suffice to get the anon to move on — which is what he has to do if he is not willing to work with the community, which is how Misplaced Pages functions. I did say that at least a month would be necessary to get any results there. If Michael Snow had taken the time to actually understand what was going on in the article, he would not have unblocked it, not if he knows what he's doing. What is that: "one week is up, unblock the page"? That might work in the case of a revert war between registered users, to give them time to talk it out in the talk page, but certainly not when a obssessed anon is involved. In fact, I checked Snow's talk page, and there it was, someone complaining about his blindly unblocking protected pages. In this particular instance, there it was: in less than 24 hours, there was the anon at it again, just like before. And it's not just me who thinks so: besides Yamla, already several other users have reverted his edits. But he'll just continue ignoring us and just vandalising again and again, even if in his mind he's not vandalising. There's no other way here: we must protect the page and keep it protected, until the anon starts talking seriously, or moves on. Regards, Redux 03:55, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Aesthetic Realism

Thanks for handling that administrative chore. I hope that we can get the anon to discuss the edits and unprotect the page promptly. Cheers, -Willmcw 05:51, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:U.S. Southern wikipedians' notice board

I have now reopened the notice board, if you are interested in contributing new topics, or in nominating articles for the Collaboration of the Week, which also received a revamp. Please post on the project's talk page if you show interest. Mike H 02:50, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Is there any reason why you updated Did you know with the newest facts and not the older ones? I had two good Jubilee articles that went ignored because of that. Mike H 00:07, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/Spirit of Ecstasy

Would you be willing to reveal which quality concerns are the basis for your objection? I take these nominations as an opportunity to improve my photographic skills, and I would like to know your opinion on this shot so I can address the problems in the future. User:Rdsmith4/Sig 03:36, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Taylor Caldwell

Hi, I got hold of that image about ten years ago when I started up the TCAS. Either someone sent it to me at a time when I was circulating TC pics, OR I scanned it in off the back of a library book (can't remember which one - I used to do this a lot in response to people's requests for pics). Sorry to be so vague! It's only ever been used on the TCAS site as far as I'm concerned, although I don't know what others may have done with it. Does this help? Jaycey 22/6/05

Kelo v. New London

Not sure this article really needs the "current event" tag - the case is decided, so the facts won't change, and it's not exactly the kind of article vandals will flock to (contra Terry Schiavo, Benedict XVI). Cheers! -- BDAbramson 22:11, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)

Monty Hall image

Hi - Traipsing through the history I'm fairly certain the image was created by user:Robert Saunders in collaboration with user:JDB1983, neither of whom look to be active anymore. Do you have any suggestions for how to handle this? My interpretation of Misplaced Pages:Copyrights is that if this image was created for submission to wikipedia it is GFDL. I'm not the original author and I'm not sure if the user's contribution history (Contributions/Robert Saunders) is sufficient evidence that he was the originator of this image. Thoughts? -- Rick Block (talk) 00:04, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I think that does follow (X is GFDL and Y is derived from X, implies Y is GFDL regardless of what Y's originator might claim). Brilliant! Thanks. -- 03:25, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Except, Image:Monty-hall.png is public domain, not GFDL. Drat! I'll write something up based on the submitting user's edit summaries, which clearly imply (to me) that it was created for submission to wikipedia and is therefore GFDL. Sound legit enough? -- Rick Block (talk) 03:29, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps you're thinking of {{GFDL-presumed}}? -- Rick Block (talk) 03:35, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

We could use this one, but I'd rather simply claim it's GFDL. You wouldn't happen to be a lawyer or anything, would you? -- Rick Block (talk) 03:38, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Actually reading it :), GFDL-presumed is more accurate. I'll see if email to the creator's account works as well (I'll be real surprised if it does). -- Rick Block (talk) 03:45, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages has no email address for either user:Robert Saunders or user:JDB1983. I'll see what google turns up. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:53, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

You're an admin, right? Did user:Robert Saunders ever have a user page? -- Rick Block (talk) 03:58, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Voila! I've created new images based on the PD original, which I've tagged as GFDL (since I created them, I can specify the copyright). -- Rick Block (talk) 04:33, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)

FP Daisy Web

I gave an answer to your remarks. JoJan 13:53, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

John Connor

If you don't even know anything about the movie, why are you inserting yourself into this? John Connor is not even a character in the original Terminator - he is an important character in Terminator 2 and Terminator 3 (although his existence is important in the first one). He would certainly warrant an actual article. But having a redirect (and one to The Terminator, a movie in which, so far as I can recall, he is not even a character!) is ridiculous. The name John Connor is a common one (I know a guy named that, for instance), and most of the links to John Connor are referring to men other than the fictional character. It is not standard practice to create redirects for any movie character who does not have an article of his own. I have deleted it again. john k 28 June 2005 05:02 (UTC)

Yes - I thought I was deleting John Connor again, but due to redirects, I accidentally deleted Terminator (movie). At any rate, I've created a short article at John Connor, so we don't have to worry about it. john k 28 June 2005 15:36 (UTC)

Vandal Rovoam and "copyright violation"

Hi BrokenSegue,

As a person who placed 'possible copyright violation' tag in Moses Kalankaytuk, I would recommend you to have a look at my post in Talk:Moses Kalankaytuk and especially my request to ArbCom regarding spurious actions by a well-known vandal Rovoam. This is just for your own information. If you have some questions, pls, let me know.--Tabib June 28, 2005 12:35 (UTC)

Jess Stearn image

Hi, you never answered my Taylor Caldwell entry above, so I'm assuming that image is OK to use?? I would now like to put an image on the Jess Stearn page, however the one I've seen is already on a web page - how could I go about using that - or can't I at all? (It is on this page - http://www.greenleafpublications.com/ElvisSearchforGod/JessStearn.html.) Thanks. Jaycey 28/6/05

Thanks for your reply on my talk page. Regarding the Taylor Caldwell image, I have just found the same photograph being used on this page - http://www.doubledarepress.com/2002/02/columns/dead-people.shtml. Does that make it 'fair use', i.e. is it OK for me to use it too? Thanks. Jaycey 28/6/05

thanks!

Hi BrokenSegue, thanks for the positive feedback and your support of my RfA. I'll do my best to use my new powers responsibly! --Spangineer (háblame) July 4, 2005 03:49 (UTC)

Celebrating

Hi! I've just crossed a symbolic milestone. Three thousand edits! I feel like celebrating. Have a cigar! Don't worry, I don't smoke them either, but it's all good :)! Cheers, Redux 15:22, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators RFA

Hi BrokenSegue,

Can you take a look at Commons:Commons:Administrators. The voting there appears to be almost inactive, and given that the window for nominations is 7 days, it could probably benefit from a little more attention. -- Solipsist 06:39, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Important VFD

Please see the VFD for commons:List of victims of the 1913 Great Lakes storm. This is of vital importance. This list and others like it are being pushed off of the entire Wikimedia project. It started at Misplaced Pages, where they were VFDd in favor of moving to Wikisource/Commons. Now they are being VFDd off Wikisource (they don't really belong there, since they are not original source texts), with people there saying they should be on WP/Commons, and it is also being VFDd on Commons, where people don't realize that Commons accepts texts (says so right on the Main Page). This will set a precedent for any user-created lists. -- BRIAN0918  22:23, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Monopsony images

Thank you for your message. There are in all 3 monopsony diagrams I have uploaded, called Monopsony1-3. I have drawn all of them and of course don't want to reserve any right. Is this statement enough? Where should I put it? Sorry for any inconvenience. --Mario 16:10, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Func's RfA :)

BrokenSegue, I saw your attempt to support my adminship, thank you! :)

Please never hesitate to let me know if you have concerns with any administrative action I may make.

Func( t, c, e,  ) 19:24, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Matoro and other BIONICLE images

I got all of these pictures off of BZPower, BIONICLE.com, and BIONICLE Sector 01 (let Crystal Matrix know. he can add his own if he wants to).

Added by User:Matau This link is Broken 00:45, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

sorry

I mentioned Crystal Matrix because he is a member of this site. He owns BIONICLE Sector 01. I didn't mean to repeat the message; the server wasn't working.

Untagged Image

I couldn't quite find what I was suppposed to put on an image that had been stolen off of a website. I saw you were a participant in the "Image Tagging Club", as I like to call it, and thought you could help me. The image: PIC1.jpg is clearly from this website. I just thought I'd point it out to someone. Thanks. --Lord Voldemort 19:36, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Yep, I'm awareof the : in front of "Image". Thanks for your help. I know how to do quite a bit in the articles, but very little with images. I am trying to get involved in images, but didn't know any tags for unfree images. Thanks for your help. --Lord Voldemort 13:43, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

touchwall FPC

just wanted to let you know tht I've responded to your comments on the touch wall FPC and even though I disagree with your relisting it I'm willing to agree to the extension to see if a consensus one way or another can be reached. I've attempted to format the entry in a way that will allow for this easily as not to confuse people but if you have any changes to make it easier please change them. Jtkiefer ----- 20:30, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough, as long as it isn't one of those things that doesn't string out indefinately, I've set up a section for votes during the extended period and added my neutral vote since I think it would be fairly innapropriate for me to vote at this point. Jtkiefer ----- 06:02, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

Comment

This is in reference to the Stardestroyer.net article that you listed as protected deleted. You commented that it was recreated enough times. It was only recreated once by a single person and no one else bothered take part in that obvious trollish behiavor. I believe at some future point a case could be made to allow the article back on Misplaced Pages. That means going through the proper channels. But listing the article as protected deleted makes that far more difficult, and I find it ultimately unnecessary. If the article gets constantly recreated without going through the proper channels is a problem, then consider further action, but don't automaticaly go the strict route just 24 hours after the article got deleted in a very hot VFD. Alyeska 20:10, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Zollner

Hi! The image is from:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/gauthier.roger/illusion/zollner.jpg

Tavilis 21:26, 4 September 2005 (UTC)--

Thanks

Thanks for noticing and reverting the vandalism on my talk page. Alf 06:12, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

After not much thought and on no particular authority, I award you with the Barnstar of Reversion as you most certainly deserve it. Alf 06:42, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Original Article

In reguards to your questions about the originality of my Gemsbok article, I did in fact write the article that is posted on the ADW, and am indeed Sheri Sanders (as listed on the ADW). I was wondering what kind of proof of autheticity you would like... after much thought, little of what I came up with seems like the easiest means of going about this. Also, I am not entirely familiar with the GFDL, so what specifically do you wish to have me include in the article? I am going to get around to wikifying it as well, but I simply wanted to get the information up for use. Sorry for all the trouble my newness to this whole program! Vikachan19 17:25, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

FPC issues

I have responded to your (frankly, rude) post on my talk page. -- RyanFreisling @ 22:57, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

The request for un-protection to Hephaestos' user talk page

Yes, he has left. But I'm sure it's not me who asked for the un-protection, anyway. -- Mike Garcia | talk 03:32, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Signpost

Thanks for adding the featured pictures to my Signpost article. I seem to be having a few caching problems at the moment, I thought it was unusual when I looked at the log and there weren't any new ones. the wub "?/!" 08:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the day

Hi Broken,

Will you be around this weekend? I'm taking a mini Wiki-break for the next couple of days and it would be useful to have a spare pair of eyes to keep a watch over POTD and the Today's Second Feature on Saturday and Sunday.

I've set up all the POTDs for the next week or so and all the elements of the Second Features are in place and are (should be) protected, so the only thing to do is follow up on any complaints about captions etc. on Talk:Main Page, or tweak the image width - which is difficult to judge until you see the template in context. Also if someone makes good changes to the associated POTD caption I usually like to copy them over to the Today's second feature since its protected and most people can't edit it. If someone does manage to vandalise anything on the MainPage, User:PFHLai can be helpful in getting things put back to normal. -- Solipsist 08:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates

Just want to make aware of a certain new feature in Kurando-san... If it can not, for any reason, read a date from a page, technically it will post that it skipped what candidate and post that in the talk page of the FPC daily until it's fixed. --AllyUnion (talk) 03:30, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikijunior name vote

Please go to m:Wikijunior project name and vote for a name in the Wikimedia children's project. -- user:zanimum

Like to get article out of limbo

Hi- Now that I've clarified that my article on the American Council on Alcohol Problems is based on materials in my website (http://www.alcoholinformation.org), to which I hold copyright, how can I get it out of limbo? Many thanks for your help David Justin 16:19, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Many, many thanks!

Hi again- Your comments were most helpful. As a stumbling newbie, I really appreciate your help. David Justin 17:19, 18 September 2005 (UTC) P.S. Given that Misplaced Pages articles are unsigned, I'm clueless as to why anyone would want to plagiarize in creating them. There doesn't seem to be any benefit in doing so.

No pain

I just did not see any original authorship in a generic midevil knight swinging a sword. Perhaps a bad call on my part. Don't hesitate to re-tag as you see fit and if you think it should go away, place it on pui or ifd - Regards Nv8200p (talk) 02:50, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Backlog

Hi Broken. Do you mind if I ask why you've added another {{backlog}} to WP:FPC?. I cleared it less than a day ago and right now it seems bang up to date! ~ Veledan • Talk 04:15, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Never mind, I just saw how many nominations dropped over the 14-day line in the 6 hours since I asked *sigh*. Time to start work on the backlog again :-) ~ Veledan • Talk 09:57, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Visual Basic Classic wikibook

I see you have contributed to the Visual Basic article on Misplaced Pages. Any chance you would like to join in editing the wikibook: http://en.wikibooks.org/Programming:Visual_Basic_Classic? --Kjwhitefoot 08:24, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

My RfA

Broken-- Thank you for your comments concerning my RfA. If I do not get promoted, I will try and be a good enough contributor that you might think about supporting me in the future. The personal attacks were wrong, and they are behind me now. I will try to prove that to you, and the others, over the next few months. Thanks for your time. --Lord Voldemort 14:08, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/Sydney Harbour Bridge

If your oppose vote on this picture was indeed a joke vote, could you please cross it out and change it? It would make it easier when votes are counted at the end. Thanks. Raven4x4x 07:22, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

User:Ingoolemo/Threads/05/10/3a

202.156.6.62

Just a note to let you know I added {{sharedip|Maxonline Singapore}} to the talk page following your comments on WP:AIV and the fact that the IP reverses to 202-156-6-62.cache.maxonline.com.sg. --GraemeL 13:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot for the barnstar BrokenSegue. I'm always happy to help in these things where I can. I originally came to Featured Pictures because I love beautiful images, and it's a good way for me to contribute in some way. Thanks again. Raven4x4x 04:50, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Talking of featured picture candidates:

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Bentley badge and hood ornament-BW.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates. ~~~~

Raven4x4x 02:58, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Redirecting AI

Q1: If redirecting Ai to Portal:Artificial intelligence is not good, might we reverting to 04:55, 6 September 2005 User:Ceyockey (the use of "AI" for "Artificial intelligence" is BY FAR the most common usage in Misplaced Pages (based on fixing links to the dab page))? --moxon 19:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Q2: The sub-pages of the Portal:Artificial intelligence I have been working on seem to have been deleted without a log. Could you assist me in finding out how and why and how to recever them? --moxon 08:00, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Was not very "intelligent" of me not to check the main page history. Fixed the problem. Put the original ones uop for deletion. On second thought, maybe I should've tried moving them? So I learn. Thanks. --moxon 15:45, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the Vote

Thank you for voting, I'm sorry I don't meet your standards. Private Butcher 19:28, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

"I think you're being a bit melodramatic. You are taking the opposition votes way to hard."

Thank you for evaluating me. That makes me feel so much better, maybe if you took the time to understand who I am and what's going on in my life, then you'd understand that I'm don't care about the "opposition votes" sure it contributes to me feeling like shit, but my life is hell okay? It's becoming more and more like I should be dead everyday, but thank you for telling me I'm being "melodramatic" I apologize that I inconvienced you. Private Butcher 20:58, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Vandilism

How about you take some of your own advice and stop destroying other peoples hard work!

Deleted

Why did you delete Cunner? 24.44.21.83 23:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC) moved from user page by Alf 23:23, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

it was blank... Broken S 01:27, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Ah, the reporting user blanked the page...the page before was quite short with little content. Broken S 01:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't know

You don't have to watch me, I don't really do much on the server. What do you mean crazy association? I'm just doing my part for the benefit of humanity. I don't vandalize, nor do I delete anything that is factual. I'm out to get the stuff not worthy of being on this server, now there is no reason why you should oppose that.

• posted by Kinneyboy9 Broken S 22:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

{{mprotected}}

When you protect images due to their placement on the main page (Image:Beta.JPG), remember to place {{mprotected}} on the image page. Just a friendly reminder :). -Greg Asche (talk) 18:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Signing Talk Letters1

Oh, I'm sorry! :). I know how to, though.

Эрон Кинней 22:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Google

Even although I know you contribute a large amount of work toward the Google article and understand the edits you made when you removed the unnecessary information; but can I ask why you removed Google's Hallowe'en logo, rather than the New Year's one? BY FAR the Hallowe'en one was better. Thank you, --Kilo-Lima 20:32, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Eh?

I checked the block log! So that I can rechange the block, could you give me the URL for the start of the block. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:55, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I checked the log wrongly... doh! However, have you put a message on Daniel's talk page? I have and told him that he's blocked for a week. - Ta bu shi da yu 23:29, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I trust your judgement. No opposition from me! - Ta bu shi da yu 05:55, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism by Kobiyashi

Hi,

Thanx for rv'ing the vandalism by Kobiyashi.

I was wondering how I could react better when I spot vandalism. It took almost an hour to stop this user. His/Her vandalism was fairly harmless, but he could have done worse.--Carabinieri 23:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Question

You're the resident crypto expert so I thought I'd ask you this. Do you think it makes sense to merge and redirect Le chiffre indéchiffrable to Vigenère cipher(which I have been trying to improve)? Neither one discusses Vigenère's autokey cipher in any detail, so they both discuss the same thing. (Perhaps I just should have done it, but I seem to remember reading somewhere that there was a difference between them) Broken S 23:08, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi! Nice work on Vigenère cipher, and I agree entirely about merging Le chiffre indéchiffrable. To be honest, there doesn't look to be much to merge; perhaps a simple redirect might suffice? (BTW, I'm not the only resident crypto editor; check out all the fine people on Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Cryptography, although it's true only some of them are regularly active) — Matt Crypto

Re: Speedy keep

Hi Segue,

I must say that I agree with you on this one. I think it was done more out of disgust. I closed the vote on the technicality that Brandt himself tampered with the vote. We probably should have left it open, but oh well. Linuxbeak | Talk 23:38, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you very much for supporting my rather contentious request for adminship, but now that I've been promoted, I'd like to do a little dance here *DANCES*. If you have any specific issues/problems with me, please feel free to state them on my talk page so that I can work to prevent them in the future, and thanks once again!  ALKIVAR™ 07:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

wikipedia-watch

Hi,

I'm leaving this message on the page of all the users mentioned by Brandt on this new page of his wikipeida-watch site. As you can see from the link, he's put together a list of the Misplaced Pages users that he sees as his enemies, and is trying to collect as much personal information as he can about each of them. Just thought I should let you know. Canderson7 12:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Why did you break the links?

Hello! Why did you break these links? Mind if I unbreak them? --grin ✎ 10:09, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

==Your Personal Info==

Brandt seems to posted personal info about you here.

jucifer 20:13, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

No check again

he has changed it, he has your email and location and real name jucifer 20:24, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Users to watch?

Why watch me? The association has been deleted, off of meta of course. It still has a blog though! http://amwofficial.blogspot.com.

It really hurts me that you would put me in the watched users category, I am not worthy of being listed under that title. Please see to it that I am removed from it. I make only credible and legitimate, neutral articles. Эрон Кинней (TALK) 07:28, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Discussion about voting period

Where did you explain this revert? I didn't see anything on my talk page nor on the FPC talk. My view, as expressed on the FPC talk page, is that there is obviously no consensus about a comments-only period, so it should be presented as a guideline supported by a subset of all users, not a hard rule. The current wording violates several guidelines and policies (about editing other users' comments). — David Remahl 16:49, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

FPC revert

Sorry for taking so long to get back tou you (my life has a been a bit hectic). Where did I put an explanation of my revert? In the revert comment I wrote "I'd rather discuss changes like these". I was hoping your response would have been to leave a comment on the talk page about why you feel it should be changed (and I would have responded to it). Please excuse if it had been discusssed before but somehow I missed. The point seems moot now since another discussion has already begun here. Broken S 20:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I did explain my changes on FPC Talk. But it was under a somewhat dated heading, so it's understandable that you missed it! — David Remahl 22:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

TY

Thank you, Sir, I am sincerely grateful.

Эрон Кинней 18:36, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Delsworth Harnish page

Thanks for deleting the page. It occurs to me that, since according to Dr. Harnish's bit on WP:GC the person who created the article was falsely impersonating a real person, that account should probably be blocked as well. -- SCZenz 01:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Note

Note to BrokenSegue: I am trying to find a way to fix your vandalism problem using PHP. Please wait a while. Sorry I had to post this here.
Darlyn Perez 00:04, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

moved from my user page Broken S

My sig

I have had that pointed out to me before but some I very much respect use transcluded signatures - the problem only comes if I ever change it - which I don't intend to do. However, since I last revisited the issue at least one person I looked to on this issue has kowtowed to the pressure and stopped using it. I am going to ask him to protect my sig page so it won't be subject to vandalism and consider dropping it all together - I will miss the colors. Trödel|talk 00:57, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Why your page gets vandalised so often:

(for context of this discussion see this)

Ever wondered? --JohnO You found the secret writing! 17:29, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Because lots of people love me? Or becasue I piss lots of people off? Truth be told I don't think my page is vandalized all that much (compared to some people). Broken S 17:43, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Piss people off? Perhaps. Could it be, rather, that you are a bit of a bellend? You got involved in an discussion that had nothing to do with you. I know you have God-like superpowers and an inflated ego, but you really oughtn't to have deleted a whole discussion simply because you didn't perceive it to be going anywhere. --JohnO You found the secret writing! 17:51, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

• First let me refer you to WP:NPA.
• Second: What could have been a possible resolution to that discussion? Changing the archives seems to be the only possible solution (aside from doing nothing). The conversation, however, devolved into name calling (ex. "fucking shithouse", "mental asylum inmate", "menace to the collective IQ" etc), arguing over defintions and there was no discussion over whether things were actualy archived improperly. I'd say that's the definition of a debate that's going nowhere. I don't plan to respond to any comments left on Talk:Main Page under that section so if you want to continue this discussion use my talk page.
• Third: Broken S 18:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

This is not supposed to be a personal attack, (I'm not intending it for broadcast to users at large), feel free to delete this line once you've read it, but... you strike me as moronic.

• First: You list the name calling in reverse order, thus giving prominence to my comment.
• Second: I've read WP:NPA
• Third: "You are a menace to the collective IQ" IS NOT A NAME!
• Fourth: It was never meant to be a discussion between anyone other than the God who archived a current post and me. The red IP address stuck his nose in. Then other people. I felt they were bating me. Obviously I can't prove that. I couldn't even be arsed trying. A recent comment I made ended with 'lol'. I wasn't taking it seriously, then someone libelled me.

If you are just going to respond with something to make yourself feel better, don't bother. If you are going to take my complaints seriously, then do so. But frankly, as soon as you got involved, I did a little research and discovered just what sort of person you are. I don't really want this conversation. I just want to help at Misplaced Pages, but there is far too much politics here. I will try not to get involved on future discussion pages, but a lot of people here have bad attitudes. Yes, I used some strong language, but your sweeping actions are just as offensive to a delicate flower like me. Now I must leave and reach for my 'medication.' --JohnO You found the secret writing! 18:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

• • Alright...
  • First: My references were in reverse order because I was reading from the bottom to the top looking for insults, not because I was trying to emphasize something. Try to assume good faith. Also, on what basis do you call me a moron? I have been nothing but patient and I think my comments are accurate. Do you know me in RL? I thought not.
  • Second: Calling someone a "menace to the collective IQ" is name calling (or at the very least insulting someone). Anyone disputing that fact is quibbling over definitions.
  • Third: If you aren't taking this seriously, then why do you care if I remove a whole bunch of you and some anons arguing? I didn't remove your complaint (you did). I just removed all of the non-serious stuff.
  • Fourth: I'd be interested to know what "research" you did and "what sort of person" I am.
  • Fifth: You called the person who archived "God". Anyone (even non-admins, or as you might say non-Gods) can archive talk pages. If you want avoid situations like this, why don't you start archiving pages?
  • Broken S 18:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Quote: "...if you want to continue this discussion use my talk page." I'm trying to! You bore me. Is that name calling, too, mommy? JohnO You found the secret writing! 18:54, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry for boring you. Would you like me to tell you a story? I don't understand the comment you left on my page. Yes, I told you to leave me messages if you want to continue the discussion. You left me messages; the conversation continued...where is my mistake/contradiction? Broken S 18:59, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:List_of_administrators#Active Number 35. I'd love a story. How about a story where "...if you want to continue this discussion use my talk page." means the same thing as "I told you to leave me messages if you want to continue the discussion." Please stop using my talk page. I'm not surprised you don't understand the last comment: it was filled with profound meaning and ambiguity so that I wouldn't be thunderbolted before I had a chance to get out of my tutu. JohnO You found the secret writing! 19:06, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh. That's what you want. The reason I was leaving messages on your talk page was because that's a wikipedia style/custom. You leave messages on my talk page and I'll respond on yours (that's just how it's done, see my other conversations on this talk page). If you want the conversation held here entirely, then that's fine (just a little odd, you won't get the conveneint message banner). Broken S 19:15, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

And that's the difference between the two of us. I like to believe there is more than one way of doing things. REFRESH. --JohnO You found the secret writing! 19:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

POTW

No problem, it's not your fault. From what i've seen, my opinion of Pigs is that he's basically the scum of Misplaced Pages -- he's even driven a user to get another username in fear of harrassment. It's ok as long as he stops, but I don't think he will since he's basically thumbing his nose at everybody up to the arbcom itself, but if you can stop his crap, that's awesome. Once he starts up again, i'll block him again. My patience with him is all but gone. Karmafist 19:45, 24 November 2005 (UTC)