Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:04, 31 December 2009

....

Triva section at Michelle Malkin

Hi. Can I suggest you take a closer look at The five pillars of Misplaced Pages? Misplaced Pages's rules explicitly forbid us from putting our opinions into articles. Instead, we should report what other people have stated, and even then only people who count as Reliable Sources. That trivia section did not fit in with the rules, and the editors who deleted it were quite right to do so.

Another important policy is WP:BLP.

I know that these rules can be a little quite tricky, but it's important for all of us to work at understanding and following them. Cheers, CWC 03:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Chess

Hi, Thank you for creating the article on Vladimir Afromeev and other chess related contributions. I would like to invite you to join the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Chess - it is a discussion site for chess-related articles.Voorlandt 18:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

September 2007

Please do not add unreferenced controversial information about living persons, as you did to Sarah Silverman. Your edits appear to violate Misplaced Pages policy regarding such content and have been reverted. Thank you. Ryan4314 17:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Sega TeraDrive edit

I have noticed you have removed content from Sega TeraDrive describing such content as "questionable" and "obsolete". The fact is, the processor used was obsolete, as it was an Intel 80286 released in 1982, and the teradrive was released in 1991, 9 years later; a gap of 9 years certainly makes a processor obsolete. Granted, maybe not every component was obsolete as the text may have suggested to some, but it was far from being POV, which is evident by the factual release dates of the hardware. Bungle 18:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Who says that a gap of 9 years makes a processor "obsolete"? I'm sure there are many examples of processors being sold in new products 9 years after their introduction. Regardless, the whole sentence is rather PoV to state almost as fact that that was the main reason it didn't do very well... again especially as it's a questionable PoV to have to begin with.

Put another way, what I'm trying to say is that PoV is bad, but if you need to put PoV at least make it "right" PoV and not one that is open to differences in opinion. :P Anonywiki (talk) 21:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I respect your views and I understand why you have that particular view. I am not going to readd the sentence just because I disagree, but I want to at least accept differences of opinion. When the machine was released, there had already been another 2 processors of that variant released, thus although the processor used was perfectly fine and in working order, the fact there had been 2 newer ones on the market, coupled with the one used being released long ago, it does make it obsolete, regardless of whether it was still in fact being sold or not. Now, you could argue that last sentence there is my POV; maybe it is, maybe it isn't - maybe that is generally accepted, maybe it isn't. Essentially though, I understand your point that POV can be interpreted as such by someone but as actual "way it is" by another. It's only for this reason why I am not rushing to readd the deleted content you removed. Regards! Bungle —Preceding comment was added at 13:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits

Hi. A couple of your recent edits have been reverted. On Eugenics, I myself reverted five of your edits, as they were completely original research, which is not allowed on Misplaced Pages, even if you put a {{fact}} template on it. On Psychiatry, someone else reverted your addition that it is a pseudoscience. No reason was given for the reversion, but I would have done so myself again under the original research line. It may be a pseudoscience (I won't take a stand on that right now), but without proper sources, it comes across as just your opinion. Just a heads-up in case you actually have reliable sources so that you could recreate the reverted additions. Cheers, and happy editing! -Lilac Soul 15:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

March 2009

Your recent edit to the page Rape appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any other tests that you may do and take a look at the welcome page, if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. --Ronz (talk) 03:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Theory of Mind

Hi -- I've temporarily moved your new material to the talk page because in my opinion it can't be in the article without a source. I have to say that this is sort of ironic in light of the edit summary in your recent edit to WP:WEASEL. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 17:00, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Titles

I saw your edits to Fruitarianism. Would you pleaase be so kind to privide titles when using the {{Cite web}} template. Debresser (talk) 22:45, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

See this link for how it should look. Debresser (talk) 22:51, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did with this edit to the page Swine influenza. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Fraggle81 (talk) 18:08, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Re your message on my talk page, I would disagree about it being a good edit for obvious reasons. Some users and admins have additional rights and tools for rapidly removing edits which aren't constructive. hope that answers your question, thanks. Fraggle81 (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Warning

Let's make it clear: your recent edits to Swine influenza and Marilyn Milian constitute clear vandalism, compounded by the fact that you repeated them after they were reverted. You are too experienced an editor not to be aware of what you are doing, so any further vandal edits will result in a request for your account to be blocked. Looie496 (talk) 19:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Anonywiki (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Homosexuality is clearly a genetic defect as exclusively mating with a particular partner doesn't allow a person to be fertile in the conventional sense. That's all. I didn't mean offence. If you find it offensive please refer to Misplaced Pages:Offensive for Misplaced Pages guidelines on the matter.

Decline reason:

You do not understand the term 'genetic defect,' and have requested that a gay administrator review your block. Oddly, I can't see a reason to unblock you. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:17, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please check existing sources before making unfounded claims.

In your edit to Orangutan, you changed a number from 65% to 90% with the edit summary "I'm next to positive it's 90%". The cited source, , says "They eat a wide variety of plant species but are mainly frugivores 61% of their diet). They have been recorded eating buds, open flowers, young leaves, bark, sap, vines, orchids, reed roots, bird eggs, spider webs, termites, caterpillars, ants, fungi, honey, and other various plant parts (Rijksen 1978; Galdikas 1988)."

Please don't make changes to existing information on Misplaced Pages without having sources to back you up - when online sources are given, it's a matter of seconds to check what you think you know against the references. --Alvestrand (talk) 06:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Unfounded? I have it on better authority that Orangutans eat 90%+, ranges given seem to be from 65%-90%+.

Might I suggest that it depends on type of Orangutan, location, methods used to observe and also because of Humans tearing up the environment and leaving many Orangutans starving (whereby they would eat vastly less fruit percentage-wise).

Fruit is the food of choice of all primates. I daresay Orangutans would eat 100% fruit if they could. But I will leave it just because that's the source already there. Anonywiki (talk) 19:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

No personal attacks

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Fruitarianism. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Vanessa Arteaga

A tag has been placed on Vanessa Arteaga requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Misplaced Pages guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Sebquantic (talk) 05:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Richard Dawkins

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Misplaced Pages about living persons, as you did to Richard Dawkins. Thank you. Carminowe of Hendra (talk) 21:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

personal attack at Talk:Charles Darwin

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Charles Darwin. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. de Bivort 02:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring at Charles Darwin

You're engaging in edit warring on this article, reverting here, here where in the edit summary you promise to put a word back if it is removed, and here. Please note that if you continue this unproductive behavior you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages for a short period to minimise the disruption you are causing.

If a change you think is necessary is being opposed, please seek consensus through discussion on the talk page, and if unable to find consensus pursue dispute resolution until you are satisfied that the problem has been adequately addressed. --TS 20:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Please stop. You can still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not violate 3RR. Auntie E. 21:04, 31 December 2009 (UTC)