Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:16, 2 January 2006

Tuesday 24 December 19:21 GMT 12 December 2024 News and notes: Arbitrator election concludes Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel articles 5 Disinformation report: Sex, power, and money revisited Op-ed: On the backrooms by Tamzin In focus: Are Misplaced Pages articles representative of Western or world knowledge? In the media: Like the BBC, often useful but not impartial Traffic report: Something Wicked for almost everybody Opinion: Worm That Turned's reconfirmation RfA debriefing Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Reference

I must say I agree with your opinions about the new reference template thingies. There is a straw poll vote at Template talk:Unreferenced, if your interested, your vote could tip the balance in favour of them being put on talk pages, which IMO is far more sensible. G-Man 17:43, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Presidential Gaffes

Fair enough, I was unsure if anyone would like the changes, but I figured Be Bold. On higher resolution screens it works better, the whitespace is not that significant, and I figured as each section got a tiny bit longer the white space would dissappear... I guess I'll just wait till it has more content and then do it up.  ALKIVAR™ 21:11, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

howdy

CFO stuff has been taking up all my free time. Sadly, that means I don't have much time to edit Misplaced Pages. Thanks for saying hi. :) --mav 00:43, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

RfC wackiness

Hi. Sorry to bother you with this, but I was wondering if you would mind watchlisting Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Iopq, as it seems to be a target for vandalism. Thanks. Jkelly 17:47, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

Your first barnstar??? How long have you been here? How many articles have you contributed to? That's odd. Izehar (talk) 23:37, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Advice please...

Hi again, I used your template (Template:Defban) on two users, who did merit it, check their usernames ( and ). Am I in violation of Misplaced Pages:No legal threats? Izehar (talk) 00:22, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Blocking rms125a?

Did you by chance block the user rms125a@hotmail.com or the IP he claims to have been using, 67.101.192.136? I can't find any record of it anywhere. (It seems this user has a history of problems, but I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt). Lunkwill 00:36, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Does that mean you do see a block listed? Because I can't find his username or the IP he gave. Now he says he's coming from 63.164.145.85, but that doesn't appear to be blocked either. Lunkwill 01:14, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, now I see something at least. "01:33, 6 December 2005, Jtdirl blocked #63715 (expires 01:33, 7 December 2005) (Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Rms125a@hotmail.com". The reason given for Rms125a@hotmail.com's block is: "sockpuppet vandal".)". What does the #63715 mean? It gives me an error when I click on it. Also, how does autoblocking work? I don't see anything on your user contribs page that would have indicated the block was put there by you. Lunkwill 01:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

That's weird; I can't find that message in the block log anymore. What gives? Lunkwill 05:08, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Traditional Catholic

You seem knowledgeable about Catholicism... we could use another voice over at this article, there is a massive disagreement, and the more informed people the better to help. A consensus of 3 against 1, while fair, would be better as 4 against 1, or 5 against 2, or whichever. Someone with more wiki-experience, specifically regarding defining articles, would also be nice. I just jumped into it, and I'm kinda new here too as well (relatively) so anyway, consider it.

Thank you for your time. JG of Borg 03:30, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

How are you descended from High King Brian Boru?

In what way are you descended from High King Brian Boru, who was killed in 1014 at the Battle of Clontarf? - (Aidan Work 06:06, 6 December 2005 (UTC))

Flags

Dear Jtdirl, I stole your European flag for my user page. Where did you get these flags from? Or did you make them yourself?

A friend said he made it for me. FearÉIREANN\ 20:03, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

=Final decision

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Rex071404 4 case. Raul654 20:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Queen's title

Actually, the title was correct before you changed it. Try not to make assumptions, just because it sounds strange (archaic style) doesn't mean it's wrong. In fact, your change is incorrect. In future, it's better to actually try to verify a fact rather than assume you must be correct. See the actual wording of the Royal Styles and Titles Act:

Royal Style and Titles Act

CHAPTER R-12

An Act respecting the Royal Style and Titles

Preamble

WHEREAS the Prime Ministers and other representatives of Commonwealth countries assembled in London in the month of December, in the year one thousand nine hundred and fifty-two, considered the form of the Royal Style and Titles, and recognizing that the present form is not in accordance with present constitutional relations within the Commonwealth, concluded that, in the present stage of development of the Commonwealth relationship, it would be in accord with the established constitutional position that each member country should use for its own purposes a form suitable to its own particular circumstances but retaining a substantial element common to all;

AND WHEREAS the said representatives of all the Commonwealth countries concerned agreed to take such action as is necessary in each country to secure the appropriate constitutional approval for the changes now envisaged;

AND WHEREAS, in order to give effect to the aforesaid conclusions, it is desirable that the Parliament of Canada should assent to the issue of a Royal Proclamation establishing the Royal Style and Titles for Canada:

THEREFORE, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:

Short title

1. This Act may be cited as the Royal Style and Titles Act.

Assent to Royal Style and Titles

2. The assent of the Parliament of Canada is hereby given to the issue by Her Majesty of Her Royal Proclamation under the Great Seal of Canada establishing for Canada the following Royal Style and Titles, namely:

Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

R.S., c. R-12, s. 1.

"Where on earth did you get that nonsensical version of the Queen's title for Canada?"

From the Consolidated Statutes and Regulations of Canada. See the Department of Justice website here and then go to the page carrying the statute here.

I'm afraid that in a disagreement between you and the actual wording of the statute as provided by Canada's Department of Justice, I'll have to go with the statute.Homey 22:04, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

If you think, for some reason, that you are right and the Department of Justice got it wrong, you might want to check this page from the Canadian Legal Information Institute or this essay by Canadian constitutional scholar Andrew Heard in which he writes:

When India gained independence, two changes were required to be made to the Royal Style and Titles in effect around the Commonwealth, which had last been amended by the British Government in 1927. In 1948, the British Government and all the remaining Dominions agreed to remove `Emperor of India' from the title; in so acting they were following the convention recited in the preamble to the Statute of Westminster. However, when India decided to become a republic but still remain in the Commonwealth, the Indian government acknowledged the Queen as the Head of the Commonwealth, a title which had not previously existed. Within a few years several other colonies were on the verge of following India to independence and a meeting of the heads of Commonwealth governments in 1952 decided that the Royal Style and Titles needed to be changed more substantially. This meeting declared, "...it would be in accord with established constitutional practice that each member country should use for its own purposes a form of title which suits its own particular circumstances but retains a substantial element which is common to all". In 1953 the Canadian Parliament passed a Royal Style and Titles Act which gives the Queen her official title in Canada: "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom, Canada, and Her Other Realms and Territories, Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith". K.C. Wheare has underlined how much the Canadian government at the time stressed the British element of the Crown. In the debate on this Bill, Prime Minister St. Laurent told the House:

Her Majesty is now Queen of Canada but she is the Queen of Canada because she is Queen of the United Kingdom... It is not a separate office ...it is the sovereign who is recognised as the sovereign of the United Kingdom who is our Sovereign...

The agreement of the Commonwealth Heads of Government in 1952 has effectively ended the previous convention that any changes in the Royal Style and Titles should only be made with the assent of all Commonwealth countries who retain the Queen as Head of State. Indeed the Australian Parliament changed the formulation in 1973 from one similar to Canada's to simply "Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Australia and Her Other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth". It does not seem that a Canadian Parliament could now amend the Canadian title to something like the Australian one. The Canadian title clearly emphasises that the Canadian sovereign is one and the same as the British monarch, whereas the Australians deliberately eliminated this connection. Now that the office of the Queen is protected by the amending provisions of the 1982 Constitution Act, such an alteration in the royal title would appear to require the unanimous approval of all the provincial legislatures as well; the elimination of the clear connection with Britain seems to be a significant change in the office of the Canadian monarch and not just a simple change in title.

BTW, your claim about "Defender of the Faith" is also wrong. It's part of New Zealand's title for the Queen as well as Canada's. As for the UK being mentioned in the Queen's title, Grenada does that as well.

In future, please try to get your facts straight before making arrogant pronouncements about the supposed ignorance of others lest you find yourself hung on your own petard (as has been the case here). Homey 22:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Michael Collins

First, Harris is not an authoritive source - just an old penny-a-line hack who wanted to make a name for himself on the Late Late and get a few more article payments out of the Indo. Coogan habitually repeats stories that some bloke in a pub told him. Cite your sources!

Even if there is some substance to it (and given that Collins appears to have been a raving heterosexual by all other accounts, I would take some convincing), then the size of this para is wildly disproportionate. Similar allegations were made about Winston Churchill and Edward Heath, but these articles make no reference to them. Why? because they are not encylopediac. If true, they had no effect whatever on the broad direction of their careers, on their effect on their peers. In the case of Oscar Wilde, it is only relevant because he wrote the Ballad of Reading Gaol due to ending up there because of the laws of the time. In the case of Roger Casement, it is only relevant because the Casement Letters were produced to destroy his reputation according to the mores of the the time and to cover up the the sham of a trial he was given. In the case of Collins, these insinuations show the hallmarks of exactly the same process - first by Dublin Castle, then by the irregulars and later by Fianna Fáil. At best, it is worth a couple of lines under Trivia, which is exactly where I intend to put it. --Red King 00:05, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I ask you again. Cite your sources. --Red King 01:08, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Well the revised version is still way too long and disproportionate to its effect on anything, but a least this time there is a semblance of balance. --Red King 20:29, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi

I just saw the note on your user page. I hope you're feeling better and get well soon! Sorry that I have not gotten around to looking at Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence... The endless circular discussions on AfD keep on leaving me little time to work on the article namespace. The very high threshold required for deletion, along with the limited time for discussion on AfD, strike me as increasingly problematic in recent weeks, although I may just be late to notice the problem. Currently Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Economic fascism 2 seems to be on verge of failing... Also, thanks for sending me the note on Talk:Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano. Please keep me posted whenever you're mobilizing support for following naming, style, content conventions that too often are left ignored on this site. 172 08:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

What the?

Um, I just added a line to the entry about Evil Dead, saying that Within The Woods was made to raise funds for the Evil Dead. It's a true fact, and I fail to see your problem with me doing so. Saying I'm like a child playing in a sandbox and I'm going to be banned is a little... um... insane. You should really calm down and take something for that, I'm serious. 20:37, December 7, 2005 216.153.214.18

Guardian Newspapers

As it is a few days old, I'm sure someone already pointed out to you this article by Jane Perrone, deputy news editor at Guardian Unlimited. I read the comments she attributed to you and your comments on the Talk page and agree with what you said. Question? Misplaced Pages has lots of policies covering editing etc. that are designed to ensure the integrity of content. However, most are ignored and if one quotes a rule, many just give it their own spin to suit their agenda. Why rules without a mechanism to enforce them? How come, with all the well thought out policies, that there is no Misplaced Pages Policy Referral/Review Committee (whatever) to quickly resolve this. Wouldn't that cut out a lot of edit wars and also reduce the Arbitration Committee caseload while improving content integrity? - Ted Wilkes 21:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the block!

Thanks for blocking that jerkhead of an IP address earlier. I was in a library and didn't have access to IRC, where I surely would've been whining about it, so I'm really glad to see you pounced on him for being so rude. Thanks! :) Mo0 03:46, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

All gone...

Hi Jtdirl. It seems your successful templates have been removed from most articles, I thought you might have a look cos it'd be a shame to lose them (just a few examples: , - also check out the user's contributions). Thanks Craigy File:Uk flag large.png (talk) 17:16, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Jtdirl,

I am trying to fix some of the edits made this morning. If I am doing it wrong let me know. Some of the royal family pages getting mighty crazy with the gazillion infoboxes placed. I figure if there is a "Country" Royal Family, we don't need the dynasty infobox as well. Thoughts? Thanks, Prsgoddess187 19:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Didn't realize we didn't need both this morning, so I was just moving them, to make it look better, but I am working on the Belgian royal family and I also think that the Norweigan needs to be reverted. Prsgoddess187 19:35, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

• My day isn't going as bad as yours, at least I get to do this at work. But it is still nuts!!! Hopefully, he won't change it back after we are done, :( Prsgoddess187 20:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Good idea! On a different note, do you think we should move Joseph Wenzel Maximilian Maria and the rest of the Liechtenstein royal family to Prince(ss) Name of Liechtenstein. Someone created the articles and titled them with just the christian names, and it looks sad. Thanks again. Prsgoddess187 20:40, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

That's insane, once it is in the infobox, that should be it. Good lord, what will they do next?Prsgoddess187 20:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I've only been here for a few months, and I learned that you don't make radical changes to anything without backup first. The old CYA move. I have seen some of the vandalism, why do people do that? That makes me nuts. Prsgoddess187 21:03, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Jerks. But I guess that is why we do this. To keep the facts straight. Maybe we are the crazy ones!Prsgoddess187 21:05, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

• I created a style infobox for Liechtenstein, can you check it out for me on Prince Joseph Wenzel of Liechtenstein. Thanks so much. Prsgoddess187 21:23, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, it is my first infobox creation. I am so proud... Prsgoddess187 21:25, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Would it be possible for you to move Nora of Liechtenstein to Princess Nora of Liechtenstein. The second is a redirect to the first, but I think that Princess Nora is a better title, and in line with the naming conventions for children of sovereigns. Thanks again for all of your help today. Prsgoddess187 00:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for all of your help today Prsgoddess187 02:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

He's at it again, Astorknlam is now adding an infobox of the S-C-G Ducal House to the descendants of Victoria. ] and ]. I moved some of them around, but if there is a box on the kids of QV and PA, do we need this too???? Prsgoddess187 12:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC) P.S. I hope today is better than yesterday :)

your message

hello Jtdirl, welcome back.

errr... i don't even remember which one that was, must be so long ago. but sure, no probs, thanks for getting in touch... with kind regards Gryffindor 21:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Autoblocking rms125a@hotmail.com

So, Rms125a@hotmail.com keeps emailing me about being blocked; this time it's:

User is blocked . Jump to: navigation, search You have attempted to edit a page, either by clicking the "edit this page" tab or by following a red link. Your IP address is 70.19.24.87. Please include this address, along with your username, in any queries you make. Your user name or IP address has been blocked by Jtdirl. The reason given is: Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Rms125a@hotmail.com". The reason given for Rms125a@hotmail.com's block is: "sockpuppet vandal".

In Special:Ipblocklist, there's a similar message, but with User:#65003 instead of a username. In your contribs, you recently blocked Karatekid7, but then why would the block log mention rms125a? He claims that he's logging in as Rms125a@hotmail.com, which doesn't appear to be blocked. Lunkwill 01:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, he definitely has made some outrageous edits. Is his Rms125a account permanently blocked? I don't see it on any of the lists. That's the part I'm confused about. Lunkwill 01:41, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Dershowitz

It seems that User:FakeName was Dershowitz, or a close associate. See the Alan Dershowitz talk page. Sadly, Jimbo has caved in to the legal threat. - Xed 12:40, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Japan infobox

Could you please check out the style infobox I made for Japan here. Just want to make sure it is okay, that way we can get them to conform to the consensus too. Thanks again for all of the help. Prsgoddess187 16:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Ask any business owner...

"What would you do tomorrow if you had to raise minimum wage by $2 per hour...?"

You will get ONE reply: "Lay people off and increase productivity."

Wake up...communism and socialism do not work. Please do not push your Euro POV on U.S.

--AustinKnight 19:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't...

..revert me, I was in the middle of re-categorising those articles per cfd. Martin 19:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I was doing it for WP:CFD where it has been on speedy deletion for 5 days. I believe lower case is correct, as is Crown jewels. Martin 19:27, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I think you need to read WP:CIVILITY and if you disagree with WP:CFD take it up there. Martin 19:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I see you are now re-categorising articles, you may be correct, but you have to confirm it on WP:CFD before you carry on. Martin 19:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Now we have Category:Regalias Category:Regalia and Category:Crown jewels, how is the best way to organise these? Martin 23:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Royal templates

Personally I only add one template to each page. If they are still living, then use the Royal Family template. For the deceased, use the House template. Of course there are some persons who can fit into two different templates, but given the small size of most of the royal articles, it is best to go with the senior template. Astrotrain 20:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

RE: Message on my Talk.

You have a new message here. xaosflux /_C 04:42, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Duke of Windsor

Why did you revert me? The point about Ireland approving one day later was repeated; no need to include this trivia in lead paragraph. Changes seemed straightforward. 04:56, 10 December 2005 (UTC) Ghosts&empties 04:57, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Jimbo Wales ongoing reticence to address core issues re. Misplaced Pages

I first wish to apologize to all people & things Irish for my initial, insulting response to Jtdirl after his above remarks were posted on my talk page. I am actually rather fond of the Irish, as is most everyone else in the U.S., and can only explain my striking out as an act of frustration to both the above blather and the unacceptable ignorance that Misplaced Pages articles continue to perpetuate (e.g., the Soviet Union article's blasphemous referral to the millions of people killed by Joseph Stalin as simply a "purge", without any reference to either their numbers or having been murdered). I will now respond to more appropriately and singularly:

Jtdirl, I first offered substantial constructive criticism to Jimbo, particularly intended to help him fix the substantial Truth and content issues that have gotten Misplaced Pages and himself into the national & international spotlight in a very sorry fashion -- and he chose not to respond. The 'why' he did not respond has nothing to to with your propositions, as he clearly was responding and joking in a very unpressured fashion to other comments on his talk page. The real 'why' has everything to do with the explanations & utterly impressive eloquence of Wyss on her talk page. I would refer you and others to her for the realities of Misplaced Pages in order not to deprive anyone of her very apparent brilliance, but I will say that her succinct comment that "Mr Wales is a marketer and he more or less means for Misplaced Pages to be this way" hits the nail right on the head. Jimbo Wales' continuing refusal to fix the enormous problems with Misplaced Pages can only be the result of a considered decision to keep it the way it is, and I, and others...for reasons stated above, and much more eloquently by Wyss...believe that this does not speak well for its future. As it exists, Misplaced Pages is simply enormously (fatally?) flawed and a waste of time at best, and a perpetuator of completely wrong-headed ideas and opinions. It is a blog for those of a particular cultural persuasion...nothing more...and certainly not the result of anything remotely resembling scholarly analysis. --AustinKnight 17:23, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

User talk:JW1805

Hi, thanks for your support earlier. Do you have any tips on how to deal with the gentleman? --sansvoix 04:23, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Astorknlam

Good Morning (at least in the States),

Yoiu might want to check out the ex-Greek royal family here (or Greek ex-royal family, whatever), last night I went through to remove the dynasty infoboxes, and left the royal family infobox, and this morning, the dynasty boxes are back and the family box is gone. Do I go through and change it back, or not. Also, the Romanian royal family layout has been changed. AGHHH!!!Prsgoddess187 13:37, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I would have changed them all back this morning, but like you said, we have reverted so many of his changes in the last week. Very frustrating, but, it's okay now. Hopefully (please Lord) he won't make any more major changes. Thanks again. Prsgoddess187 19:57, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Ireland coa.png

I believe you uploaded the image Image:Ireland coa.png, it was deleted earlier today and I have reuploaded it. Djegan 19:54, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes the secret deletion police, I am currently working on a larger version. Djegan 21:06, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Irish Catholic Rebels

I invite you to have a look at this garbage and then vote to have it speedily deleted. Camillus 23:24, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Thanks for your support regarding the article above, and also for your support regarding my "feud" with User:Aidan Work on WP:AN. Camillus 00:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Constantine

That is entirely a matter of opinion. He is not a king and should not be described as one. What royalist sycophants choose to do is not our business. Adam 03:07, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

This amounts to saying that the people of Greece have no right to decide their own form of government. Constantine cannot be called "King of the Hellenes" when the Hellenes have decided by due democratic process that they don't want a king. He is no more a king than I am, and to call him one is a grossly POV usage which I won't allow. Adam 03:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Adam,you are wrong. King Constantine II of Greece has never abdicated. I can understand why King Constantine is still treated as one, as it was the Colonels that forced the King into exile.Tsar Simeon II of Bulgaria is still a King, as is King Michael of Romania. In King Michael's case, his 'abdication' was extorted from him by [[Petru Groza]], who held a gun to Queen Mother Helen's head. In any case, King Michael's 'abdication' is not legally valid. - (Aidan Work 03:01, 13 December 2005 (UTC))

Thanks for telling me so many things

Thanks for your telling, I will follow these instrutions to edit articles than Astorknlam

Greek royals

How would you like it if we were to title an article, Elizabeth II, Queen of Ireland? The Greek people, like the Irish people, made a decision to become a republic. Is it your position that they have no right to do this, and that a family of foreign parasites has the right to go on being heads of state for ever of countries where they are not wanted? Adam 00:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I saw that this morning, but since there were edits done after the move, I wasn't sure if I could move it back. I wouldn't have cared about the move, if it was done in the proper manner. It blew my mind, to say the least. I saw that he had been here a while, which kind of confused me. I guess everyone is entitled to a few OOOPSs. Thanks for moving it back. Prsgoddess187 01:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

• Already been there. Been watching it go back and forth for, what, 3 days now. Had to oppose, and since you put the reasons for it so well, just backed you up. I wonder who they will try to move next. This could be a fun game to play, Guess the Next Move!! Prsgoddess187 21:19, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Prime minister

Hey, easy there--no illiteracy problems here. The ariticle should be titled "prime minister" (or, "Prime minister", in Wikicase), because "prime minister" is a common noun. Indeed, the body text of the article reflects this. Only when used as a title, i.e. "Prime Minister of the United Kingdom", does it get capitalised. The Tom 00:53, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Er, Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (capitalization) most certainly does not say one "simply cannot put an article at a semi-literate Prime minister." Quite the opposite, it demands that it be named as I had moved it, and makes absolutely no mention of any kind that, as you allege "WP policy is not to do that. If a two or more word title is all upper cased or all lowercased, WP uses all upper cased since it can't do all lowercased for technical reasons and a mixture of both produces a ridiculous title." The article is about prime minister, not Prime Minister, and just as "particle physics" belongs at Particle physics and "chief executive officer" belongs at Chief executive officer, the article should be at Prime minister. Yes, it looks a bit funny, but such are the rules. Think of how the sentence "Prime ministers, royalty, millionaires and noted writers have been known to break bread at Smith's restaurant" would be rendered in any newspaper. This has absolutely nothing to do with American/British/Canadian/Irish/Jamaican/Pitcairn Islands stylistic quirks. The Tom 21:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm honestly shocked that an administrator and long-term contributor such as yourself is repeatedly taking such an uncivil tone during this discussion. I'm hardly a mouth-breathing illiterate who's bent on making Misplaced Pages look like garbage, and I'd prefer if you stopped presuming that. I've tried my best to persuade you that my actions were in keeping with the rules by which we all abide, and you respond by flinging back made-up policy about a prefernce for naming in proper-noun case and saying it "looks dumb."

I think it's time we got some third-party perspectives, and so I'll go post a request for some sort of outside input.The Tom 21:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Greek royals

You haven't answered my questions. Process is meant to serve content, not the other way round. Adam 01:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

There is nothing to answer and nothing to debate. The NPOV rules on the nomenclature of deposed royals are straightforward and must be followed. Your view, and my view, on the gobshite Constantine and his appalling family are irrelevant. FearÉIREANN\ 01:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

It is one of the curious quirks of Misplaced Pages that despite its general left-wing bias, both the articles on royalty and ex-royalty, and the rules relating to royalty and ex-royalty (whatever they are) have been captured by a clique of reactionary monarchists, who impose their anti-democratic POV both on articles and on other users. I have tried in relation to Romanian, Bulgarian and Greek articles to reduce the number of fantasy titles and general royalist tosh, but I am repeatedly thwarted by the monarchist clique. I am surpised to find you, an Irishman, supporting such people. However, things being as they are, I won't bother further with these articles, and they will rapidly revert to their previous ridiculous state. Adam 04:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

On a completely different note, I noticed in the articles on some of the deceased Greek royals, they are still introduced with HM or HRH styles, we don't do that do we? And if not would we insert the style infobox? I am more than willing to do it, I just don't want to violate the standards for those articles. Thanks again for all of your help Prsgoddess187 21:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, if you let me know where it is, I can do it tomorrow. Thanks. Prsgoddess187 21:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I will insert the infobox today. Would have done it last night, but it was time for the company Christmas party, and I couldn't miss that... Prsgoddess187 11:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC) P.S. I we don't talk again before it, Merry Christmas.

• The Greek royal articles do seem to be a bit of a mess, however I don't think they are giving a monarchist POV as some people have been suggesting. Astrotrain 22:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

That's because I tried to fix them. Now that I have given up they will revert to monarchist fantasy very quickly. Adam 23:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Abuse of admin powers

I think you abuse your powers. Karatekid7 01:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Jtdirl, this guy has now started inserting his weird little theories into Jock Stein, backed by some wacko ntlworld homepage. Can't anything be done to stop his metastasis?- Middenface 01:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Jtdirl, I am a regular reader but have never felt the urge to post before, I saw this issue being discussed on another website. It does look to me that you have been harsh in blocking this user. The source given is not of a good standard however being Scottish I do remember these stories from the time, and will check to see if they are available in a public library. I hope there is no ulterior motive in you blocking this user. John79 03:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Readers may be interested to know that John79 is suspected of being a sockpuppet of Karatekid7 by the community. FearÉIREANN\ 19:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Aidan Work

An RfC has been filed on Aidan Work, you might want to take a quick look. --Kiand 15:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Prime minister

Yesterday I was a vandal blinded by POV, today you seek my assistance. I will have a look. Adam 23:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Felix Dies Nativitatis

Maybe you should send this to Bill the Bear - I'm sure he'd love it. ;) Camillus 00:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Demographics...of NI

Somebody (check the history) added this rather dubious statement to the Demographics and politics of Northern Ireland:

"Most Northern Irish Catholics support the union with Britain an the proportion of Protestants given in the study who wish to join the Republic is minute."

I don't particularly want to get involved with this - can you check it? Camillus 02:30, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Blocking IP addresses

I have changed my IP address again. Do you not think it would be easier to consider the fact that Bill_the_Bear is not a sockpuppet? That you could be wrong and that if you are wrong you are very unfair?

British Commonwealth.

The profile from RTÉ's Guide to the Oireachtas about Éamon Ó'Cuiv makes reference to the British Commonwealth. You can find it here - ] . So you can't accuse me of getting the organisation's name wrong as you have been claiming. - (Aidan Work 03:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC))

Dumb & stupid, am I?

That is definitely a personal attack on me. Please can you post an apology on my talk page? I am neither dumb or stupid, but Gerry Adams is definitely an idiot just like Robert Mugabe & Saddam Hussein. - (Aidan Work 03:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC))

PM's

To be honest i'll abstain from the argument. I am not the person you want to ask about english language issues, as i butcher the language on a daily basis. With that said though, i dont agree that the article should be changed from the PM format to the Pm format. I also looked around on the net to fund some kinda rule, and came across this, Titles of People, which would seem to back up the opposing view, for the rename, the problem is is that rule applies to the body of a text and the the title of a text, which the name of an article is, or shupld interpertated as being. Their for it should fall under this rule in Titles of Things, which would mean that naming the artile Prime Minister, being that is the title of the article, is correct and the the usage of the title of Chief exeutive officer, is incorect. I am not certain if this is the across the board usage in all of the types of the english language, but the caps of article names, being tthat they are the Title of the artile be capped, unless their is compelling reason, such that the official name of something goes aginst the rule, be the perffered. The only thing i have to say, is this is another one of the multitulde of problems with Misplaced Pages, the MOS, with people trying to redo the langage to their perferd format agingst established conventions, MOS is such crap anyway. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 06:02, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Typo

Hi Jtdirl. I think you've made a typo on your front page. "This user believes its every citizen's duty to vote." Shouldn't that have been "This user believes it is / it's every citizen's duty to vote". If I'm not completely mistaken, "its" is a pronoun. On a more serious note; I'm a bit scared that you actually like Carlsberg. Have you tried Czech beer? :-) Merry Christmas from Denmark. --Valentinian 09:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Anon 212.18.25.198

I was wondering if there is anything to do to stop this anon's ridiculous edits. and . Thanks and have a good one... Prsgoddess187 14:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

{{Behave}}

Your template {{Behave}} is up for deletion: Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion#Template:Behave. Just thought you should know. Izehar (talk) 23:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I voted to keep them as well. Izehar (talk) 00:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I am back

what was the real reason that you blcoked me? Karatekid7 02:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

KK7 insistes he is not a sock-puppet of John 79 or Bill the Bear.

Let's look at the evidence:

Contributions: KK7, John79, B the B

KK7 edits only articles related to Celtic and "kafflicks" (with a slight foray into Mark Walters from May to 02:12, December 13th, 2005. blocked.

83 minutes later, John79 arrives and edits only articles related to Celtic and "kafflicks" from 03:25, December 13th, 2005 to 17:39. blocked.

67 minutes later, B the B arrives and edits Jock Stein, with the same dubious slander from 18:46, December 13th, to 0:30, 14th. blocked.

The next day, KK7 re-appears, and edits only articles related to Celtic and "kafflicks" from 0:28 15th Dec.

If these three are not sock-puppets, I guess we can only assume they share a brain.

Makes you wonder: have any of these "three" anything positive to add to Misplaced Pages. Don't "they" get fed up "attacking" Celtic and "kafflicks"? Have they no interest in anything to do with, say, Rangers, or even any other Scottish subject?

Camillus 12:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:LdyLourd.jpg has been listed for deletion

EffK is forced to Abandon a Corrupted Misplaced Pages

I refer you to my response of a few moments ago at 15 December ],http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/EffK/Evidence#3_December_2005 EffK 02:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Philippe of Belgium

Thought you would find this move interesting. Moved from Philippe, Duke of Brabant. Edited since the move, so once again, I am not sure how to move it. Maybe you could give me some hints so I wouldn't be bothering you all the time (unless you don't mind). Thanks again Prsgoddess187 17:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

RM: Irish Republican Army

Their is a requested move for this article, see Talk:Irish Republican Army. Djegan 21:48, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Policylist

Regarding this deletion debate, please be aware that your comments to Ashibaka are what I, at least, would consider rather inappropriate. They smack of, "keep back and leave the oldies to it", and I don't like them - it's like a form of newbie biting; that too something I can't stand.

People are only trying to help. Don't insult them for that. Rob Church 04:39, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment on Jkelly's Page

Hi Jdiri. I know we have had some minor disagreements re Paisley in the past.... But I would really urge you not to quit. To my mind there are two sorts of people with whom we can get into conflict. Those who want to produce good articles, and those who simply want to annoy others. {I hope I fall into the first category.} The first type can be reasoned with (hopefully), so they are OK. The second type have to be reasoned with, and if unable to reason with them, disciplined somehow. I find that it is best not to get too annoyed. The fact that the rules are very lax is good, and this is the great thing about Misplaced Pages, that anyone can "have a go". However, people who have the wrong attitude, ie, not trying to be co-operative should be told. I would hate to see Misplaced Pages become more and more rule bound. I guess though that it would be naive to think that things will remain the same. I also think that Misplaced Pages is probably going through a teenage phase of its development. Things will probably get more intense as Misplaced Pages becomes ever more important too. Wallie 14:49, 18 December 2005 (UTC) Hi Jdiri. Got your message. Thanks. Merry Christmas. Wallie 10:37, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

George W. Bush, suppression of section editing, and vandalism

I notice that you state that a NOEDITSECTION directive in the Bush article has reduced vandalism, but I have strong evidence that in December since it was introduced vandalism is increasing. Please see User:Tony Sidaway/Dubya vandalism. I list the program and the results, which are based on a near-live replication of the English Misplaced Pages database. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 15:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Your block of 84.9.73.251

Hi, I notice you blocked this IP indefinately for a single act of (horrible, I agree) vandalism. I'm not sure that it's justifiable to indefinitly block an IP, other than for being an open proxy. Also, I'm not sure this user is likely to face legal action for his claims about himself and little boys; in context, these claims are obviously being made to be an internet troll, not to be taken seriously. Just a few thoughts - I thought I'd ask you before I unblocked. Also, it's possible that that IP is dynamicly assigned. -- Pakaran

Ok, thanks for the clarification. I guess when I see a comment like that, my first instinct is to think "lame troll, been done before," hit rollback, and give a warning. I was unaware of the legal issues. -- Pakaran 00:41, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Alexander, Crown Prince of Yugoslavia

Can you confirm that you moved this after User:Prsgoddess187 asked me to move it? I'm a bit vague about the history, and I don't want to compound the felony. Deb 20:56, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Well they are at it again... Is there anything we can do (besides moving it back) to get it to stay where it should be according to WP:NC? Is there a simple way to move it after the new article title has been edited? Then I could do it myself, and not keep bothering you. Thanks, and have a Merry Christmas. Prsgoddess187 12:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Birth and death stuff

Jdtirl said:

I stumbled across a couple of edits of yours (some old). You probably didn't know at the time, and may do now, but just in case you don't:

• Don't include born and died in the opening bracketed dates. All that goes in is (] ] dash ] ]). Born is only used if they are still alive.
• The location of their birth and death is never put in those brackets, only in the body of the article.

Hi there. This has come up before. I've never been quite sure how to handle it. Rossrs previously informed me about it, saying, but he also claimed that the way it was phrased on the page which covered it said on the page that "the opening paragraph talks about the advantage of standardizing, but it also goes on to say that it's offered as a suggestion, and that individual editors do not have to follow it". If this has changed since then I'm all too happy to finish in the other way. Personally I find it easier to read this way, but I can understand that policy overrides this.

I concede my position on this in which I always maintained that I was okay to do it. Just double-checking that what I do separate the dates with is an –? I'm not going to run through all my edits and change the format that I've been using, because that would be so arduous and so incomplete a task that I'd never be able to get it finished, but I will keep this in mind in the future if this is definitely what you would rather I did. Thank you. Bobo192 03:04, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Nadolig Llawen

Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda. Deb 22:17, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Mary I of Scotland/temp style test

can this page be deleted ? --Melaen 13:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Yer sig.

I love you, you know that right? Not in a icky sort of way but in an admiration for fellow hu...never mind. Well, I did some exploration and it seems that the graphic in your sig...Image:Ireland-Capitals.PNG#filelinks is linking to a huge amount of pages... Given the size of the graphic, isn't that taking up a lot of Misplaced Pages's resources? Cannot you upload a 48x32px version to use in your sig? Just friendly advice. ℬastique▼♥♑ 14:38, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I'll be happy to make something small and useful for you... -- B

New York

We frequently have stories from our major centers of readership that speak English -- Britain, Australia, US -- and this is the largest English speaking city in the world. This story is being covered in every paper in the world and has a huge financial impact on the center of global finance home to hundreds of international companies. This is not a local story. It also has global labor implications. For example, here is over 400 articles written about the story in German. Tfine80 23:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

It got zero coverage on the major British, Irish, French and Italian stations all night, is in no newspapers anywhere, etc. Inconvience to New Yorkers ain't news. FearÉIREANN\ 23:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

A cursory search of the Internet proves this is false. It is huge in the business sections and has been printed in every major newspaper on the internet. Also, English Misplaced Pages should give extra focus to British, Australian, and American stories for obvious reasons. We do this all the time for these countries. Tfine80 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

We do not. Some users try and get reverted. People from all over have been complaining about the American bias of some contributors on the page. The BBC gives equal prominence to stories about democracy in Hong Kong and Liberia, a banker's trial in Germany and Elton John's wedding. Why are inconvienced Americans seen as more important to other world news stories? FearÉIREANN\ 23:22, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Please stop removing the New York story from ITN. You are clearly the only person who feels it doesn't belong there. Raul654 23:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Governors of the Central Bank of Ireland

Here's an article which will interest you; Governors of the Central Bank of Ireland. Could you please find some information about the 2 signatories on each of the Irish pre-Euro banknotes? I am sure that you'd be able to complete the signature chart,as I don't know enough where to place the fada accent mark in the officials' names. - (Aidan Work 02:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC))

Merry Christmas

I'm not expecting to be online as much over the next few days so...

User:Francs2000/Christmas

-- Francs2000 09:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Irish people peer review?

The additions and editions made on this page even within recent weeks - especily photos - has vastly improved it, to the better I think. Would you support it being submitted for a peer review, and help tidy it up/add some more? Nollaig Shona! Fergananim 14:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

infobox pope

Please do not unilaterally change the pope infobox. That design was the one chosen in a long debate. If there are errors that need correcting, change them while maintaining the design style chosen. It shows contempt for the detailed debate and contributions of a lot of users to unilaterally dump an agreed format and replace it with your own. FearÉIREANN\ 20:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Please don't ever drop the word "unilaterally" on me... this is a wiki and you and I both do "unilateral" edits all day long. -- Netoholic @ 20:15, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Changing an agreed design, that has met with withspread approval, to one in a format that was overwhelmingly rejected, is not fair on those who reached the consensus decision on what design to adopt. Yes we do unilateral things but I hope that we don't simply bulldoze a consensus reached after a long debate out of the way. The format was agreed and that agreement should be respected. Indeed many have said since in one-to-one conversation that they regarded the pope infobox as one of the most attractive on WP. FearÉIREANN\ 20:21, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

You know, I just read the talk page, and I think this "agreed" format argument is bull. There is never such a thing as a completely stable version of anything,a nd the last few people who've voiced a desire to use the infobox standard have been shot down only by you. I think you're in the minority in this day and time.

P.S. You broke every pope page with your snap-revert. Don't be in such a rush. -- Netoholic @ 20:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually every single pope page had a form of template that had been voted down in a detailed discussion. I simply returned the pages to the form that had been agreed. If there are problems with codes, fix them. But don't unilaterally redesign an agreed format to one rejected by the community. You did two things: changed codes and changed designs. I reverted the change. It is up to you to fix the codes without changing the design. FearÉIREANN\ 20:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

"Rejected by the community" is a bold phrase when it seems you're basing that on a poll held in relative secrecy way back in April. Since than, numberous editors have shown a desire on Template talk:Infobox Pope to put the template into plain "infobox" style. Coming from the outside, when I looked at that page, that is what consensus I read. Don't browbeat people or state your points in such rigid terms. You'll have better luck if you explain why you feel the pope articles are being better served by your preferred design. I've commented that your design is actually limiting to those users that prefer to modify their personal settings. By hard-coding, you prevent them from doing so. I think that's a solid reason for change. How about you counter that on the template talk page. -- Netoholic @ 20:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Aleksandar Karađorđević

I invite you to discuss the proposed move on Talk:Alexander, Crown Prince of Yugoslavia. FCYTravis 20:24, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Aleksandar Karađorđević

May I ask you to explain why you moved Aleksandar Karađorđević to Alexander, Crown Prince of Yugoslavia? Do you mind answering on the talk page of the article in question, and possibly get involved in a discussion there? Thank you --dcabrilo 20:45, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Greetings

Thanks, Jtdirl, for your kind greetings. I am wishing you a Merry Christmas as well - I don't have such a nice pitcture of the Magi at hand, but maybe you will like the picture under the following link: - and a happy new year. Str1977 10:03, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Diana's Death circumstance

Dear Jtgirl, I hope you'll visit the Princess Diana talk page for my vote to remove reference to Diana's death as a 'car accident'. Note that now on Misplaced Pages, the former 'Car Accident' section is titled 'Road Traffic Collisions'. PatrickA 23:03, 23 December 2005 (UTC).

Republican template

Thanks for the note on my talk page. I guess the main reason I balked at deleting the template was that it seemed to be based on potential problems than actual current problems. But you may well be right, and it may be best to nip such problems in the bud. Or before they bud. As for the definition of republican, as a general pragmatist, I would assume the most straightforward defintion would be used: one who espouses "a commitment to a republican form of government" (as you said on my talk page). This may well be too broad for a useful template (as has been mentioned). As you can probably tell from my contributions, if you look at them, my area of knowledge is basically confined to a limited period of the republican movement, and it's much easier to define a republican before the establishment of an Irish republic ('49, is it?). Once the republic was established, I suppose it greatly changed the dynamics of what a "republican" was. I wasn't really thinking about this at the time. At this point, I don't feel the need to involve myself further, and when it comes to the later republican organizations and ideologies, I have to admit I know little, and am willing to let the experts decide such things. I'd withdraw my vote, but as my vote was neutral, that wouldn't really do anything at all. So for now I'll sit this out, though I am rather sympathetic to your views. Cheers. -R. fiend 03:38, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

:-)

What you mean I'm not a vandalministrator? :) Nice to know that someone is watching my talk page. (By the way, I love your Bush thoughts). Merry Christmas! Dmcdevit·t 06:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

My user page

Will you please explain the message on my user page? I would like to know why you left it, and I want to know what is "Fear EIREANN"? Is this some kind of threat? Lion King 14:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I see. And the "Fear EIREANN? Lion King 22:56, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

With you. So it's your name. O.K, EIREANN means Ireland, and Fear means, well Fear I take it? So, You're telling people to Fear Ireland, yes? What makes you think a Cockney would fear Ireland?Lion King 02:06, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Why would I check your user page? It's MY page you've been mucking about, and leaving snide remarks on.Lion King Man Of Millwall

Merry Xmas

Merry Christmas JTD! Don't stay on WP much longer or you may bump in to Santa! Camillus 02:29, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm just back from the pub, and am sitting up talking with my dad about old days in Donegal...he tells me that Oiche Maith means Goodnight - correct? And if so - Oiche Maith!

Your reverts on Karađorđević article

Do you mind not reverting without explanation. If you feel something really has to be reverted, than do it with a good edit summary and explanation on the talk page. I removed the link to Serbian Monarchs, because it may give impression that he is in fact a monarch or at least was. As he is clearly not a monarch and nobody in their right mind may argue such a thing (monarch being an actual ruler), the link felt out of place. You also "own" explanation for your previous reverts of the rewritten introduction.

Keep in mind that I am actually trying to improve that article. If you have any criticism on my edits, than do explain them so that we all benefit from constructive criticism. --dcabrilo 03:06, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Edited back Tel Aviv. Could you bring evidence that one or more states regard TA as Israel's capital (as opposed to having a view on Jerusalem's status)? elpincha 06:36, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Tel Aviv status

Let me point you to the following:

   * FACT: Israel maintains Jerusalem is the capital
   * FACT: Most countries don't accept Israel's position
   * FACT: Most embassies are in (or around) Tel Aviv

We're OK up to here. Now:

   * ASSERTION: There are countries that designate/recognize Tel Aviv as Israel's capital.

Why am I so stubborn on this? I am not pro-Israeli on this, nor anti-Israeli, nor neutral. I just care for the truth. Can you show me one (1) document where a country that currently exists (as opposed to the USSR) makes good on the "assertion"? You state that over sixty states do. Please add references, and nobody will be able to counter that... elpincha 19:29, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Lion King

G'day Tom,

please take care to be a little more civil in future. I don't think describing others' good faith contributions, however misguided, as "stupid" is very conducive to a friendly working environment. Cheers, fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 08:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Axis of Evil.

Jtdirl,the phrase 'Axis of Evil' was first quoted by the President of America in a speech in late 2001 or 2002.Condoleeza Rice coined the phrase 'Outposts of Tyranny'. - (Aidan Work 02:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC))

No obits rule?

What on earth is that silly policy? Basically, you just removed a news item about the most powerful man in Australia dying. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:56, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Irish Literature

Great job ye've done, me bucko! No doubt ye're an expert on Irish history and politics! I just wonder if some work on Irish literature could be done in comparable manner and to such magnitude of detail and accuracy. I hereby name you the Commander-in-Chief of all Irish Wikipedians, ho ho ho. Cheerio, MarkBeer 12:48, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Moving articles on afd

If you move an article that's on afd, please make sure that it still points at the discussion instead of a redlink; this helps the discussion be found if you stumble across the article (or actually wrote it), instead of just reading afd. You can do this either by making a redirect (as I've done at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Banknotes of Ireland), or by editing the link in the afd notice. —Cryptic (talk) 15:35, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

== Mediation requested.

You have blocked User:Carlossuarez46 and claimed that I have "posting potentially defamatory claims on Misplaced Pages." That's mealy mouthed. Anything is potentially something else. Your claim on my user page is defamatory and you should remove it at once or risk the legal consequences. I have requested mediation from your vandalism and misuse of admin privileges. See you in mediation or see you in court. 24.10.30.65 19:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Minor Note

Put notices of bans or any or information you want users to know on their talk, without exception. That way, they'll be notified immediately by the orange bar at the top of the screen. Also, you won't be disrupting their user page unnecessarily. Superm401 | Talk 19:48, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Elisabeth of Bavaria

Please take a look at the suggestion to move this article, at Talk:Elisabeth_of_Bavaria#Requested_move --StanZegel (talk) 23:53, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Tel Aviv

Please either provide a reference to back up the claim that some countries consider Tel Aviv to be the capital of Israel, or I will cite this as vandalism and revert endlessly accordingly. --Leifern 00:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Why did you simply revert without comment? --Leifern 19:02, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

You did it again. What is your problem? --Leifern 19:09, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Let me say "me too". You are violating the "must be verifiable" once and again here. Asking for citations is not being POV, it is the correct thing to do. I find your overall behavior in this issue detrimental to the values you're supposed to uphold. Have a nice 2006. elpincha 21:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Important templates

Hi Jtdirl - you seem to be very knowledgeable with templates. Is there a similar template to {{Defban}} which can be used if someone repeatedely inserts personally identifyable information into Misplaced Pages? --HappyCamper 04:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Zita of Bourbon of Parma

Jtdirl,

Thank you for posting on my talk page rather than just editing mercilessly. I'm new to Wiki, so thank you for informing me of the page moving guidelines. I set a discussion up for Duchess Elisabeth in Bavaria because that title is rather misunderstood. I mistakenly just took it upon myself to move Zita because the name written out is Zita de Bourbon de Parme; that is Zita of Bourbon of Parma. Alternatively, she is also Zita of Bourbon, Princess of Parma. Bourbon is her house name and I changed the article to best reflect fact. I thought it wasn't much conseriding she's usually known as Empress Zita. However, thanks for the note. Charles 22:35, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

reply

OK, thanks for that :( Martin 22:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Pinfo4

I've added a link. It sounds harsh, but in a very appropriate way. Could you elaborate on who has been "exposing" you, either to me or on WP:ANI? Radiant_>|< 23:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

RE:Post nominals

I'm interested to know your opinion on the post nominals? I believe since we have successfuly removed styles from articles (although they still linger on the peergae artciles), we should also relegate honours to a subsection at the bottom of the page, as was done in the royality pages without any complaints. Astrotrain 00:05, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

OSJ

Thats fine that you removed the vandalism. I reported him to the Administrators' noticeboard because the conversation above yours and Bratsche's on my talk page was a conversation with Captain Spinkicker. Which I belive is a sock puppet of OSJ's. Join in on the conversation at the noticeboard if you like. It's under the heading Hey look, Sock Puppets at the bottom of the page. SWD316 00:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Loyalist

Thanks for stepping in, I was just about to report it on WP:AIV. Demiurge 01:00, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Wonderful!

- Jtdirl! Thank you so much for taking the time out of your day to make {{Pinfo4}} and {{Pinfo5}} for Misplaced Pages :-) Here is a WikiThanks for you! --HappyCamper 01:56, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Posting personal information on other users

Hi.

A serious message - PLEASE READ Misplaced Pages operates on the principle that every contributor has a right if they wish to remain completely anonymous. Misplaced Pages policy on that issue is strictly enforced. Posting private information about a user, specifically their (alleged) name and/or personal details, is strictly prohibited as harassment, and users who do that are often immediately blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Such posting can cause offence or embarrassment to the victim of the posting, not least because it means that their name, and any personal criticism or allegations made against them can then appear on web searches. If you have posted such information, please remove it immediately. Please then follow the link to this page and inform people there that the information was posted (but crucially, do not repost it on that page). An admin or developer can then remove the information from the archives of Misplaced Pages. If you do not ensure that personal information you posted is removed from this site you may be blocked from editing this site. REMEMBER: Misplaced Pages's privacy policy is there to protect the privacy of every user, including you.

While I read some choice comments about you after your escapades, I never did hear your side of the story. I await the sublime torrent of your prose.

Lapsed Pacifist 02:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

User:66.24.251.76

You have been told that there is no consensus behind what you are doing, and were blocked for doing so. It is not acceptable to try to circumvent a block by using an IP to continue your campaign. FearÉIREANN\ 22:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

You seem to be of the opnion that this IP was being used by Bobblewick. It was instead used by me. i might add that the edits were IP edits ONLY because the loging cookie expired, ther was no intnet to edit not-logged-in, and as soon as I sa I was not logged in I logged back in. DES 03:20, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

32 County nutcases

Excuse me, but may I question what you ment by "32 County nutcases" on your message posted on Djegan's talk page? Thank you Paddy :-) 06:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe he means people who have been institutionalized in all 32 traditional counties of Ireland, i.e., if they've been institutionalized in North Tipperary, then they remain qualified regardless of whether they've been institutionalized in South Tipperary, anywhere in traditional County Dublin supercedes the necessity of being institutionalized in Dun_Laoghaire-Rathdown. Or something like that. ℬastique▼♥♑ 19:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

For a fuller comment the disputed text is "...and would be a guaranteed source of endless POV battles between SFs, RSFs, 32 County nutcases, etc etc...". I assume it could be a reference to the 32 County Sovereignty Movement, either way it hardly violates wikipedia policies to be criticial of the "Pretend United Ireland" as I could put it in smoother language, ultimately this must be placed in context of the quote which is not that harmful. Djegan 19:37, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

That is fine, I understand this and I don't intend to start a pointless discussion here.

I just find it painful to see some of my fellow Irishmen, ignoring the north, and as a Belfast man I would love to see a United 32 county Ireland again, sorry if I misunderstood him. Paddy :-) 22:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: X image on test5 template

Then let us use the "X" image to denote that a ban has just been applied.  Denelson83  22:42, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

TFD

Thanks for the note. I'm also quite frustrated with the template deletion in particular, and, moreover, the entire deletion process in general. It's ironic that helpful templates in the styles series easily get deleted, while just about any piece of crap can survive AFD. Some major changes in the process are needed if it is becoming so obvious that much more support is needed for getting Misplaced Pages to accept talk page templates than is required to have articles accepted into the encyclopedia. 172 19:11, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more and couldn't have stated it better myself. I may be taking extended "Wiki-break" out of frustration (again!) sometime soon as well. (Though I've lost track of the number of times that I've left already!) In the meantime, though, I have been contemplating for around a year some (hair-brained?) schemes meant to deal with the problems that you've mentioned. In the long run I think that Misplaced Pages should get rid of the existing deletion mechanisms entirely, and replace AFD, CFD, TDF, etc. with new deletion processes overseen by an editorial review board composed of top-caliber academics appointed by the Foundation. Of course, such a proposal is way too radical for most Misplaced Pages users at this stage. But, based on some email correspondences that I had in mid-2005 with around a dozen like-minded veteran editors, I think that it may be possible to set up a voluntary editorial review board issuing non-binding opinions regarding MoS-, NC-, content-, and deletion-related disputes. Such a "voluntary association," if initiated, wouldn't be an end in itself from my point of view, but a hopefully the embryo of a future system of professional editorial review set up to arbitrate content disputes, just as the arbitration committee currently intercedes behavioral disputes. 172 20:02, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Rollback

Stop misusing your admin rollback function to fight edit wars over MoS issues. From Misplaced Pages:Revert#Admins, rollback "is solely to be a timesaving shortcut for reverting mass vandalism". No matter how passionately you feel, editing against the MoS is not vandalism (see Misplaced Pages:Vandalism#What vandalism is not). -- Netoholic @ 19:59, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Netoholic 2 is illuminating. Incidentally, Netoholic happens to be the main user who drove me off Misplaced Pages in mid-2005. You may want to keep an eye on him. 172 20:06, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Style Wars

Keeping the templates has my support... I'll keep my eye on it. I also added a new style to Style (manner of address); Ducal Serene Highness, a rather peculiar find formerly used by the House of Nassau. Can it somehow be incorporated if an article can be written about it? - Charles 22:48, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Put my two cents in on the WP:TFD, hope it helps. It seems that everytime it gets settled down and not too much going on, this always happens. Hope you have a happy new year. Prsgoddess187 04:11, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

thanks for the comments but

I'm going on extended Wikibreak. I'm burnt out. This G thing is passing but now CyclePat is back to his antics and Ben is calling in a AMA person to "advocate" for him. I'm just tired of it all. I've had over 170 headings on my talk page in the last month. 170. I just need a break. But I do appreciate the thoughts. Hopefully I will come back and come back refreshed. --Woohookitty 12:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Pope

You haven't posted on Template talk:Infobox Pope since Dec 4th. Repeated reversions without participating in the discussion rarely ends well. You are free to join the conversation, but right now it seems your version does not have consensus. -- Netoholic @ 12:55, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

So wait, rather than discuss on the talk page, you're going to go solicit help from other admin "hired muscle". You seem to often go on these spamming sessions, drumming up support for your various causes. You may do good work in other areas, you have got the wrong idea about how to handle things you disagree with. -- Netoholic @ 20:32, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Netoholic

Hi. You may or may not be aware, but Raul did specifically ask for leniance in enforcing Netoholic's parole, since a return to a mentorship is being considered actively. That said, if he was edit warring on templates or being disruptive, I fully understand the block. Can you point me towards the edit that prompted your block? Phil Sandifer 15:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Netoholic is currently helping deprecate Template:Qif in accordance with WP:AUM. I'm going to unblock him and suggest he put some boilerplate text on the talk pages of templates he alters. Phil Sandifer 19:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't you ever block me again. You are clearly doing so in opposition to the policy that you not block someone you are in a direct dispute with. That's twice in two days that I've warned you about watching how and when you use your admin rights. It has led to loss of those rights in the past. -- Netoholic @ 20:20, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, I'm not going to lift this block, though I think going to the arbcom at this point would be unhelpful as well, and encourage you to, well, not. Phil Sandifer 21:44, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. You should never have blocked Netoholic because of this issue. I would encourage you to withdraw your RFAr request on him. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:J23paceminterris.jpg

Hi, please add the source for this photo. Thuresson 01:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

In case you haven't noticed...

... but Template:Infobox now has Netoholic's very clever CSS hack to allow for empty parameters. When you unilaterally revert, you lose those neat changes. I don't care so much about the look of the box, I do care that you have removed the new and useful feature that Netoholic had implement. I also notice that you haven't discussed the changes on the talk page (neither have I, to be honest). - Ta bu shi da yu 02:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, I must make amends! I fully apologise: I did not read the template carefully. I stuffed up! Apologies. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

• User warning templates