| Revision as of 22:02, 17 October 2010 editTony Sidaway (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers81,722 edits →The Hockey Stick Illusion: Forewarned is forearmed.← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:23, 18 October 2010 edit undoEdJohnston (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators71,206 edits →Your actions are being discussed at WP:Arbitration enforcement: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 91: | Line 91: | ||
| Forewarned is forearmed. The real point is that all areas in the topic are being very closely watched, so we all have to be on our best behavior. --] 22:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC) | Forewarned is forearmed. The real point is that all areas in the topic are being very closely watched, so we all have to be on our best behavior. --] 22:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC) | ||
| == Your actions are being discussed at ] == | |||
| Please see ]. The Misplaced Pages articles about climate change are subject to ]. This is your official notice. See the 'Advice for editors' which is provided there. You may respond to the complaint at ] if you wish. An editor complained about your actions because you had reverted three times in one day at ]. Your name is being logged at ] since that seems to be how Arbcom wants us to do it. I think the only action taken this time will be logging. Thank you, ] (]) 15:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:23, 18 October 2010
Welcome to my talk page!
If you write to me here, I'll answer here. If I've written on your talk page, I will have put it on my watchlist and will look for replies there. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 09:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Rudolf Hoess
Hi Squiddy Why do you think that Rudolf Hoess was born 25 Nov 1900? talk —Preceding undated comment added 18:50, 15 May 2010 (UTC).
- Hi Oldfirehall,
- I just did a bit of googling when I saw your edit - all the sources I found said 1900, the most reliable-seeming being:
- www1.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/microsoft%20word%20-%206418.pdf
- and several others (of varying degrees of reliability). I didn't see any giving 1901 as his birth year. Do you have a reliable source that says otherwise? Cheers, Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 19:58, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Fixing redirects
Hi, Squiddy. In Limpet mine, you changed a link to mollusk to a piped link to mollusca. It probably doesn't matter in this case; but in general, it's better to leave such links to go through the redirect. There's a good explanation at WP:NOTBROKEN. Hope you find that helpful. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 14:14, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info, I'll stop doing that then. :) Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 14:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Difficult editor
Hi Squibby, I'm starting to tire of this user's edits ]. I think they are in good faith, but are unsubstantiated and disruptive. Do you think its time to report under RRR? Cheers Clovis Sangrail (talk) 12:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, yes, I agree absolutely. I'm just putting a list of diffs together. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 12:23, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'll leave it to you.. (I did place a tag warning after your comment on their talk page, now removed by user. Also, admins are often strict with 3RRR - Ive seen people blocked on their 3rd rollback.). Cheers, Clovis Sangrail (talk) 12:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- Because he's a newbie, I don't want to rush to get him a block, but I also feel that we can't leave the articles in the state he wants. I'm putting a para on the Mau Mau Uprising talk page and the Hola massacre talk page, then I'll revert again. If he carries on I'll go to 3RR. Cheers, Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 13:06, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- Nice work Clovis Sangrail (talk) 13:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- I got lost with the reversions of the article back and forward - for some reason I'd thought DrJenkins was editing a version with the original figures. Since DrJenkins was invited, I also though he/she was an established editor, but have since realised that they only created the account yesterday. I'm concerned about the drastic changes to the articles and also the similar responses of DrJ and Scott to reversions, so I'll keep an eye out for sock behaviour. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 14:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- Just to finish - you were right, the edits were loopy, and did not match the references in any way.. ]. >Reverted, hopefully thats the end of it.. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 17:37, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- I got lost with the reversions of the article back and forward - for some reason I'd thought DrJenkins was editing a version with the original figures. Since DrJenkins was invited, I also though he/she was an established editor, but have since realised that they only created the account yesterday. I'm concerned about the drastic changes to the articles and also the similar responses of DrJ and Scott to reversions, so I'll keep an eye out for sock behaviour. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 14:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- Nice work Clovis Sangrail (talk) 13:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- Because he's a newbie, I don't want to rush to get him a block, but I also feel that we can't leave the articles in the state he wants. I'm putting a para on the Mau Mau Uprising talk page and the Hola massacre talk page, then I'll revert again. If he carries on I'll go to 3RR. Cheers, Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 13:06, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'll leave it to you.. (I did place a tag warning after your comment on their talk page, now removed by user. Also, admins are often strict with 3RRR - Ive seen people blocked on their 3rd rollback.). Cheers, Clovis Sangrail (talk) 12:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
User:ScottPAnderson
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Galloping Moses (talk) 14:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Mau Mau
Hi, there's a discussion on at the Talk:Mau Mau Uprising page, in case you're interested Cheers, Clovis Sangrail (talk) 05:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Kenyan history isn't really my subject, so I probably won't be active in it, thanks. I only got involved because I tried to prevent a revert war, and got drawn in myself because Scott's edits were so awful.
- I'm pretty sure User:DrJenkinsPhd is a sock of Scott's, so if that account turns up again to agree with Scott (and disagree with everyone else) let me know and I'll dig out the diffs. The circumstantial evidence is fairly strong.
- Lastly, one of the sources in Hola massacre appears to be a university student's essay - ref. no. 2 (Robbie Bolton's) has a course number on the front and is the right length and quality to be an essay not an academic paper. I haven't removed it because it ought to be checked a bit more thoroughly - I only gave it a quick once-over.
- Cheers, Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 06:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'm the same, I don't like inaccurate edits but don't know enough about the topic to add to the article. Another strong editor is on the article now, so sparks are flying.. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 08:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Misplaced Pages:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:56, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Req for clarification
Who are you answering to here - the text seems to indicate one thing, and the indentation level another. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 18:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I wrote it in a hurry and it wasn't clear. I've clarified. Thanks. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 10:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you :) --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 10:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Clangers
Nice work on the Clangers episode summaries. It's great to see some positive development of the article. Majorclanger (talk) 14:39, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks very much. I'll continue adding them as I watch the second series DVD. :) Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 22:15, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Vietnam War in film
I am now converting the list into a table.
You are more than welcome to participate in doing so.
Varlaam (talk) 19:18, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
(But please do not add Rudolf Hoess to the page.)
Denialism and NPOV
I see you reverted my work about using more neutral words in accordance with Misplaced Pages's NPOV principles. I'd like to know why you did that. Kary Mullis doesn't deny anything. He expresses doubt about the "official" story. And that's what the word "dissident" means. Bwass (talk) 18:58, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
- Because denialism is the correct term for denying the link between the HIV virus and AIDS. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 23:04, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Is the correct term determined by neutrality (in the dictionary sense) or by majority? Bwass (talk) 05:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
- 'Dissident' also means 'someone who publicly stands up to totalitarian government', so using it in this article paints the scientific mainstream on HIV/AIDS, by analogy, as some kind of sinister Soviet organisation. Which isn't very NPOV. Whereas 'denialism' is the term used for the position of supporting all kinds of disproved hypotheses about HIV being caused by recreational drugs etc. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 14:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
The Hockey Stick Illusion
You seem to be edit warring on this article . Please stop. Note that the article falls under the discretionary sanctions from the climate change arbitration. --TS 21:29, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
- Is there an executive summary, or some policy page? You've directed me to some massive arbcom case page. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 21:36, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
- The main thing to look at is remedy 1.2, but that also directs editors to look at all the principles. --TS 21:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I'll check that. Not that I'm in breach of the rules as far as I can see - I've stated the reasons for my edits on the talk page. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 21:44, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
- The main thing to look at is remedy 1.2, but that also directs editors to look at all the principles. --TS 21:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Forewarned is forearmed. The real point is that all areas in the topic are being very closely watched, so we all have to be on our best behavior. --TS 22:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Your actions are being discussed at WP:Arbitration enforcement
Please see WP:AE#Newcomers Rendahl and Poznan edit warring on climate change articles. The Misplaced Pages articles about climate change are subject to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change#Climate change: discretionary sanctions. This is your official notice. See the 'Advice for editors' which is provided there. You may respond to the complaint at WP:AE if you wish. An editor complained about your actions because you had reverted three times in one day at Hockey Stick Illusion. Your name is being logged at WP:ARBCC#Notifications since that seems to be how Arbcom wants us to do it. I think the only action taken this time will be logging. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)