Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:27, 15 February 2006

Seeking meaning

in this sea of white.

This administrator willingly provides the following services on polite request:

• Administrator intervention (see also WP:AIV or WP:VIP).
• Obtain deleted text as long as it's not used to violate Misplaced Pages policy.
• Review deletion or blocks, and reverse these if necessary.
• Semi-automated search and replace using the AutoWiki Browser.
• Advice on Misplaced Pages policies, guidelines, and procedures.

This administrator refuses to provide these services:

• Mediation, including interpreting votes (see the dispute resolution process).

Admin requests

Hi, please allow me to pass the final vote-counting and decision for the Physical anthropology section of Asian fetish on to you. Thanks in advance. --Wzhao553 05:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Responses to admin actions

Nice response on Asian fetish, kudos. Ronabop 16:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 19:24, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Responses to editor actions

No discussions yet.

Uncategorised comments

Archives

Isn't it unnecessarily difficult to navigate through the old versions of this page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.212.68.237 (talk • contribs) 20:49, February 10, 2006.

That's not necessary; see the discussion archives. // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 21:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Template:User-AmE-0

Since this was speedied, I wondered if you could subst the syntax into pages that still link there. I copied the syntax to User:Celestianpower/User AmE-0. You can find the list of places it still links to here. I hear this is uncontriversial. Thanks! --Celestianpower 23:18, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

You've been susbstituting the wrong template, and I don't appreciate you messing with my page. Jooler 00:32, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Comparing the deleted version with the substituted version, I see no perceivable difference. However, it's your user page; you're free to revert or change the edit. // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 00:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I just undid your edit to GrahamUK's page; his template was User AmE-0 which was not deleted. Your edit substituted in the deleted template User-AmE-0 instead. I don't know what's going on with these templates, but since your substituted test was quite different text than the replaced text, I reverted. You may want to check that you have not made this mistake on other pages. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 00:37, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the mistake; I'll fix the search string and check my other changes. // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 00:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for substituting it on my userpage. Brian | (Talk) 02:10, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 02:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

All done; it took a while because I was multitasking. Note that userboxes on a transcluded subpage with <noinclude> syntax can't be found by the bot, and weren't affected. // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 04:12, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

User page design

New user page

Hey, is Image:Pathoschild-newpage.png how your how your user page is intended to look like? —Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 02:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Yep. I included the toolbox links one couldn't use on the talk page, just in case users wanted to use them. :) // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 02:37, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm doesn't appear to affect classic so much —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geni (talk • contribs) 05:16, February 13, 2006.

It's just recently implemented, I'm tweaking it. ;) // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 05:17, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Edits to my user page

Please don't intentionally break my user page's design. Since the hidden links are available in the content or on the talk page, accessibility is not much impaired. Familiarity is irrelevant on a user page. If you have any particular reasons you feel that the design is improper, please discuss on my talk page. Thanks. // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 05:14, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

replied on my talk. —Charles P._(Mirv) 05:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

the hidden links are available in the content or on the talk page—in fact, your layout wipes the contributions, block, e-mail, printable, and permalink links from the toolbox; the history, watch, and move tabs are broken, as are the admin links (protect and delete) and the added admin tabs (block, blocklog) that I and numerous other users add with personal .js files. All the links in the upper right are inaccessible: links to the reader's userpage, talk page, preferences, watchlist, and contributions are gone, as is the logout. Your layout breaks basic site functions in ways that are difficult to get around; this would be a problem in any other page in any other namespace, and it is my opinion that the broad latitude extended to userpages does not cover this. But I won't revert it; let's solicit other opinions in a more public forum. —Charles P._(Mirv) 05:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Most of those links are available on the talk page, which can be accessed by clicking "talk page" in the content. Most of what's left is useless on the userpage; you have no reason to ever move the page, it should only be deleted in extreme circumstances, and I personally oppose protection of my user page. Those links that aren't accessible on the talk page were added to the content; if you can think of any that I've missed, feel free to point them out. // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 05:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

User:Betacommand

He's confirmed now :P--Shanel 05:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

They're still on the banned list; has Essjay looked at the request? // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 05:33, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, phoenixoverride is confirmed.--Shanel 06:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Happy Valentine's day!

Valentines Day is a day of black cynicism and misanthropy, of slavering greed and lust intermingling. But... happy Valentines Day! :) // Pathoschild (_admin / ) 04:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Happy valentines day ;) — FireFox • T • 10:37, 14 February 2006

User:Tawker wishes you a happy and fun Valentines Day after all, it's childish :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tawker (talk • contribs) 06:10, February 14, 2006.

Hi

Noticed you are retrieving deleted userboxes and inlining them. I think this is excellent work. Did you see my Grandfathering proposal on wikien-l?

I welcome Jimbo's forthright statement that "political or, more broadly, polemical, nature are bad for the project", and his thoughtful and considerate request that editors contemplate helping to reduce the userbox culture by simply "removing your political/religious/etc. userboxes and asking others to do the same. This seems to me to be the best way to quickly and easily end the userbox wars."

I know this is going to meet resistance, so I'm trying to think of a way in which those who think that expressing their opinions on their userpages helps wikipedia and have so far chosen to do so using userboxes, can be asked to do so in a way that doesn't contribute to the very divisive culture that has ground up specifically around userboxes.

I've come up with a suggestion as follows:

1. that if he disagrees with Jimbo's request, the user should instead consider using the subst command to place the content of the template directly into his userpage. This would reduce the "viral" transmission of userboxes somewhat and, for the user, it would have the benefit of divorcing the fate of parts of his userpage from the fate of individual userboxes--whether editing or deletion.

2. that having done this, he should take the opportunity to edit the text so that it more precisely expresses his individual views. In my opinion this would be more in keeping with the *good* effects of userboxes in enabling self-expression, while being more in keeping with the principle that Misplaced Pages is a wiki in which we edit content, and not a cookie-cutter website in which we reduce our complex beliefs as individuals into regimented blocs that serve no purpose but to emphasize the cultural divisions.

I think of this as "grandfathering". Ultimately we should be able to foster a benign culture of fearless expression of our editorial biases, without enabling the subversion of our relatively fragile neutrality principle by alliances between single-issue campaigners--however justifiable they may feel this subversion to be.

I see this as the way forward and I think your work, what I've seen of it, is compatible with this. --Tony Sidaway 00:27, 15 February 2006 (UTC)