Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:14, 18 November 2010

Archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117
edit

Please Review Ganas page

I request assistance on the summary section of http://en.wikipedia.org/Ganas. I seem to be in an edit war with Campoftheamericas, and am unable to engage him in stating his case(s) on the talk page. At this point I am mostly concerned with getting agreement on what belongs in the summary, also the validity of some of his references, especially Ganas' own website. Thanks so much. Eroberer (talk) 14:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Eroberer, I've protected the page for a week. PhilKnight (talk) 17:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Eroberer (talk) 18:27, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Trouble is brewing

I would appreciate it if you could keep an eye on the talk page of Gideon Levy. There is a very disgruntled participant in the conversation, who seeks to make a complete rewrite of the lead. The article as it stands was the result of a long and very arduous negotiation, of which the complaining editor was a participant; the end of that negotiation was an agreed version that has held up without challenge for about eight months. The editor has recently disavowed any agreement with the existing version, and wishes to restore the previous version of the lead.

So far he has done nothing untoward (he earlier tried twice to restore the rejected version, but was reverted by other editors), but his latest posts suggest a possible intent to unilaterally make changes in the lead without agreement.

Thanks for your attention. --Ravpapa (talk) 17:34, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi

I just wanted to tell you that you have found a great way to respond to this. It always works for everybody, who knows he's wrong, but would never admit it. :) Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Settlement discussion

Phil, it doesn't look like Carol will be able to read through the discussion and come to a conclusion :

What now? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:39, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure. PhilKnight (talk) 23:51, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Violation of 1RR on Yom Kippur War

here and here. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:38, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I've left a note on his talk page to give the opportunity to self-revert. PhilKnight (talk) 16:59, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the elections

Dear PhilKnight, thank you for nominating yourself as a candidate in the 2010 Arbitration Committee elections. On behalf of the coordinators, allow me to welcome you to the election and make a few suggestions to help you get set up. By now, you ought to have written your nomination statement, which should be no more than 400 words and declare any alternate or former user accounts you have contributed under (or, in the case of privacy concerns, a declaration that you have disclosed them to the Arbitration Committee). Although there are no fixed guidelines for how to write a statement, note that many candidates treat this as an opportunity, in their own way, to put a cogent case as to why editors should vote for them—highlighting the strengths they would bring to the job, and convincing the community they would cope with the workload and responsibilities of being an arbitrator.

You should at this point have your own questions subpage; feel free to begin answering the questions as you please. Together, the nomination statement and questions subpage should be transcluded to your candidate profile, whose talkpage will serve as the central location for discussion of your candidacy. If you experience any difficulty setting up these pages, please follow the links in the footer below. If you need assistance, on this or any other matter (including objectionable questions or commentary by others on your candidate pages), please notify the coordinators at their talkpage. If you have followed these instructions correctly, congratulations, you are now officially a candidate for the Arbitration Committee. Good luck! Sven Manguard _Talk 19:59, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

v t e Arbitration Committee Election 2019 candidate: PhilKnight Candidate statement (create) Questions for the candidate (create) Discuss this candidate (create)

Phil, just a quick reminder about the instructions above; your nomination statement should include a categorical declaration about any other accounts you have edited with (i.e. either naming them or if there are privacy/security concerns stating that they have been disclosed to the Committee). Cheers, Skomorokh 14:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Skomorokh, thanks for the reminder. PhilKnight (talk) 16:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for that Phil. Skomorokh 17:01, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Block of User:Japol1

I noticed you blocked User:Japol1 for vandalism. I looked at his contribs and it appears that his edits were constructive, just incorrect according to the manual of style. Based on the talk page reply, I believe he didn't realize he had done anything wrong and was genuinely trying to help. I believe that a indefinite block may have been a little harsh, and perhaps a little bitey. Can you please reassess this? Thank you, --Alpha Quadrant 22:11, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Alpha Quadrant, you're saying this isn't vandalism? PhilKnight (talk) 22:28, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

That edit was inappropriate, yes. This one was not thought He even provided a source. --Alpha Quadrant 00:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

In your opinion, was this vandalism? PhilKnight (talk) 00:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it is. Perhaps the account is being shared. Some of the edits are constructive and some are not. Either way the account should be blocked. My mistake, sorry for bothering you. --Alpha Quadrant 00:24, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem. PhilKnight (talk) 00:33, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom

Glad you're running. MastCell  22:49, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Best Wishes.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:41, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

What should be done with this?

User:Stevonmfl incorrectly filled out a mediation cabal case back on 10/4/10. I did respond to it, outlining why I didn't feel it even belonged there and why what Steve said was....well, not true. Anyway, the case, being incorrectly filed has sat in some sort of limbo. The nominator isn't a regular editor and has edited only one article since he tried filing the case. He hasn't followed up on it. I was going to PROD the page, but knowing him, it would be a waste of time because he'd just contest it and start accusing me of something. I then considered making an AfD nom since it's not listed under the MEDCAB cases and, as such, borders on being an attack page. Anyway, any suggestions on what to do with this page? Niteshift36 (talk) 01:22, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Niteshift36, I've deleted the page. PhilKnight (talk) 02:47, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Niteshift36 (talk) 02:49, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Questions from Lar

Hi. Best of luck in your upcoming trial by fire. As in previous years I have a series of questions I ask candidates. This year there are restrictions on the length and number of questions on the "official" page for questions, restrictions which I do not agree with, but which I will abide by. I nevertheless think my questions are important and relevant (and I am not the only person to think so, in previous years they have drawn favorable comment from many, including in at least one case indepth analysis of candidates answers to them by third parties). You are invited to answer them if you so choose. I suggest that the talk page of your questions page is a good place to put them and I will do so with your acquiescence (for example, SirFozzie's page already has them). Your answers, (or non-answers should you decide not to answer them), that will be a factor in my evaluation of your candidacy. Please let me know as soon as practical what your wish is. Thanks and best of luck. ++Lar: t/c 17:39, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Lar, looking at your questions, I think just 9 & 10. To be honest, I think you could've combined these, and included them as a standard question. The others read like exam questions, and remind me of my finals. And not in a good way. :) PhilKnight (talk) 01:51, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't quite understand your response. They are not exactly a menu that you pick and choose from. Candidates 2 years ago and last year managed them fine. At least the serious ones, anyway. ++Lar: t/c 06:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, don't worry then. PhilKnight (talk) 13:30, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Did you want them copied over to your questions talk page or no? Perhaps I should have just asked that initially without all the explanation... ++Lar: t/c 14:04, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Lar, yes, copy all of them. I promise to answer 9 & 10, and if I have time, I may answer the others. PhilKnight (talk) 14:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 14:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Carhartt

I noticed you fixed an edit at Carhartt. Actually, that needed to be reverted a bit more.

The story there is amusing. It's a classic case of "unflattering but verifiable" information about a company. Back in the 1990s, the company tried to promote their line of heavy-duty outerwear in the hip-hop community. Their NYC sales rep was actually quoted in the New York Times about their brand's popularity with crack dealers. That's in the article, and is the only ref to a WP:RS reliable source in the article.

The company has since repositioned their brand (the fad for baggy clothing being over) and every few months, tries to take that reference out. The edits definitely come from the company. - check out this reverse IP search: . It's not worth a block. --John Nagle (talk) 18:21, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi John, thanks for explaining. PhilKnight (talk) 21:40, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

MEDILIG - List of open source healthcare software - Deleted with no reason.....

Hi, any particular reason behind this action 18:13, 15 November 2010 PhilKnight m (27,829 bytes) (Reverted good faith edits by Healis (talk) to last version by IsaiahNorton). Thanks for your help.Healis (talk) 23:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Healis, my edit was intended to remove an instance of File:Example.jpg. PhilKnight (talk) 23:22, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Sherif yet again

The AE hasn't even closed yet and he does it again--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 03:00, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

The case was closed with no action. Am I missing something here? (and that's not a rhetorical question)--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 01:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I posed this question to Ed Johnson. I'd like to get your view on this as well.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 02:05, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

The template says 'one revert per editor per article per 24 hour period', so four reverts in a 24 hour period, even if they were in regard to different parts of the article, wouldn't be ok. PhilKnight (talk) 02:14, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

IP editing

Sorry I never got back to you, but it seems you're on track towards an attempted solution. Good luck!--Tznkai (talk) 21:54, 17 November 2010 (UTC)