Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:47, 6 March 2012

This is Eraserhead1's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 20 days

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Thanks - Wikiquette assistance

Hello Eraserhead1. This is just a short note to express my thanks for your time and your wisdom on WP:WQA recently. I’m particularly grateful for the soundness of your contributions at diff1, diff2, diff3, diff4, diff5, and diff6. Many thanks. I have made my closing remarks on the thread and I publicly acknowledged your contribution – see my diff. (I subsequently amended my edit to get your Username correct! – see my diff.) Dolphin (t) 02:24, 17 February 2012 (UTC).

No problem :). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:09, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Hearing Impairment move

Hi, Eraserhead... I noticed you closed the discussion at Talk:Hearing impairment#Requested move as approving the move, but the move has not actually been performed. Was that an oversight, or am I just being impatient?  ;) Powers 23:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

You were just being impatient as I'm not an admin so I was waiting for the target page to be deleted, but it has now been done! -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Dukes of Viseu

Hi. I noticed you closed the RM on Talk:Infante Ferdinand, Duke of Viseu#Requested move. It was a move of multiple pages. I don't think there were objections on moving the second & third (John & Diogo, who were not infantes, their article titles are just plain error), just over the naming of the first (Ferdinand, who was an infante). I don't know if you concluded there was no consensus on the first, or no consensus on all three. Walrasiad (talk) 02:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's clear - its difficult to know what people think. If you think that latter two are uncontroversial make another move request for just those pages in a few weeks and notify the people involved this time. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Google

I get 103 million hits for "anti-abortion" on google.co.uk. Still getting 18 million on google.com though. Can we get someone else to run the same searches to verify? It's likely some silly error on my end, but I'd like to be sure. --Cerebellum (talk) 23:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

All right, I tried the search on another computer and got 104 million, so I must have had some weird settings in effect on that computer. However, if you look at the search results for anti-abortion (without quotes), they include many websites (examples: , , ), which use the word "pro-life" instead of "anti-abortion."

I think this is because a search without quotes includes synonyms, so I propose that we update the RFC page to use only searches with quotation marks. Here, "anti-abortion" gives 4.5 million results, while "pro-life" +abortion gives 25 million results. Similarly, "abortion-rights" gives 2.25 million results, while "pro-choice" +abortion gives 12 million results.

Are you okay with updating the RFC page with these new numbers? Please verify and make sure they are correct, there may be a problem with my safesearch settings or something. --Cerebellum (talk) 03:06, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll get back to you over the next couple of days. I need to think about it. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I am a bit concerned, both by this and by your reversion of my table (). Please don't be offended, but I have alerted an administrator. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:26, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem at all :), I'll address your other issues later - you look to have a good point here - and I'm puzzled as to why the figures are so different. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

My point of view on this is to remove all Google-related search results as it seems to vary and we do not want to include any unfactual information into the arguments. Thanks, Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 18:38, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that's the simplest. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for reverting that vandalism on my talkpage! (Also: It is saddening that despite is being vandalism that it's the only award I've ever gotten... *sniffle*. Excuse me; I have something in my eye....) Barts1a / What did I actually do right? / What did I do wrong this time? 00:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

A new editor

I try to refrain from getting involved more deeply in the Taiwan/China-related issues outside of what I'm already watching, but I noticed today that a new editor, User:A580666 (Special:Contributions/A580666) seems to be going around changing related articles to suit a particular POV without sourcing. As I've seen you frequently in related discussions, could you please check their contribs, revert what needs to be reverted and maybe talk to them (or find someone else who is also interested in maintaining related articles to do that)? Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 01:50, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I've reverted most of the edits, although I don't find any problems with A580666's edit to ]. GotR 03:26, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of that. wctaiwan (talk) 04:04, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I guess its sorted now? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

It is to me. Sorry for bothering you. wctaiwan (talk) 09:21, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem :). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

WMUK

So we're both in the UK - will I possibly see you at the upcoming Wikimedia UK AGM in May? Deryck C. 21:07, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Slowing edition so that it can be checked

Hi Eraserhead1, you asked in the edit summary of 479561842 whether I could "do it slowly enough that the diffs can be checked plausibly". I am not sure what you mean by that. The changes I did today were extremely progressive and detailed, you should be able to check each change individually by using the "prev" links on . See Help:Page history for information on using the page history.

If you were asking to make the changes even more gradually, please indicate which specific change(s) you would want to see decomposed. However, I'm afraid it's a little late to do that, in any case. --Chealer (talk) 02:27, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

AN/I (mine, not yours!)

I see I'm on AN/I, yay. I've told the IP to use dispute resolution multiple times, but if you look at their contributions they're obviously here with a very strong Israeli POV, removing Palestine from tons of state lists even though they acknowledge it is recognised along 1967 lines. Ironically they added the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza to the List of world map changes without a source, even though per their 'world maps won't show it' argument it shouldn't be there. There's now a second meat/sock IP (well, I suspect so, given its limited contributions and apparent knowledge of policy), which is just more fun. Anyway, I'm going to end up ranting away. Since you commented, I thought I'd ask for a raincheck there, to decide if I'm doing things right or whether I'm troutable. I'd appreciate it if you did (although obviously there's no obligation!). CMD (talk) 00:08, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

ROC challenge

I didn't see where you moved it - please just delete it. Thx Milkunderwood (talk)

I'm being kind of groggy - just woke up. Wherever mine is now, please just delete it. Thanks. Milkunderwood (talk) 23:24, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

It was in oppose, I've removed it. CMD (talk) 23:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

:-) We are thoroughly confused, but it's okay. By "mine" I meant just my comment to Eraserhead1's challenge of Salix's Oppose, not my own Oppose. Sorry that I wasn't clear. But thanks anyway. Milkunderwood (talk) 00:47, 6 March 2012 (UTC)