Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:09, 11 August 2012

Welcome to Misplaced Pages, and thank you for your contributions.

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. When you recently edited Pak Hon-yong, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Korean (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

British or Welsh?

A slightly false distinction, obviously, as one can be both. But perhaps you could tell us what these categories mean and why we use them for Tom Jones:

• Category:Welsh crooners
• Category:Welsh expatriates in the United States
• Category:Welsh knights
• Category:Welsh male singers
• Category:Welsh pop singers
• Category:Welsh rock singers
• Category:Welsh tenors

Why is Ruth Jones given a Nationality of British and an Ethnicity of Welsh, but Tom Jones not? Do you intend to go and "correct" all of these: Category:Welsh female singers and these Category:Welsh male singers too, because "Wales is not an independent Nation"? Or have you just singled out Tom Jones for special attention? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Or do you plan to change the articles for all people currently described as "English" to read "Nationality: British, Ethniciity: English"? What claim can be made that England is an "independent nation" in any way that Wales is not? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:11, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

AE

Hi Alssa1. I think AE is being misused quite a bit at the moment. It's not the right way to settle content disputes. Do you want me to open up a discussion on the talk page ]? That might be a better way to discuss what term to use, and will also be a reference for anyone looking at the article. Regards. --Flexdream (talk) 13:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Alssa1. I second what Flexdream has told you. You've strayed into a very contentious area and it isn't worth sticking to your principles for a couple of words on a page. I would suggest you be honest with the sysops on the AE page and tell them you weren't aware of what 1RR was and also (very much) throw yourself at their mercy. Don't edit war is the answer. SonofSetanta (talk) 14:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply on my talk page. I made the same mistake as you. This isn't about fairness or being able to discuss content. You are up against experienced gamers who will hound you to make mistakes and when you do they will complain about you and you will have no comeback (as now) because you fell into the trap. You must always abide by Misplaced Pages rules, even when it seems frustrating and unfair that others are able to trash your work without so much as a by your leave. My comments are very well intended and I hope I can persuade you to take the proper action at AE to avoid a ban because that would demoralise you and I can see you have been a useful editor in the past. Be warned though: any article to do with Irish Republicanism is guarded by a band of followers and they will prevent you from making alterations without their permission. SonofSetanta (talk) 14:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Alssa1. There's now a section on the talk page you can use ]. The 1RR rule doesn't apply on the talk page, as you wont be making any reverts their, just adding comments. Feel free to post to my talk page or email me if there's anything you're unsure about. Regards.--Flexdream (talk) 14:37, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Alssa1 thank you for your further reply on my talk page. I am very sorry to say that you are correct. Some groups do band together to make articles they guard uneditable. They enforce this in a number of ways, one of which is to start an edit war then sound really hurt when they file a complaint against the unwary who breach the 1RR rule on contentious articles. You've fallen victim to that. For the record, any article which concerns the Irish Troubles is subject to this restriction. If you change something and someone changes it back then you must wait 24 hours before reverting them. Then they, or another member of their "tag team" will immediately revert you again. You may raise objections on the talk page but you will be swamped by the team who will rubbish your opinions and sources. It takes a lot of patience to have any edit you wish to make acceptable and often only by following the very complex grievance procedures which exist on the wiki. Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings Bach but that's how it is. Please hear what I'm saying and get over this hump quickly. SonofSetanta (talk) 15:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Alssa. Have a look at ]. I think it might help you just to step back at bit. Maybe see how the discussion on the Sinn Fein talk page goes first. Its only just got going so you can see who else wants to contribute to that first. Any contentious edits to articles should not be marked 'minor'. If you are unsure of procedure you can ask. Regards. --Flexdream (talk) 18:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I know you will again delete but

Putting this info with sources does not mean anything. You are using a concept developed by the Western world. Can you please give websites of the sources.Egeymi (talk) 20:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Please respond on AE

As you are aware, a request for ArbCom enforcement has been made. Please enter your response at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Discussion_concerning_Alssa1 in the section Comments by Alssa1. Please be aware that failure to respond is unhelpful to your position. Do not attempt to remove content from the Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement page again, or you may be blocked. KillerChihuahua 08:09, 11 August 2012 (UTC)