Misplaced Pages

Deleted Page: Clare Munn

Hi Fram,

I have noticed that you have deleted Clare Munn Misplaced Pages page because of an copyright infringement including citing Huffington Post. Is it possible for me to delete that citing and move forward with publishing the page? I do not have much experience with Misplaced Pages and appreciate your help and advice.

14:35, 9 August 2012 Fram (talk | contribs) deleted page Clare Munn (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clare-munn/)

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ParkerNatalie (talk • contribs) 15:35, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

You may always start the page again, writing it from scratch (i.e. not copying (even with minor changes) text from books, magazines, websites, ...). It may still be deleted if people feel that the person doesn't meet our guidelines (see WP:BIO for some information on this). Adding reliable, independent sources about the person is a good method to avoid this. Newspaper or magazine articles about her, that kind of thing. Good luck! Fram (talk) 06:50, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

AWB new version

There is a new snapshot available at http://toolserver.org/~awb/snapshots/. It fixes almost all general fixes bugs reported and improves autotagging. Can you please update to this one? -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Done, thanks! Fram (talk) 06:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Please update to the newest version that we just uploaded. It 'll save you valuable time. Older version was slow when page had images. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:01, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Massemba

Hi Fram, Back in 2007 you removed the PROD for this article . This article is under AfD. Do you know anything about this subject? I'm trying to develop it but the article is so basic with little information, I don't even know the name of the artist. Do you have any expertise in this? Thanks. Tamsier (talk) 06:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

EDIT - I just saw the name of the artist, will do some research, but any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Tamsier (talk) 06:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ashton Kutcher on Twitter (2nd nomination)

Hi Fram, Given the numbers (10 to delete, 8 to merge, 15 to keep as I could it) and discussion content I really don't see a consenous here to merge. And I certainly don't see any consensous that WP:NOT applies here. In fact arguments were made that it doesn't and weren't really countered IMO. Your close seems to be claiming such a conensous was found (or your option that NOT applied, I can't tell which). I hate to resubmit this to DRV, but I really don't see how this close is in line with the discussion. Could you either provide more of an explaination about how you reached that outcome or change the outcome? Thanks, Hobit (talk) 19:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Did you count opinions like "Keep. If it takes this much effort to get such an obviously dumb and inappropriate article deleted, the article should be kept as a badge of shame. " as a "keep" or as a "delete" or as a "not valid, ignore"? Do you consider an opinion that starts with " WP:NOTPAPER suggests that the only policy based rationales are 'keep' or 'merge.' " as "policy-based" and thus "valid"? Apart from that, there is no reason not to also take into consideration the opinions expressed in the first AfD as well. All in all, in my judgment as closer, the "violates WP:NOT" argument, coupled with the sentiments in the general discussion about person X on Twitter articles, are stronger than the "meets GNG" arguments, since articles need to meet "both" the GNG and NOT to be kept. But, obviously, feel free to take this to DRV. Fram (talk) 16:17, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

What? Either you did not understand the beginning of my rationale or you misconstrued it. Yes, it was policy based and valid. Perhaps in your reading you did not perceive the implied and later made explicit "here"?Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:39, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I still don't see how there was consenous that WP:NOT applied here. I probably won't have time to do the DRV for a few days (Monday maybe?) but I'll get to it. Thanks for the reply. Hobit (talk) 19:54, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

(merged from another section) Foo on Twitter articles have been debated endlessly at AFD recently. Closing these debates has no doubt been an ordeal. Nonetheless, I contest whether there is really sufficient consensus not to keep if 43% (I counted 16 keep, 10.5 merger and 10.5 delete) of the respondents said keep. Thus, I am following procedure and talking with the closing administrator of the most recent AFD.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I don't expect you to change your decision. I am just really seeking acknowledgement/permission regarding an impending DRV.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Feel free to take it to DRV, I'll comment there if needed. Note that consensus isn't an exercise in votecounting, otherwise "me too" votes would be encouraged instead of discouraged. Fram (talk) 10:19, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

It seems that the history of User:TonyTheTiger/Ashton Kutcher on Twitter has been deleted. Can you please restore this page so that I can refer to it for the DRV.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:42, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

There is no history at that page, only a move log. All the history should be on the Ashton Kutcher on Twitter page. Fram (talk) 07:22, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I am trying to request a userfication so that the DRV discussion will be able to refer to a replica of the page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

The page has not been deleted, you can see it at its original location, all the history is there. You can add a link to any oldid you want in the DRV. Fram (talk) 11:54, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for Ashton Kutcher on Twitter

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ashton Kutcher on Twitter. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Belle's eye color

Belle's Disney Wiki page. It says that Belle's eyes are hazel and has a screenshot of a close-up of her eyes revealing their color.--Wolfcho (talk) 05:22, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Striking text

Striking works just fine if you put the slash in the right place. I assume you missed my fix when you put it back.. Kanguole 11:58, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I replied at your talk page Fram (talk) 12:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

AfD - Curiosity rover timeline

Hello, I see you are engaged in an edit war with user:Havebased123 at Timeline of MSL Curiosity mission‎. He is quite a disrupting editor bent on anarchy (or WP:ownership?) A few of us (main editors of the rover mission) have tried several approaches ranging from welcome, to feed-back, to warnings; he deletes everything in his talk page. In addition there is a sock puppet investigation on him; mostly, he uses the sock puppets to stay below his 3R limit. It seems we can't Wikify the timeline article nor delete it. Any help or advice will be greately appreciated. Cheers BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:30, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Your comment is not germaine to the topic, may I suggest you move it to an appropriate space?

This message is in response to your recent edit at ANI. We all know that you have an involved history with Geo Swan, but the appropriate space for that discussion is most likely here. The topic has drifted away from Geo Swan's personal edits and we are discussing drafting guidelines for the fixing/removal of Guantanamo detainee articles. Please do not try to bias that discussion by pointing out other problematic articles by Geo Swan. Misplaced Pages has no deadline and WP:OTHERSTUFF can be addressed at another time. If we can get Geo Swan (and everyone else) to focus on fixing one issue at a time, we can improve the trajectory of his editing behaviors (and ours) and avoid accusations of WP:WIKIHOUNDING. Let's improve the quality of Misplaced Pages together! --Joshuaism (talk) 14:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

The fix needed is not a new guideline to keep his articles included, but a topic ban for Geo Swan. So my comment is rather germane to the topic, and I'll not remove it. But feel free to accuse people of wikihounding as much as you like, it will only reflect badly on yourself. Fram (talk) 06:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:1981 establishments in Fiji

Category:1981 establishments in Fiji, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nouniquenames (talk) 17:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:1979 establishments in Fiji

Category:1979 establishments in Fiji, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nouniquenames (talk) 17:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

G4?

Hi Fram. About your deletion of London Buses route 66 as a G4 recreation, are you sure that was the right decision? The main reason given by the delete !voters in the original AfD was lack of notability because there weren't enough reliable sources covering the route in detail, but the new version contained two more news pieces about the route - that was why I recreated it, because (in my view at least) the reason for deletion no longer applied. I actually informed you about it and asked for your opinions two years ago, but you didn't reply... at the very least it seems to justify a new discussion since the additional sources help towards notability. Alzarian16 (talk) 20:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

You argued in the AfD for keeping, you argued in the DRV for keeping, and the next day you recreated the article with two additional sources, but with largely the same content and degree of notability. You can always take it to DRV again, but I don't see how such blatant disregard for our consensus-based processes should yield a different result. Fram (talk) 20:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Your note two years ago came a few days into a holiday I had, I only started editing again three weeks later or thereabouts and must have missed your message for that reason. But you had no way of knowing that.Fram (talk) 20:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, in retrospect I shouldn't have recreated it without discussing it first, but I was seriously inexperienced back then - I didn't deliberately disregard the consensus, but (from what I remember) I thought I'd found a way to overcome the problems and naively assumed that everyone else would agree. But setting aside my stupidity for a minute, I still think there's a case to be made for a further discussion since the new sources do provide additional evidence of notability and G4 only applies to sufficiently identical or unimproved copies. Alzarian16 (talk) 20:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

...which in my opinion it was basically. Fram (talk) 21:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Aileen Soares

Your deletion of the article was quite a hasty one. It was previously nominated for deletion (by me) and result was delete but later I did some more research and found a few reliable references of her work. So here's my explanation;

Notability: Have been serving in education sector as a teacher for more than 50 years. Also one of the few Christians in Pakistan to have achieved this.

References: Dawn (newspaper), The Express Tribune

This might seem like my POV but a minority who has served that long in an esteemed 150 year old institute probably is notable. Anyways, I won't contest if your decision is final. Cheers Samar 12:35, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:BLP1E: she gets two very short mentions for one event, her 50 years, in newspaper articles for the 150 years of the school. This is far removed from what is required in WP:BIO. Coupled with the AfD, I see no reason why this article should be recreated. Fram (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

AnI question

I have asked you, as a pronounced critic of Geo Swan who is otherwise uninvolved, to select three articles of Geo Swan's at AnI that you think represent his contributions well. Please message me on the talk page if/when you decide to do this. Thanks! Tazerdadog (talk) 01:44, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Émile Bravo, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Spirou and El Mundo (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) 11:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Somerled the Viking Slayer

Fram: Moidart has what is basically the text of this article (perhaps an earlier version) on his user page. It shopuld probably be deleted as well. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:41, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Replaced with the "indefblockeduser" template, which has the same effect as deleting it. Fram (talk) 07:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Talk back

concerning your comments towards me at

I made a simple mistake. Some of the things the guy did create were nominated in the same batch as that one article, which simply has the name of him and another famed mathematician who also lived in the 1700's. Since sources have been found, and hordes of people showed up to say keep already, I didn't see the need to dig too deeply on this one AFD. I have corrected and clarified my comments there. And I didn't try to keep any of those articles originally, but was convinced after someone who understands them posted on the ARS page explaining they were valid. Dream Focus 16:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Yep, just as I expected, you voted keep without even looking at the actual article, but after the ARS was used as a canvassing vehicle. Thanks for confirming this! Fram (talk) 06:48, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Its no different than other Wikiprojects, people post things related to the project, and others can read things there and decide how best to help with articles mentioned. And the articles that are valid, as these clearly were, are kept by arguments not vote count. Thankfully we were around to notice and someone who understand the issue showed up to comment on it, or the Misplaced Pages might've lost some valid educational content. Dream Focus 07:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, AfDs are decided by arguments, not votecount. So why did you try to increase the keep votecount with obviously incorrect and uninformed "keep" votes? Practice what you preach, and I might start eventually believing what you say. Fram (talk) 07:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

As I stated I did not vote, until someone who understood the issue posted on the ARS page explaining it, and that convinced me they should be kept. I don't see anyone just visiting every single thing listed by the ARS as keep. Dream Focus 07:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

No, at least no one is that blatantly obvious. Fram (talk) 07:50, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Arema FC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to ISL

Nicola Philippaerts (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Belga

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect perception.

Per User_talk:Jilliance#Discussion_at_ANI, my edit was not an attack on the editor. It was merely an edit to rectify a problem. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 09:10, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prix Saint-Michel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Svoboda (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) 09:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Timeline of MSL Curiosity mission

Please don't put words into everyone's mouth. The consensus at the AfD was that we don't want separate pages per day for the timeline, but there was no agreement over how to present information on Timeline of Mars Science Laboratory. Deryck C. 13:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

• • There was no agreement on how to present it, but there was broad agreement that the presentation as it was was not the right one. The version I reverted was the same one as that during the AfD, which was then reverted by numerous people, and was rewritten and steadily improved upon since. Saying that something is a consensus isn't "putting words into everyone's mouth", it's giving my reading of that AfD and what many people there said. I didn't claim "unanimous agreement" or anything resembling what you read into it. Fram (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Note the lack of difference between the pre-AfD close version and the version of today that I reverted from: . Fram (talk) 13:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Confrontational

Some parts of your comments at User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Seriously, Jimbo? Come on, appear overly confrontational, IRWolfie- (talk) 13:59, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, apparently disagreeing with the God-KingJimbo Wales and readding perfectly normal, well-sourced information against His Word is enough to be accused of inserting falsehoods and to be warned not to do it again. If my comments are confrontational, it's only as a moderate response to his high-handed approach. If he wants a discussion, like he claims, then he has to be open for other opinions. Following the WP:BRD cycle would be a good start. Now it appears as if he is more worried about the feelings of a jet-set friend than of upholding some of the basic policies of Misplaced Pages. It may not be what he intends, but it's the impression he gives. Fram (talk) 14:03, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't disagree with your position. I just disagree with some of the specific ways you are writing to express that. IRWolfie- (talk) 14:13, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Allright, thanks. I'll try to take it into account in the future. Fram (talk) 14:16, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

AWB rev8414

You can find a new AWB version at http://toolserver.org/~awb/snapshots/ -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:04, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, installed. Fram (talk) 14:18, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Courtesy notice since you weren't notified by filer

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Jimbo Wales and others reported by User:Müdigkeit (Result: Protected 3 days) -Floquenbeam (talk) 14:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I had seen it, but I appreciate the gesture. Fram (talk) 14:26, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Article deletion

Concerning the new article Commemorative Decoration of the 50th Anniversary of the Creation of the Railroads that you suddenly and quite arbitrarily deleted.

You do NOT possess the authority to arbitrarily delete articles regardless of your title and/or function on Misplaced Pages. There is a process for that, one that had it been followed, would have seen the article remain as is.

The sources you qualify as unreliable are from a book of royal decrees compiled by 3 authors years after the fact (1888), hence, INDEPENDENT sources and quite reliable.

An article's TALK page serves a purpose, it is to avoid such situations, might I suggest you use it in the future before wiping out hours of work and research and frustrating the living "H" out of serious contributors to Wiki.

I have "undone" your deletion, if you wish to pursue your points, please do it on the article's Talk Page where they belong.

Fdutil (talk) 14:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

As you notice, the article was not deleted, and hours of work were not wiped out, but were brought back to the front in an instant. Everyone has the right to redirect an article, and I gave my reasons in my edit summary and at the project page where you announced the creation. The source you give is not a book about these orders, it is a reprint of all laws, edicts, judicial decisions, and so on. They don't convey any notability as being reprints of primary source material. Fram (talk) 14:51, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Actually, they do "convey notability as being reprints of primary source material". Read carefully the individual references, each one contains not only the original Royal Decree with date, but also the date at which each was published by the "Moniteur Belge" which is the equivalent of the official "Gazette" used in countries such as the UK or Canada. Your argument is an oxymoron, read yourself again carefully my friend. These decrees, laws and edicts ARE the primary source material when a state award is concerned. Fdutil (talk) 19:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Please check WP:N, WP:RS and WP:PRIMARY. Fram (talk) 06:44, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Fram, please understand my surprise and frustration. Over the past 3 years, I've created (or expanded) over 250 articles and highly detailed lists dealing with over 750 Orders, decorations and medals, and this is only on English Wiki, I've done almost as much on French, German and Russian Wikis combined. All of these were made the same way with the same basic set up and data. They are part of, and have been rated by between 2 and 5 WikiProjects each, often multiple times as they progressed, with most getting a "B" rating; and trust me, some of the raters on these WikiProjects can sometimes be quite demanding (politically correct term for something else -wink-). Never before has this problem come up, the very nature of these articles, the very rarity of most items precludes anything but the references already found in the articles. Cheers! Fdutil (talk) 15:58, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

So, have any reliable independent sources talked about this order, not just reprinted the laws surroundings it? There are many notable orders, but why is this one supposedly notable? Fram (talk) 06:32, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Again, read what I wrote on the 27th just above. Do you want my 250 articles deleted? Go for it! I am honestly so incredibly tired and sick of this game, you have no idea. And as long as you're at it, make it your life's mission to obliterate 90% of of the nearly 3000 articles on English Misplaced Pages dealing with Orders, decorations and medals. Once you've done this on English Wiki, you might want to get yourself an e-translator and start obliterating the subject from other languages Wikis. I'd seriously consider contacting the related WikiProjects first though... Cheers! Fdutil (talk) 15:29, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I've just contacted other editors on this subject, they'll contact you or start a conversation somewhere, I'm not quite sure. It's obvious we aren't going to resolve this matter just between the 2 of us, the ramifications are simply too big. Fdutil (talk) 15:51, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Colorado Achievement Ribbon. Your articles are a lot more detailed, so I'm not comparing them in that regard; but why are those orders not independently notable, while this one is? 06:35, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

This in not the same, this article is being merged into a ribbon chart where it should have stayed in the first place. Many other discussions are on right now about deleting lists of medal recipients to which I agree, because the individual recipient's articles are already linked to the award. Fdutil (talk) 15:29, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Jimbo's talk page

Hey, just an FYI, you forgot to sign your comment. I thought it would be easier for you to go back and do it rather than me trying to figure out that unsigned template. Jauerback/_dude. 15:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Never mind. I assume you might be offline now and it wouldn't make sense to go back and add it any later. Jauerback/_dude. 15:53, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, it's one of the errors I often make, either forgetting to sign or signing with the date only. No idea why I still try to do it manually instead of suing the handy button in the editing screen. It also happens when I make two or three comments in one go, and only sign the last one of those. Fram (talk) 06:43, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Curious. I noticed on Jimbo's talk page you said you know the world will end on 21 December. If this is the case I wonder why you are so concerned about Gibraltarpedia and not living your last months of life on earth to the full? Me personally if I thought my time up on earth would be 21 December I'd probably be maximizing my enjoyment, or do you find this kind of thing enjoyable? I'm intrigued to know your outlook for 21 December 2012 which of course has its origins in ancient Mexico and why you are so convinced. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:46, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Actually, it is not in December, it is a lot sooner. I was giving an example, not sprouting my own beliefs. I could have made the same argument with "I know that the CIA blew up the Pentagon (but not the WTC)" or any other conspiracy or fringe theory. I thought that was rather obvious in the context... Fram (talk) 09:50, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Ah, OK. William Roache is convinced in the 2012 world is going to change theory though! I guess at least it means he won't have to put up with Deidre's bad breath any longer.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:32, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Having a clean out. Good for the mind. Can you do me a favour if its straightforward for you create a page with all of my user space pages for User:Dr. Blofeld/Himalayan Explorer and Tibetan Prayer, a lot of redirects and accumulated page which are lost. I'll db author most of them then.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:50, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean this? Fram (talk) 13:55, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:20, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Interested in translating from Frenc/Dutch wiki for Template:Les Tuniques Bleues? You might be interested in expanding Louis Salvérius and Un chariot dans l'Ouest.. Plot needs proofing from French. Video here ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:52, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Lost interest in Belgian comics?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Not really, no. But too much to do and not enough time. Fram (talk) 11:26, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Please use talk pages to collaborate with your fellow editors

Hi. I noticed you contributed to Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for deletion/Flat Bastion Road. This content should appear on Talk:Flat Bastion Road or in your user space. The edit you made was not in the right place for article improvement. Such conversation should take place on the article's talk page. --LauraHale (talk) 08:01, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Please don't talk to me about article improvement. I have repeatedly pointed out to you and in general the problems with many of the sources in the article. I have posted about this on the talk page of the article. You have completely ignored this, apart from one fairly ridiculous reply. The information I put on the AfD talk page is directly relevant for the AfD, as it indicates the article people really should be judging, not the utter fabrication and puff piece they are looking at thanks to people like you. And as you may have noticed, I am not really interested in improving an article on an utterly non notable subject, I am arguing for its deletion, for which the talk page of the AfD is the appropriate place. Feel free to copy my improved page to the talk page of the article though (or if you have any integrity left, to the actual article). Fram (talk) 08:07, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Asterix Infoboxes

You recently did a mass-edit, replacing all instances of Infobox Asterix with Infobox Graphic Novels.

However, a recent TfD discussion recommended keeping Infobox Asterix, and transforming it to a wrapper round Infobox Graphic Novels.

Actually, it recommended making it a wrapper round infobox book, not graphic novel. What is the disadvantage of my edit? The advantage is that we have more uniformity, additional possible relevant fields, and that a Smurfs comic book is no longer listed as being part of the Asterix series. I see no obvious disadvantages from my edits, but I may have missed those.

Note how e.g. Asterix and the Goths did not use the Asterix infobox anyway. Fram (talk) 13:46, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Diplomats

Just so you know I have a huge list of British ambassadors by country to get through. I recall you redirected some of the Anguillan governors to a list but I'm assuming that British ambassadors to countries are likely easily expandable and should be started and are of greater notability.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:17, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

If all you (initially) have is "X was the british ambassador to Y between YYYY and YYYY", then making a list first is much more efficient (with redirects from the individual's names if wanted). The redirects can always be turned into articles once you have more info of course. British ambassadors are more likely to be notable than e.g. Belgian ambassadors, but I wouldn't assume automatic notability for such an often discrete function. Fram (talk) 06:03, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I googled a few at random and there seems plenty of sources for them like Ronald Macleay. Most of them are Sir.. so are likely notable diplomats. The problem is that if I try to create them like Macleay I won't have the energy to create more than a handful. If we think long term on wikipedia I think its probably best having stub articles on them. You've created some shortish biographies on painters and artists and likely thought a similar thing. The thing is we have a list of British ambassadors by country which state the names and dates of terms. Ideally the stubs need a bit more and would all look like Ronald Macleay but I really won't have the energy to do the lot if so. P.S. replied on Rock Hotel DYK, hadn't seen your comment until now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

The difference with the painters is that there aren't logical lists for it (or extremely broad ones), while you can easily have a list of "British ambassadors to Greece" or whatever. Yes, most of them are probably notable (if only by being nobility), but it isn't really clear for people like Andrew Charles Stewart whether they are truly notable, despite having been ambassador to Libya and to Iceland (not at the same time, presumably :-) ). On the other hand, there wouldn't be a problem in establishing the notability of Roderick Sarell. Ity really shoulmd be looked at on a case-by-case basis. Fram (talk) 07:07, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

True. But then again there's millions of missing notable articles we'll never have time to start so even if I do stub all of the diplomats its likely there are thousands more missing from other countries on that topic alone.. And all those missing side streets of places like, erm Gibraltar.... Its funny how some of the diplomats go to radically different countries one yesterday went from Angola to Afghanistan, that one for Libya to Iceland.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:24, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Now you are just being excessively provocative. "Arab, Arafat, Ararat, Arbalest, ah, here it is, ArbCom!" No one expects the Gibraltar Inquisition ;-) (and true, being a diplomat must be a very unusual life) Fram (talk) 07:29, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Who, me?. Wouldn't dream of it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:06, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

:-D Fram (talk) 12:12, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Maryana

Belated, but thanks for the support in the discussion on my talkpage with Maryana. I am still annoyed by the tone of the discussion, and the lack of trying to understand what was going on. Again, thanks! --Dirk Beetstra 08:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I was quite amazed by the way she approached you as well. Fram (talk) 12:11, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

NeutralHomer

Asking for an unblock. With the circumstances as they are, I figured you might want to be the one, or at least aware. I'm inclined to think that he gets it and will get some mentoring. I've too much on my plate as it is, or I would myself as I think he is generally a good guy, he just did a really, really dumb thing here. Anyway, I wanted to make sure you were aware and had first bite at it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:42, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

• Fram, I support this and will play the mentor part until a better person is found. Please come by Homer's talk page and tell us what you think. Drmies (talk) 00:16, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
  • No problems with your unblock, and good luck with the mentoring. If there are any problems you'ld like to discuss, feel free to drop me a note here. Fram (talk) 06:44, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
    • I appreciate that, Fram. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:47, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the quick action. It still makes me mad. Frankly half of me wants to quite editing altogether and the other half wants to submit an RFA every month until it passes. This place just isn't fun anymore. Too much drama, red tape and politics just to volunteer to create an Encyclopedia. Anyway happy editing. Kumioko (talk) 14:18, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Mail

Thanks. Read it, and I basically agree. It's sometimes hard, but I mostly learned to live with it. Fram (talk) 06:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Dupuis

Can you source this? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:11, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Done. Well, more sources are always possible, but the main parts now have a good source. Fram (talk) 08:20, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Good job, thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Rad ...

... to see Achilles on Skyros this morning.  _.: 11:50, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Fram (talk) 11:57, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Achilles on Skyros

Hello! Your submission of Achilles on Skyros at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Prioryman (talk) 21:14, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Marrakech

Some input needed on the talk page as to what spelling to use.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Roman Catholic Diocese of Bruges

Howdy. Could you please move Roman Catholic Diocese of Brugge to Roman Catholic Diocese of Bruges? Bruges is the word in English, and it would match all the others. I would, except the target page has a history. Thanks, Oreo Priest 17:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Done! Fram (talk) 18:02, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Oreo Priest 15:35, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Achilles on Skyros

Pakistan

As you might know, Pakistan articles are amongst the worst on wikipedia. Town articles especially. I was wondering if you'd support me in a mass cleanup thing and greatly reduce the number of articles and leave only notable sourced settlements. Its far more problematic having many of the articles than not, they're shit magnets. I think we need to treat Pakistan as a special case, India too really given the large number of people with computer access and poor english. I think the articles need strict regulation and reduced to a manageable amount which go on people's watchlists and then built up gradually with a standard of quality. It's of no use to English readers having these articles and them being plagued with crap.Let me know, I'm considering organizing a mass AFD and then clean up of the main towns. The benefit of having Chak 68EB Dogaranwala for instance, more problematic than its worth.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 16:23, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Redirecting many articles to larger entities, and somehow protecting the redirects (not technically perhaps, but in practice) would be a move in the right direction. These articles are often the result of much enthusiasm and a complet disregard for our rules like NPOV and V, combined with often poor English (even compared to mine). We'll have to think how best to handle this though. Fram (talk) 06:49, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

An interesting example indeed. Chak could logically be redirected to Trikhni, which is itself a hopeless unsourced stub; or both could be redirected to Arifwala... Oops! -- Ohconfucius  07:04, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

User:Legoktm/Pakistan/Famous containing the word "famous". I was thinking of some sort of mass AFD proposal like you did with Afghanistan, I'd vote to incubate most and redirect/delete the small villages.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:03, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I think that (rightly or wrongly) a mass AfD would be shot down as long as the villages and cities are verifiable, no matter how poor the quality of the articles. I would support a mass redirect to larger lists, or a mass cleanup effort. Frankly, it is a disgrace that effort is put (noyt by you or other individual editors, but by the WMF and chapters) into Glam projects for English speaking western regions like Monmouth, Gibraltar, ...; these are generally speaking already the best covered regions, with the most active and literate (in English) editors. If an extra effort should be made (not to raise money, but to improve Misplaced Pages), then Glam efforts centered on poorer, underrepresented countries should be the main focus. I just took a look at Muridke, which doesn't even have the number of inhabitants (more than 100K), but does contain "The first IT Company in Muridke was established on 15 August 2008 with the name of " plus external link... Fram (talk) 12:16, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Gerhard Kramm AfD

IB it's customary for admins to provide a brief narrative of their reasoning when deleting a controversial page. Gerhard Kramm certainly qualifies. Can you please add such to the AfD page? TIA, Pete Tillman (talk) 17:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Ho ho, I knew you'd get grief for closing that one William M. Connolley (talk) 17:40, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for posting your rationale -- which is well-reasoned. As you note, it's a marginal case. Best regards, Pete Tillman (talk) 05:56, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Galileo Galileo can you do the fandango

Hi, see you changed this 'article' to a redirct, which I agree was the thing to do (I'v refined it to target the section in the article & removed the wl to article in target]]. Questin is, wh is the etiquette on changing aticles like this to redirects? I know anybody can do it, since I have done it, but are there any gudelines?TheLongTone (talk) 10:31, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Everyone is free to do this, and everyone is free to undo it (in general). After that, discussion at the talk page of the article or at WP:RfD or a similar page is preferred. You also request a merge if you think that more than a simple redirect is needed. But in general, the things to remember are WP:BOLD and its sequel WP:BRD. Fram (talk) 11:00, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that's really what thought. I'm a bit wary of merges: tried to do one once, & could not quite understand how to do the stuff to maintain page history.TheLongTone (talk) 12:00, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Please refrain from posting on my talk page

I would like you to refrain from posting on my talk page. If you have any concerns about of my edits please advise a neutral, uninvolved editor or administrator. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 07:24, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Alan Liefting you have to find a way to coexist with other editors though. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:08, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

That applies to any editor of course. I have been made aware that my manner appears to be arrogant but is in fact brusqueness (I only have a limited anount of wikitime so I try not to waste it). Another problem - and I think it may be creating wiki-wide problems - is the fact that online communication cannot convey the subtleties of face-to-face communication. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 08:25, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Fram, you'd better do what he says. Having said that, even if you don't you may still find yourself being dragged through AN and wasting a whole bunch of time. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:57, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey man. Sorry. My Man. Can I call you Rambling? Thanks. Anyway, you got me at a good time. Or maybe a bad time. Have just consumes the best part of an NZ merlot. The best part is the most part. I was goin 2 sign off but then I saw yr commment. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 09:02, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

So that's my thanks for giving you a simple warning about your topic ban violations instead of going in search of a block immediately? Blame the messenger? Be my guest, but don't complain that further infractions will not result in warnings before blocks of course... Fram (talk) 08:21, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I note that you have since been blocked again for more infractions like and . No idea why you can't just leave it alone, the only result is that you get blocked for longer and longer periods. It seems silly to be heading for a lengthy block over something which should be fairly easy to avoid. It's not a cae of an editor accidentally forgetting his topic ban after a few months for a single edit or so, this seems to be rather deliberate, but why? Fram (talk) 08:40, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

(Am not drunk this time) I don't want you to comment on my talk page because the comments were not conducive to furthering the project. I alluded to it here. I have now noticed that you have a predilection for having editors blocked. Rich Farmborough should not be penalised for doing stuff that helps the project and the suggestion that LauraHale should have a DYN topic ban seems petty. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:48, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

The link to WP:CTDAPE in the LauraHale WP:AN discussion is applicable here. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:52, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Denmark years

An afd of interest?

Hey Fram. I saw this afd, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Zouzous, and couldn't make head nor tail of it, but I thought you might have a better idea on it. Anyway, best regards, Hiding T 16:56, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

DYKs

I have addressed your concerns at Template:Did you know nominations/Women's sport in New South Wales and Template:Did you know nominations/Eric Bickerton. --LauraHale (talk) 11:17, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I have addressed your concerns at Template:Did you know nominations/Eric Bickerton. --LauraHale (talk) 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

AWB rev8512

You can find a new AWB version at http://toolserver.org/~awb/snapshots/ This version is much faster in large pages than the one you have. Moreover, it fixes a lot of important bugs. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Fram (talk) 14:41, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Re-Review James Gough

Deletion review for James Gough

An editor has asked for a deletion review of James Gough. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Please re-review James Gough, as he will be notable soon, if not now. Soon, he will be playing minor-pro hockey, and possibly make the NHL. He should be on Misplaced Pages, and this would be a good time to put him on.

Jimmer93 (talk) 15:33, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Have you seen THIS?

Oh, can't believe it, but we must find a way to stop this, its very tragic --TheChampionMan1234 06:35, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Your apparent connection to WP:USRD

Apparently Kumioko thinks that you're somehow connected to USRD, and has been making serious allegations in that arena at AN and at my talk. Thought you should be aware. --Rschen7754 21:38, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea what my supposed connection to that project would be (had to look up the acronym to even know what it stands for). No idea where that allegation comes from, but I tend to ignore Kumiokos allegations altogether as being rather fanciful or uninformed generally. Fram (talk) 07:53, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

That's a fair assessment. I guess tThere are lots of editors around here with a dozen FA's, 30 or so GA's who have 400, 000 edits and variety of other things who are uninformed. But since I am not an Admin and that seems to be the standard by which people, right or wrong, gauge an editors knowledge and respect measurements in WP, then its true enough. As much as it might appear, my problem isn't with everything that you do, its that you seem to be allowed to violate policy on numerous occasions and no one cares. In this case alone you broke at least 3. Forum shopping to get what you want, you didn't notify the user about the AN thread for half an hour, 3 minutes before they got blocked (which virtually assured that the user couldn't reply), Wikistalking and hounding, that it always seems to be you crying to some board somewhere about something Rich does when you are clearly involved (and this has been stated by more editors that just me). I'm not sure if its because you are an admin that allows you to violate these policies or if people just don't care about these anymore. But that is what made me mad about seeing you yet again, running to AN to run down Rich because he was...OMG I can barely say it with a straight face, editing. BTW, for what its worth, the reason I thought you were more affiliated with USRD is because Rschen is heavily and wherever I see one of you the other seems to be arms length away. When one is there at ANI the other is frequently there to support or to perform the block. You work in tandem far too much to assume a coincidence. In the end though it doesn't matter. I am the only one that seems to care about these policy violations and one of the Arbcom folks even commented that the block was justified. So I am going to return to my retired state and let you get on with systematically eliminating all the high volume editors. May I suggest Koavf next, he has over a million edits and must be doing something wrong somewhere. Kumioko (talk) 12:15, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

My commentary about your allegations has nothing to do with your article work, but with your accusations about other user's affiliations and motivations, which are usually baseless. I haven't forum shopped, and while I had forgotten to inform RF earlier about the AN thread, he was well aware of the accusation that his edits violated the editing restriction, but he hasn't responded to that before or after. It's not as if due to the small delay in the AN note, he is blocked or he has had a new block log entry, while otherwise he wouldn't have been blocked, so while I made a minor error in process, the outcome is hardly any different for it. As for me being involved: I am in general involved, obviously, that's why I don't take any admin action but post my concerns so that other, uninvolved people can look into it. There is no reason why they would follow me if my notices were baseless, and there are enough examples of cases where consensus didn't went with my proposals or opinion. Posting to AN, ANI or ArbCom in cases where you are involved is not violating any policies though.

I was hardly involved with his violation of the editing restriction though, it is not as if I am trying to win some content discussion. He choose to make those edits on his own, without any interference or baiting by me. He was editing, obviously, there are few complaints for people not editing; but he could edit in a myriad of ways, and choose to pick one of those that are forbidden to him via his editing restrictions.

As for me working in tandem with Rschen: ? I have never turned to him, never followed his actions or complaints; there may be intersections, just like I will have with most other active editors and admins; but I am not aware of us working in tandem at all, I hadn't noticed him or her around the same discussions all that much.

Finally, you have repeatedly, for months now, accused me of trying to eliminate all high volume editors. I have never had any intention of doing this, I haven't spent this much time on Misplaced Pages to now bring it to a halt. But being highly prolific or active is not an excuse to create lots of problems or to ignore policies, and when I notice editors e.g. creating many copyright violations, I'll take action to correct this, friendly at first, harsh if needed. I try to stop all problematic editing I come across, no matter if it is from a newbie or from an extremely experienced editor. And if I notice that problems are recurring or widespread, I will regularly check to see if it continues to happen, or (as in this case and some others) whether the restrictions imposed to prevent these problems are being followed.

Obviously these editors (and their Wikifriends) will often not like such scrutiny, but this is not "stalking" or "wikihounding". I am not opposing people in discussions only because they have caused problems elsewhere; I don't join the same projects, don't interfere with unrelated actions, ... but I am following up whether the same or similar problems reappear. I don't have a big plan with this, don't use other editors to support me; there are no conspiracies involved. That you see it differently is a pity, but hardly anything I feel responsible for.

I would appreciate that, if you continue to make accusations about tag teaming or big plans, you would provide some diffs to support this. Fram (talk) 13:29, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Really? You didn't forum shop? So you didn't go to Arbcom about Rich and when they told you it wasn't a violation of his Arb decision you then went to AN with it? That didn't happen right? That my friend is forumshopping. And my allegations are not baseless. When I get angry and start ranting about this or that, its almost always because someone like you has violated policy and by virtue of their position as an admin, because they are buddy buddy with them or whatever its overlooked. Just as was done in this case. If there is onen thing that angers me on this site its users who violate policy and then are supported by others. This has more often been common of Article ownership but also has happened as in the case above. 28 minutes is not and never has been a small delay. Its even more so not a small delay when the user in question is blocked three minutes later before they can even respond and when that user wasn't doing anything vandelous. Just making edits. The reason I have accused you is because it seems to nearly always be you doing it. Its always you going after Rich for petty shit like this. If it was a problem, which it is not, then someone else will handle it. Frankly, if you had followed policy in the AN or Arbcom submission and hadn't violated policy (More than one) and used dirty tactics to get your way I wouldnt have even commented.

Your right though, about your statement above b"eing highly prolific or active is not an excuse to create lots of problems or to ignore policies, and when I notice editors...." Me too and you are doing it now. But because I am not an admin and you are, I am the one out of line. If you were an editor and not an admin and would have pulled that I forgot to notify him/forum shopping crap you would probably have been blocked. I have seen that many times over the years.

As I mentioned earlier, I am not going to spend my time providing diffs when nothing will be done. I did that a lot in the past and stopped because it never made any difference. I got responses like "Well they are admins so we need to give them some latitude", "A few diffs doesn't mean there is a problem" or some other BS. The same BS BTW that you and other admins are using too get these editors blocked and why I gave up editing. What I find trully trully sad and is also a pity is that you are trusted with the tools and I can't even edit a protected page even as more and more content gets protected, am limited to 25000 pages for AWB, can't block an obvious vandal (also why I gave up Vandal fighting 3 or 4 years ago), I cannot protect a page being vandalized, etc. Because I am the one who cannot be trusted. So there is no reason to continue editing.Kumioko (talk) 16:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Kumioko: Now that Fram, Fredddie, and I have denied that Fram is a member of the USRD project, will you retract all accusations you have made regarding USRD tag-teaming? --Rschen7754 19:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Your right, after looking a little deeper (and spending more time on it than I should have) I cannot find any ties between Fram and US roads other than a huge intersection of edits between the 2 of you including some edits to US roads related articles. Upon further review of those and the intersection I noticed that most were simple AWB edit runs. So I apologize for that error. Truly, I was wrong in that. I should have researched the intersection more closely before making that statement. With that said though, I still think he needs to disengage from being Rich F's minor edit monitor as so many have asked from him, I still am disgusted by his abuse of the admin tools and the dirty tactics he used yet again to get Rich blocked (that you fell for), I still think he was stalking, hounding and more importantly he was forumshopping. I also think that his failure to notify Rich of the ANI for 38 minutes, leaving only 3 minutes for him to respond was intentional and not in error as he, an experienced admin would lead us to believe. Kumioko (talk) 21:26, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. As far as your allegations regarding abuse of tools on the part of Fram: could Fram have done exactly what he did without using his admin tools? --Rschen7754 21:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Also a good point on your part and I should clarify that as well. When someone gets the admin tools, Checkuser tools, etc. their association to those tools are reflected in their actions with or without the use of the actual tool. If an admin creates a sock they would still be socking. Even if they were the one that blocked it (unless of course it was done for a valid reason and under an approved guideline like to test a new tool or something). Fram is a longterm admin and I would wager that most experienced editors who perform work around things like ANI would recognize that. So when he violated several policies in order to get Rich blocked, even if he didn't use the tool itself, he used his status as an admin to infer a validy to the action which was innapropriate. Kumioko (talk) 21:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't have an opinion of the situation(s) under discussion (put another way: I haven't researched them).

But to clarify a point: admins are merely editors who have been entrusted with additional tools and responsibilities. If an editor who has been entrusted with admin tools (or any extra additional tools) takes an action that has nothing to do with whether they have such tools, then scrutiny and any appropriate sanctions is towards them as an editor. To claim "abuse of tools", one has to have actually used said tools in the abuse. (I'm not saying that anyone has claimed abuse in this case, I'm merely attempting to clarify a point.)

I also think that all 3 of you are experienced enough editors to presumably know this already, so please treat this note as merely a reminder : ) - jc37 22:04, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't think you can seriously claim abuse of the tools for blocking someone for something that it would have been legitimate to block them for doing a tenth of the numbers.

It is like complaining about admin abuse for an admin blocking someone for 30 reverts. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Worse, it is complaining about admin abuse for an admin not using any admin tools, but for presenting a case as a regular editor, for uninvolved admins to decide. It's not really worth responding to, as it is such a farfetched complaint that it is hard to see anyone taking it seriously. Fram (talk) 07:48, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Well lets see, when I looked at Rich's talk page, from only a couple months ago there was a discussion about you constantly following Rich and a number of editors besides me telling you to stop...and you adamantly refusing to accept there was a problem. There is another 3 (at least) at ANI, there is another half dozen comments at the Arbcom case about it and even a couple in your history (I didn't provide links because there easy to find with a simple search and I don't believe the links will change your habits anyway so there's no point spending the time). My point on admin abuse is this. If an editor is an Admin and has been entrusted with the tools and has a reputation as an Admin and then submits a user to Arbcom and then turns around and goes to ANI only a couple minutes later about the same issue (thats by definition forumshoppoing), then fails to notify the user for 38 minutes, that is abuse of the tools. Wether he performed the block himself doesn't matter. Its still intent. Also, ANI is an admin tool (though be it not a part of the Admin toolset and used by others as well), using his knowledge of the system and policy from being an admin to fail to notify the user of the AN discussion so the user cannot respond. These are my problems with this, not the block itself. But at this point it doesn't matter. The community doesn't seem particularly interested in an admin using dirty tricks to get their way like forum shopping and not noticfying users of discussions. Fram is not likely to stop hounding Rich and no one is going to stop him so really I am just wasting my time by thinking that people here are interested in doing the right thing. The whole situation to me is extremely disappointing. Kumioko (talk) 17:56, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

" If an editor is an Admin and has been entrusted with the tools and has a reputation as an Admin and then submits a user to Arbcom and then turns around and goes to ANI only a couple minutes later about the same issue (thats by definition forumshoppoing), then fails to notify the user for 38 minutes, that is abuse of the tools." - No it is not. There is nothing in this example that ANY editor couldn't have done. If you want to suggest sanctions to the editor in question as "an experienced editor", that's at your discretion. But nothing in this example suggests an abuse of admin tools. - jc37 18:10, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I actually thought about that. I even started drafting something up and do you know why I stopped? Because the culture in Misplaced Pages has degraded to a point where I truly believe that this sort of behavior is condoned by the community and accepted. Particularly of the person is an admin. Unfortunately I do not have faith in the system anymore that anything would come out of it other than a waste of my time. And no its not because I think my arguments are baseless. But because Fram is an admin and its next to impossible and extremely rare for an admin to lose thier tools for any reason other than inactivity regardless of how poorly they use them. Kumioko (talk) 18:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

"submits a user to Arbcom and then turns around and goes to ANI only a couple minutes later about the same issue (thats by definition forumshoppoing": two fatal errors there: first, I went to Arbcom enforcement here, 5 November 09:19; I went to AN here, 6 November 09:16: your "a couple of minutes" is actually 1437 minutes later. Second; I raised the issue of the editing restriction violation in my first post at the ArbCom enforcement page, and in reply to Rich Farmbrough directly asked him about this aspect as well. Other users pointed out that AE would not handle the possible community restriction enforcement anyway, and that needed to be taken to a different venue. The AE page only wanted to handle the ArbCom restriction, so the AN discussion was not "forum shopping" but the appropriate forum for the discussion of an aspect that hadn't been handled (or dismissed) elsewhere. I would ask you, if you want to pursue this, to take it to an appropriate general discussion board of your choice, since I don't believe that continuing this discussion here will achieve anything. Fram (talk) 21:02, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Copyvio detection

I'm sincerely impressed by your skills in detecting copyright violations on Misplaced Pages, and would be quite interested in learning about some of the procedures you utilize to do so. Articles for creation would truly benefit from improved procedures and guidelines regarding the detection of copyvios. Northamerica1000 10:13, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

• Also, per discussion at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Northamerica1000, I'm requesting the temporary userfication of Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Deux Filles to User:Northamerica1000/Userfy, for further analysis in relation to copyright violation. Northamerica1000 10:23, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

• • I've replied at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Northamerica1000. Fram (talk) 10:24, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Daniel Fohr, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tyrol (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) 11:57, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:Rich Farmbrough

Just a heads up, there is a discussion at User talk:Rich Farmbrough where you are mentioned (in case you are wondering why your cyber-ears are burning...). -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:21, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Arb

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests#Resysoping of FCYTravis / Polarscribe and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:55, 10 November 2012 (UTC)