Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:09, 18 November 2012

Your hard work over at WP:ANI

Just letting you know: thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xtcy3 (talk • contribs)

Fortunatly, I am watching for the election!

Coren, please check your facts before taking me on . While I never learnt to spell or punctuate in any language (or even indent on Misplaced Pages - which seems a more heineous crim to some), I more than compensate by an exrememly long and accurate memory and high regard for facts. Giano (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Comment

Without commenting on the discussion itself, the edit summary is one I've so often thought when trying to discuss on Misplaced Pages. We should have a guideline or some such which reflects this (And having said that, I have that feeling that we'll discover a half dozen lol). - jc37 20:33, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing medium

I thought that you deserved something a bit extra for all of the amazing work you've done for the project. I've nominated you for a gift from the Wikimedia Foundation!

Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:14, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the flattery, but I'm afraid that as I've grown older my belly has gotten increasingly stubborn. I haven't fit in a medium in some time.  :-) — Coren  19:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Categorizing people as pedophiles -- issue with another article

Hey, Coren. Per this discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard, where we both commented, do you mind weighing in at the Talk:Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal#The word "paedophile" discussion? I'm not interested in getting too involved with that issue, but I did leave a comment there about it. It's clear that Category:Pedophilia is problematic in these cases; by that, I mean that it's clear that it usually should not be used to apply to people (especially living people, per our WP:BLP policy). If it's going to continue to apply to people, it should only be used for those who have been officially diagnosed as having pedophilia, which would mean very few people would be listed in this category, and for people who have heavily studied pedophilia (such as Michael C. Seto, who is already listed as part of the category). But the thing about that is that the category would require constant watching to ensure such inappropriate uses of it are not allowed; either that, or it would need to be full-protected so that the talk page is primarily used to discuss what and who should be added to it. Flyer22 (talk) 22:13, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Duty calls

Wondering if you thought about answering the call. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:04, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

The context! She is meeessing! — Coren  23:05, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

If he is talking about the Arbcom elections, then I'll second the call : ) - jc37 23:07, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Gah! It's still not clear to me what I did wrong to deserve it, but didn't a three years stint means I served my sentence already? — Coren  23:09, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

You know, I've asked several past arbcom members, and this seems to be the general consensus... It's a shame that with all the work done discussing reforming the tone at RfA, we don't work on discussing the tone of being on Arbcom : ) - jc37 23:12, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong; it's not so bad that I'd refuse if I was asked to sit on the committee. But it was no walk in the park either, and it's not a bad idea to let new blood in either. And, truth be told, I'm sorta enjoying the freedom that comes with not being an arbitrator.

On the other hand, I admit I'm worried by the very low number of candidates at this time. They are surprisingly good candidates on average (that's a good thing), but having too few of them means that voters don't get much of a meaningful choice either. — Coren  23:18, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I dunno if you read other talk page discussions before saying that, but if you have, and that was a subtle nudge... I'm looking over the questions : p - jc37 23:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

If you were willing, your run would serve a couple of purposes. It would provide the community with a known quantity, someone who is familiar with the process and can make a difference from day one without a lot of "getting up to speed". It would also be an option for anyone wanting change, as you aren't a current Arb, yet you know the system enough to be effective. And perhaps there is something to be said about an on/off Arb session, experience without the entrenchment and burnout. Familiarity with both Arb and not being in Arb anymore. Having some Arbs serving every other term only might actually be a plus, imho, to prevent burnout. I think your odds would be reasonably good. I certainly would support you, but even if you didn't make the cut, the community deserves choices from viable candidates. And before you ask, I've been asked by a great number of people but I'm not ready nor a viable candidate yet. I know my limitations and it isn't my time. I certainly don't blame you if you chose to not, and you shouldn't feel obligated in any way. If you are looking for a way to make a difference here, I think it would be excellent timing. Maybe the Arbs that don't run this year can be talked into running again in a year or two, and maybe some rotation will be a good thing, allowing some Arbs to just "be one of us" as often as they serve, if they choose. It is a tough job, after all. All I'm asking is that you consider it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Dennis and I third this excellent motion! ~ GabeMc 23:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

It was incredibly well said. You're gonna be competing with Mr. Stradivarius for charming the wool off of sheep DB : ) - jc37 23:48, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I'd support you! --Rschen7754 23:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

That's... compelling. I'll consider it, especially if the number of candidate remains too low for comfort as the deadline approaches. Thanks for your support, by the way, it does make it feel better about even considering returning to a job where criticism of everything one does is the norm.  :-) — Coren  01:06, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

your improper deletion of an article

List of pedophiles should not have been deleted. It should've been renamed to People convicted of child sexual abuse. Those on the list are already in that category. Please undo your out of process deletion, and send it to AFD properly if you decide its warranted. Dream Focus 00:01, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#List_of_pedophiles - jc37 00:05, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't matter, just as many people would be against this if given the proper time to notice and comment. I have to mention this on the talk page of the administrator before starting a deletion review. We'll deal with the issue there. Dream Focus 00:09, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Just a thought, but there is a difference between notifying a closer, and attempting to discuss a close with them. I merely was pointing you to a related discussion. But I might suggest you might want to wait for Coren's response before going to DRV. - jc37 00:17, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

That's what I'm doing. It says in the instructions to attempt to discuss it with the closing administrator before starting a deletion review. Dream Focus 00:21, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I most certainly will not. That deletion was out of process because it was necessary for it to be out of process – the delay of an AfD was entirely untenable. Such a list is impossible to make even vaguely-compliant with BLP (regardless of its name), and its existence in search results is harmful and destructive. Feel free to send this to deletion review, but I've no doubt that the result will remain the same. — Coren  00:25, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of pedophiles

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of pedophiles. 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. Dream Focus 00:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks, Coren, for taking care of that issue with a minimum of fuss. Keep up your fine work. Herostratus (talk) 01:09, 18 November 2012 (UTC)