Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:17, 3 January 2013

I will get to every FLC and I will reply to comments I made on them. No need to hit me with "talkback" templates. If you're feeling particularly WP:BOLD, leave me a message here and update my to-do list!

Archives

no archives yet (create)

Civility

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I just wanted to you let you know that your comments in the thread Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Error_and_desperation in response to Maile66 come off as extremely rude. It is possible you are not aware of this, hence this message. If necessary, please review WP:CIV. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 03:48, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Imagine my surprise to discover that you are an administrator, a bureaucrat, and an Online Ambassador. Based on your behavior, I find that absolutely incredible. Viriditas (talk) 03:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I for one think you are overreacting. Till 07:05, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

The comments aimed at Viriditas (talk · contribs) weren't that bad, but the criticism coming at the hook is rude for someone's work (in this case, mine). It was clearly a good faith nomination, and I was trying to improve this site and to say bad things like "was not only the most boring DYK that I've ever seen". You should have a least had the proper mind to leave me know you are remove my own hook from the main page, and your reasons why. I'll leave a more detailed reply Misplaced Pages talk:Did you know#Error and desperation, please see that. It appears to violate WP:CIV somewhat. TBrandley 07:45, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you all for your valuable and insightful input and suggestions on how to improve my behaviour. I shall most certainly be reviewing my ongoing contributions to this project in light of the criticism here. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:42, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Oops, perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I meant that I thought Viriditas was overreacting about your comments about the hook which I didn't really find uncivil. Till 12:20, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

No, it's fine, the response above was to those who criticised me. I'm really going to work on my attitude here, especially as I have the tools to protect pages and rename people. I'm going to try to do better, I really am. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:03, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Imagine my surprise when I read that Viriditas "discover" I was an admin and 'crat and found it "absolutely incredible". Happy to discuss where I abused those positions when declaring an opinion on a DYK hook and where I removed an erroneous DYK from the main page, but suggest the discussion is conducted centrally so everyone can have their say, not just here on my parochial little talk page. Thanks for your interest! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:17, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Aha, more censorship! Well, as you would say "For fuck's sake STOP"! Hypocrisy of the highest magnitude. Get off my talk page forever. Bye now! The Rambling Man (talk) 22:08, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

By the way, there is something seriously fucked up here if you think me suggesting a DYK hook to be boring is somehow worse than yelling "For fuck's sake STOP" in an edit summary. To think, an editor with over 100k edits and such experience would react to an edit by User:Mercurywoodrose to add a "low" parameter to a talk page in such a way is very disappointing indeed. Incredible in fact. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:24, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah it is hypocritical to tell someone to read WP:CIV when you have engaged in using unnecessary profanity in an edit summary (it was only two days ago). The comments at the DYK were slightly harsh if that, it's nothing compared to saying 'for fucks sake stop'. Till 23:51, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Nice clean slate!

The fun (?) asides aside, I was hoping to hear whether you think an RfC re linking from quotations would be worthwhile . EEng (talk) 21:12, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I think it would be worthwhile, but trying to compete and discuss issues with some of the condescending and utterly patronising vultures at the MOS appears fruitless. I'd rather just spend the time making sure articles are up to scratch and meeting community-agreed standards rather than some mythical scientifically accurate crap that the MOS-ers bang on about. Perhaps they've lost sight of the fact that we have around four million articles to get right. Making MOS perfect first is just not going to win. And being a procrastinating and sanctimonious advocate is just slowing us all down and making life harder than it needs to be. On the other hand, I read your note and I appreciated its message. I think some of us are here to build and embellish the articles we have, others are here simply to sit in ivory towers, attempting to tell everyone what to do, despite not actually doing anything positive for the encyclopedia. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Your use of the British patronise violates MOS™ Fasc. 1 Vol. XIX Pt. 3 §47 ¶11(A)(2)(iv)(cl. 17), under which this discussion is considered a continuation of an already established discussion using American English. In addition, you have used boldface for emphasis, which all stylistic authorities agree is gauche.

In the last 48 hr I've become aware of a simmering dispute over whether MOS itself should be in American or British English. With any luck the participants will put that discussion (let's call it Discussion D1) on hold while they engage in Discussion D2: consideration of the variety of English in which D1 should be conducted. Then, if there really is a God in Heaven, D1 and D2 will be the kernel around which will form an infinite regress of metadiscussions D3, D4, and so on -- a superdense accrection of pure abstraction eventually collapsing on itself to form a black hole of impenetrable disputation, wholly aloof from the mundane cares of practical application and from which no logic or reason can emerge.

That some editors will find themselves drawn into this abyss, mesmerized on their unending trip to nowhere by a kaleidoscope of linguistic scintillation reminiscent of the closing shots of 2001, is of course to be regretted. But they will know in their hearts that their sacrifice is for greater good of Misplaced Pages. That won't be true, of course, but it would be cruel to disabuse them of that comforting fiction as we send them on their way.

EEng (talk) 09:02, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Certain editors treat this place as a personal experiment to spank others with a pseudo-intellectualism which is entirely against the ethos of Misplaced Pages. Most of us do our best to make good articles and improve the project, but some people's entire existence here is to just tell us how poor we are at creating a free-to-everyone encyclopaedia. Those who simply lurk at WT:MOS and snipe at and belittle regular content editors are a pathetic group and dissuade (worse, eliminate) most newcomers from editing. I've read a lot of the recent edits from "contributors" like Noetica and it leaves me mortified that these sort of "editors" think they're helping. Leave them with their fiction, you're right, but don't allow them to piss all over editors who want to actually make an active and positive difference to the encyclopedia rather than double dot every i and double cross every t. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh, there was a reason I filed Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation, and I was bitterly disappointed there was so little in the way of remedies... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:17, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Vidya Balan

The list is now a perfect list grammatical and other basic mistakes has been fixed such as I have rv DASH, I have fixed such as went to.. and other mistakes. and now i am absolutely sure it meets the criteria Please check the page once back and promote/fail the article list, Thank You. A Great User ✉ ✉ 04:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I was working on article why did you close the discussion and i was fixing problems by Samarojit and other user(s) Greatuser _(t@lk) 12:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Because it's still far too far away from the quality I would expect to see as an initial nominee, let alone one that has had dozens of comments and edits in the past few days. Please seek a native English speaker to copyedit the article thoroughly and ensure all the existing comments have been addressed before renominating. FLC is not a substitute for WP:PR. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured list removal candidates/Jessica Simpson discography/archive1

Hi TRM, I think I've addressed your issues. Can you check it again? 五代 (talk) 11:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Note to self

List of international cricket centuries by AB de Villiers. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:22, 3 January 2013 (UTC)