Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:41, 25 January 2013

Thanks

Thanks for this constructive edit to the article Scientology. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 02:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dalian Medical University

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Dalian Medical University, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BurhanAhmed (talk • contribs) 15:56, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Copyright violation in Tony Parisi (software developer)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Tony Parisi (software developer), by another Misplaced Pages user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Tony Parisi (software developer) is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Tony Parisi (software developer), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 18:40, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Request

I noticed your contributions to Unified Messaging and Unified Communications articles. I appreciate that, however I would like you to remove redirect page of Unified Communications to Unified Messaging. They are not the same, which I explained on Talk:Unified messaging. Klapouchy (talk) 23:06, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Lao romanization vote

Hi there, I am throwing in a debate about the romanization of Lao on the Misplaced Pages and would appreciate your input. ] Cheers, Rdavout (talk) 14:24, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Pratyeka! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 4 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Tony Parisi (software developer) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

m:Global sysops/Vote

You or someone with your username has voted in m:Global sysops/Vote but you don't have a SUL account. Please merge your accounts or add a link from your Meta user page to your local user page to confirm your identity, or your vote may be struck. Thank you, Nemo 17:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Gianbattista Grancino

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Gianbattista Grancino, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://danpritchard.com/Giovanni_Grancino. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:20, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Your recent article

I've deleted the article you just tried to create due to WP:DENY. Whoever was making these attacks was clearly enjoying the attention he was getting from it; the last thing we need right now is an article about the situation. Thanks for your understanding. Hersfold 21:21, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Hotan and Kingdom of Khotan Articles

Hi, just wanted to thank you for your work on these two articles. I started both of them, very poorly as I was just learning how to edit in Misplaced Pages. I've just gone back to see what became of my stubs, and am amazed at the work you and others have done on them. Baronger (talk) 23:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bitcoin

The article Bitcoin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable software

While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Q 04:42, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Please watch what you remove from artilces....

WP:NEWSBLOG "Some newspapers host interactive columns that they call blogs; these are acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control." Foreign Policy is a Resectable new magazine as is the Author a resectable journalist Weaponbb7 (talk) 22:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I must respectfully disagree, this particular article .. and I quote in full .. is basically 100% opinion. It does not even begin to attempt to draw any kind of logic from the -- very detailed -- source. It's not journalism, or if you did admit it, has to be considered something of the basest kind, of a level beneath a 'source'. prat (talk) 23:49, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I've already said I was underwhelmed by the Wikileaks docu-dump on the Afghan war, and Peter Feaver and Dan Drezner have also weighed in with similar takes. As Drezner puts it, "So it turns out that the war in Afghanistan is not going well and Pakistan is playing a double game? Well, knock me down with a feather!!"

Nonetheless, a lot of people seem to be shocked by the revelations in the documents. One of them is New Yorker editor Amy Davidson, who discusses one incident where a convoy was shaken down by Afghan gunmen "in the pay of a local warlord, Matiullah Khan, who was himself in the pay, ultimately, of the American public." (Khan was the subject of a lengthy New York Times profile in June.)

Davidson seems outraged by this, but I find her reaction naive. She writes: "We may be the ones being shaken down on the highway, but from an Afghan perspective we are, by aligning ourselves with and propping up Hamid Karzai, also deploying the bandits. We are robbing ourselves, both of our purse and of our good name."

Fair enough. So who should the U.S. align with? And how does she think all those supplies get to U.S. bases?

(the above is obviously opinion) prat (talk) 23:49, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Bitcoin AfD: Sock farm comment

Could you please explain your comment here: Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Bitcoin? prat (talk) 14:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I get extremely suspicious when lots of new users arrive at AFDs and vote one way, and I generally interpret this as resulting from actions taken in bad faith and vote the other way. Stifle (talk) 15:32, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Could you please clarify who the new users were exactly that you considered to be part of your 'sock farm'? Or did you not even bother to research before making such claims? prat (talk) 15:57, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Cb6, 166.70.24.100, American Antics, and Dizm. It appears clear to me that the users in question are single-purpose accounts. Stifle (talk) 09:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Through the Jade Gate to Rome

Dear Prtyeka:

Thank you so very much for your generous accounjt of my book. I am thrilled you have found it of interest. I send you my very warmest wishes and if I can ever be of any help inh anhy waqy - or you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Cheers, John Hill (talk) 16:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem John! Actually I've recently started as a volunteer translator for IA CASS (Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences) so am getting a little more Chinese exposure these days. This is in addition to early-stage research on a book about the history of Southwest China - though it won't be nearly as academic as yours! prat (talk) 17:42, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi!

Thank you for your input! Please have a look over at the Commons --Pojanji (talk) 22:35, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Nemerle

Um... what the heck? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Are you planning on closing the DRV early too, or just letting it run? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, missed the DRV. I am pretty sure I checked? Anyway, the case is clear and this is a mistaken deletion. prat (talk) 23:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Xinzhai

I have reason to believe that you are referring to a completely wrong "Xinzhai Village" here. If this Xinzhai were truly located at 22 38' N 100 59' E and 80 km from the Laos border (there are several Xinzhai Villages in Yunnan), then it cannot possibly be in Wenshan Prefecture. So is the Xinzhai of Lianghe County, Dehong Prefecture? See this page for a list of some Xinzhai Villages. --HXL's Roundtable and Record 03:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Shenyang Agricultural University

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Shenyang Agricultural University requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Misplaced Pages to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Misplaced Pages:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 20:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Chinese history background

• /Github

Delivery 1  Done. Hunger to see your work : ] Yug (talk) 14:18, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Delivery 2  Done. Need your clear proposal for a new frame (see svg to edit). Yug (talk) 13:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Delivery 3  Done. Finished for me. Good luck Yug (talk) 21:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Some news ? Yug (talk) 11:57, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for being silent. I'm kind of between worlds right now but trust me I'll get to it. The house I'm living in here in southwest China has been without running water for five days due to some bureaucratic spat - it's hard enough just surviving right now. But the truth is, I looked at this again today and it's in my mind. Time heals all wounds. We're already a long way from a year ago when it was quite another state of affairs... such matters take time, especially for proper execution. prat (talk) 18:56, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I've been in taiwan for 5 years, I understand : ) Give me some news when that's moving again, nad simply curious to see what you have in mind. Fight well ! Yug (talk) 19:59, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Pratyeka! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:50, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Mayer Amschel Rothschild, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain (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) 10:59, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Pratyeka,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Misplaced Pages administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.206.39 (talk) 03:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Hekou, Hekou County, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Red River (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) 10:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject India Tag & Assess 2012 Contest

Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.

As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.

If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.

You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.

ssriram_mt (talk) & AshLin (talk) (Drive coordinators)

Delivered per request on Misplaced Pages:Bot requests. The Helpful Bot 01:31, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. When you recently edited Hoi An, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malaya (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) 10:54, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 29

Hi. When you recently edited Xz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gentoo (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, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Permission to use File:Chinese-buddhist-cuisine-taiwan-1.jpg

Hi, I am from Malaysia & I am an editor. I would like to use one of your photo of File:Chinese-buddhist-cuisine-taiwan-1.jpg in a school textbook. I will credit you in the book, please advice on how I should put. Please email me jouehuey.yeoh@pearson.com.

Regards, Joue Huey — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.219.19 (talk) 09:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'm actually in Kuala Lumpur right now! I sent you an email too. prat (talk) 09:24, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Clarify Advert flag on Hardware security module

I'd like to edit to remove the advert tag, but it's not clear why you flagged that section. Could you clarify on the HSM talk page? Thanks! TrivialJim (talk) 18:24, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited Nishi people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yam (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) 04:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Beijing Institute of Clothing Technology for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beijing Institute of Clothing Technology is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Beijing Institute of Clothing Technology until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. FunkyCanute (talk) 15:02, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Birla family

The article Birla family has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability.

While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TheLongTone (talk) 06:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Passenger name record

Hello, you added the comment "(This section is presently being moved to Category:PNR sharing agreements.)" but haven't edited the article in over a month. Are you still moving this section, or can the comment be removed? Op47 (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Sure, go for it. Waylaid by other juicy chaos-tangents. prat (talk) 00:00, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Concerning your edit on Bitcoin

When MSGJ made the change to the content, he forgot to add the refs . Please also be aware that just because a link is down, that does not mean the link no longer verifies the content, so adding a citation needed link is inappropriate. The article is fully-protected; that does not mean that administrators are free to edit the articles as they wish, but that administrators can make changes to the protected article reflecting consensus; not only was there no such consensus for your edit, you did it contrary to WP:DEADLINK and also removed the punctuation from the statement, placed the citation needed tag inside a reference. Your user page makes it abundantly clear that you are WP:INVOLVED in the article, so your edit runs contrary to a multitude of policies and guidelines. Please revert the edit. Since the version that was in the article was made as the result of an edit request that an uninvolved administrator made reflecting consensus, it is inappropriate to make changes without addressing that on the talk page, please correct this by undoing your edit and discussing it on the talk page. SudoGhost 19:55, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Done. The intent is fair and non-partisan. Off to explaining in Talk:Bitcoin now. prat (talk) 22:45, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry if that seemed a little accusatory, it's was just unexpected and somewhat frustrating to see the edit changed and not be able to correct the issues brought by it, but after looking at how long and complicated the discussions at Talk:Bitcoin have become, it's kind of unrealistic to expect someone to be able to read through all of that before making any edits, but I didn't realize that at the time. - SudoGhost 23:38, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

References

1. Chirgwin, Richard (8 June 2011). "US senators draw a bead on Bitcoin". The Register. Retrieved 14 November 2012.
2. O'Leary, Naomi (2 April 2012). "Bitcoin, the City traders' anarchic new toy". Reuters. Retrieved 14 November 2012.

Removal on Bitcoin...again.

I've read over the discussion on the talk page. There is no consensus to remove the material. Even if there were, an uninvolved administrator should be the one to remove the material. Please restore it and let someone who isn't the article's creator make that assessment, especially when the previous text was added as the result of a consensus approved in an edit request by an uninvolved administrator. It's inappropriate to remove sourced content like that without discussion, when an uninvolved administrator was the one that put the wording into the article. - User:SudoGhost (Away) 21:21, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I will focus on the content. I disagree with your interpretation of consensus. In my view, it is clear that many people have supported altering the statements which add little to the article. It is unfortunate that, given the amount of policy-bashing that has been going on (largely powered by you) combined with the protected status, we have a result where everyone who has contributed seems to have become demotivated and left, even after I explicitly invited participation and made a fair new effort to resolve the issue. Therefore, I am going to revert the change as per your request but in the interests of getting something actually changed after the positively Herculean combined effort put in by many volunteers, including myself, to discuss and overwhelmingly support altering the obviously poor statement that you alone seem to be blocking (which is basically explained elsewhere in the article and consists of only opine), I will be seeking some further involvement from other Wikipedians via Misplaced Pages:DRN. I will note also that while you seem to be so keen on labelling me as "involved", frankly, I do not consider myself to be partial to any particular public perception of Bitcoin though neither can I afford the time to debate endlessly. I am all for inclusion of properly sourced statements, even opine, as you can see from my previous comments, but in my view your actions at this point are simply counter-productive. The section is one-sided, poorly sourced and uninformative and desperately needs to be fixed. There's very little to be lost removing the section entirely. If you want to improve it to resolve the concerns expressed, then by all means contribute an improvement. Please don't just get in the way of others, as it demotivates contributors and harms the community. prat (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Created dispute resolution request over here. prat (talk) 00:11, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I have provided a suggested edit. Sorry for being slow. How does it look to you? Mike Hearn (talk) 18:53, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your proposal, which I support. I have replied on the talk page. prat (talk) 22:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard

Hello. I am a dispute resolution volunteer at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard. I just deleted some material that you added that violated our "do not discuss the dispute prior to a volunteer opening the thread for comments" policy. I apologize for having to do that, but DRN is a place where we try to resolve disputes in a systematic and structured manner, not a place to continue the arguing you are already engaging in on the article talk page, I encourage you to read the Guide for participants at the top of WP:DRN so that you know what our policies are. --Guy Macon (talk) 10:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: the above comment is obsolete, because the material was re-added. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:34, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

What's the DRN about?

Hello Pratyeka. I was just reading over the DRN request about Bitcoin. It looks like you opened the request because you disagree with SudoGhost about some of the page content. There is a long section starting at Talk:Bitcoin#Please add a correction to the Ponzi Scheme accusation where both you and SudoGhost have participated but it's hard to see if there is any progress or any result. Do you think that any unresolved points from this thread could be pulled out into a formal RfC? Or at least a new talk thread where everyone could be answering the same question? If you could summarize where the discussion stands in your own words (on the article talk) it would be helpful. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 03:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, I will add an attempt at a summary shortly. prat (talk) 10:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your new section at Talk:Bitcoin#Summary of my own view of the discussion status (by request). Do you think it would be possible to move the Ponzi thread (which includes your summary) to the bottom of the page? Otherwise a person who comes to the page from outside will not see where the current work is being done, and where input is desired. If you think that your proposed solution might be controversial, consider framing it as a WP:RFC. I notice that you are giving your support to a suggestion by Mike Hearn, which was presented earlier on the page. If you truly want to give a summary of the prior discussion, you probably should give an overview of the posts that were made which disagreed with Hearn's text. User:Smickles86 is one of those who commented, as well as SudoGhost. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:20, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it should be considered controversial. prat (talk) 22:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

That sounds good, but I'd like to see the details. Is there a completely written-out version of your proposal, suitable for an edit request? EdJohnston (talk) 23:51, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I think at this point I should ask you to focus on the talk page. This jump-around parallelism is not helping matters. At present there are two proposals on the talk page, both of which I am happy with. The latter one seems mildly more informative, so has my vote. prat (talk) 00:09, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Your edit at Bitcoin

Other administrators have asked you to stop editing the Bitcoin article in this way. Please revert your edit and submit an edit request like everyone else. If your edit is truly as uncontroversial as you believe, an uninvolved administrator won't hesitate to make the edit. - SudoGhost 21:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

The POV dispute is a ridiculous thing to dispute. Be reasonable. prat (talk) 23:15, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Minangkabau Misplaced Pages

Hello! Do you remember me, Ramzy Muliawan, from the LangCamp? Please support Minangkabau Misplaced Pages request in Incubator. Thanks! SpartacksCompatriot 04:56, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

OK, done. prat (talk) 10:43, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Observe Hack Make

See . Where was restoring this article discussed? Has there been any new coverage to demonstrate notability? Do we usually have advertising for future events in Misplaced Pages? --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:27, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

• The deletion was in error. This series of events is extremely well known. There is zero chance it will not occur. I have followed the events since the 1990s. The last one was attended by, for example, Jacob Applebaum, Julian Assange, Dan Kaminsky and many others. Given the expertise and status of the organizing parties, it is insane to suggest that the event will not go on, or that the event is not notable. Furthermore, the event series is well known for a 'turn up early, pitch in setting up' vibe, which means many weeks before the scheduled date there is already a significant presence of event goers. That means, very soon now there will be people physically present at the site. Scale is typically 1000s of campers. prat (talk) 01:50, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh good. Can I put all my future concert dates on Misplaced Pages, too? And I think there's a plumbing fixtures show coming to town, it needs promotion, too. It's important that Misplaced Pages be used to advertise future events. After all, it's contributing to the "vibe". --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:06, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

If a concert has been going for three decades, once every four years, then it's fair to say that its latest iteration is worthy of note, even months before it happens, or even if it doesn't happen. Be reasonable. Err towards inclusion. Deletion is not something to support or look for, and is a last resort only in extreme situations. prat (talk) 06:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

"Extremely well known"? This is one of a large class of things that I've only heard about from Misplaced Pages. Good thing the advertising goes on. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

• You have unilaterally overturned the outcome of a community discussion which produced an unambiguous consensus. You say "The deletion was in error", but that amounts to no more than saying "I think that the deletion was in error". An individual editor has no authority to overturn a consensus because he/she personally disagrees with it. There are several options open to you, including deletion review, but simply imposing your own individual decision in defiance of unanimous consensus at a deletion discussion is not one of them. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:00, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
• Pratyeka, if you want your opinion known then you comment in the AfD discussion, or bring the article to deletion review if you believe there was an error made in the deletion process. What you cannot do is use your admin tools to override community consensus based on your opinion and personal beliefs - that is an outright abuse of your tools. --Jezebel'sPonyo 21:57, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

ANI Notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Pratyeka_abusing_admin_power regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JDDJS (talk) 21:48, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I just want to let you know that due to your unapologetic at ANI where you refused to admit to any wrong doing, there is now a proposal to ban you from undeleting articles. JDDJS (talk) 02:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

My response

See ANI response for the full text. Basically I see it as a valid undelete which was made with expert domain knowledge and in good faith. Given the imperfections of the deletion process and the fact that we are appointed administrators after a long period of good faith contributions, plus I gave a reasonable notability case in the undeletion, I don't see the problem in this case. Sorry if anyone got upset about it, sheesh. prat (talk) 01:10, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

• You say in the ANI, "what's the point of having admin powers and expert domain knowledge". Let me answer that for you. What you should have done as an expert was take the deletion to review at WP:DRV and present your case - then if you got a consensus, the article could be undeleted. What should you have done as an admin? Absolutely nothing! As you had a clear opinion of your own concerning the deletion and you were the one personally contesting it, that made you WP:INVOLVED, and you should not have used the admin tools. So what is the point of having the admin tools? It is to use them to carry out the will of the community, *not* to enforce your will (expert or otherwise) against the will of the community. Do you understand that? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 03:41, 25 January 2013 (UTC)