Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:28, 12 April 2013

My experience after contributing literally thousands of edits to wikipedia; edit the project at your own risk

Well, today I very bitterly say goodbye to Misplaced Pages and announce my final day editing for this project. Finding out that the many complaints I've heard about this website were all true was a real bummer because I gave it the benefit of the doubt and contributed many, many, many thousands of edits. I won't be contributing my services to the project anymore. I am a 26 year old graduate student into the final semester of my Master's degree program. I should be busy spending my time contributing to a task that I receive money and respect from in return for all my hard work and efforts. As it seems hard work and efforts are only rewarded with cliquishness, belligerence, ill reasoning and grief by this project I do not have the energy or time to further waste with this website.

I just like to call attention to the following links before I leave and encourage you all to take a look at not only the news sections but the posted complaints by many people , , and . This link is an article titled "Misplaced Pages in danger as contributor numbers drop." According to the websites in question, since 2007, the number of Misplaced Pages editors have been dropping rapidly like flies and it usually has to do with mindless reversions of edits and abuse of power and Misplaced Pages tools.

This is the very reason I am retiring from the site. On the Judge Judy wikipedia article, I reported on 3 heavily media-covered lawsuits in which Randy Douthit and Judge Judy were sued. User:Canoe1967 later came along and reverted the edits with the reason that Judge Judy and Randy Douthit "were never sued but just the production companies." (as shown here and here ) I argued that they indeed were sued and making it seem that only the production company was sued was not only false, but misleading and potentially harmful to the production companies in question as they really had nothing to do with why the lawsuits had been made. While Canoe provided no sources to his claims that these two had been sued and repeatedly reverted the edits, I repeatedly presented him with credible sources. Just two among the slews of sources I tried to provide this editor. (Redacted)

These were only of the few of the numerous sources I presented in attempt to reason with the editors that Judge Judy and Douthit had been sued as opposed to their production company. But in the end I was deemed in the wrong when an editor with page protection tool--who admitted to having past relations with Canoe in editing Misplaced Pages--not only protected the page on Canoe's edit as shown here and here , but then flat out reported me on the admin noticeboards for reversion (as shown here ) while neglecting the many reversions of the editor he has worked with on Misplaced Pages in the past, Canoe (Canoe's many reversions as shown here: Here Here Here and Here

After arguing my case with blatant evidence in the form of numerous websites at the admin noticeboards (as shown here ), the below is what resulted. The blocking admin takes care to note on the noticeboards that he's going to let Canoe continue editing in despite his many reversions but makes sure to give him a gentle shame on you (as shown here ) I will not even bother with an unblock request because I've tired of the cliquishness, politics, and abuse of tools that goes on with the website. I always heard complaints about it in off-site forums but chose to give it the benefit of the doubt. Having experienced just how bad it is firsthand, I can wholeheartedly vouch for all the complaints against Misplaced Pages and it's manner of handling reversions with little logic, cliquishness, abuse of tools, etc. I encourage new users to very seriously consider what they're getting into before editing this project. The site isn't rapidly lowering in users for no reason. As you can see by the above, logic and reason clearly do not win out on this website.

I have copy and pasted the above complaint to my word processor and will be sharing my experience here on Misplaced Pages with others and will also be sending this complaint to news websites so to spread the word on what editing here is like after loads of hard work and contribution. Goodbye and have a happy life! AmericanDad86 (talk) 04:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Block

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Judith Sheindlin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conspiracy (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) 19:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Bill Maher

Hi. A belated welcome to Misplaced Pages, and thanks for working to improve the site with your edit to Bill Maher, as we really appreciate your participation. However, the edit had to be reverted, because the personal opinions, analyses or commentary of editors cannot be added to Misplaced Pages articles. Doing so violates Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:17, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome. I provided a source.AmericanDad86 (talk) 01:26, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

How's this?

We both know you don't actually care about the sourcing, you're just making a point because you worked hard and feel like it got crapped on. Understandable. And I'm not about to put an inline citation on every single fact in the RAW article. A lot of those are verifiable enough by clicking the Wikilinks, and it would waste a lot of my time to follow the rules that strictly. I never said we should. I ignore them all the time, if it helps the article and nobody objects. In your case, giving the most recent episode of 1,000+ about 1,000 times more weight (through length, prominence and juxtaposition) than any other clearly is a foul, as several people made clear.

However, your work may have a place it belongs. And that's in an Aftermath section of WrestleMania 29. The post-WrestleMania RAW is often seen as a special one, in terms of storylines concluding/beginning and media coverage. While this episode doesn't stand out in the context of 20 years of RAW, it's certainly a lot more relevant to this event. And "on a grander stage" to boot. So if you like that option, let me know. What you put together could be the basis of a useful, informative section we're currently lacking. Or it could make you angry, disliked and/or blocked. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:28, April 12, 2013 (UTC)