Misplaced Pages

User talk:Blade-of-the-South: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:38, 5 November 2013 editBabelBoy (talk | contribs)33 edits This is relevant too← Previous edit Revision as of 03:54, 5 November 2013 edit undoBlade-of-the-South (talk | contribs)2,896 edits This is relevant tooNext edit →
Line 128: Line 128:


Blade, as a newbie not sure whether this is the best place to raise it, but obviously better than the Ghouta talk page. I can't really make out whether that Ghouta CW page is being subverted for a political agenda or whether those people have valid points under the Wiki operating rules. Who actually has final authority on these sorts of things? I look at the Latakia page and it has been whitewashed of the Aug04.2013 attack were 20 insurgent groups combined to kill hundreds and kidnap hundreds more. So I'm getting an impression that anti-Assad people are sanitizing these pages. ] (]) 01:38, 5 November 2013 (UTC) Blade, as a newbie not sure whether this is the best place to raise it, but obviously better than the Ghouta talk page. I can't really make out whether that Ghouta CW page is being subverted for a political agenda or whether those people have valid points under the Wiki operating rules. Who actually has final authority on these sorts of things? I look at the Latakia page and it has been whitewashed of the Aug04.2013 attack were 20 insurgent groups combined to kill hundreds and kidnap hundreds more. So I'm getting an impression that anti-Assad people are sanitizing these pages. ] (]) 01:38, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

:Thats my take too, intel agencies is my guess. Theres a discussion on it here. Maybe policy will develop from this. I know that some editors seem to be on pages full time and are pro US POV. Its a symptom of these times that POV is what they want. But you know BB these are people who are not waking up. Theres a whole movement aware and awake these days, you included. ;) ] ] 03:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:54, 5 November 2013

Your submission at Articles for creation

Bill Le Page, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Misplaced Pages. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

Thank you for helping improve Misplaced Pages!

Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:36, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 16

Hi. When you recently edited Bill Le Page, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charitable (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) 18:23, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok I will look at it, thanks --No-More-Religion (talk) 22:06, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:OS

I noticed the unintentional "outing" and if I wasn't so busy today I would have asked one of the oversighter team arbitrators to do it for you. Please go into the edit history of the page in question, find the edit difference containing the outing, copy its URL and then contact one of the oversight team here WP:OS (section Oversighters, top group), refer to the edit diff and ask him to clear it for you. Cheers. Hoverfish Talk 01:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC) OK thanks will do it later tonight --HumusTheCowboy (talk) 02:26, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Humus

I recently looked at AA site and all my talk with you seems deleted. I can't even pull up by 'BabaisLove' stuff. You seem to have modified, edited and censored much of the talk suggestions I sent you, so that even what I suggested isn't complete! I also see you are adding various refs to support your angle, but I can't see how you jump to some of your conclusions from those refs (I know and have read every document you have quoted here - and much more). Finally, I had thought we agreed the whole point of an AA article was to say (for Baba's sake) something positive and uplifting about His place for the numerous outsiders who read this instead of dwelling on our human error? What will they think of Baba if they read all this? Is the Abode only the sum of our mistakes - nothing more? I had prepared a fully referenced article for you to look at but I see no point, as I don't see any openness or willness to work together here. Good luck and goodbye. RayCK 22:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

@ re openness and willingness, its takes two to do this, but you have been absent from AA talk since the 24th March. BTW I moved this post of yours to the bottom. New posts are always last on the page, like reading. I have not modified any talk page on Avatars Abode. Please dont make accusations without checking first if they are true. Check the history on the talk page please. Misplaced Pages takes some learning, but assume good faith first is the rule. I dont know what you mean by 'I can't even pull up by 'BabaisLove' stuff.' what do you mean? What stuff? I think you are confused with the long posts on your own talk page. Anyway the place for this talk is on the AA talk page. I will reply there BTW sign off with signature icon HumusTheCowboy (talk) 02:27, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Parkinson's science learning project in Wikiversity

Hi. I'd like to bring your attention to a new learning project in Wikiversity. As you have been involved with the discussion on the wikipedia Parkinson's disease page I felt you might be interested in looking at the project and perhaps even contributing material to it. Please see my Talk page, http://en.wikiversity.org/User_talk:Droflet#The_Science_Behind_Parkinson.27s_learning_project , the subpage, http://en.wikiversity.org/User_talk:Droflet/ProjectDescription or the project itself , http://en.wikiversity.org/Portal:The_Science_Behind_Parkinson%27s . It would be great if you could bring the project to the attention of others who might be interested in helping us develop it. Thanks.

Jtelford (talk) 15:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC) (My Wikiversity Username is Droflet)

Thank You Blade-of-the South 00:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Armstrong

Have a read of a couple of my articles, like this http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/06/lance-armstrongs-business-links-a-flowchart-by-dimspace/ which is the most in depth evidence of LA's corruption you will find. Or this http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/07/the-legend-of-the-500/ which was widely accepted as totally dispelling the "tested 500 times" argument and became even more accepted following the UCI's admission that they tested armstrong 215 times. I am far from an Armstrong apologist, totally the opposite. Ive been one of the voices fighting against him for the last 7-8 years. Hell, ive even been personally abused by his team. That said, im impartial on wiki, and for the armstrong article to be accurate some pretty serious changes have to be made to create a balanced article that gives a total impression of the person. That may take a few months, and may involved taking a step or two backwards to start with before we get to the end. Dimspace (talk) 23:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Good to know. I dislike cheats, but the scale of his offending when coupled with the hero thing is ground breaking. Lets nail him impartially Blade-of-the-South (talk) 23:56, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Its amusing to get called an apologist on wikipedia when in other areas im viewed as one of the biggest fighters against him. Have a good read of the business links pdf, it will give you an idea of how he controlled US cycling, filtered money out of livestrong for himself et. When all said and done on wikipedia I want accuracy, and i have the advantage of knowing an incredible amount about armstrongs career, good and bad. In the end an article that starts of critically, does not have nearly as much impact as an article that says he did this, he did this, oh and by the way, it was all a lie. But above all it needs to be accurate, readable and well presented, or people simply wont read it. If you have twitter, you will find me there. Dimspace (talk) 00:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Sign of the times (sighs) Tell you what, when you're ready, insert data and I will back you up Blade-of-the-South (talk) 07:04, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alexander Thom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christopher Knight (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) 11:44, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks for improving Christian O'Brien! Paul Bedsontalk20:23, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Like Blade-of-the-South (talk) 23:20, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Baseball Bugs

Information icon Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Here's a direct link for your convenience. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 07:43, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

edit request

can you please remove "mafia state" from the putin article, meybe it will be a beginning to a serious discussion 83.180.195.202 (talk) 16:55, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I will. Im wondering if you think I put it there? I didnt and am working slowly on riding the US POV, but getting resistance. Blade-of-the-South (talk) 23:42, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

A Home-made Barnstar for you

Home-Made Barnstar
After following your latest efforts in the Syria conflict related articles, I wish to award you this Home-Made Barnstar for editing in difficult areas, for "thinking outside the box" and for doing it well IMHO. Hoverfish Talk 11:16, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

LOL did you find this page, heres where the big battles are. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Ghouta_chemical_attacksBlade-of-the-South (talk) 23:24, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Good edits

Despite our disagreements, I liked some of the edits you made on Ghouta chemical attacks to remove badly cited anti-Syria statements. I think you'll find that a much more efficient use of your time than adding badly cited pro-Syria statements. Rolf H Nelson (talk) 02:49, 13 October 2013 (UTC) Rolf H Nelson (talk) 02:49, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

That almost sounds like a compliment :) Blade-of-the-South (talk) 07:58, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Rebel fatalities in Ghouta

See talk page, discussion had already been opened. Blade-of-the-South talk 00:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Your opinion asked on problems in ‘Syrian civil war’

Esteemed Misplaced Pages colleague: a discussion has been started at Talk:Syrian civil war#Section 2 (Events): five chronology-problems, concerning problems in section 2 of Syrian civil war. I invite you to give us your opinions on suggestions brought forward in that discussion, for as far as those suggestions don’t leave you indifferent. Corriebertus (talk) 15:01, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Having said that despite its flaws WP attracts people due to its potential and also esp the way its used to push bias. Its bias drew me in and others I know. Its potential is vast, but its abuse potential is exploited. And with search engine preferences this one sided view is seen by all. Seeing this unbalanced view many join to give the other side an airing. Make WP more respected. Academic. This leads to issues with some editors who resist the changes. I dont care who edits but do you know intel agencies edit WP?. I woundnt be an admin, it must be difficult. I do believe you are neutral. Blade-of-the-South talk 01:12, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

You're correct - it is hard to be an admin, but I shouldn't complain as it was (mostly) my choice. And I appreciate the neutrality comment. Please try harder to be more aware of the issues associated with this topic area. Blocks generally escalate in length, and if you want to edit this topic area, you have to stay out of trouble. You know, you can always ask someone who's qualified to make the judgment whether something you want to do is acceptable. Take care.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:19, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Thks for the reply, I will ask Hoverfish about WP pointers. And also be more careful. Hopefully you wont read my name on your page again. Dont feel the need to reply. Blade-of-the-South talk 02:27, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Intel editing WP

Found this, hilarious. Blade-of-the-South talk 01:36, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

This is relevant too

American mass media shown to slant heavily in favor of government views on NSA and surveillance Study Huffpo TYT petrarchan47tc 02:19, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Great links, IMO the American people are on the whole good and decent, but the so called leaders are fully controlled by an Elite bent on domination and control, they have about 60% control of all corporations. This whistleblower says the same. . Blade-of-the-South talk 03:37, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Blade, as a newbie not sure whether this is the best place to raise it, but obviously better than the Ghouta talk page. I can't really make out whether that Ghouta CW page is being subverted for a political agenda or whether those people have valid points under the Wiki operating rules. Who actually has final authority on these sorts of things? I look at the Latakia page and it has been whitewashed of the Aug04.2013 attack were 20 insurgent groups combined to kill hundreds and kidnap hundreds more. So I'm getting an impression that anti-Assad people are sanitizing these pages. BabelBoy (talk) 01:38, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Thats my take too, intel agencies is my guess. Theres a discussion on it here. Maybe policy will develop from this. I know that some editors seem to be on pages full time and are pro US POV. Its a symptom of these times that POV is what they want. But you know BB these are people who are not waking up. Theres a whole movement aware and awake these days, you included. ;) Blade-of-the-South talk 03:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)