Misplaced Pages

User talk:JzG: 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 01:43, 17 February 2014 editElaqueate (talk | contribs)5,779 edits →James McGibney has weak sourcing and material.: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 06:43, 17 February 2014 edit undoQuackGuru (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users79,978 edits →Truce: truceNext edit →
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 69: Line 69:
::I understand I don't own chiropractic and I can take a break from pseudoscience articles. With your help I can improve my approach to editing Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 20:45, 13 February 2014 (UTC) ::I understand I don't own chiropractic and I can take a break from pseudoscience articles. With your help I can improve my approach to editing Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 20:45, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
::: The evidence is against you on this. It's not as if this is your first go-round. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 21:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC) ::: The evidence is against you on this. It's not as if this is your first go-round. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 21:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
::::I do want to and I will change the way I use and edit Misplaced Pages. I will change the way I comment on the talk page. I will restrict my edits. I am changing my behaviour. I am moving on from the content dispute we had at chiropractic. I made a mistake by sticking to policy and now understand even if text is sourced it should not overrule editorial discretion. I am sorry I was wrong. And I am sorry for pissing you off. ] (]) 02:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
::::I do accept your offer of an . If you want to try an edit restriction instead I will abide by it. But I think for the main chiropractic article I should not edit that article for a very long time. I think a clean break from editing the main ] article is best for me. I would like to edit other related articles such as Chiropractic controversy and criticism. If you accept an edit restriction for me it can be imposed with my agreement. ] (]) 04:06, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
::::It is also acceptable to me if the article was restored to the before the changes I made to the article. I should not have made so many changes at one time. This by another editor gave me the wrong idea about my edits. It should of been discussed and consensus gained first. I should work better at collaboration and I will accept edits I disagree with to the articles I edit. ] (]) 06:43, 17 February 2014 (UTC)


== dell == == dell ==

Revision as of 06:43, 17 February 2014


Archives
no archives yet (create)
Gastrich, PRT, October 2005, December 2005, January 2006, January 2006a, February 2006, February 2006a, March 2006, April 2006, May 2006, June 2006, July 2006, September 2006, October 2006, November 2006, December 2006, January 2007, February 2007, March 2007, April 2007, May 2007, June 2007, July 2007, August 2007, October 2007, December 2007, January 2008, February 2008, March 2008, April 2008, May 2008, June 2008, July 2008, August 2008, September 2008, October 2008, November 2008, December 2008, January 2009, February 2009, March 2009, April 2009, May 2009, June 2009, July 2009

Obligatory disclaimer
I work for Dell Computer but nothing I say or do here is said or done on behalf of Dell. You knew that, right?
This user is an administrator on the English Misplaced Pages. (verify)
This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.
This user is a
Rouge admin.

busy

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. Please send email for anything requiring urgent attention.

Chiropractic page

Dear guy,

I am concerned when reading the chirorpactic page that it has been hijacked and presents a highly biased point of view by QuackGuru. Would this be able to be fixed as an administrator?

Regards, DJFryzy — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJFryzy (talk • contribs) 08:52, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

You would not like what would happen if I was allowed to control that article, believe me. Guy (Help!) 23:02, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Thankyou for your reply DJFryzy (talk) 05:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Possible mis-click

Hello there! I noticed that you template-protected the article Halla Diyab. I'm sure this was just a mis-click or oversight (and you're not the first to do it). If there is a specific reason for this (which is possible and allowed), please note that on the talk page. I figured I would let you know directly so that you could take care of it. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} 20:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks like it. I'll fix it. Guy (Help!) 23:03, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Truce

I am only trying to improve the chiropractic article. If there is a specific problem with a particular edit I can fix it. Please help. QuackGuru (talk) 18:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I have read your comment. Is there any changes I made you want me to fix or change. I am more than happy to improve the article. Is there a specific sentence you want me to delete or rewrite. Any changes I made you specifically disagree with I can fix it. Please let me know what you want me to fix. I think we can work together on fixing the article or if you prefer I take a break from chiropractic. Let me know what you want me to do. QuackGuru (talk) 20:06, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

You really don't get it, do you? This is not about any specific change to the article it's about:
  • Large numbers of substantial changes, overwhelming anyone else's ability to review them
  • Reflex reversion of any edits to your text
  • Behaving as if you WP:OWN the article
  • Dysfunctional communication with other users, rarely extending beyond terse assertions that you are right
That sort of thing. Exactly as in the RfC. It's not content you need to change, it's the way you use Misplaced Pages. Guy (Help!) 20:17, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
I can make small changes rather than large changes such as only one section of an article at a time and discuss the changes.
I can discuss changes I want to make on the talk page rather than reflex reversions.
Even when I think I am right I can move on rather continuing to discuss the matter.
I understand I don't own chiropractic and I can take a break from pseudoscience articles. With your help I can improve my approach to editing Misplaced Pages. QuackGuru (talk) 20:45, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
The evidence is against you on this. It's not as if this is your first go-round. Guy (Help!) 21:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
I do want to change and I will change the way I use and edit Misplaced Pages. I will change the way I comment on the talk page. I will restrict my edits. I am changing my behaviour. I am moving on from the content dispute we had at chiropractic. I made a mistake by sticking to policy and now understand even if text is sourced it should not overrule editorial discretion. I am sorry I was wrong. And I am sorry for pissing you off. QuackGuru (talk) 02:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
I do accept your offer of an edit restriction. If you want to try an edit restriction instead I will abide by it. But I think for the main chiropractic article I should not edit that article for a very long time. I think a clean break from editing the main chiropractic article is best for me. I would like to edit other related articles such as Chiropractic controversy and criticism. If you accept an edit restriction for me it can be imposed with my agreement. QuackGuru (talk) 04:06, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
It is also acceptable to me if the article was restored to the previous version before the changes I made to the article. I should not have made so many changes at one time. This edit by another editor gave me the wrong idea about my edits. It should of been discussed and consensus gained first. I should work better at collaboration and I will accept edits I disagree with to the articles I edit. QuackGuru (talk) 06:43, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

dell

Is "Channelregister" a reliable UK site? The VSP is obviously real, but the "exceeding expectations" seems to be something ive not heard elsewhere, and in light of the rumored "bloodbath" layoffs seems unlikely? Gaijin42 (talk) 19:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

There is a VSP. Nobody I work with is eligible, we all have strategic skills (cloud, virtualisation, datacenter transition etc). It's normal after an LBO. Same happened when I worked for SunGard, IIRC. I can talk more about it later in the year. Channel Register is a bit tabloidish on this kind of thing, IMO. The bit about EQL being replaced by CML technology? Not any time soon. EQL walks out of the door unaided, we can't ship it fast enough. Everybody who has it, loves it. CML was a fantastic acquisition, its price was softened by its weak hardware platform, and we are the world's largest OEM server vendor, according to the info I have. The site where I'm working now has CML arays, they love them. They don't really compete in the same accounts. EQL is very popular with small & medium, CML sells mainly to larger midrange, enterprise and hosting companies. All this is, of course, just my personal impression as a storage dude, and I certainly don't speak for Dell. Guy (Help!) 22:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, my entire division was immune since we were just bought, and part of the software division. That part that mainly confused me was that more people had taken the VSP than expected, because I hadn't heard that anywhere else. Gaijin42 (talk) 22:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
The rumour mill said some of that, but I've not seen any evidence. Applications may have exceeded quota, anybody with transferable skills will bite your hand off for a payout right now since people are hiring left right and centre. A couple of mates who were on the WFR programme before Christmas are minted now! Lucky sods :-) Guy (Help!) 23:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Declined speedy

I ended up declining the speedy for Lindsay Deutsch. I don't think she passes notability guidelines as a whole, but she has enough of an assertion of notability to where she just barely passes speedy criteria. WP:AfD would probably be best here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:13, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Yaariyan (2014 film)

A note on the talk explaining this edit would have been helpful. Thanks. Soham 18:16, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

The edit history is pretty much self-explanatory, I reckon. Look at the edit histories of the contributors. Guy (Help!) 00:10, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

James McGibney has weak sourcing and material.

Hi, I don't want you to think I'm, in any way, hostile to your note on this article's talk page, because I'm not. I'd like to give people a fair chance. But the more I look at the actual sources available for this subject, the more it seems like someone who got a spike of favourable attention in 2012 for buying out a competing "public shaming" business with worse ethics, and nothing but self-promotion and press releases after that. The CBS Go story and the interview with Anderson Cooper are the highest attention he got among usable sources. The second party interviews about bullying were all related to his purchase and later interviews seem to all have COI issues with them. Anyway, I didn't want you to think I was removing stuff without reason, beyond WP:V and WP:NPOV, and I'm also not trying to antagonize the subject of the article, but we can't source an article to old press releases. I hope you see what I'm trying to say. (I hadn't heard of this guy before his article was mentioned on the RS noticeboard.) __ E L A Q U E A T E 01:43, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Category: