Misplaced Pages

Left a note on his talk page - again. He has been warned a number of times about page blanking. I'm afraid next time it happens, a note will have to be left on WP:AN - I would prefer to have dealt with it nicely, but it just happens time and again. :S ViridaeTalk 13:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for jumping in. I was leaving a message for him and had an edit conflict with you. I didn't realize he had done it before so I let your message stand alone because you were firmer with him. Maybe you could answer a question for me on a related topic: I noticed a user who continually blanks his Talkpage, which has the effect of hiding the various warnings he's been issued multiple times. Is there either policy or guideline relating to that? --Doc Tropics 13:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes removing warnings from talk pages is considered vandalism. If they keep doing it, I would suggest reporting it to an admin. Viridae 13:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I've seen your sig on AfD discussions (where we seem to hold similar views) and at the village pump. Maybe you've noticed comments from Captain Kook (not his real name). He was told several times on his Talkpage by Killer Chihuahua not to blank the warnings, but he blanked KC's comments as well. While his antics are entertaining he seems to be disrupting a segment of the community. <sigh> Can't we all just write a dictionary people? --Doc Tropics 14:02, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I utterly agree with the "write a dictionary" sentiments. I would suggest reporting Captain Kook on the Administrators noticeboard or to Killer Chihuahua himself. (now I think about it, the latter might be the best option). Viridae 14:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Oops! I meant encyclopedia of course; sometimes I type faster than I think. BTW - I paged through some of your contribs real quick and I really admire the work you've been doing here. Have a great day :) --Doc Tropics 14:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Viridae 14:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

BTW - No need to bring Captain Kook to anyone's attention anymore. He recently called himself to the attention of our legal counsel Brad Patrick with an...interesting...message titled "Hi Brad". I find myself harboring some sadly non-wiki sentiments probably best not elaborated on here :) --Doc Tropics

What on earth? Seriously, what the hell is that about! Sounds like he has lost it. I now know who you are talking about by the way - I had never seen him user the signature Captain Kook, but I have seen IMHO around. Viridae 08:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, he started in the Half-life article and he's been posting to almost every column in The Village Pump recently. I have to admit that tagging him as Captain Kook was my idea of a joke, but probably poor wikiquette. I try to be a good boy but sometimes...it's just hard. I've made a point of never, ever engaging him or responding to his comments because I don't think I could do it without turning into a troll. Sometimes when I need a break from more serious editing I follow his recent contribs just for a chuckle :) --Doc Tropics 08:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Image link

you're welcome. It took me a while to work out that you need to put a colon in front of image/category/foreignlanguage links in order not to "activate" them, but rather make them linkable. Misplaced Pages is a learning experience. Agathoclea 14:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

You earned this :)

No one has tagged your quote yet, but we'll give it a little more time. The cookie looks good on your Userpage :) --Doc Tropics 06:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Credibility Crisis

Hi again. There is an essay about WP's credibility issues being written here. I wanted to invite you to review it if you have the time and interest. If you'd care to leave any comments on the Talkpage I'd be very interested in your opinions. --Doc Tropics 17:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for jumping into the discussion. Your point was well made and needs some serious thought; I think it really goes to the heart of the issues we're trying to address. --Doc Tropics 00:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

He seems to have stopped.Blnguyen | rant-line 05:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Speedy delete templates

This template must be substituted. Replace {{Cfr-speedy ...}} with {{subst:Cfr-speedy ...}}.

Berkeley of the West

An editor has expressed concern that Berkeley of the West may not be neutral. Please do not remove the template without addressing those concerns.Viridae 23:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The editor didn't give any reason why, other than suggesting that NPOV was somehow obvious. It's not obvious to me. Looking at the subjects of his previous edits, the only thing obvious to me is that he is Mormon, and my guess is that he was offended by the inclusion of the term. I suppose he will call it NPOV until if and whenever the article gets deleted. Understood it is a term Mormons may not like to hear, but that doesn't make it NPOV any more than the article on hell isn't NPOV for not talking about heaven. Perhaps you can assist me in understanding how this article is not NPOV. Reswobslc 23:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe sentances like The term's underlying suggestion is that if the folks at BYU who claim academic freedom is not an issue can't even properly reference the location of their own school on a map, that they must be too sheltered to be in a sufficiently well-informed position to make that sort of claim. are overly critical of the students. I also think the use of presumably in this sentence is designed to be derogatory: while students at BYU presumably find the level of freedom acceptable enough to attend the university.. See WP:AWW. Viridae 23:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

There is no WP:CRIT saying being critical is not allowed, otherwise we wouldn't have pages like Microsloth to criticize Microsoft, or a nigger page, or the terms described on this page and this page and this page and this page. All of these reference terms that are undoubtedly critical of the groups they refer to. When someone makes a big public mistake (and publishing a prominent obvious error in a newspaper is a textbook example), they're going to merit legitimate criticism, whether they're a BYU student, a Microsoft employee, a Presidential advisor, or whoever they might be. Just because a page about criticism (or a critical term) contains criticism, doesn't make it NPOV! If you look at BYU's entry, you'll see that academic freedom at BYU is an ongoing sore spot there, all the way up to the level of the AAUP, and not some little jab one guy took at the University writing a biased Misplaced Pages article to laugh at the mistakes of three of its students. Further, I am not sure I agree that the second statement you mention (the while students at BYU presumably find the level of freedom acceptable enough to attend the university.) is intended as an attempt at WP:AWW, rather it is simply a logical one, like presumably your chair is not on fire because you're still sitting in it., but a word means something different to everyone and acknowledge that many will agree with you on that point and not me and that's reason enough to be concerned about it. Reswobslc 00:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

My view on that second sentance was that it was a fairly disparraging way of putting it. I am considering editing it to say something along the lines of "However the university has many students enrolled, indicating that the freedom given is acceptable for those that attend.". I believe that imparts more neutrality than the current sentence. Viridae 01:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

The changes you made have removed my misgivings over the neutrality of the article. The NPOV template has been removed. Thanks for being a worthwhile editor to work with. Viridae 01:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks likewise Reswobslc 01:55, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Khoikhoi

It was probably a sock of one of the Persian or Turkish editors who always appear to be conflicting with him. In some of the Persian pages there is always talk of a Zionist conspiracy to turn WP into a Zionist propaganda machine. Khoikhoi's alerted me to the existence of off-site Persian forums where there seem to be quite a few people who are angry with him.Blnguyen | rant-line 03:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Caught me too fast

You removed the {{citation needed}} template from the article saying refer to the talk page but I cannot see where you mean. Can you point me in the right direction. Viridae 06:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

You caught me too fast on the Male Pregnancy page - I was still typing my Discussion response. Check it out now. Queerwiki 06:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that.Viridae 06:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thnaks for the welcome !

Thanks for the welcome Viridae ! I've been adding things to the sea star article and was registered under my IP address. Perhaps I will try to create new articles relating to the Echinoderms, as it is noticeably lacking if compared with other invertebrate-related articles, especially insects.

Best Regards, Pentapod 06:49, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Sonny Perdue

The primary issue with the Sonny Perdue page is the amount of editorializing that has been found.

The first piece that tipped things off was the mention of local control involving schools, in paragraph 4 (I believe). Specifically of note was the statement that Perdue was not getting in the way of the legislature involving extra paperwork for homosexual clubs. I wouldn't have thought it serious, but the language that was used seemed to be very editorial in nature.

The second issue that I was going to bring up was the issue of cleanup involving the article. It seems to look more messy. Being as I have had issues trying to clean up such pages, I would have figured to put up a "clean up banner" would have helped.

Anyhow, since everything has been resolved, I have no need to worry about it. Thank you for taking the time to help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.223.194.94 (talk • contribs)

Verifiable

Your comments in AfD are incorrect. How you personally interpret policy is your choice. I prefer to read the words and follow the policy as written. You wrote: "And it is your job as someone listing an article for deletion, to actually do a bit of background research to make sure that it warrants deletion under one of the wikipedia policies. ViridaeTalk 11:48, 2 July 2006 (UTC)" It is not my job. That is the job of the author. And if an author does not provide any sources of information then it makes that quite impossible and by definition original research. I haven't any personal prejuidice against any topic or content whatsoever. All articles must be compliant, however. You perhaps are a contributor. I on the other hand mainly do cleanup of the WP:BACKLOG. I see no reason for you to be upset at me at all. If an article can stand on its own, then what does it matter to you? Thanks. Ste4k 16:09, 2 July 2006 (UTC)