Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:34, 22 July 2006

Why not take the original CTMU article to Wikinfo, which promotes a "sympathetic point of view" policy for every article? Just a thought!--Byrgenwulf 11:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I did not write the original CTMU article and don't know who did (other than that his name is Tim Smith). He did a good job, though! Also, I don't think it needs a sympathetic POV, just a neutral one. Langan has written a lot of material and people who follow his work read it very closely and repeatedly. DrL 13:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

DrL, do not edit my comments and change the words that I wrote (changing "socks" to "others"). If I say something you don't agree with, then by all means disagree with me, but do not edit my comments. I see you edited "IQ Prophet's" words as well. His spelling. Why not make sure you can spell properly before editing other people? If they are, in fact, other people. --Byrgenwulf 16:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a clue who IQ Prophet is. Didn't mean to offend and did not use "socks". Please don't make such accusations. Thx DrL 16:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Mediation

Greetings. Byrgenwulf has requested mediation concerning the Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe article. If you'd like to participate, you can find the discussion here: Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-13 CTMU. Thanks. SynergeticMaggot 08:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I have joined the page some time ago and am still waiting for others to join the mediation process instead of vandalizing the CTMU article. DrL 15:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

3RR

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. --ScienceApologist 14:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Please join the mediation (link above) and refrain from massive deletes. DrL 14:26, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Please discuss your edits on the talkpage. --ScienceApologist 14:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

You have been reported for violating WP:3RR here. --ScienceApologist 15:43, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Please note that, thus far, I am the only one following the mediation process wrt the CTMU page. The 3RR rule does not hold in cases of vandalism or sudden mass deletion. DrL 15:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Please reread WP:3RR. It says nothing about "mass deletion" nor do the edits you reverted qualify as vandalism. --ScienceApologist 15:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

DrL, you are not "the only one following the mediation process". Because this is an AfD, the mediation I requested has become redundant. And moreover, I responded to the mediator as well, so please don't try to slant things again. I see you removed my warning regarding 3RR that I gave you before (I understand now it should have come here, but you could have moved it instead of deleting it). Byrgenwulf 16:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions made on July 17 2006 (UTC) to Cognitive-Theoretic Model_of_the_Universe

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

Please note that I was reverting mass deletes/vandalism (examine history for further details). It was my understanding that the 3RR rule does not apply in such cases. Please explain your action. Thank you. DrL 17:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read WP:3RR more carefully. Only blatant vandalism counts, which this wasn't - it appears to be a perfectly sensible argument about what should be on the page William M. Connolley 17:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your efforts to save CTMU. No one can say we didn't try. You might want to add your opinion to the deletion review. Thanks again. Tim Smith 21:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

At this point, I think it's hopeless, but will add my opinion. You inspired me :)) It's nice to see that there are people (albeit only a few) who understand and appreciate the CTMU. I hope to meet you one day at a time when we can all look back and laugh :) Take care, Tim. DrL 22:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

If it's a defeat, it will be a glorious defeat. :) Take care. Tim Smith 15:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

A brief note

DrL, I feel I should mention this. Please do not feel that my actions here are in any way motivated out of hatred for Chris Langan, or his associates. I am arguing a case here which I feel will make Misplaced Pages a better encyclopaedia. I honestly have no "personal issues" here, but rather am pursuing this course because I think it is the most appropriate one to take.

My "deletionist" efforts are not targeted at Langan alone, as a brief look in my editing history will show. I am doing what I believe is best. I don't want the CTMU erased from the planet, I simply feel that is has no place, yet, in an encyclopaedia, correct or incorrect as it may be: perhaps sometime in the future, if has gained a respectable following among experts in the field, it should be included.

I have certainly not wanted to upset Langan, although from what I understand it would take a bit more than this to break him down ;). Indeed, should he ever wish to engage in another debate on the CTMU, my offer still stands. What I am trying to say is, I am sorry if I have caused upset, that was not my intention, ever. Even when Asmodeus was insulting me as he did. I have simply been trying to do what I see as the right thing, and will continue doing so. Byrgenwulf 12:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

• If you were interested in improving Misplaced Pages, you would have given suggestions for improving the Mega Foundation and Ultranet articles instead of just trying to delete them and saying unkind things to me. Now please stay off my talk page. DrL 12:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

IRL

Are you the "Dr. Gina Lynne LoSasso" to whom megafoundation.org is registered?

I think you have probably misunderstood the reason for Byrgenwulf's concern about your articles. Please see my votes in the current AfDs, where I tried to briefly explain the problems posed for the Misplaced Pages by vanity cruft in general. I see these AfDs as part of a salutory attempt to remove vanity cruft in general, not a personal attack on you. However, assuming I have guess correctly about your IRL identity, as a matter of common courtesy, in future please disclose possible conflict of interests on the talk page if you create/edit articles on organizations in which you are closely involved. TIA ---CH

I'm sorry but you are misinformed. Please stop adding to the noise! DrL 23:34, 22 July 2006 (UTC)