Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:41, 25 July 2006

Archives of Old Comments:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

merge and delete

I haev a theory about why people put merge and delete in AfDs, based on my own experience getting to know the black art that is Articles for Deletion. There are, of course, common misconceptions about how the GFDL requires back history on all submissions, and this frequently conflicts in the minds of the uninitiated with the way merge is interpreted by default as a 'keep' (or at the least, not a 'delete') by closers. I've taken to adding "Do not keep as a separate article" to my merge votes just to make my intent clear after seeing several AfDs go the opposite way from what I expected. I don't know what the solution is, since merge/redirect/cleanup are technically outside the scope of AfD, but... my two cents. -- nae'blis _(talk) 17:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm just happening upon this discussion, but I've argued several times for merge and delete's being a valid formulation, consistent with the discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Merge and delete and Misplaced Pages:How to fix cut and paste moves, but the latter, for one, seems to require more work than it's worth. In any case, at your suggestion (and consistent with what I, myself, was already inclined to do), I removed my co-nom from Yanksox' (or "Yanksox's" for those who are fans of the MLA—which, of course, opposes text justification and is, therefore, crazy) RfA. Joe 01:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Pokémon on the Wii

I would put it on AfD, but the whole article is a copy from Pokémon, sectioned under Pokémon#Pokémon on the Wii. The article was created by another user in an odd attempt to cut down article size. I moved the criticism section to a sub-article, which removed 8kb from the size, but I don't see the point of moving one paragraph. If you could speedy it, it would be deeply appreciated. Cheers, Highway 20:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Pardon? It's a paragraph copied out of an article. Highway 20:51, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Misza13's pile!

Thank you for contributing the impressive the pile of supports gathered on my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 0x0104/0x01/0x00. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. If I ever may be of assistance, just leave a note on my talk page. Misza13, the rouge-on-demand admin wishes you happy editing! NOTE: This message has been encrypted with the sophisticated ROT-26 algorithm. Ability to decipher it indicates a properly functioning optical sensor array.

AAAAH!

I'm getting lonely, do you know anyone I can talk to, your the only person that knows I exist probably! *weeps* Legolost 20:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Yanksox

Do you know what that grey stats box is doing on Yanksox's RfA. It's got stats from 3 June and some people think he's only been editing for 2 months! (He started his account February 5, 2006.) Tyrenius 22:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Re : AfD/Muhammad Muhsin Khan

Opppppsssssss, how did I do that. :P Perhaps it's the result of closing AfDs in the wee hours of the morning. Anyway, I've fixed it. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 08:19, 23 July 2006 (UTC) ;)

• Heehehe... :D - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 13:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Delete my page?

The Galaxship is a project that I am currently working on. Do you have proof it doesn't exist?

Aliud

Hi! >I must ask, where is the material from? It reads in places as if it was copied from an academic paper - and I > fear there may be copyright issues here. - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:08, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there are copyright issues. I wrote this as part of a University exam. Of course I got the information here and there, but I always give the references to the sources and I did never cut and paste. Purposedly I did not upload but a single image, over which I am sure there is no copyright, because I generated it, starting from one of the many similar versions that have been known for over 200 years. Aliud 19:22, 23 July 2006 (UTC)aliud

Consensus at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/CheNuevara

You might notice people dropping by these days who are looking at the current Requests for adminship process with some surprise. The way requests for adminship works has apparently changed over the last 6 months again, to the point where people have difficulty in grasping how the process works. I suppose it'd be best if someone actually figures out what's up. :-)

The Requests for Adminship page is still officially a consensus finding procedure, fortunately. This means that it is permitted and in fact even encouraged to ask questions to gauge consensus.

I hope that covers what I'm doing enough to reduce your worries a bit. Will this be ok?

If you still think aspects of what I'm doing are wrong somehow, would you care to explain your reasoning? Communication is important when you're trying to come to some compromise, and if you wish to alter a persons' behaviour. Kim Bruning 19:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Requests for adminship was designed as a guided process for finding consensus. People have traditionally not been entitled to anything, and especially and explicitly they are not entitled to vote. My questions are a tad brief, because I have little time these days, and I respect other peoples possible lack of time also.

I hope you understand that I'm not asking people questions in bad faith. I do expect or hope to establish polite communications with each and every person I've reached out to.

On wikipedia there is no right of free speech, and therefore it would be very hard to curtail mine any further. There does exist a duty to maintain process, and there are attendant rights attached to that (including a right to seek consensus towards making a better encyclopedia, with the attached right to question people about their reasoning.)

I am currently looking into the requests for adminship process and trying to decide if it is still viable, so it's very important for me to communicate with as many people about it as possible.

Kim Bruning 20:15, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Punjabi Prison match

It really should be recreated seeing as people know what it is now. Thanks, User:Clay4president

Rude?

I would tend to think so..."buddy"--MONGO 12:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

That's what I figured...best wishes.--MONGO 15:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

username

It actually comes from Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series of books, where it's a title for "second in command", sort of. It's been my handle/e-mail online for a long time, both as a reminder that I'm not in charge, and not to be so self-effacing. I find it a nice compromise... -- nae'blis _(talk) 15:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Warren Kinsella

My recusal comes from the fact that I have long had close dealings with some of the people involved. Outside of Misplaced Pages I also have strong views and a long historey of involvement in Canadian politics, and do not want to be seen to be in a conflict of interest situation. - SimonP 15:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Why was the Punjabi Prison Match article deleted?

Why? It happened last night!

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Punjabi Prison Match - CrazyRussian talk/email 20:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

All those comments weremade before it happened.

So list it at WP:DRV - CrazyRussian talk/email 20:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Gerontech

Thanks for your help in getting this new stub organized --Gerontech 21:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why Gerontech's web site is considered as "self promotional" On the same token, so are most of the others. Gerontech is a NPO and public institution.

Gerontech 06:21, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 24th

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. --Michael Snow 04:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Catamorphism's RfA

Oppose mostly on userpage. Similar reasons to my vote at RfA/Joturner2 - user espouses very controversial beliefs and is a quite bit aggressive about it. And zere it iz! lol - CrazyRussian talk/email 22:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify, the votes are similar, but that is not to say that Joturner "espouses controversial beliefs" - there the situation had to do with his non-controversial religious beliefs. - CrazyRussian talk/email 11:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Um... no comment. Out of curiousity, do you think my userpage is still a problem? -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 12:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey JT. Userpage is a lot better - and you've been great under fire. In retrospect, had I supported your RfA2 I would not have regretted having done so, and I'll be happy to support you in RfA3. I saw your name in a few controversial places, and you were espousing thoughtful and refreshingly non-partisan views, which made me feel good. What's with the username, dude? Tariq from JoTu? :) - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

So you think you might get into Stanford? How's the SAT situation? You're an exceptionally bright kid - and it'll help to be black, too. - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't realize ab meant from. That's actually, like Jo and Tu, the first two letters of a name (Abbas). But, I suppose Tariq from JoTu works perfectly fine as well. Regarding Stanford, I know getting into Stanford is tough for anyone, no matter how intelligent one may be. I'd have to say I'm satisfied with the SAT situation and the place I'm working now and during the school year. Apparently Xoloz has some confidence too. Perhaps being black may help, but I honestly hope people don't capitalize on that (I know you didn't mean any harm). I remember this intelligent black student last year got accepted to MIT and well... he got the affirmative action flack from so many people. But then he went off to MIT, letting them be bitter all with their lonesomes. I predict a similar kind of reaction will be directed towards me, regardless of what happens in my college application process. But frankly, I've heard enough black sheep, oreo, derka, derka, Muhammad jihad jokes to not really care any more. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 15:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

"Tariq ab JoTu" (see the first line of ). Therein lies the biggest problem with affirmative action in education and employment - those racial minorities who are perfectly capable of getting in / getting hired on their own merits are commingled by everyone with those that were "pulled up by their ears", to quote a Russian saying, and that doesn't help one bit. As for the "oreo" stuff, that is beyond disgusting. If anyone said that to me, I would truly clock them, and I advise you do same. - CrazyRussian talk/email 16:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh noes ZOMG!!1! Xoloz wants to gently {{prod}} you?! Strong Keep! </psychosis> - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

If I'm correct, you just suggested I punch those who insult me... sounds almost as bad as attacking those who draw cartoons. And then you followed that with a... um... not sure what exactly that's supposed to mean (a request to accept Xoloz's offer?). Well, either way... that explains the crazy. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 17:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I see... perhaps I would have understood better if we were talking about MIT; I here going there is like being deleted. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 17:31, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Your closure of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Votes for deletion (2nd nomination)

While I disagree with you about "cross-namespace redirects are not allowed" (there is no such policy), I'd like to ask why you chose to recreate articles for deletion as {{deletedpage}}. Now it appears that a page with this title exists (as it is a blue link) and people will accidentally link to it and not notice that it does not lead where they think it will lead. I can understand if you choose to delete the "article" or the cross-namespace redirect, but the only guideline that exists against cross-space redirects is WP:ASR. Now {{deletedpage}} is also a self-reference. In replacing a cross-space redirect with {{deletedpage}}, we have replaced a useful self-reference with a useless one. How is this an improvement? Please re-examine your decision and at least delete the pages. Or check out Misplaced Pages:Cross-namespace redirects where some people are at last discussing the question of a policy about this topic. Thank you, and happy editing, Kusma (討論) 19:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)