| Revision as of 00:03, 26 August 2010 view sourceDYKUpdateBot (talk | contribs)Bots, Administrators249,039 edits Giving DYK credit for Scottish Review of Books← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 20:55, 30 April 2015 view source Maintenance script (talk | contribs)Bots398 editsm Maintenance script moved page User talk:ChrisO to User talk:ChrisO~enwiki without leaving a redirect: Automatically moved page while renaming the user "ChrisO" to "ChrisO~enwiki" | ||
| (37 intermediate revisions by 16 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| ''Old discussions now at ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ] / ]'' | |||
| '''Please add new comments below.''' | |||
| == Have a barnstar! == | |||
| {| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#if: {{ifequal|{{{2}}}|alt}}|]|]}} | |||
| |rowspan="2" | | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Good Humor''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Your ] was rather funny. Thanks for a good laugh! <small>--]: ]</small> 22:27, 3 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| == DYK == | |||
| It's verified and ready to go. The infobox needs to be filled out a bit though. I'm sure 1935 is the correct date even though it's been changed since then. | |||
| Anyway this was in ]: | |||
| {{fmbox | |||
| | image = ] | |||
| | text = <div style="font-size:1.4em; font-weight:bold;">Attention</div> | |||
| Your IP address ] will be logged by the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc and disseminated publicly. Violators of our ] can and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law by the <big>''']'''</big>, which takes such offenses very seriously. Criminal violations include but are not limited to defacement, knowingly providing false information, and/or uploading copyrighted material without permission from rights holders, any of which can be punished by fines, imprisonment, and a term of ] during which you may be restricted by the court from accessing a computer or the Internet. You may also be subject to civil suit by the Wikimedia Foundation, resulting in disgorging of your assets and/or ] of wages to satisfy the judgment. You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the ] License and the ]. | |||
| }} | |||
| ] ] 20:54, 4 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :LOL! | |||
| :Actually 1941 ''is'' the correct date - the seal was created in 1940 and first used in January 1941. -- ] (]) 21:01, 4 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| I'm afraid the character count is still not okay, can you add some more to make it ready for DYK? --] (]) 07:06, 5 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::*] ] ] 16:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *While I'm not sure that this adds much, this piece of at least indicates the spread of sealgate. Perhaps not worth adding, good luck with the more academic and historical research. . . ], ] 18:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==Voluntary CC article restriction== | |||
| Please consider signing the CC restriction, as explained . ] (]) 01:37, 6 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==DYK nomination of Milan Paumer== | |||
| ] Hello! Your submission of ] at the ] has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath '''{{T:TDYK|Milan Paumer|your nomination's entry}}''' and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! <!--Template:DYKproblem--> ] (]) 00:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :nice work, but it's missing in line refs ] (]) 00:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::ready for DYK . ] (]) 00:40, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Heidi Klum's husband == | |||
| {| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#if: {{ifequal|{{{2}}}|alt}}|]|]}} | |||
| |rowspan="2" | | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I know we've argued sometimes in the past, but I have to congratulate you on your integrity. Jimbo's comments on T:TDYK, I feel, were anathema to the entire point of this wiki, and are, to me, tantamount to allowing the government to needlessly interfere with the running of the encyclopedia. We need more editors to not bow to such pressures. ''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 02:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| :Chris, I'm afraid I have to take an opposite position. I've probably agreed with you more than not on most other issues. I agree that the FBI's position was asinine. But a DYK on this article smacks of retaliation for the FBI complaint. I just think it's a bad move and I really hope that you'll reconsider and withdraw the DYK nomination. ] (]) 13:45, 12 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::As I said on Jimbo's page, I think your compromise proposal is a very good one. Thanks for your flexibility on this. ] (]) 17:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==DYK for Attorney General of Virginia's climate science investigation== | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| |tyle = notice | |||
| |small = | |||
| |image = ] | |||
| |text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and add it to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
| }} -- ''']''' (]) 06:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Nice article. Well done. ] ] 15:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Your comment at JW's talk page == | |||
| Concerning at Jimbo Wales' talk page, I refer you to ]. -- ] (]) 17:31, 12 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :I have no idea what you are no about, I am a neutral and care less apart from the wikipedia. ] (]) 17:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Come off it, you've been following me around for some time. -- ] (]) 17:37, 12 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::I have not, I do my thing to protect living people and to support the wikipedia foundation as I see fit and am able, if you bounce off me because of that then lets try to contribute something together. ] (]) 17:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Global Warning skepticism == | |||
| You put the deletion discussion on the wrong place. It's supposed to go on the ], not inside another discussion. <span style="color:green">Ten Pound Hammer</span>, his otters and a clue-bat • <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup> 17:07, 13 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Sorry, my bad. Thanks for fixing it! -- ] (]) 17:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==Scottish Review of Books== | |||
| I'm afraid your recent edit to the ] concerning the ''Scottish Review of Books'' deleted a number of posts, which I've restored. I've also answered your question about which Alastair McIntosh wrote that review. -- ] (]) 16:20, 15 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Sorry about that - and thanks for fixing it. Must have been a copy-and-paste error after the edit conflict, though I can't quite see how I managed to do it. ] (]) 16:26, 15 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == 4 reverts on Michael Mann == | |||
| A less confrontational attitude from all concerned would be helpful. The first one to cease name-calling and aggressive comments ("silly," "knock it off" etc.) is the winner. ] (]) 00:27, 16 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Perhaps I should just ban these people from my talk page. In fact, let's do it. ATren, Marknutley, Minor4th and the rest of the crew are hereby banned from this talk page and any edits they make will be reverted on sight. I've deleted all existing edits from them (would that this was possible Misplaced Pages-wide!). Problem solved. -- ] (]) 00:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::That's probably not a textbook definition of 'less confrontational', but it can't help. Just remember to keep the edit summaries polite. ] (]) 00:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::It can't ''help''? -- ] (]) 00:36, 16 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Freudian slip? ] (]) 00:37, 16 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Probably. :-) -- ] (]) 00:41, 16 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Hurt. :) Got the first letter right. Got the number of letters correct. So I got the meaning completely wrong. Do you expect me to be ''perfect'' or something? ] (]) 01:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Firefly3xx == | |||
| Hi there. You just asked that blocked user why he maliciously reported me on SPI. Don't bother, he does that because he thinks it's funny. He's done it several times now since I filed some of his own socks for SPI. ] (]) 18:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Ah, I see. No worries. He made the mistake of posting to one of the most closely watched sockpuppet subpages, though... -- ] (]) 18:39, 17 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Who is Scibaby? == | |||
| Hello ChriscO...you left a message concerning a sock (argyle?) Scibaby. Who is Scibaby? ] (]) 05:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010) == | |||
| {{WPMILHIST Newsletter header|LIII|July 2010| }} | |||
| {| style="width: 100%;" | |||
| | valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" | | |||
| ; <big><font color=steelblue>Project news</font></big> | |||
| ] | |||
| | valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" | | |||
| ; <big><font color=steelblue>Articles</font></big> | |||
| ] | |||
| |- | |||
| | valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em; width: 50%;" | | |||
| ; <big><font color=steelblue>Members</font></big> | |||
| ] | |||
| | valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" | | |||
| ; <big><font color=steelblue>Editorial</font></big> | |||
| ] | |||
| |- | |||
| | valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: center; font-size: 85%; " | | |||
| To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section ]. | |||
| |} | |||
| <small>This has been an automated delivery by ] (]) 21:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)</small> | |||
| == BLP == | |||
| Just wondering how you square restoring to the lead, despite the poor sourcing, yet at the same time arguing that material from the W/Post about Michael Mann—material nowhere near as bad—might not even be notable enough to be in the article at all. <font color="blue">]</font> <small><sup><font color="red">]</font><font color="green">]</font></sup></small> 23:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :It was deleted without comment by a hit-and-run anonymous IP, and the material in question appears to be sourced to reliable sources. On the other hand your material from the Washington Post ''is not even about Mann''. It doesn't even ''mention'' him. I've already explained in detail why you've got it wrong but you don't seem to want to acknowledge any possibility that you might have made a mistake. Please, for heaven's sake, familiarise yourself with the source material before pontificating on it. -- ] (]) 23:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::The sources look like rubbish to me, a barely notable newspaper and some websites, yet the material's considerably more damaging that the Mann stuff. And you restored it, so you're responsible for it. I'm asking you to explain why you're so protective of the BLP of someone you agree with, yet so cavalier with another. <font color="blue">]</font> <small><sup><font color="red">]</font><font color="green">]</font></sup></small> 01:01, 19 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::SV, this exchange leads me to conclude that the deletion from the Rekers page is ] editing. I have already reverted part of that deletion on other grounds -- in part because of your own assertion that other sources you consider better are available (and indeed there is a wealth of sourcing for that part of his bio). ] (]) 01:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::No, this is far from pointy editing. I didn't want to edit that article, but felt I couldn't leave that stuff in the lead. Chris restored highly critical material to the lead of a BLP based on the '']'', a freesheet; rawstory.com; and pinknews.co.uk. Further into the article, I see sources such as blog.unzipped.net. and slog.thestranger.com. This is a BLP that Chris has edited 26 times since May, and the talk page 27 times in the same period. Yet holding himself up as a bastion of BLP elsewhere (when it comes to BLPs of people he agrees with politically), he restored these very poor sources to a BLP lead. | |||
| ::::I did see that the same material is better sourced deeper in the article, otherwise I'd have removed it all, but that's not a reason to add bad sources too. | |||
| ::::Look, the point is that other people have been alleging that certain editors use BLPs of people they don't like as dumping grounds for criticism from poor sources, while at the same time whitewashing BLPs of people they do like no matter how good the sources are, and this looks like an example. <font color="blue">]</font> <small><sup><font color="red">]</font><font color="green">]</font></sup></small> 02:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::This is getting very silly and dishonest. I haven't edited the Rekers article for months and I reverted an obvious act of vandalism; if someone else has added blog sources to the article I agree that needs to be fixed, but you can hardly hold me responsible for that. I corrected an obvious factual error on the Mann article which I've explained repeatedly and you haven't even acknowledged. In response you have been repeatedly lashing out and attacking me with no justification whatsoever. Might I remind you that you are still under that you appear to be flouting? Do I need to ] or are you willing to show a bit more cooperation and a lot less denunciation? -- ] (]) 07:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| * coming up. . . ], ] 09:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| By the way, looks rather like you're responding to me, @ Atren would presumably clarify things. . ], ] 13:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == We've been down that path before... == | |||
| it was called BADSITES, and I think it's a vast credit to Misplaced Pages that they've moved on from such things. You learn to tune out the people that can't/won't be reached, honestly (and if you look at my participation there, it's really dropped off), If there wasn't a Misplaced Pages Review, I quite think that there would be something like that already. It can be a useful safety valve. ] (]) 19:38, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :As for the Shark tank comment, trust me.. nothing would surprise me. Daniel Brandt listed information on me on Hivemind, I've been targeted be a couple of users there for mockery/abuse etcetera.. So, you learn to grow as thick a skin as possible. Me posting there wouldn't change it one way or the other, sadly. ] (]) 19:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::I guess, but I think you can understand where I'm coming from. As far as I'm concerned it's run by malicious kooks for malicious kooks, and the support of the non-malicious merely puts a veneer of respectability over a rotten core. It would have been far better to have consigned the kooks to their own website and started a reputable forum for reputable editors. -- ] (]) 19:42, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::SirFozzie, editors in authority shouldn't need a place to vent their spleen outside of the several thousand forums on Misplaced Pages. But if they do, they should keep zipped about current situations in which they are officially involved. I'm not commenting on your Internet posts, but I was just annoyed to notice that one administrator active in the CC discussions, a professed "uninvolved administator," is posting on that message board about WMC's block. I think that's wrong. ] (]) 20:17, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::A fun exercise - count how many of the contributors to that thread are banned. -- ] (]) 20:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I'm less concerned with that than I am seeing editors who can and do wield power over others, and their participating in discussions concerning editors in which they are involved in active disputes. Since an arbitration committee member theoretically could become involved in anything, I don't see the wisdom of an arbcom member participating in net forums, if they take their volunteer responsibilities seriously. Websites outside of Misplaced Pages are exempt from Wiki conduct rules. I don't think it's fair or right for administrators, who have so much power anyway, to babble on about other editors outside of Misplaced Pages's jurisdiction, if they expect to be trusted by the community. ] (]) 20:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::ChrisO, Misplaced Pages Review is responsible for helping resolve several big time problems occurring in Misplaced Pages, which, if allowed to continue, probably would have resulted in immense damage to the project's credibility and reputation. You should be thanking WR for exposing them, not criticizing it. In fact, you should feel welcome to join and post there. ] (]) 21:58, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I don't see that as being relevant, as it relates to the situation we face in the CC pages. My concern is that external websites, whatever they may be, present two potential problems. One is that administrators/arbitrators/others in authority may make comments indicating prejudice on issues they're dealing with as administrators or arbitrators. The second problem is use of outside websites to circumvent Misplaced Pages canvassing rules, to encourage participation on one side of a dispute. Whether the websites themselves are good or bad is not the point. ] (]) 14:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==DYK for Milan Paumer== | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| |style = notice | |||
| |small = | |||
| |image = ] | |||
| |text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and add it to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
| }} <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 18:03, 22 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==DYK for Star Carr house== | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| |style = notice | |||
| |small = | |||
| |image = ] | |||
| |text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and add it to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
| }} ] (]) 06:03, 23 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Mark your reverts as such? == | |||
| ] (]) 18:01, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :I didn't notice that someone had previously hatted it... Either way I don't think it contributes anything to the article's development, so it either needs to be hatted or archived. -- ] (]) 18:13, 24 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==DYK for Scottish Review of Books== | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| |style = notice | |||
| |small = | |||
| |image = ] | |||
| |text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and add it to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
| }} ] (]) 00:03, 26 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 20:55, 30 April 2015
Redirect to: