Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:07, 17 June 2015

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.

See additional sources regarding Musk. Added professional clinic source + documentary on Silicon Valley for video proof. If you need any further feel free to see the available google indexed sources. It is widely accepted which there isn't any reasons for this not to be on Wiki under health and appearance as it is for other famous celebrities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.141.164.13 (talk) 19:41, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

• This is scurrilous personal trivia. The sources are not reliable per WP:RS. andy (talk) 20:11, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Are you actually saying a HT surgeon and a video of Musk itself prior to surgery is unreliable info? If that's the case, I don't know what reliable information is. Please illuminate all of us. Trying to get your rationale on record.

I have already pointed you to the main guideline that applies here, WP:RS. In addition you have presented other people's speculation as fact and presented your own opinions as fact - see WP:OR. You must follow these guidelines. And there's also the issue of including trivia in an article, but let that rest for now. andy (talk) 21:56, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Chlorella - yes that is what it says. Blue-Green algae. And IBT was quoting John Hopking's. You have a quick rev before you look at it.207.119.112.48 (talk) 22:02, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

"More stupid" is merely an attention grabbing headline that isn't borne out in the body of the article, which is in any case a rewrite of someone else's article. The phrase actually used is "minor cognitive impairment" andy (talk) 22:29, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

"Crewed" rather than "manned"

You reverted my edits, saying while "crewed" does in fact sound odd, "that's the way it's now written". According to whom? Manned is the standard term for nearly all space agencies I know of.

• Misplaced Pages's manual of style, I'm afraid. See MOS:GNL. NASA now calls it "human spaceflight", which sounds a lot less ugly than "crewed" but doesn't work in every context (e.g. "humaned spacecraft"). Andyjsmith (talk) 21:22, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Manned is already gender-neutral, however; just as "mankind", "manhole", and "congressman". MeanMotherJr (talk) 21:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

• I'm not trying to argue otherwise, simply pointing out that WP:MOS says otherwise. Andyjsmith (talk) 21:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Where in the style guide does it mandate the use of "crewed", or state that "manned" is not gender-neutral? MeanMotherJr (talk) 21:34, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

As I said, I have no stake in this. I grew up with " manned" so it sounds ok to me. Why not ask for a third opinion? WP:3O Andyjsmith (talk) 21:53, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I'd love to, but from who? MeanMotherJr (talk) 22:12, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

It's all explained at WP:3O Andyjsmith (talk) 07:24, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Elon Musk Stanford advisory board

There is nothing on his Forbes profile, see; http://www.forbes.com/profile/elon-musk/. A quick Google search will provide zero reliable sources, merely a small collection of unreliable sources, almost certainly getting the information from Misplaced Pages itself. DocHeuh (talk) 15:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

• Sorry, I was reverting the guy before you who thought Musk wasn't American, hence the ref to Forbes. I'd thought I'd preserved your edit but I goofed. Andyjsmith (talk) 16:17, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. Will change back now. DocHeuh (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Dust devil

It was not disruptive editing. it is almost all about Earth so it should not be in the Mars category. 118.93.90.74 (talk) 09:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't know that we measured articles for categories - I thought it was to do with the semantic content. A non-trivial part of the article is about Mars, which is why it was given that category in the first place and why it should remain in that category. Reverting after a clear objection on sensible grounds is disruptive, especially given some of your previous edits. Please discuss on the article talk page if you want to change it. Andyjsmith (talk) 10:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

If we use you reasoning we would almost end up with every single article in every single category. And we don't want that do we. WP is in enough trouble already. So think about it: an article that is predominantly about a terrestrial phenomenon is placed in a category that is about Mars. Does the make sense? No it doesn't. You are not even considering putting it in one of the subcategories such as Geography of Mars. Have a look at how categorisation is done. 118.93.90.74 (talk) 20:00, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

If you can find an appropriate subcategory, be my guest. Andyjsmith (talk) 20:12, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

There isn't so I didn't. 118.93.90.74 (talk) 20:28, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)PLEASE BE MORE CAREFUL WITH YOUR EDITS lol! _Fortuna 20:37, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

wot do u mean? wot r u tryin to say? 118.93.90.74 (talk) 20:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

You are gung-ho, is what it means. E.g. Your edits to Peter Singer. Andyjsmith (talk) 21:23, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

And you have no idea about rational editing of wp. you seem to think the every aricle should be connected to every other articlke and to every category. u need to THINK befory u EDIT. 118.93.90.74 (talk) 21:32, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

• This isn't a pissing contest. Andyjsmith (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I know that but if your pissing is like your editing it will be a dribbler and mine will be over the roof of the house. 118.93.90.74 (talk) 19:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Friendly notice

Incase you are unaware:

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Andyjsmith. Thank you. -- Orduin 20:07, 17 June 2015 (UTC)