| Revision as of 14:24, 20 January 2020 editAustronesier (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers26,163 edits →Germanic peoples: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:01, 20 January 2020 edit undoErmenrich (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers22,358 editsNo edit summaryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile editNext edit → | ||
| Line 88: | Line 88: | ||
| The scope of the article is disputed, and without consensus about the latter by the community, there should be no major changes from the last stable version (whatever it is in this case). Being relatively unexperienced in wikidrama (except for SPIs), I have no idea if this is achieved by full PP and/or other means directly involving the warring editors. –] (]) 14:24, 20 January 2020 (UTC) | The scope of the article is disputed, and without consensus about the latter by the community, there should be no major changes from the last stable version (whatever it is in this case). Being relatively unexperienced in wikidrama (except for SPIs), I have no idea if this is achieved by full PP and/or other means directly involving the warring editors. –] (]) 14:24, 20 January 2020 (UTC) | ||
| :I second {{u|Austronesier}}, things are really out of control there and I can’t even really figure out what it is they’re debating, the discussion gotten so convoluted.—] (]) | |||
Revision as of 15:01, 20 January 2020
The current date and time is 1 January 2025 T 02:55 UTC.
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
|
You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise.
Comments which I find to be uncivil, full of vulgarities, flame baiting, or that are excessively rude may be deleted without response. If I choose not to answer, that's my right; don't keep putting it back. I'll just delete and get annoyed at you.
D O U G W E L L E R |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Home | Talk Page | Contributions | My Stats | Archives | Subpages |
 | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| home |
Talk Page |
Workshop |
Site Map |
Userboxes |
Edits |
Email |
|
Coming here to ask why I reverted your edit? Read this page first... |
Please leave me new messages at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new section at the bottom. I usually notice messages soon. I attempt to keep conversations in one location, as I find it easier to follow them that way when they are archived. If you open a new conversation here, I will respond to you here. Please watchlist this page or check back for my reply. If I have already left a message at your talk page, unless I've requested follow-up here or it is a standard template message, I am watching it. If you leave your reply here, I may respond at your talk page if it seems better for context. If you aren't sure if I'm watching your page, or I'm slow to reply, feel free to approach me here.
| Welcome to my talk page! I am an administrator here on Misplaced Pages. That means I am here to help. It does not mean that I have any special status or something, it just means that I get to push a few extra buttons to help maintain this encyclopedia. If you need help with something, feel free to ask. Click here to start a new topic.
|
| First, please remember that I am not trying to attack you, demean you, or hurt you in any way. I am only trying to protect the integrity of this project. If I did something wrong, let me know, but remember that I am human, and I do make mistakes. Please keep your comments civil. If you vandalize this page or swear at me, you will not only decrease the likelihood of a response, your edits could get you blocked. (see WP:NPA) When posting, do not assume I know which article you are talking about. If you leave a message saying "Why did you revert me?", I will not know what you mean. If you want a response consisting of something other than "What are you talking about", please include links and, if possible, diffs in your message. At the very least, mention the name of the article or user you are concerned with. If you are blocked from editing, you cannot post here, but your talk page is most likely open for you to edit. To request a review of your block, add Administrators: If you see me do something that you think is wrong, I will not consider it wheel-warring if you undo my actions. I would, however, appreciate it if you let me know what I did wrong, so that I can avoid doing it in the future. |
Help wanted
Hi Doug. I don't think we've ever really interacted before so I admit it's a bit awkward for me to come here asking what I'm about to ask. However, I think you might be the right person and generic pleas haven't worked. This revolves around a despute over drug pricing and what guidance should be in the MOS about it. If you click on that link I summarize things up until recently, but if that doesn't do it for you I'd be happy to do so here. At this point I think there needs to be a different person focused on mediating the RfC towards launch from the person addressing the behavior around that discussion, which is elgible for MOS AE. For a while I could do both, but I don't think that's tenable anymore. While I could be either of these people, it seemed like you might be a person who could handle the AE/behavior element of it. Thoughts? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:31, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Barkeep49: too busy today, sorry. This is not something I enjoy doing, but I'll try to find time tomorrow to look. I can't promises though, sorry.Doug Weller talk 19:39, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for considering and I surely understand how it's not something that is enjoyable. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Xenagoras
User:Xenagoras has appealed your arbitration enforcement block at WP:AE. Bishonen | talk 10:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC).
Charmer
Hi Doug, I have only encountered this bizarrely impolite level of hostility rarely and wondered if you had a perspective on the best way to respond to or deal with it. Might be a bit soon for ANI. I could ignore the tone and respond regarding the deficiencies of their argument but feel they may have forfeited much right to a continued dialogue. It's more strongly worded but not their first such remark and they appear to have a bit of a checkered past. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:19, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) But what are they talking about with the "NPC", Mutt Lunker? It's mentioned in both the posts you link. Niagara Parks Commission scum? Bishonen | talk 21:36, 14 January 2020 (UTC).
- @Bishonen: NPC (meme). Doug Weller talk 21:38, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- Learn something every day. Bishonen | talk 21:46, 14 January 2020 (UTC).
- @Bishonen: NPC (meme). Doug Weller talk 21:38, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- A new one on me too. Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:17, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Durrani map
https://alchetron.com/Durrani-Empire#demo
This is the most perfect map with time line, dates and details. Can you uploud it please. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4643:C8EC:0:B88F:9C6D:8AEE:6A9F (talk) 16:58, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Mentioned in dispatches
I namechecked you on WP:ANI re Keith Johnston. Guy (help!) 19:53, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
User insisting on citing Fringe author
Might you be able to offer a little assistance with this very stubborn supporter of including the Christ myth theory supporter Richard Carrier as showing the flaws in academic methodology at Historicity of Jesus? Talk:Historicity of Jesus#Richard Carrier.He keeps asking me for the policy defining Carrier as a fringe figure even though I've pointed him to wp:fringe and wp:rs multiple times. In fact, despite preventing me from removing Carrier, he even made me tell him what Carrier was being cited for!--Ermenrich (talk) 23:49, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Ermenrich: I see it's protected so I guess nothing for me to do? Sorry to be so late replying, I did see it this morning and checked. Doug Weller talk 17:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- Did both of you notice this edit? Strange coincidence. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:27, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Cluebot NG Response
I don’t believe I owe any editors an apology. One has finally come forward and posted a notice that the page I edited does appear to be a propaganda page. Perhaps this wasn’t known when this note was posted to my page?
If my edits were wrong, then you need to correct the page covering the 2009 security breach at the White House. That page (thanks to others, not me) has these facts. And there has been no explanation as to why the bot claims to do routine/tedious edits, but has delved I to things that would require judgement as to if it is “loaded” or “negative” — things requiring human judgement.
Are there bots operated by PR companies? Can’t imagine they wouldn’t try such a thing.
And also, on the question “why would you expect a tool to talk to you” the answer is that if it did talk to me by sending me a message saying it undid my edit, and if it put the accusation in the edit line that the edit was vandalism, then it is reasonable for me to think it could explain itself to me when it posts to my page. Simult2018 (talk) 09:12, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Simult2018 you still owe them an apology for showing such lack of good faith. Whether the article is good or not doesn't excuse your behaviour. But I can see that you can't be convinced and still think that a computer program can hold a discussion with you. Doug Weller talk 09:14, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- I did leave them a note about ClueBot, with instructions for viewing each edit. -- Deepfriedokra 09:20, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Has anyone here showed good faith to me? No. Simult2018 (talk) 09:21, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Simult2018 you started out with "I’m suspicious that this bot is actually working on behalf of the subject of the article." and then "I suspect both of the people that posted these replies are actually involved with the bot." You charged in showing a lack of good faith. Marking a major edit minor doesn't help either. Doug Weller talk 09:27, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Another Fringe pusher
Hi Doug, Would you mind keeping an eye on User:Tympanus? He appears to be a single purpose account promoting the website of a single fringe author. See especially this post where he threatens to edit war over the inclusion of the website and its fringe views? I'll note that he also appears to be at the very least in contact with the fringe author, Rolf Badenhausen, as evidenced here , but given the nature of his contributions it seems possible there's actually a conflict of interest going on here, i.e. he might actually be Badenhausen (because who else would care whether his website saying that Dietrich von Bern is from Bonn was included?). --Ermenrich (talk) 18:05, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Germanic peoples
Hi Doug,
I don't know where to post it (ANI, EW, RPP?), but I think that Germanic peoples (>2000 views per day) needs admin attention. Two editors rip the page to pieces, and especially one of them plays a very unpleasant game (content forking and shifting the scope of the article under the guise of a size split), and becomes increasingly agressive and uncivil in his talk entries. The talk page is spammed with new topics every day, and I am not the only editor who holds back with comments, which likely will be drowned in the endless flood of exchanges by the two dominant and dominating editors. One of the warring editors already went to ANI which resulted in an admonition.
The scope of the article is disputed, and without consensus about the latter by the community, there should be no major changes from the last stable version (whatever it is in this case). Being relatively unexperienced in wikidrama (except for SPIs), I have no idea if this is achieved by full PP and/or other means directly involving the warring editors. –Austronesier (talk) 14:24, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
- I second Austronesier, things are really out of control there and I can’t even really figure out what it is they’re debating, the discussion gotten so convoluted.—Ermenrich (talk)