Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:03, 8 January 2007

Mangojuice is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.

Administrators: if you want to overturn one of my administrative actions, and I don't appear to be active, go ahead, so long as the action wasn't an overturning of your action. Use common sense, naturally. Mangojuice 18:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Archives
15,000,000,000 BC – 17 Feb 2006 17 Feb 2006 – 17 Apr 2006 17 Apr 2006 – 10 May 2006 10 May 2006 – 9 Jun 2006 9 Jun 2006 – 12 Jul 2006 12 Jul 2006 – 26 Aug 2006 26 Aug 2006 – 19 Oct 2006 19 Oct 2006 – 3 Dec 2006

Welcome to my talk page! Please leave your message. I'll respond on your talk page unless I feel like I need to defend myself from what you're saying, in which case I'll reply here. Thanks!

3RR

Be careful about describing resolution as "getting backup", that could easily give people ideas about getting friends or sockpuppets to edit war with them. —Centrx→talk • 22:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Darin Fidika blocked

Just as an FYI, since you were involved in the whole mess. ···日本穣 19:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

AIV removal

• You removed 66.244.203.244 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) from WP:AIV because they hadn't vandalized since their blatant vandal warning (which I had accidentally reported as them doing). However, I feel a block is more than justified even if they hadn't received a single warning since their most recent string of vandalism. They have just come off of a month long block expiring Dec. 7th, and have 14 edits since, all vandalism. It is my understanding that you do not need to go through the warning process at this point and vandals can be blocked on sight. In fact, I would not be suprized if several admins would block for 6 months in this instance. (I would probably block for 2 months). Please reconsider your decision to not block this vandal, as looking at their edit history blocking would seem quite preventative of future vandalism from this IP address. I specifically noted in the AIV report they had just come off a month long block. VegaDark 22:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• Just an FYI, they have been blocked for 6 months by another admin after being relisted on AIV by someone else, without any edits since. I believe that shows that I was in fact in the right to post them on AIV. VegaDark 23:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline

Hi. I'm posting this on your talk page because I have noticed that you are often active in one or more aspects of our image use and/or image deletion processes.

I would like to propose Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline as a guideline to detail the necessary components of a "non-free image use", or "fair use", rationale. At present, it's kindof a moving target. Some image description pages have a detailed, bulleted rationale, while others have a one sentence "this picture identifies the subject". Patroling Category:All images with no fair use rationale, I've seen image pages that explicitly have something of a rationale that have been nominated for a speedy.

This is not an attempt to change or influence the image use policy in any way - and I would like to steer it away from becoming a rehash of the arguments over recent changes to the fair use policy. The only purpose of this guideline is to assist users who upload fair use images in correctly and adequately documenting what they feel to be the rationale for using the images.

So I would like for us to formalize what is required. I have also created Template:Fair use rationale and I would like to propose that we use it or something similar as a template to assist users in creating an acceptable rationale. I have no particular attachment to the proposal as it stands now - I have created it only as a starting point. Please see Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline and the associated talk page to give your thoughts and ideas. Thank you. BigDT 19:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Makes me want to quit this whole damn project (check out my anti vandalism edits). As they say: its the small things that matter. Thanks for nothing pal. Superdude99 22:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I guess I'll stick my thanks here too - as you may have noticed, I'm new to the New Page Patrolling malarkey, so I may have been a little trigger-happy on the ol' speedy-delete... I see where you're coming from with the articles you've mentioned, though I'd be more inclined to PROD a couple rather than AfD. I'll keep going on the patrolling, but I'll try and be a bit more careful: I've been learning a lot these last couple of days! MikeMorley 18:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Wishing you and yours a joyous holiday season! I really appreciate the fact that you took some time to review my article comment on it, and removed the deletion tag. I was new to Misplaced Pages at the time and now wonder what would have become of my article had you not intervened. As a more experienced user now, I take some time to help others as I see fit. You're a good Wikipedian, you lit a candle and the light is being passed on to others - you should be very proud of that. Thanks! --Lperez2029 19:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Paul Telner

The Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Paul Telner article you got deleted has been recreated and needs to be deleted again. Please see discussion at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/APAULED. Hu 05:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Andrew Nellis

Hi there, I was just reading about the Andrew Nellis page getting deleted, I must say there are far less notable people I've come across with pages on Misplaced Pages. Kultur and his cronies were only making a fuss of it all, because he was permanently banned from Andrew's IRC channel and the two have never got on. Your decision doesn't appear to be particularly well though out. Have you actually made any effort to research Andrew's work in and around Ottawa, not to mention public apperances on national radio and television?

Rod Gilbert (using 80.195.183.183 (talk · contribs · count))

D. Fidika

I am staying completely out of his bid for reinstatement and will not comment on any related pages, however it seems it should be pointed out that plagarized articles created as recently as October (or thereabouts) were deleted, including Hinarasu and Fujii Kogen, as well as the article that you (or Nihonjoe) had User "Nagaeyari" check out - I don't remember which one it was, but I believe it might have come from a S. Turnbull book, and that article might have been created by DF as recently as November. It is very likely that many more were created as recent as these ones, however we didn't notice the creation date when they were deleted. It isn't really something he only "did in the past". Everyone probably already knows this, but he has had an uncanny ability to hide behind the excuse of ignorance. He also seems blissfully unaware of the policy that plagarized articles are not "kept up until someone can add more information" - that is a big crux of his "argument" to be unbanned. --Kuuzo 04:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Nkras

I don't know if you read this on my talk page when you posted, so I am copying it here for you: As a general point, I am concerned at the growing habit of admins blocking users without explaining how the block can be reviewed. I am thinking about raising the matter. It seems a procedural irregularity, unfair and likely to lead to improperly blocked users leaving the project as they assume ArbCom is the only option.. I concur with this sentiment. Since Nkras knows he is indefinitely blocked, and no recourse was offered to him (a relatively new user), I doubt if he will try to reverse this himself. On a related note, seeing how Wiki has handled this matter has served to increase my ambivalence about participating in this project--and I was one of the editors most irritated by his edits. I and a few others will undoubtedly be taking this further. Jeffpw 21:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• With all due respect, Mango, I and several others have tried discussing this with the relevant admin. It has gotten us nowhere. I find it ironic that it is the users who were most affected by his contentious editing who are trying the hardest to have his block rescinded. In any event, thank you for explaining to me the appropriate place to lodge a complaint about this action. Jeffpw 21:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • My concern is that by the time I explained the unblock procedure to Nkras several hours had passed since his last edit after the block. I'm just trying to see that Nkras gets a fair hearing. WJBscribe  22:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Process Question Re: Traditional Marriage Article

Hi! When you have a chance, would you please take a look at the question I posted on the talk page for "traditional marriage"? Talk:Traditional Marriage Thanks! Sdsds 17:54, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

RFA

Thank you for your nomination and kind words. I have replied with my acceptance and added my replies to the three standard questions. --BigDT 22:42, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kennan1990.jpg

Mango, The WP:CSD I6 says: images uploaded before May 4, 2006 should not be deleted immediately; instead, the uploader should be notified that a fair-use rationale is needed.. The image was uploaded in 2005, so this clearly applicable. I have restored the image Alex Bakharev 06:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:PAIN

Unfortunately you appear to have completely disregarded the diffs - there was no civility when the two users in question consistently harassed me with false accusations, threatening constant blocks on my talk for no good reason and leaving abusive edit summaries. Give me a break. metaspheres 17:11, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Please take note of references before nominating for Speedy Deletion

This person is the daughter of two prominent scientists and a successful artist in her own right. Please refer to references. If you have suggestions on how to better edit, please advise —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Archiemartin (talk • contribs) 22:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC).

Suz Andreasen: Talk

Mango: You replied - thank you.

You state: + :I removed the speedy tag; when whether or not an article claims significance is in dispute, it's best to at least have a fuller debate, so that may happen, but I'm not nominating it right now. I think, in all honesty, if you can just give the basics of why she's a significant artist, that would help. Right now, the references are bad, because they basically don't back up anything in the article: the NYT link, for instance, only establishes who her father is, and Misplaced Pages articles are generally not considered reliable sources. But then, articles don't have to be perfect right away. Mangojuice 23:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

OK - I would like to have that debate. I can easily re-write and edit. However if you would like me to state why she is significant, then you need to tell me what kind of references you would like. For example, if you would like a geneological reference on her mother or ancestry, state that. In terms of defining what makes an artist significant - I cannot A. list many of her publications or works because they are commercial or I would assume be considered such since many places sell her work. The American Craft Council is a highly reputable organization which is non profit and also why I listed it. Getting in this council is extremely difficult and so - I again ask you - be specific and tell me what you want in terms of references so that I am able to give them to you.

Archie

Mango reading your post I have some agreements with you and some disagreements.

Firstly - the reason Suz's parents are of note is that they are both well known in the science and invention fields. She values the work they did and feels that her background played a major role in her decision to be an artist. While I agree that Suri Cruise should not be listed because of Tom unless she has her own life, there are other examples of artists who had notable parents and it is important to their history and biography. Example - Rembrant Bugatti the famous Sculptor who was the son of the car maker.

Regarding the statement that artists are like academics, they are really not at all like academics and should be addressed looking at they given set of criteria. Example, John Irving who dropped out and wrote books only to return as a teacher. In reality - most artists can not become well known withint the parameters of a University because they become teachers.

Regaridng reliable sources - thank you for being more specific - however this latest revision includes many primary sources of her work - many however are visual. This should be addressed within the parameters of inclusion as a visual artist is visual and should be looked at as such.

In my current revision, I have listed some sources that should be removed - like her website which I will do now. However most of these sources are reliable and primary. One example is that I could list her book on Amazon but since that is a commercial site, I should think that would be out.

Please review and let me know. Thanks, Archie 01:36, 8 January 2007 (UTC)~~

Thanks for your attention

Mangojuice, thanks so much for your attention to my issue with my internet proxy situation. I really appreciate it. --Shiznick

Thank you; Re: Suz Andreasen

Mango,

Thank you so much for flagging my article which was once again nominated for deletion. I am hoping that someone reads it. I feel like I am battling the deathstar here or something! I keep trying to relate the core issues here and no one seems to be doing the research. Anyway - I don't know why it is currently marked. I was in touch with humanities editors and placed it in the correct category and revised it. Do you think you could help me get this to where it needs to go?

About me -- I am a Bard Graduate student in the curatorial dept of jewellery design. I would like to post another 10 or so well known designers but since I am having so many problems with this one, I just want to get one under my belt. She has the most sources. Any and all advice would be welcome. Thanks, Archie Archiemartin 16:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

16:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)