Misplaced Pages

User talk:Mantanmoreland: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:48, 31 May 2007 editDavid.Monniaux (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users17,126 edits Copyright on books← Previous edit Latest revision as of 20:57, 15 October 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,011,970 editsm Fixing Lint errors from Misplaced Pages:Linter/Signature submissions (Task 31)Tag: paws [2.2] 
(143 intermediate revisions by 73 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{| class="infobox" width="270px"
{{divbox|green|Please note that trolling and personal attacks will be archived or deleted.|}}
|-
*]
!align="center"|]<br>]
*]
----
*]
]<br>
*]
]<br>
*]
]<br>
]<br>
]<br>
]<br>
|}<!--Template:Archivebox-->
----


== Copyright on books ==
====


Your remark on books whose authors hold the copyright was interesting. Could you tell me more about this through my talk page? Whatever the publisher (], ] or others), I've always been asked to sign a copyright transfer form when I published scholarly content. I've always resented this. ] 22:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Please ] 10:23, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
==Ethnicity in header==
Oh yes, there's an accepted format over at ] - #3 "Nationality (In the normal case this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen or national, or was a citizen when the person became notable. Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.) " I hope that helps. I find it annoying as well, especially when a person is "half something" and "half something else" and I see some editor's just put in one of the halves. Or worse, when they've put in BOTH halves or more, you know "Nicolas Cage is a German-English-Italian-American actor".... eh.... ] 03:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


== RfC opened on my conduct related to the Gary Weiss article==
==James Cagney==
Hi Mantanmoreland! I've just opened an RfC on myself for my conduct in a dispute that you were involved with concerning the ] article. The RfC is located ] and I welcome your comments or questions. ] 21:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I think the image you've noted would be much better. It's obviously a promo photo (the Warners Brothers logo etc strongly suggests that). I'd be careful to ensure that a fair use rationale is stated, and an example is at ]. I think it's a good choice. ] 20:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
::It looks good. I've added the source and a fair use rationale to the image description page. ] 06:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


== WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive ==
==Spencer Tracy==
Hi, another good image and a big improvement. The only thing that remains to be done is adding the source, so could you please do that. ie just provide a link to the website the image came from (as per the Cagney image).


<div style="border: 2px solid #484898; background: #FFF; background-color:#E2E7FF; padding: 1ex 1ex 1ex 1.5ex; margin: 0px 0px 1em 1em; font-size: 90%">
There's also something you need to watch out for, and I only mention it because you said you're new to uploading photos. We have to be careful when replacing an image that we don't replace one that is either a Commons image or is tagged as public domain, or as being released under a GFDL tag. These are all "free" images and are always our first choice (even when the quality is a little scrappy). The Tracy/Fredric March image was a Commons image and ordinarily I wouldn't think it should be replaced, but I think it's status is a bit doubtful. I'll explain what I mean. Movie trailers released before 1963 are considered public domain because they were not copyrighted independently of the film. So their copyright has either expired or never existed in the first place (this is my understanding anyhow) Therefore, a screenshot from these trailers is considered public domain. The problem with this is that many of the film frames are identical to what exists in the films, and the films are still copyrighted. The image you changed came from the trailer but there is nothing to prove that as it looks exactly the same as the film. So, I think the public domain tag on it is a little dubious, and I think it's not a bad thing that you replaced it. If I add an image from a public domain trailer I always try to include something that only exists in the trailer, such as the name. That way it's clear that it came from the trailer. Example : ]. If I used the same image without her name, it would be exactly the same as the film, so it's status could easily be questioned. Wouldn't it be great it this wasn't so convuluted? Hope I haven't bored you too much with this lengthy explanation :-) ] 06:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
<div style="border-bottom: 2px dotted #484898">'''WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive!'''</div>
]
] is holding a '''three month long''' assessment drive!<br>
The goal of this drive is to '''eliminate''' the backlog of unassessed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2007 – September 1, 2007.


Awards to be won range from delicacies such as the ] to the great ].<br>
== ArbReq ==
There are '''over 110,000''' articles to assess so please visit the ] and help out!


This drive was conceived of and organized by ] with the help of ]. Regards, <span style="font-family:'Kristen ITC'">''']'''<sup>] ]</sup></span>.
I think it is unfair that you weren't notified that your name was being mentioned at ]. Cheers. Just FYI. ←] <sup>]]</sup> 12:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
</div>


:Sure I'll pitch in, but 113,385 unassessed articles? You don't need editors, you need members of the cast of "Mission Impossible" ;) --] 03:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
==Lowenstein==
Oh, if there is no citation for it, just like any other piece of info, it should have been (and was) removed. I just noticed today that someone removed the "Jewish" categories from ], though! Now that's ridiculous... ] 06:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


== Judd Bagley == == Good complaints ==
Thank you -- am moving to my main page right under the barnstar from....err....--] 21:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
:See also, another board that isn't getting the attention it deserves...]...--] 22:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
::I have just made use of it, so let's see what happens.--] 22:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


==Max Keiser==
Can you lend me a hand? I'm trying to write an article on ] and it's been put up for speedy deletion. ] 19:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
You may revert my changes if you disagree, but personally I feel that this article is a vanity piece and should be roundfiled accordingly. ] 19:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


== AN/I == == ] ==
I'd appreciate your guidance concerning this article, since you have knowledge of finance. In your opinion is this a ]? I have only rarely encountered this term of usage and I am dubious about devoting an entire encyclopedia entry to it.--] 17:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
:I'll file this under "no s--t, Sherlock."--] 18:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


== COI ==
Thanks for your input. I trust you've refreshed on perhaps an intended affiliation to ]. I haven't yet decided if there is irony in this or not. ] 16:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
:I hadn't noticed that, but it provides a clue as to the identity of this user.--] 16:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


Do you think is related? i.e. a 3rd or 4th of the same "person"? I only noticed since I'm doing some archiving off of my talk page to sub-pages. ] 16:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC) You may want to take a look at . --] 23:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


== Flattered==
:Quite possibly. You may want to raise the issue at the AN/I. What struck me about the new user in Martin Luther is that it engaged in even-handed slashing, not showing any particular partisanship and getting everybody, not just one faction of editors, annoyed.--] 16:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


Planning something?
== ] ==
] 04:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


== ] ==
Please review recent edits at ], and the personal attack on the talk page. ] Is continuing his campaign of original research, despite the Lengthy discussions you were a part of some time ago . He's doing exactly the same things. Other sectiosn of the talk page show more of his efforts regarding this. ] 04:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I see your point on the Notable Wikipedian thing, that template is always problematic in situations like this. My basis was the licensing on ] - do you think that image should be flagged as possible copyvio pending ] verification of source? ] 16:18, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


==NPA==
:Yet again, RJensen has opted to play a 'let things cool off, then attack' game on the Henry Ford page. He avoided the page after being left a lengthy (more than a screen long) list of points to contradict. He replied to none. He left. Now he's back, again, starting EXACTLY where he started before, making this the third series of tendenious edits he's commenced. Please look in and try to help out on this. I don't know what his agenda here is, but Incivility is a part of it now. This isn't Good Faith, it's a game. ] 12:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
It was inadvertent ... in the process of adding a section on off-wiki harassment to ], I mistakenly cut that out. Happens when you just get up ... ]] 15:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


== Sourcing on your created pages ==
==Unsigned comment from 85.92.183.128 ==


I threw up a few tags on your created pages. Some of them are questionable notability, but I think in general they are written from from a fair point of view and are informative. Many of them have improper citing, as I'm sure you know. I won't throw tags up on all of them, just giving you a head's up.<small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
pump and dump is starting to use wikipedia to look "legitimate". please do something about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/Burren_Energy{{unsigned|85.92.183.128}}


== RfA thanks ==
:Looking at the page, I don't see any apparent reason for concern. If you have any problems with the article, please state them in the talk page of the article. Also please log in and sign future posts.--] 15:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
{| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="border: 1px solid Black; background-color:OldLace; font-size: 9pt"
|align="center"|]
|
Hi {{BASEPAGENAME}}. Thank you for your support and kind words in my RfA, which passed with 95 support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral !votes. It means a lot to me to have your individual support and the collective support of so many others. I truly will strive to carry myself at a level representing the trust bestowed in me as I use the mop to address the never-ending drips of discontent in need of ].<br>
::<font face="Kristen ITC">''']''' <sup>''(])''</sup></font> 08:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
|align="center"|]
|}


==Your opinion welcome at deletion review for Plot of Les Mis ==
==Orphaned fair use image (Image:Something wild 1961.jpg)==
After ] closed as a deletion, I'm challenging the way the closing administrator acted as in violation of Misplaced Pages rules. Your participation is welcome at that discussion, ]. Please keep in mind that only arguments related to either new information or to how Misplaced Pages rules were violated or not violated in closing the discussion will be considered. It isn't a replay of the original AfD. I'm familiar with ] and I am alerting everyone who participated in that discussion to the deletion review. I won't contact anyone again on this topic, and I apologize if you consider this note distracting. ] 04:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see ]).


==Merger ==
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you. This is an automated message from ] 09:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Looks good to me, as long as ] is the acquirer.--] 22:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


== Banned user ==
:A case of "uploaded and forgotten." Will add to the article.--] 20:28, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


Thank you for clarification. Article is deleted. --]] 21:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
==Irish-American Fordham==
Thanks for your support. While some may have issue with the existence of a Wiki category for "Historically Irish-American colleges and universitites", that is quite another issue. As you have pointed out, if such a category exists, then Fordham must be lieted there as surely as just about any other institution. I had a chuckle over the assertion (not by you) that though Harvard was an institution dominated by those of British ancestry it was nevertheless never known as a "British-American" school. Absurd! Of course it was: The language of the day was not the phrase "British-American", however, but "White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestant" (WASP), and I don't think anyone can seriously argue that heritage did not or does not influence that insitution to this day, despite its diversity and plurality now. Best, ] 16:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


==Fair use rationale for ]==
:Yes, Harvard was the quintessentially WASP school, and Fordham was the institution of choice when Irish and dogs were not permitted on its campus as you know.--] 17:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to ''']'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found ].


Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
==Racism by Country==
Thanks for responding to the Request for Comment ] 04:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
*Well, I certainly felt that there was no way any reasonable editor could have serious issues with the section I proposed on Iran (although they could've taken issue with the grammatical mistake in the initial version!) - but I'm kinda stuck because the admin who locked the page won't unlock it unless there's a consensus for a new version on Iran ... oh well. Anyways, I just said thanks because RfCs rarely generate much feedback - just trying to thank you for doing a generally thankless task. ] 15:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
*Only 32 out of ~180 countries are listed - I've been meaning to get around to getting at least a little ditty for everyone (save countries where there may genuinely be no racism: ], ] and so on) but I've been more concerned with cleaning up what's already there - something I can't do until it's unlocked, which won't happen without a consensus on Iran. ] 15:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
**Of course that's ''possible'' - the claim that discrimination by ethnicity isn't racism could just come from poor English skills rather than maliciousness, and they'd hardly be the first editors to try to apply a policy or two they didn't understand. ] 16:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale --> ] 13:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
This is classic POV pushing. One editor misapplying policy is one thing, a half-dozen is something else. POV-pushing is also endemic at every article related to Iran.--] 16:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
*Yeah, Iran and every other article. I'm not sure I'm aware of a topic without it. But I'm kind of stuck at the moment. Request for comments is supposed to be the first step on the dispute resolution ladder, so even though I may have to climb a long way, I'm taking it one rung at a time. ] 16:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


== Cat: Iranian neocons == == ] ==
This article was recently deleted and I am submitting it for deletion review. As I see you supported keeping ] - an article almost exactly the same as NYU in popular culture - please support me in restoring this page. As the creator of the page I plan on bringing it to the level of ] should it be restored. Please comment on the process here: ]. Your support is appreciated. Thanks. -- ] 23:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


== David Rockefeller ==
]. Thanks.--<font color="red">]</font><font color="green">]</font><font color="yellow">]</font><font color="black">]</font><font color="pink">]</font><font color="blue">]</font> 18:09, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


Hi,
== Iranian neoconservatives ==


I just was wondering why you were reverting my change. David Rockefeller is a central figure in a lot of conspiracy theories, so I think the category "Conspiracy" fits into his entry.
I think you are right about the Iranian neoconservatives. What do you think should be done with this: ]? If you search for "neoconservative" & similar words, you will find that the concept is well-embedded in the article. I get the feeling that the article needs a delete or complete rewrite but I haven't decided what to do yet. What do you think of it? ] 20:09, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
:The term is definitely used, but I think that, overall, it is done so disparagingly by whiny opinion articles or biased reports. This is what have I seen from my experience, at least. I don't believe any of these people describe themselves as "neoconservatives," unlike in the US where people actually identify with the description. The attack derives from a simple comparison to the US setup. In a way, to carry the usage into articles is to carry attacks on living people. Anyway, I look more into it to make sure this holds, as I haven't dealt with those kind of writings for awhile. Thanks for looking it up. ] 20:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


] 00:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
== 11-M ==


==Orphaned non-free image (Image:Paul burke in naked city.jpg)==
Hi, Randroide wants the article to look as if it were posible that Spanish police DID the bombings. You must keep this in mind to understand what is going on. We must stop him of doing that. I feel this as an obligation towards the dead and towards the police who risk their lifes. Sorry but I have no more patience to see how Randroide cheats everybody with his cheeky behaviour.--] 17:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]).


If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] 13:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok. I explain to you. There is a guy called Toro who were a traffiker of hashich. He was being supplied on a regular bases by the arabs who afterwards did the bombings. They have been introduced each other by a picturesque caracter called Zouhier (a stripper and a minor criminal) who met Toro in prison. When the arabs were convinced by a fanatic to start actions in Spain the look for explosives and this Zouhier told them that perhaps Toro can provide. The arabs asked Toro and he said that he do not have explosives but that his brother in law (who were a former miner) can obtain.


== Barnstar ==
The thing went on and the brother-in-law sold the dynamite. Toro is a profesional criminal (hashish, stolen cars, etc..) but Zouhier and the brother-in-law, called Trashorras, were more amateurs. Trashorras was starting in the criminal world and was a mad caracter. Both of them have been informers for money (to diferent unrelated branches of the police) and BTW both were considered very unreliable because they tend to use imagination and sell incredible stories.


Hey, ''thank'' you. Your support has been unwavering throughout this, and it's meant a huge amount to me, particularly as you've been laboring under the same situation yourself. It's these messages of support that put it all in perspective. ] <small><sup>]]</sup></small> 01:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
The story that The Times article explains is that the wife of Trashorras (sister of Toro) has a phone number of someone called "Manzano". Manzano is the name of the police officer in charge of the squad that desactivated one of the bombs found in the trains thus making posible to follow the cell phone used as detonator thus making posible to chase the perpetrators. Conspirationists said that this bomb was not in the trains but was factored by the police.


==Arbitration case==
The conspirationists said that Manzano was involved in the conspiration and they use the fact that the wife of Toro has his phone number to proof it. This is the moment when the article of The Times was written. But then, the judge investigated the phone number (he call to the number) and found that was the operative phone of a police in charge of a drugs investigation with nothing to do the head of desactivation team. In fact "Manzano" was not his real name but a nickname. So the story of Manzano and the wife of Trashorras died there and the article of The Times is outdated.


I have requested arbitration regarding ] and its derivative in ], and named you as a party in this case. ] 00:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
There is another story that is related with the cell phones used as detonators. The arabs bought them to some hindus who own a kind of bazaar. This hindus bough them as part of a promotion of a bell company so they can only be used with this company. They went to the shop another person to make unblock the phones. It happens to be that this person was a former police. This is the caracter introduced by Randroide recently. This guy has nothing to do with the bombings since when he touch the cell phones, they were generic cell phones. He probably unblock hundreads for the hindus.


== Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks ==
The current tactic of Randroide is make appear as much policemen as he can in the text. He is using the fact the in English wikipedia nobody knows anything. His conspiration is that ETA (a Spanish group similar to irish IRA) did the bombing and the police allowed them to do and then falsely accused islamists and kill some of them simulating suicide. It is so far fetched that is dificult to understand but if you bear this in mind you will understand Randroide maneouvers. Because he know that he cannot flatley state this ("ETA did helped by Spanish police") he tries to create a maze were "Spanish police" and "ETA" appear as much as posible.


Since you seem to have an opinion on this proposed change (based on your removal of the text thrice), could you please join the ]? ] ] 00:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Finallly, the discussion about Al-Qaeda is irrelevant to me because it depends more in the definition you make of Al Qaeda than in a study of the facts. The perpetrators have Bin Laden videos showing horrible things done by westerners to muslims and they hear again and again Bin Laden speeches. But they payed the operation with the money they earn smugling hashish. So they did because Al-Qaeda and they were instructed by people with known contacts with Al Qaeda but is imposible to proof were the order came from.


==] opened==
My point is that extremists islamist did the bombings -I can bring 100 sources if necesary- and all Spanish police behave honourably (some of them with sheer neglicence and lack of resources).
Hello, Mantanmoreland. The ] in which you are listed as a party to has opened. Please provide evidences on the ] for the Arbitrators to consider. You may also want to utilize the ] for suggestions.


For the Arbitration Committee,<br>
Sorry for the lenght and the bad english.--] 17:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- ] &#124; <sup>] / ]</sup> 20:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


:10-4.--] 23:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
:One hundred sources aren't necessary -- just some good ones contradicting the 2/07 New York Times piece. I appreciate your taking the time to explain it to me. But as I said on the talk page, he keeps coming up with sources putting a different slant on things. It is tedious, but your case needs also to be built on specific sources. That is why I asked if you could come up with some re the Times article. That is how Misplaced Pages works. I am predisposed to believe it was indeed Islamists, but when an editor comes in with sources you have to respond with sources. I agree that it would be deeply wrong to have the article imply that "Spanish police informants" were behind the bombing if that is not so or is simply a crackpot theory. Right now the very first paragraph seems to fit with your viewpoint.--] 21:10, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


== Rec ==
::I am really not an internet person. I much prefer books. You can buy "The one percent doctrine" by Ron Suskind. There is explained everything from the mouth of CIA operatives. I have read many, many about terrorism and nobody has any doubt. You can also go for Bruce Hoffman or see the congratulations of americans to Spanish police for the way the investigation was conducted. Would american FBI and CIA colaborate with a police suspicious of colaboration with Al-Qaeda (or individual islamic terrorists)? Now the trial is going on and here in Spain there is no doubt anymore about ETA (Doubts about police faded years ago).--] 20:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


As a Catholic proud of his Jewish heritage, I think you would enjoy reading Daniel Boyarin's dense and very scholarly - but well-written and very thoughtful - ''A Radical Jew'' which is about Paul (Boyarin is a Talmud professor at UC Berkeley) ] | ] 19:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
:::You can certainly cite books, particularly by reputable journalists like Suskind.--] 21:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


== Edit summary ==
Hi Mantanmoreland : I spoke about Suskind many months ago but Randroide is not here for subtelties. I also put a 30 pages report by Hoffman and 16 sources but all this is for nothing. Randroide is only going to be bend by force as it was in spanish wikipedia were he was blocked until stoped.


Ah, an occasional humorous edit summary works wonders. ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 23:24, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Since nobody is going to force Randroide into not speak about whatever he wants to speak I give you some background about explosives to survive the Deluge of cherrypicked sources and twisted reasoning that Randroide is going to unleash.:


== ] ==
* What happened : The most popular explosive in Spain for mining is manufactured by Santa Barbara and is called GOMA 2. Since seven years ago the most common kind was GOMA 2 EC that containes DNT that is a cancerigen product. Seven years ago Santa Barbara started manufacturing a new kind of GOMA 2 called GOMA2 ECO that does not contain DNT. When Trashorras stole the dynamite from the mine to sell to the perpetrators most part was of the second kind (GOMA 2 ECO) but in the floor there were remains of GOMA 2 EC and they also grab them. The analisis carried out this year with all guarantees (and posted by Randroide in the hope that nobody will understand) says that the explosive found in the bomb that did not explode, in the car used by the terrorist to go the station, in the flat where some of the perpetrators commit suicide and in another attempted bombings by the same cell that was GOMA 2 ECO with some contamination of DNT. Police did some fotografs inside the mine were Trashorras stole the dynamite that showed the floor full of mixed dynamites.


::I take your word on it (the non-necessity). In was just concerned that this article not duplicate ]. I certainly agree that this is an article on a Book, not on Martin Luther.
*Conspiracy theory about explosives : In the delirium of the conspiracy the explosive had been one of the central issues. The analisis carried out after the bombings were done hurriedly and without supervision so results were not as accurate as they the ones of this recent analisis. The conspirationist said in the begining that the bomb that did not explode was factored by the police and that the real explosive was C4 (a military substance). Some of them said that was Tytadine (i,e, the explosive used by ETA). Now after the analisis there is little room for especulation. What they say now is cannot be GOMA 2 ECO because GOMA 2 ECO does not have DNT. THey show again and again evidence that says that GOMA 2 ECO does not have DNT (which everybody knows). One of the policemen when declare in a Parliament hearing about the bombings said that "nitroglicerine was found in the trains" . It was a mistake and he corrected himself the day after (and has been doing for two and a half years) but the people like Randroide still is saying that there was nitroglicerine. They say that because in the laboratory cleaned the products the nitroglicerine disappeared. And to make things worse, one of people that did that did the analisis (who was there as representative of one organisation that believes in the conspiration told to El Mundo that some nitroglicerine was found but not writen in the report so El Mundo did a front page. This one of the sources of Randroide.


::On an other issue, shouldn't "their' begin with a capital, so: "Their"? That really bothers me, as I pay careful attention to Book titles. The alternative is to change "Lies" into "lies" (] Format - but I don't like that.
The strategy of conspirationism here is to show that there is somehting hidden. They do not care very much what so I do not know if Randroide will start with C4, nitroglicerine, Tytadine or his catch phrase the he can extensively source -since is pure truth- "GOMA 2 ECO does not have DNT". He will hide that in the mine they work with both, so the guys grab whatever was in the floor.


::Best, ''']'''
Randroide is in a hurry now since he needs to focus the attention in another thing that is not the libel of police officers that is still on the introduction and that has become evident.


PS: Get my point? So why's the above NOT Red? --] 18:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
For me all this is ludicrous since all the sources except El Mundo say the same. We do not need to discuss each single detail since Suskind, Hoffman, CIA, FBI, Spanish police, Spanish judicial and all the world press tell us clearly what happened.
Thanks for your attention and just tell me when you are fed up. Very few people resists more than one month of Randroide intrincated manipulations.--] 15:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


==WikiProject Biography Newsletter 5==
This article as the whole wikipedia should be biased towards truth. I also would like more people understanding how sophisticated and succesful is Randroide's tactic. I would like someone saying "Let the deads alone and go to play in another article". I have been looking other articles and specially 9/11 and it makes me cry. Conspirationist are not allowed even in the talk pages. Nowere says "some sources say that the WTC was intentionally demolished by FBI" or in the introuduction does not say "FBI had the names and credit card numbers of the guys who bought the plane tickets" or "some of the hijakers had visas isued in spite of the fact that they were known as having relationship with islamist extremists" or etc.. This is the respect I want for my country, his policemen and his dead people.
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Biography/Outreach/Newsletter/Issue 005}}
<small>To receive this newsletter in the future, please list yourself in the appropriate section ]. This newsletter was delivered by the automated ] 15:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC) </small>.


== ] Closed ==
I do not want to hazle and you can run away at any moment but I think is clear for you now what is going on. The tone I use is because Southofwatford is worn out and is surrendering. Robust aproach is the only way to stop Randroide and atract people to the article. When I am polited, Randroide introduces more and more garbagge and people tells me "You must discuss with him and find a middle ground". Midle ground between sheer infamy and truth, is sheer infamy.--] 16:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


The above named Arbitration case has closed.
:A middle ground is not always necessary, when the issues are clear. As for conspiracy theories, you are preaching to the choir and there is much resistance to conspiracy theories among Wiki editors. What I am trying to say to you is that when a request is made for sourcing by an editor not familiar with the issues, it is best to comply with the request. Remember that US editors are simply not as familiar with the Madrid bombings as 9-11. --] 18:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


You may refer to the case page to view the decision.
::Does people in the States know about Bali, Istambul, Bombay and London bombings? Perhaps I can push for a category so the articles protect each other.--] 18:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


For the Arbitration Committee, - ] &#124; <sup>] / ]</sup> 20:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Note my comments concerning the innuendo in the first few paragraphs. If you feel that the articles convey the wrong impression, there are Wiki policies such as the ones concerning undue weight (]) that you should cite. --] 21:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


== Replaceable fair use Image:John mcloughlin -- publicity photo from yahoo.jpg ==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under ], but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our ] in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


# Go to ] and edit it to add {{tlx|di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, '''without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template'''.
== You deleted sourced data ==
# On ], write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.


Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, ], or by taking a picture of it yourself.
{{{icon|] }}}Welcome to Misplaced Pages. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|]|an article}}. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Misplaced Pages without a good reason, which should be specified in the ]. Take a look at the ] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the ]. {{{2|Thank you.}}}<!-- Template:uw-delete1 --> ] 15:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on <span class="plainlinks"></span>. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:di-replaceable fair use-notice --> ] 20:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
("level 2" warning too agessive, sorry for the inconvenience)


== Malcolm Johnson ==
I did nor revert your deletion of sourced content: I expect ''you'' to write a text you consider appropiate using all the sources you deleted (see article talk page). Thank you for your understanding. ] 15:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


Yeah, but I'm not sure it'll be acceptable to you. Please see ]. I'm not sure if this fellow went to the same school as Patterson, but I'm fairly sure the motivation for my action was pretty much the same motivation. ] (]) 15:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
:Your edits were reverted for the reasons explained in the talk page. Please don't leave vandalism warnings for good-faith edits. Misusing warning templates is disruptive and violates ]. I see that you have been recently warned about this. --]15:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


== Um... ==
:: We have had months of this kind of aggressive overbearing behaviour from Randroide, but now he is being even less reasonable than previously; he is completely unwilling to contemplate any solution does not highlight conspiracy theory material in the main article - today demonstrates that perfectly. ] 16:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


Noticed the link to a foreign language template, assumed it wasn't a translation of your user page, deleted it. ] (]) 07:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
:::I see your point. Too bad. --] 17:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


==]==
== You deleted information from talk page ==
]Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate, that landed on ]! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the ] and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to ] status! Thanks again, and have a great new year, --]]] 05:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC) {{-}}


==Importing crap from WR==
please be more carefull in future edits as you deleted my text from the AV/I page with this edit of yours - . ] 11:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Edits like are entirely inappropriate. Please don't import crap from WR. <font face="Arial">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 04:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
:See below. Terribly sorry.--] 12:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


Maybe post a link to WR without a hyperlink? <font face="Arial">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 05:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
== What's going on? ==


Yeah, that could work. <font face="Arial">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 05:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
May I ask why you have deleted, three posts of Maestroka (me), Tony Siddaway, Atabek, on section, which is a debate, not an article? What do you think you are doing? FYI, this is called vandalism.


==Non-hyperlinked==
If this was a mistake, I suggest you be careful next time you are editing...--] ] 12:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Try <nowiki>http://www.yahoo.com</nowiki>] (]) 05:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! I just omitted the "http" but I'll do that.--] (]) 05:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


==Comments after archiving==
:I just checked the diffs and am mortified. My intent was to fix one word. Have no idea how that happened.--] 12:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
No big deal. Let the comments stay. That creates less drama. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


== My Rfa ==
::That's OK. I was already tense about something else. Sorry for my tone. --] ] 13:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


I wish to thank you for being supportive of ]. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--] 06:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
:::You had every right to be upset! --] 13:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


== What on Earth... == == Thanks for the headsup ==


I guess I'm one of the people who've noticed your good work on articles before. Good luck avoiding the stalkers. ] (]) 05:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
...happened with ? You removed a bunch of active conversation. Please try to fix it. --] - '']'' - ] 14:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


==RFC/U about you==
:It's already been fixed, as per the preceding comments. I'm terribly sorry about it. It was inadvertent and I'm at a loss to explain it.--] 15:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
]. ] '']'' 06:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


:Comment directed largely to you: ]. ] '']'' 08:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
::I am terribly sorry, I did not see the above messages. If you can, can you take a look again, because there is some missing content still (the discussion on Reddi, for instance). --] - '']'' - ] 15:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


==Comment on your RFC==
:::It clearly wasn't on purpose. Don't stress it. --] - '']'' - ] 15:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


<S>Re this comment you made - . Who is Sara, please? ] ] 17:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)</S>
:::::I replaced the "Imam Khomeini" discussion. The Reddi discussion was already restored. The rest is a bit of a mystery -- snippets here and there. I'm really curious as to how this happened. My first thought was "edit conflict" but there's no evidence of that. --] 15:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
:Wait, never mind, ]. ] ] 17:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


== RFC == ==RfArb filed==
Please note I have filed a Request for Arbitration about the current dispute. It is available . ] (]) 20:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


==]==
I have called for an RFC on 11-M--] 15:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located ]. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, ]. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, ].


On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 22:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
== POINT for point ==


==Utterly meaningless, eh?==
], I beat you to calling my posting of the link a WP:POINT. But there's a bit more to it than that: The exact page I linked to does not contain any personal attacks, which was the real ''point'' of my ''POINT''. Please don't ignore the content of my comment: I totally agree that this and other sites should not be linked as attack sites, but personally, I find the essay on that subpage interesting and thoughtful, well suited for an essay page on Misplaced Pages. I'm simply trying to shed light on both sides of the story. I'm all for protecting Misplaced Pages users from attacks, but it still means censoring a lot of harmless stuff, some of which I do find interesting (which isn't against policy, yet). —] (] • ]) 16:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could either (1) explain to the community what happened to you in October 2006, or (2) explain why you've lied to all of us so long. ] '']'' 22:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


: ] '']'' 20:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:I understand, but I thought that your actions and mine were not comparable and were a bit of a cheap shot.--] 16:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


== hm ==
::I see what you mean. You may be interested in ]. With my "cheap shot", I hoped to get my message across very quickly. I should be more patient (and I know it). —] (] • ]) 16:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
:::No problem. As I said on the attack sites talk page, this is no big deal.--] 16:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Agree and thanks. —] (] • ]) 16:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


An IP reverted your posting . At first impulse, I wanted to restore, but then decided against because it goes too much into the direction of ] for my taste. User:] 14:40,&nbsp;],&nbsp;200]
== Your note ==
:Imho, the ArbCom should decide about it. User:] 14:51,&nbsp;],&nbsp;200]


== Sorry ==
I agree that defamation alone should cover the subject. I would not restrict it to libel, as I can see an argument that IRC could be construed as slander. ] 18:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't have used that language. It was over-the-top. Feel free to explain what happened to you in October 2006. ] '']'' 03:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
==Orphaned non-free media (Image:Borgnine as marty.jpg)==
] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, it is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]).


If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Orphaned --> ] (]) 23:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
== arbitration requested - you are named ==
==Orphaned non-free media (Image:Spencer tracy.jpg)==
] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, it is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]).


If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Orphaned --> ] (]) 23:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
] has filed for arbitration about ] at this . We are named parties. - <font color="#0000C0">]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">]</font>)</i></sup> 21:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


==Email==
:Thanks. My first arbitration! How novel.--] 21:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Re your email to me...I don't think it's a threat, but a warning you should heed. Did you talk to Lar about it? <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 23:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


== ''disruptive'' ? == == G'Day Mantan ==


I thought it would be polite to let you know that there's a(nother) discussion about you at ] at the moment.
How are my edits at ] ''disruptive'' ? I'm offering my opinion, that's all. —''']]''' 00:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
:<s>I think a better question is, "when are they not disruptive?"</s>--] 00:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


I also noticed that you haven't edited in over a week, and thought I'd ask you if you did plan on continuing working on the wiki? There's obviously a presumption that you wouldn't like to be banned from editing, but I thought I'd come to the horse's mouth so to speak! A short note about your intentions here would at least let everyone know where you stand, I guess...... best, ] (]) 03:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
== vandalism ==


Events overtake me, as so often they do.... you'll know by now that you've been indefinitely blocked from editing, which in some ways actually makes the answer to the above question even more relevant! - I think it would be helpful to know - would you like to return to editing? ] (]) 04:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for catching . ] <sup>]</sup> 10:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
:Better question is one that asks you, Privatemusings, if you want to continue editing. You were fortunate to get only a 90 day break as far as I am concerned...so don't go stirring up drama.--] 08:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
::MONGO, this is not helpful. Please don't escalate matters with block threats. ] (]) 10:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


== ] == == Account blocked ==
Currently, the page is still a policy proposal. The idea I believe was to collect relevant bits and pieces of existing policy and ArbCom rulings on the matter and make it into a policy with special regard to attack sites. It's definitely worth keeping as an essay. I think the question rather is if it should be more than that. —''']]''' 21:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
:]. —''']]''' 02:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


Hello, Mantanmoreland.
== Mega Group ==


I have blocked your account and that of {{user|Samiharris}} pursuant to the AN thread mentioned above. Despite there being some significant dispute about ''what'', exactly, is a proper response; there is overwhelming consensus that you have ], despite having been strongly admonished not to so in the past by an arbitrator.
It never hurts to propose a deletion. "<nowiki>{{subst:PROD|put your reason here}}</nowiki>" -] · ] · 23:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


Please note that this is, very specifically, not ]. If you can convince the community that you intend to contribute productively and within Misplaced Pages policy, you are welcome to make your case for unblocking ''this'' account. Placing the {{tl|unblock}} template will attract administrator attention to your talk page, although I expect it will be closely watched for the foreseeable future. &mdash;&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 12:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
=="Solitary" gunman (])==
Hi. The introductory sentence has been previously decided by consensus. See the ] for more detail. Thanks. ] 19:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


Seconded. I myself am watching your talk page in case you do decide to post an unblock request ... but bear this in mind. Your trust with the community is hanging by an eyelash--now the ball's in your court. There are quite a few admins' opinions on where to go with this (including mine) which bear on your explanation. ]] 12:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Cool. Thanks for getting back to me. ] 21:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
{{unblock reviewed|1=I am not Samiharris, and in any event I have edited only sparsely in recent months and I will comply fully with the arbcom decision.|decline=already unblocked so nothing to see here. I can't accept as I didn't unblock so this is simply to remove user from CAT:RFU — ] <sup>'']''</sup> 13:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC)}}


: Maybe you want to edit that unblock request: "Although there may be substantial appearance that I am Samiharris, I will comply fully with the arbcom decision, including to only use one account and to avoid all editing that represents an actual or perceived conflict of interest." I think that repeating the denial without providing a credible reason is unpalatable. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
==The WikiProject Biography Newsletter: Issue II - April 2007 ==


:I see Doc glasgow has already unblocked, and suggested the matter be taken to arbitration. OH WAIT, IT WAS JUST THERE, WASN'T IT. - ] (]) 13:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
The ] issue of the WikiProject Biography newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you ] 19:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


::Regrettably, it was. And due to the lack of a conclusive decision, there is now wheel warring. How regrettable. Folks, please stop playing block pong with this account. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
== ] ==
I have responded to your comment on the AfD. Can you please take a look(also at the details I have provided under my keep vote). Thanks --] 07:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


:::One block and one unblock is not yet ping-ponging. It falls into that grey area where not everyone agrees it is wheel-warring. If someone reblocks, that will be clear wheel-warring. But as Jay Jay has said, the water from the burst dam is moving too fast at the moment for calm discussion. ] (]) 13:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
== User:JohnHistory ==


I note that you have not been participating in the arbitration case for the past several days and before that had participated to only a limited extent. If you have any additional information or evidence to present that may be useful to the Arbitration Committee or the community, including any explanation of the actual or perceived relationships between this account, ], and any other present or former accounts, please present it as soon as possible. Thank you. ] (]) 16:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
It's kind of a long story, but I might as well summarise for you b/c I haven't done it before. Be warned though, it's not ''that'' interesting a story, so I don't mind if you "]" it:


One fine day about 2 months ago, I was patrolling with ] when I came across some deletion and read the talk page of an article, ]. An IP had used offensive language against ] in a content dispute that seemed to be about a source that hinted at "non-Aryan" ancestry of Richthofen. Now, I'm not particularly interested in military history etc, but I handed out a warning and (unwisely, in hindsight) displayed enough curiousity about the dispute to attract that IP to ask me for "help".


== ] ==
I took a look at the whole thing and noticed a minor flaw in Clawson's line of argument: From the fact that the author was Jewish, he deduced that the essay was specifically talking about Jewish ancestry. Clawson and I discussed it on his talk page, and finally we agreed to rephrase the statement and move it to the "Richthofen family" section.
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Misplaced Pages's role with respect to serious off-wiki or "real world" controversies and disputes is to provide encyclopedic coverage of such matters from a ] where they are ] and sufficiently documented in ]. Neither Misplaced Pages's mainspace article content, nor its administrative and dispute-resolution procedures culminating in Arbitration, are intended or may be used as a vehicle for off-wiki disputes such as those involving the financial markets or legal or regulatory issues. Actions related to the articles involved, including ], ], ], the (now-redirected article) <span class="plainlinks"></span>, and ], have been repeatedly disruptive and have had serious implications both on and off wiki. Any current of future editor making substantial edits to these articles is direct ed:
:(A) To edit on these from only a single user account, which shall be the user's sole or main account;
:(B) To edit only through a conventional ISP and not through any form of proxy configuration;
:(C) To edit in accordance with all Misplaced Pages policies and to refrain from any form of ] concerning any external controversy, dispute, allegation, or proceeding; and
:(D) To disclose on the relevant talk pages any circumstances (but not including personal identifying information) that constitute or may reasonably be perceived as constituting a conflict of interest with respect to that page.


Any uninvolved admin may impose reasonable restrictions, after warning, upon involved articles or editors. Knowledgeable and uninvolved editors are urged to review these articles to ensure accuracy, fairness, and adherence to wiki policies. ], under any current or future account, is banned from editing articles related to Gary Weiss, Patrick Byrne, Overstock.com, Naked Short Selling, and other mainspace articles in the area of dispute, broadly construed. He may make suggestions on talk pages, subject to the requirements of remedy 1 in the decision. ] is directed to edit Misplaced Pages from only a single user account and to advise the Arbitration Committee of any change of username, and to edit only through a conventional ISP and not through any form of proxy configuration.
Shortly thereafter, Clawson left (maybe due to ], which failed partly because of me easily digging up many instances of snide remarks etc). Meanwhile, the IP had registered an account, ], and we exchanged a few emails, where I tried to explain core policies of NPA and NPOV. When he started to bug me to delete that source entirely, I declined, saying that I find the claim itself interesting and enriching when (as it then was) truthfully cited. He... didn't react well.
:For the committee, <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 21:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


==That was constructive==
On the talk page, ], a fellow German user, came up with yet another source, this time explicitly claiming Jewish ancestry of Richthofen, while Mackensen came up with a more precise reference for the first source. There was some friendly dispute among several interested editors, and consensus was that although that assertion obviously wasn't mainstream, it was still interesting and citing them with due weight was a good idea. So I incorporated the second source, and everyone was happy, except for JohnHistory.
I consider a constructive move forward on your part, and I thank you for making it. ] (]) 16:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
:Agreed, that is a step in the right direction ... almost enough, in my view, to take a ban off the table. ]] 17:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
::Yes, you still need to apologize for your past, bad-faith behavior. Right here on your talk page is probably the best place. ] (]) 07:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


He started to rephrase my version in a POV way (calling the sources "Jewish propaganda" ''within'' the article...), so I started to revert and tried to get him into reasonable debate. Turns out, I had assumed a little too much good faith in the beginning, as he immediately started to throw the same kind of things at me that you have read at my talk page, and then decided to remove the references completely, which I also reverted.


== Wikinews impostor account ==
He was also warned, by Ryan Postlethwaite and more recently by Chairboy. However, he continued to delete the statement, so I filed for a ], and bibliomaniac15 responded that he agreed with my version. It didn't stop JohnHistory, though. So I finally decided to file an article ], to little response or effect.
As suggested by Wikinews, posting a link to this post there, which was indeed by me.--] (]) 13:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
:I have renamed the impostor to "Impostor of Mantanmoreland" - the account was already indef. blocked. And renamed the account you created on Wikinews from Mantan to Mantanmoreland to avoid futher impersonation. --''] /<sup>]</sup>'' 14:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


==Popeyes==
The latest thing was JohnHistory deleting the references ''twice'' from IP and posting those latest rants on my talk page. The main problem is, as long as the sources are not in the article, he seems to be totally quiet. He only ever turns up when I notice and revert (I don't have the article watchlisted, as I'm not strongly interested in the article subject itself).


FYI...
So that's just about the whole story behind those remarks. Yes, I feel they're somewhat unwarranted, too. I don't believe I'm a "bigotted Jewish propagandist", "cancer to the world" or "violating Jimbo Wiki guidelines" ''(sic!)''. To be clear: As we both know perhaps better than anyone else, I'm not always the most level-headed guy, but I really tried in this case because it appeared to be the perfect opportunity to argue for article neutrality and quality where I don't have strong (or rather: any) emotional ties to the subject either way.
] claimed he named the ] chain after the fictional detective Jimmy "Popeye" Doyle in the movie '']'', whose nickname was unrelated to the cartoon character ]. The chain later acquired rights to use the namesake cartoon character for marketing. The company's early brand became deeply tied to the cartoon character with its sponsorship of the "Popeye & Pals" children's show in New Orleans, and the character appeared on items from packaging to racing boats. As of 2006, the Popeyes' online history omits any reference to the cartoon, though some international markets, notably Puerto Rican restaurants, continue to use the Popeye's (cartoon character) theme. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:If that can be sourced, fine. However, the Popeye logo is the same as the typography of the cartoon.--] (]) 20:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


Yes, after the chain was founded, it partnered with whoever owns the license to the Popeye cartoon to use the character in its advertising. But the chain was initially named for the movie detective, not the cartoon sailor. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
All in all, it has been a great learning experience for me, but I wish the issue could be resolved by now, I just don't see how that could happen in an agreeable fashion. —''']]''' 15:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Carol baker in baby doll.jpg==
:See my reply in your talk. That kind of abuse is not justifiable.--] 16:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by ]. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an ]; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.


If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair --> ] (]) 07:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
::I may do that, eventually. The wicked aspect is, I know I could get rid of this simply by letting him remove the references. Now, those are not perfectly reliable sources by any means, but his reason for removing them is .
::Actually, I don't take particular offence at his remarks, as they're so totally outlandish. I rather regret his complete unwillingness to participate in any kind of reasonable debate, which requires the ability to accept and welcome to stand corrected from time to time. If there was any way to get that simple point across without going through process, I'd strongly prefer it. I just happen to be out of ideas. —''']]''' 17:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
:::I'd say you've also exhausted all remedies, short of seeking action.--] 17:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
::::I did post at AN/I once, to the effect that Ryan warned him. —''']]''' 18:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC) (Also, thank you for reassuring me that I've been really *trying* to work it out amicably with JohnHistory, much appreciated.)
==Orphaned fair use image (Image:Cagney.jpg)==
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see ]).


==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Something wild 1961.jpg==
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Orphaned --> ] 18:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by ]. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an ]; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.


If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair --> ] (]) 07:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


==Help Me Finish and Edit This Article==
== Your note ==
Hello, you may not recall who I am but I am the user who originally started the ] article about the September 11th hero. Unfortunately it was speedy deleted before I could react recently, and I have uploaded my old backup page. There is no history before the revertion, so I am requesting your help to clean and edit the page. On the original ] page you were kind enough to show me some mistakes and flaws about my editing and helped me change it. I ask of you to lend a helping hand once again and clean up this article to meet wikipedia standards. (and to ensure it doesnt get "deleted" again). Thank you. - ] (]) 22:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Will look. --] 15:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


== Block ==
Have added add'tl materials and also used the source you provided. Thanks. --] 17:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


I have blocked you for two weeks, and ] indefinitely, for abusive sock-puppetry or otherwise being in breach of both ] and the remedies of the case ]. The relevant details can be found at .
I apologize for my hasty edit. It was a cut and paste gone haywire. I will try to be more careful in the future.--] 00:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


This should also be considered a final warning on some matters in that post.
==Racism by country==
Hello, a ] has been filed given the deadlock at ]. You previously offered comment on it, but were not involved in any edit warring. As such, I'm inviting you to add yourself to the RFM if you feel that you're part of the dispute. You can do so ]. If you feel you're not involved in the dispute, please disregard this message and thanks for your earlier opinion. ] 21:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
*Well, okay - here's the deal: The article was locked very quickly, and only Pejman47 and myself actually "edit warred" - but there's some discussion on the talk page. Rather than decide who was involved versus who was just commenting in a driveby myself, I invited everyone who commented to decided whether ''they'' felt they were involved. If ''you'' feel you're involved, please feel free to join the mediation. If you don't feel you're involved, don't worry about it. I think it's a fairer and more accurate way to decide who's involved (since it's a bit vague) and keeps it free of any bias I might have in deciding who's involved or not. In principle, ] has been in an edit war for a couple months now. But the activity level is low, so who knows?
:Anyways, that was longwinded, but - if you want to be involved in the mediation, then be involved. If you don't want to, you don't have to be. ] 21:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
::I'll be happy to weigh in at the appropriate time.--] 20:00, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


]&nbsp;<sup><span style="font-style:italic">(]&nbsp;|&nbsp;])</span></sup> 21:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
== Clarification request on ] ==


:Due to a very strong community consensus at the AN/I discussion FT2 linked above, I have reblocked you indefinitely. Unless the community changes its mind, consider this a formal community ban. ''']]''' 18:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello,


::See ] for the complete archived discussion. See also the subsequent discussion on that page about what to do with the targeted articles. - ] 23:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
I asked this question on the ] for the RFA mentioned above, but in the case that you're not monitoring that page actively, I wanted to make sure I asked it of you directly: contains a message you added to a previous RFA discussion, which contains a link to one of the primary sites mentioned in the various attack sites discussions. I'd be curious to find out whether you'd now find that message inappropriate, and if so, how you'd reword it to fit with your current views on the policies in question while still retaining the (in my opinion) important and relevant evidence of off-wiki misconduct therein. Thanks for any clarification you can provide on this matter. ] 00:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


== Wikidrama yet to be oversighted... ==
: Thank you for the prompt response! ] 00:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


See ]
== Gracenotes' RFA ==


I guess it explains why this account was blocked, but the discussions are far more interesting. The ] page is so blocked up you can't even edit the talk page. It is completely misleading, of course. --Intentionally unsigned 01:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) </span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Please note that GN has clarified the oft-misunderstood answer to Q4 ], if you wish to review the oppose viewpoint you placed on this RFA. If not, I won't bother you again about it. -- '']']'' 21:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


== ''Ichthus'': January 2012 ==
== Question about apparent sock, with respect ==
Hi, this was raised on the Gracenotes RfA talk page, and was rightly taken down, but not before I happened to see it. I'll admit my curiosity is piqued. Can you explain ? Thanks, --] 21:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
I don't recall how that happened, but I guess it must have the same explanation as this edit.
{| style="text-align:center; border:10px solid black; background-color:black; width:100%;"
--] 22:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
|-
|]
|- padding:15em;padding-top:5em;"
|style="font-size: 350%; color:gold; "|<br>'''<big>I</big>CHTHUS''' <br><br>
|- padding:15em;padding-top:5em;"
|style="color:gold;"|'''January 2012'''
|}
<div style="background-color:#FFF; font-size: 120%;font-weight:bold;">
''In this issue...'' <br />
*]
*]
*]
*]
</div>
-----
<center><small>''Ichthus'' is the newsletter of Christianity on Misplaced Pages &bull; It is published by ]<br>For submissions contact the ] &bull; To unsubscribe add yourself to the list ]</small></center>
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0237 -->


== Adele ==
== Edit warring at ] ==


Dear fellow wikipedia editor or administrator,
I was forced to protect ] due to edit warring which you were involved in. We prefer to keep our policy pages editable to the public. When the protection expires I will be more inclined to block people for edit warring than to protect the policy again. In the future please discuss these things on the talk page and come to a consensus. Do not argue by reverting back and forth on a policy page. ]<!-- Was HighInBC --> 03:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


Greeting to you my fellow contributors and friends. I trust that you are all well and in good health and spirits.
== Etiquette? ==
Just so I know, is there some way an editor could ask you about the appearance of sock-puppeteering in such a manner as would meet your standards of etiquette, and not be reverted as "trolling" ( and )? I'm trying to be as delicate as possible. If you revert this as well, could you please suggest some alternate phrasing that you'd be more responsive to (on my talk page, if you like)? It would seem to me that asking you directly (and politely) in this way is more courteous (and ]-compliant) than simply reporting you would be, but when you call this "trolling" you don't leave me much of a choice. Thanks Mantanmoreland,--] 15:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


I am a continued and consistent user of our open contributor forum. I have edited several articles and have worked with each of you in at least one or two instances. My most contentious edits and requests have been Jose Baez's birthplace and The Capeman BLP.
:If you have reason to believe there is sock puppetry going on and communication with the person is not successful, I would recommend ] which will let you request a check. ]<!-- Was HighInBC --> 15:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks H. The account in question has not been used for ten months, but it is still technically active. I am not eager to get Mantanmoreland in trouble if he's retired the apparent sock, which is why I've come here rather than RCU; but I do think that if the anomaly can't be adequately explained, the account should be closed and the transgression owned up to.--] 15:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


As you can see, I have continued to use my anonymous IP address in place of a regular user id or moniker. This is a personal choice and one that I most likely will continue.
:I should point out that having multiple accounts is allowed unless used in a manner prohibited by ]. I myself have more than one account, it is fine as long as you don't use them to abuse the rules. ]<!-- Was HighInBC --> 15:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
::Yes, I know. In this case Mantanmoreland and Tomstoner have edited together on contentious pages (esp. ]) and address each other as separate editors . They've also actively edit-warred together on the same side: see the following sequence for example: , , ; then with Mantanmoreland at three reverts in comes , then again. This doesn't add up to a picture of legitimate use of multiple accounts, unless I'm mistaken.--] 15:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
:::Tomstoner is not me. Stop harassing me over 15-month-old edit. I already responded to you. Do not post on this talk page.--] 16:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


My reason for contacting you is I request your assistance and input in relation to a BLP that I believe has the potential to continue to draw a very large number of readers and potential editors and others. The article in question is Adele, the singer.
== Copyright on books ==
The article has many inconsistencies and errors contained within it. The article has been locked down and several edits reverted that have 1) validicity and potentially correct/new iinformation 2) Absolutely no talk page entries or discussion taking place whatsoever and when someone does use the talk page it is ignored or easily dismissed without a single opinion or answer to the person proposing the discussion.


I must state that I have personally not made one change to this article at all! I feel it is important to state I have no knowledge of this BLP subject whatsoever. In fact, I know nothing about her other than what is contained in the article itself. and the cited references contained within. My only contributions to anything regarding the subject is to the talk page for the article and a registered editor's user talk page.
Your remark on books whose authors hold the copyright was interesting. Could you tell me more about this through my talk page? Whatever the publisher (], ] or others), I've always been asked to sign a copyright transfer form when I published scholarly content. I've always resented this. ] 22:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

My first entry was dated May 11, 2012 when I contributed to the talk page detailing specifically the inconsistencies within it and at the least opening a discussion and at the most requesting article editing. I also included one or two small constructive suggestions to hopefully clear some confusion I experienced in the article. No additional discussion by anyone was offered at all. (It was like I was the only one who knew that a talk page even existed). My next entries were 7 days later. and true to my mo, I become contentious and somewhat aggressive in an attempt to provoke any response whatsoever.

I am a constructive user and sometimes editor in subjects that I know are correct and I possess the knowledge and information to challenge constructively. I must apologize for my contentious tendencies and state once again I am nearly always a reasonable and fair person.

My problems with this article is outlined in the talk pages. The claim that the vandalism is persistent, I must question this as I see no persistance, nor a reason for an editor to assign a 4 month lockdown. Also, currently the last edit has reverted causing the removal of an inclusion that this artist is a pop artist when the article itself states this fact in a number of paragraphs and references within it.

I only request that you please offer a little time and review the article, talk page and recent edits and reverts. I would not ask this of you, if I did not know that this article was in need of such drastic assistance. In addition, due to the huge fame of this artist, I believe this article should really be helped by those I know are fair, just, caring and competent to the wiki community.

I have also requested the assistance in the wiki chat portal this morning outlining my concerns there as well. Unfortunately, I have much less confidence in that forum than I can say I do have in you all. The only response that I really received was nearly a dozen users immediately exited and left after stating the facts as I have here.

Any and all assistance and aid you may render, I am sure the wiki community will be the better for.

Best regards always.

Mark R] (]) 16:42, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 20:57, 15 October 2024

Archive
Archives

Archive 1
Archive 2
Archive 3
Archive 4
Archive 5
Archive 6

Copyright on books

Your remark on books whose authors hold the copyright was interesting. Could you tell me more about this through my talk page? Whatever the publisher (Elsevier, Springer Verlag or others), I've always been asked to sign a copyright transfer form when I published scholarly content. I've always resented this. David.Monniaux 22:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

RfC opened on my conduct related to the Gary Weiss article

Hi Mantanmoreland! I've just opened an RfC on myself for my conduct in a dispute that you were involved with concerning the Gary Weiss article. The RfC is located here and I welcome your comments or questions. CLA 21:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive!

WikiProject Biography is holding a three month long assessment drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unassessed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2007 – September 1, 2007.

Awards to be won range from delicacies such as the WikiCookie to the great Golden Wiki Award.
There are over 110,000 articles to assess so please visit the drive's page and help out!

This drive was conceived of and organized by Psychless with the help of Ozgod. Regards, Psychless .

Sure I'll pitch in, but 113,385 unassessed articles? You don't need editors, you need members of the cast of "Mission Impossible" ;) --Mantanmoreland 03:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Good complaints

Thank you -- am moving to my main page right under the barnstar from....err....--Mantanmoreland 21:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

See also, another board that isn't getting the attention it deserves...User:Bishzilla/Dispute Resolution Board And Swedish Massage Parlor...--MONGO 22:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I have just made use of it, so let's see what happens.--Mantanmoreland 22:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Max Keiser

You may revert my changes if you disagree, but personally I feel that this article is a vanity piece and should be roundfiled accordingly. Burntsauce 19:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Short and distort

I'd appreciate your guidance concerning this article, since you have knowledge of finance. In your opinion is this a neologism? I have only rarely encountered this term of usage and I am dubious about devoting an entire encyclopedia entry to it.--Samiharris 17:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll file this under "no s--t, Sherlock."--Mantanmoreland 18:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

COI

You may want to take a look at . --Agha Nader 23:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Flattered

Planning something? Piperdown 04:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Max Keiser

I see your point on the Notable Wikipedian thing, that template is always problematic in situations like this. My basis was the licensing on Image:M Keiser.jpg - do you think that image should be flagged as possible copyvio pending WP:OTRS verification of source? Videmus Omnia 16:18, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

NPA

It was inadvertent ... in the process of adding a section on off-wiki harassment to WP:HARASS, I mistakenly cut that out. Happens when you just get up ... Blueboy96 15:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Sourcing on your created pages

I threw up a few tags on your created pages. Some of them are questionable notability, but I think in general they are written from from a fair point of view and are informative. Many of them have improper citing, as I'm sure you know. I won't throw tags up on all of them, just giving you a head's up.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwynand (talk • contribs)

RfA thanks

Hi Mantanmoreland. Thank you for your support and kind words in my RfA, which passed with 95 support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral !votes. It means a lot to me to have your individual support and the collective support of so many others. I truly will strive to carry myself at a level representing the trust bestowed in me as I use the mop to address the never-ending drips of discontent in need of caretaker assistance.

Jreferee 08:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion welcome at deletion review for Plot of Les Mis

After Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Plot of Les Misérables closed as a deletion, I'm challenging the way the closing administrator acted as in violation of Misplaced Pages rules. Your participation is welcome at that discussion, Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 14. Please keep in mind that only arguments related to either new information or to how Misplaced Pages rules were violated or not violated in closing the discussion will be considered. It isn't a replay of the original AfD. I'm familiar with WP:CANVASSING and I am alerting everyone who participated in that discussion to the deletion review. I won't contact anyone again on this topic, and I apologize if you consider this note distracting. Noroton 04:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Merger

Looks good to me, as long as Microcap stock fraud is the acquirer.--Samiharris 22:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Banned user

Thank you for clarification. Article is deleted. --Anthony.bradbury 21:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Borgnine_as_marty.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Borgnine_as_marty.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 13:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

NYU in popular culture

This article was recently deleted and I am submitting it for deletion review. As I see you supported keeping Yale in popular culture - an article almost exactly the same as NYU in popular culture - please support me in restoring this page. As the creator of the page I plan on bringing it to the level of Misplaced Pages in culture should it be restored. Please comment on the process here: Misplaced Pages:Deletion_review/Log/2007_August_14#NYU_in_popular_culture. Your support is appreciated. Thanks. -- Noetic Sage 23:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

David Rockefeller

Hi,

I just was wondering why you were reverting my change. David Rockefeller is a central figure in a lot of conspiracy theories, so I think the category "Conspiracy" fits into his entry.

Lord Chao 00:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Paul burke in naked city.jpg)

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Paul burke in naked city.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Durin 13:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hey, thank you. Your support has been unwavering throughout this, and it's meant a huge amount to me, particularly as you've been laboring under the same situation yourself. It's these messages of support that put it all in perspective. SlimVirgin 01:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration case

I have requested arbitration regarding WP:BADSITES and its derivative in WP:NPA, and named you as a party in this case. Phil Sandifer 00:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks

Since you seem to have an opinion on this proposed change (based on your removal of the text thrice), could you please join the discussion on the talk page? Picaroon (t) 00:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Attack sites opened

Hello, Mantanmoreland. The arbitration case in which you are listed as a party to has opened. Please provide evidences on the evidence page for the Arbitrators to consider. You may also want to utilize the workshop page for suggestions.

For the Arbitration Committee,
- Penwhale | 20:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

10-4.--Mantanmoreland 23:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Rec

As a Catholic proud of his Jewish heritage, I think you would enjoy reading Daniel Boyarin's dense and very scholarly - but well-written and very thoughtful - A Radical Jew which is about Paul (Boyarin is a Talmud professor at UC Berkeley) Slrubenstein | Talk 19:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Edit summary

Ah, an occasional humorous edit summary works wonders. JFW | T@lk 23:24, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

On the Jews and Their Lies

I take your word on it (the non-necessity). In was just concerned that this article not duplicate Martin Luther. I certainly agree that this is an article on a Book, not on Martin Luther.
On an other issue, shouldn't "their' begin with a capital, so: "Their"? That really bothers me, as I pay careful attention to Book titles. The alternative is to change "Lies" into "lies" (Library of Congress Format - but I don't like that.
Best, User:Ludvikus

PS: Get my point? So why's the above NOT Red? --Ludvikus 18:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Newsletter 5

The Biography WikiProject Newsletter
Volume IV, no. 4 - September 2007
Project News
  • The three-month long Summer Assessment Drive, organized by Psychless, was a huge success! It ran from June 1 – September 1, and reduced the backlog of unassessed articles from 113,385 to 56,237. In all, over 100,000 articles were assessed. Over 60 people contributed in some way.
  • A barnstar has been created for exceptional work on Misplaced Pages biographies and for assisting the project. The Biography Barnstar is listed with the other WikiProject awards and can be awarded easily with a template. See the template page for more details.
Member News

Congratulations to the editors who worked on the newest featured biographies: Augustus; William Shakespeare; Adriaen van der Donck; Alfred Russel Wallace; Alison Krauss; Anne Frank; Anne of Denmark; Asser; Bart King; Bill O'Reilly; Bobby Robson; Bradley Joseph; CM Punk; Ceawlin of Wessex; Colley Cibber; Cædwalla of Wessex; Dominik Hašek; Elizabeth Needham; Frank Macfarlane Burnet; Georg Cantor; Gregory of Nazianzus; Gunnhild Mother of Kings; Gwen Stefani; Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery; Harriet Arbuthnot; Harry S. Truman; Henry, Bishop of Uppsala; Héctor Lavoe; Ine of Wessex; Ion Heliade Rădulescu; Jack Sheppard; Jackie Chan; Jay Chou; John Martin Scripps; John Mayer; Joseph Francis Shea; Joshua A. Norton; Kate Bush; Kazi Nazrul Islam; Kevin Pietersen; Martin Brodeur; Mary Martha Sherwood; Mary of Teck; Maximus the Confessor; Miranda Otto; Muhammad Ali Jinnah; P. K. van der Byl; Penda of Mercia; Pham Ngoc Thao; Rabindranath Tagore; Ramón Emeterio Betances; Red Barn Murder; Richard Hakluyt; Richard Hawes; Robert Garran; Roman Vishniac; Ronald Niel Stuart; Ronald Reagan; Roy Welensky; Rudolph Cartier; Samuel Adams; Samuel Beckett; Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough; Sarah Trimmer; Sargon of Akkad; Shen Kuo; Sophie Blanchard; Stereolab; Sydney Newman; Sylvanus Morley; Tim Duncan; Timeline of Mary Wollstonecraft; Uncle Tupelo; Waisale Serevi; Wallis, Duchess of Windsor; Walter Model; William Bruce; William Goebel; Yagan; Zhou Tong; Æthelbald of Mercia; Æthelbald of Mercia

New Members

Congratulations to our 225 new members

From the Editors

The newsletter is back! Many things have gone on during the past few months, but many things have not. While the assessment drive helped revitalize the assessment department of the project, many other departments have received no attention. Most notably: peer review and our "workgroups". A day long IRC meeting has been planned for October 13th, with the major focus being which areas of the project are "dead", what should our goals be as a project, and how to "revive" the dead areas of our project. Contribute to the discussion on the the new channel (see below)

We decided to deliver this newsletter to all project members this month but only those with their names down here will get it delivered in the future.

This is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue. Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned or post news on the next issue's talk page

New irc channel

Lastly, a new WikiProject Biography channel has been set up on the freenode network:

#wikipedia-en-bio

Our thanks to Phoenix 15 for setting it up.

Contributors to this Issue
Complete To Do List

Suzanne Carrell • Mullá Husayn • John Gilchrist (linguist) • Thomas Brattle •


Assessment Progress
Biography articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Core Other ??? Total
FA 35 1,634 1,669
FL 205 205
FM 616 616
A 1 131 132
GA 41 8,388 8,429
B 98 40,602 40,700
C 33 172,778 172,811
Start 1 765,483 765,484
Stub 1 1,030,128 1 1,030,130
List 8,202 8,202
Category 12,409 12,409
Disambig 3,908 3,908
File 31,292 31,292
Project 214 214
Redirect 3 44,874 44,877
Template 3,924 3,924
NA 15 15
Assessed 213 2,124,803 1 2,125,017
Unassessed 23,995 23,995
Total 213 2,148,798 1 2,149,012
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 10,841,640 Ω = 5.37
We couldn't do it without you!

To receive this newsletter in the future, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated R Delivery Bot 15:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC) .

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Attack sites Closed

The above named Arbitration case has closed.

You may refer to the case page to view the decision.

For the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | 20:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:John mcloughlin -- publicity photo from yahoo.jpg

Replaceable fair use
Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:John mcloughlin -- publicity photo from yahoo.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. High on a tree 20:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Malcolm Johnson

Yeah, but I'm not sure it'll be acceptable to you. Please see Talk:Lyman Ray Patterson#christian/baptist?. I'm not sure if this fellow went to the same school as Patterson, but I'm fairly sure the motivation for my action was pretty much the same motivation. John Carter (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Um...

Noticed the link to a foreign language template, assumed it wasn't a translation of your user page, deleted it. John Nevard (talk) 07:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3

Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate, that landed on WP:100! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Misplaced Pages:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, and have a great new year, --Elonka 05:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Importing crap from WR

Edits like this are entirely inappropriate. Please don't import crap from WR. Corvus cornixtalk 04:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe post a link to WR without a hyperlink? Corvus cornixtalk 05:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that could work. Corvus cornixtalk 05:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Non-hyperlinked

Try http://www.yahoo.comWjhonson (talk) 05:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I just omitted the "http" but I'll do that.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 05:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments after archiving

No big deal. Let the comments stay. That creates less drama. Jehochman 20:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa

I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 06:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the headsup

I guess I'm one of the people who've noticed your good work on articles before. Good luck avoiding the stalkers. John Nevard (talk) 05:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

RFC/U about you

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Mantanmoreland. Cool Hand Luke 06:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment directed largely to you: Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment/Mantanmoreland#I'm done gathering evidence. Cool Hand Luke 08:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment on your RFC

Re this comment you made - . Who is Sara, please? Neıl ☎ 17:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Wait, never mind, I figured it out from context. Neıl ☎ 17:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

RfArb filed

Please note I have filed a Request for Arbitration about the current dispute. It is available here. SirFozzie (talk) 20:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 22:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Utterly meaningless, eh?

I was wondering if you could either (1) explain to the community what happened to you in October 2006, or (2) explain why you've lied to all of us so long. Cool Hand Luke 22:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

So I take it you have no intention of explaining? Cool Hand Luke 20:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

hm

An IP reverted your posting here. At first impulse, I wanted to restore, but then decided against because it goes too much into the direction of WP:NLT for my taste. User:Dorftrottel 14:40, February 18, 2008

Imho, the ArbCom should decide about it. User:Dorftrottel 14:51, February 18, 2008

Sorry

Shouldn't have used that language. It was over-the-top. Feel free to explain what happened to you in October 2006. Cool Hand Luke 03:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Borgnine as marty.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Borgnine as marty.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Spencer tracy.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Spencer tracy.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Email

Re your email to me...I don't think it's a threat, but a warning you should heed. Did you talk to Lar about it? — Rlevse • Talk • 23:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

G'Day Mantan

I thought it would be polite to let you know that there's a(nother) discussion about you at the admin.s noticeboard at the moment.

I also noticed that you haven't edited in over a week, and thought I'd ask you if you did plan on continuing working on the wiki? There's obviously a presumption that you wouldn't like to be banned from editing, but I thought I'd come to the horse's mouth so to speak! A short note about your intentions here would at least let everyone know where you stand, I guess...... best, Privatemusings (talk) 03:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Events overtake me, as so often they do.... you'll know by now that you've been indefinitely blocked from editing, which in some ways actually makes the answer to the above question even more relevant! - I think it would be helpful to know - would you like to return to editing? Privatemusings (talk) 04:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Better question is one that asks you, Privatemusings, if you want to continue editing. You were fortunate to get only a 90 day break as far as I am concerned...so don't go stirring up drama.--MONGO 08:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
MONGO, this is not helpful. Please don't escalate matters with block threats. Carcharoth (talk) 10:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Account blocked

Hello, Mantanmoreland.

I have blocked your account and that of Samiharris (talk · contribs) pursuant to the AN thread mentioned above. Despite there being some significant dispute about what, exactly, is a proper response; there is overwhelming consensus that you have abused a sockpuppet account, despite having been strongly admonished not to so in the past by an arbitrator.

Please note that this is, very specifically, not a ban. If you can convince the community that you intend to contribute productively and within Misplaced Pages policy, you are welcome to make your case for unblocking this account. Placing the {{unblock}} template will attract administrator attention to your talk page, although I expect it will be closely watched for the foreseeable future. — Coren  12:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Seconded. I myself am watching your talk page in case you do decide to post an unblock request ... but bear this in mind. Your trust with the community is hanging by an eyelash--now the ball's in your court. There are quite a few admins' opinions on where to go with this (including mine) which bear on your explanation. Blueboy96 12:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Mantanmoreland (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not Samiharris, and in any event I have edited only sparsely in recent months and I will comply fully with the arbcom decision.

Decline reason:

already unblocked so nothing to see here. I can't accept as I didn't unblock so this is simply to remove user from CAT:RFU — Spartaz 13:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Maybe you want to edit that unblock request: "Although there may be substantial appearance that I am Samiharris, I will comply fully with the arbcom decision, including to only use one account and to avoid all editing that represents an actual or perceived conflict of interest." I think that repeating the denial without providing a credible reason is unpalatable. Jehochman 13:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I see Doc glasgow has already unblocked, and suggested the matter be taken to arbitration. OH WAIT, IT WAS JUST THERE, WASN'T IT. - David Gerard (talk) 13:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Regrettably, it was. And due to the lack of a conclusive decision, there is now wheel warring. How regrettable. Folks, please stop playing block pong with this account. Jehochman 13:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
One block and one unblock is not yet ping-ponging. It falls into that grey area where not everyone agrees it is wheel-warring. If someone reblocks, that will be clear wheel-warring. But as Jay Jay has said, the water from the burst dam is moving too fast at the moment for calm discussion. Carcharoth (talk) 13:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I note that you have not been participating in the arbitration case for the past several days and before that had participated to only a limited extent. If you have any additional information or evidence to present that may be useful to the Arbitration Committee or the community, including any explanation of the actual or perceived relationships between this account, Samiharris, and any other present or former accounts, please present it as soon as possible. Thank you. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Misplaced Pages's role with respect to serious off-wiki or "real world" controversies and disputes is to provide encyclopedic coverage of such matters from a neutral point of view where they are notable and sufficiently documented in reliable sources. Neither Misplaced Pages's mainspace article content, nor its administrative and dispute-resolution procedures culminating in Arbitration, are intended or may be used as a vehicle for off-wiki disputes such as those involving the financial markets or legal or regulatory issues. Actions related to the articles involved, including naked short selling, overstock.com, Patrick M. Byrne, the (now-redirected article) Judd Bagley, and Gary Weiss, have been repeatedly disruptive and have had serious implications both on and off wiki. Any current of future editor making substantial edits to these articles is direct ed:

(A) To edit on these from only a single user account, which shall be the user's sole or main account;
(B) To edit only through a conventional ISP and not through any form of proxy configuration;
(C) To edit in accordance with all Misplaced Pages policies and to refrain from any form of advocacy concerning any external controversy, dispute, allegation, or proceeding; and
(D) To disclose on the relevant talk pages any circumstances (but not including personal identifying information) that constitute or may reasonably be perceived as constituting a conflict of interest with respect to that page.

Any uninvolved admin may impose reasonable restrictions, after warning, upon involved articles or editors. Knowledgeable and uninvolved editors are urged to review these articles to ensure accuracy, fairness, and adherence to wiki policies. User:Mantanmoreland, under any current or future account, is banned from editing articles related to Gary Weiss, Patrick Byrne, Overstock.com, Naked Short Selling, and other mainspace articles in the area of dispute, broadly construed. He may make suggestions on talk pages, subject to the requirements of remedy 1 in the decision. User:Mantanmoreland is directed to edit Misplaced Pages from only a single user account and to advise the Arbitration Committee of any change of username, and to edit only through a conventional ISP and not through any form of proxy configuration.

For the committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 21:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

That was constructive

I consider this statement a constructive move forward on your part, and I thank you for making it. Noroton (talk) 16:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, that is a step in the right direction ... almost enough, in my view, to take a ban off the table. Blueboy96 17:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, you still need to apologize for your past, bad-faith behavior. Right here on your talk page is probably the best place. Cla68 (talk) 07:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


Wikinews impostor account

As suggested by Wikinews, posting a link to this post there, which was indeed by me.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 13:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I have renamed the impostor to "Impostor of Mantanmoreland" - the account was already indef. blocked. And renamed the account you created on Wikinews from Mantan to Mantanmoreland to avoid futher impersonation. --Brian McNeil / 14:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Popeyes

FYI... Al Copeland claimed he named the Popeyes Chicken & Biscuits chain after the fictional detective Jimmy "Popeye" Doyle in the movie The French Connection, whose nickname was unrelated to the cartoon character Popeye the Sailor. The chain later acquired rights to use the namesake cartoon character for marketing. The company's early brand became deeply tied to the cartoon character with its sponsorship of the "Popeye & Pals" children's show in New Orleans, and the character appeared on items from packaging to racing boats. As of 2006, the Popeyes' online history omits any reference to the cartoon, though some international markets, notably Puerto Rican restaurants, continue to use the Popeye's (cartoon character) theme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.3.128.3 (talk) 20:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

If that can be sourced, fine. However, the Popeye logo is the same as the typography of the cartoon.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 20:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, after the chain was founded, it partnered with whoever owns the license to the Popeye cartoon to use the character in its advertising. But the chain was initially named for the movie detective, not the cartoon sailor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.3.128.3 (talk) 13:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Carol baker in baby doll.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Carol baker in baby doll.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Something wild 1961.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Something wild 1961.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Help Me Finish and Edit This Article

Hello, you may not recall who I am but I am the user who originally started the Dominick Pezzulo article about the September 11th hero. Unfortunately it was speedy deleted before I could react recently, and I have uploaded my old backup page. There is no history before the revertion, so I am requesting your help to clean and edit the page. On the original Dominick Pezzulo page you were kind enough to show me some mistakes and flaws about my editing and helped me change it. I ask of you to lend a helping hand once again and clean up this article to meet wikipedia standards. (and to ensure it doesnt get "deleted" again). Thank you. - Penfish (talk) 22:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Block

I have blocked you for two weeks, and User:Bassettcat indefinitely, for abusive sock-puppetry or otherwise being in breach of both puppetry policy and the remedies of the case Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland. The relevant details can be found at WP:ANI#Mantanmoreland and Bassettcat.

This should also be considered a final warning on some matters in that post.

FT2  21:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Due to a very strong community consensus at the AN/I discussion FT2 linked above, I have reblocked you indefinitely. Unless the community changes its mind, consider this a formal community ban. krimpet✽ 18:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
See Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive426#Mantanmoreland and Bassettcat for the complete archived discussion. See also the subsequent discussion on that page about what to do with the targeted articles. - Face 23:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikidrama yet to be oversighted...

See Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Mantanmoreland#Jimbo_expressed_a_suspicion_that_Mantanmoreland_is_in_fact_Gary_Weiss.

I guess it explains why this account was blocked, but the discussions are far more interesting. The Gary Weiss page is so blocked up you can't even edit the talk page. It is completely misleading, of course. --Intentionally unsigned 01:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.175.18.130 (talk)

Ichthus: January 2012


ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...

Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Misplaced Pages • It is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here

Adele

Dear fellow wikipedia editor or administrator,

Greeting to you my fellow contributors and friends. I trust that you are all well and in good health and spirits.

I am a continued and consistent user of our open contributor forum. I have edited several articles and have worked with each of you in at least one or two instances. My most contentious edits and requests have been Jose Baez's birthplace and The Capeman BLP.

As you can see, I have continued to use my anonymous IP address in place of a regular user id or moniker. This is a personal choice and one that I most likely will continue.

My reason for contacting you is I request your assistance and input in relation to a BLP that I believe has the potential to continue to draw a very large number of readers and potential editors and others. The article in question is Adele, the singer. The article has many inconsistencies and errors contained within it. The article has been locked down and several edits reverted that have 1) validicity and potentially correct/new iinformation 2) Absolutely no talk page entries or discussion taking place whatsoever and when someone does use the talk page it is ignored or easily dismissed without a single opinion or answer to the person proposing the discussion.

I must state that I have personally not made one change to this article at all! I feel it is important to state I have no knowledge of this BLP subject whatsoever. In fact, I know nothing about her other than what is contained in the article itself. and the cited references contained within. My only contributions to anything regarding the subject is to the talk page for the article and a registered editor's user talk page.

My first entry was dated May 11, 2012 when I contributed to the talk page detailing specifically the inconsistencies within it and at the least opening a discussion and at the most requesting article editing. I also included one or two small constructive suggestions to hopefully clear some confusion I experienced in the article. No additional discussion by anyone was offered at all. (It was like I was the only one who knew that a talk page even existed). My next entries were 7 days later. and true to my mo, I become contentious and somewhat aggressive in an attempt to provoke any response whatsoever.

I am a constructive user and sometimes editor in subjects that I know are correct and I possess the knowledge and information to challenge constructively. I must apologize for my contentious tendencies and state once again I am nearly always a reasonable and fair person.

My problems with this article is outlined in the talk pages. The claim that the vandalism is persistent, I must question this as I see no persistance, nor a reason for an editor to assign a 4 month lockdown. Also, currently the last edit has reverted causing the removal of an inclusion that this artist is a pop artist when the article itself states this fact in a number of paragraphs and references within it.

I only request that you please offer a little time and review the article, talk page and recent edits and reverts. I would not ask this of you, if I did not know that this article was in need of such drastic assistance. In addition, due to the huge fame of this artist, I believe this article should really be helped by those I know are fair, just, caring and competent to the wiki community.

I have also requested the assistance in the wiki chat portal this morning outlining my concerns there as well. Unfortunately, I have much less confidence in that forum than I can say I do have in you all. The only response that I really received was nearly a dozen users immediately exited and left after stating the facts as I have here.

Any and all assistance and aid you may render, I am sure the wiki community will be the better for.

Best regards always.

Mark R65.8.151.206 (talk) 16:42, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Category: