| Revision as of 16:48, 7 January 2008 edit59.154.24.147 (talk) →PISA← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 13:53, 4 March 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (131 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <center><br><div style="align: center; width: 60%; padding: 1em; border: solid 2px gold; background-color: black;"> | |||
| ==Delisting Lithuania and Argentina as GA== | |||
| '''<font color="white">R E T I R E D</font>''' | |||
| Hi, i just wanted to let you know that you should have asked for a ] before delisting ] and ]. This process allows other people to give their opinions and it gives the article's editors some time to fix the article before being delisted. In both ] and ] people have asked for your reasons and you haven't responded. I have raised this issue at the ].--]<font color="#203"></font><sup>(])</sup> 17:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| <font color="white"><center>'''This user left Misplaced Pages permanently on 28 Feb 2008.'''</font color></center> | |||
| </div><br></center> | |||
| {{archive box|<center>]</center>}} | |||
| ==Regarding Macau== | |||
| * Thanks for the comment. I've been trying to add references to and check the factual accuracies of the article, section by section. I'm glad that I might be of help. But I'm kinda new to wikipedia and what is MoS? As soon as I know what that is, I'll make sure all the citations conform to it. Trimming the article is not easy though, but I'll try. Thanks for your contributions too. ] (]) 03:58, 5 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ** Ok, I read the MoS for citation. I guess I'll just use the templates provided and everything would be fine. It also seems that size is not a big issue; ] is more than 90K long but is also a featured article. ] (]) 08:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Welcome back! == | |||
| * The article is now 51K and I've edited all sections except Healthcare and Culture. I'll work on them tomorrow (actually later today) and I expect some further reduction in length. Since we've omitted some portions of the article, the layout needs to be redone. ] (]) 22:01, 6 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Welcome back, I hope you still like Misplaced Pages after being temporarily blocked. ]] 22:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| * I've edited the whole article. It should be free of grammatical errors and spelling inconsistencies. Referencing looks satisfactory to me too. Maybe we can sit on it for a day or two and it'll be ready for nomination. Thank you for your great contributions to the article, and also the little shiny thing. I wish there will be more good and featured Macau-related articles in the near future. ] (]) 07:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Blocked? when? ] (]) 23:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==PISA== | |||
| what you have done by listing the US on he PISA page is show your own arrogance. i want you to realise that the US is no more special than the UK or indonesia, except to nationalistic americans and even though these may make up the majority of veiwers, though i doubt it, it does not mean that the US should be listed. as far as i understand wikipedia is completely neutral and so any arguement that americans should see how badly they have done has no merit because people of other nationalities may want to too. | |||
| i have offered you alternatives but you seem either too lazy or too far up yourself to change anything so i will continue to make sure that your arrogance is not published in the neutral medium of wikipedia. ] (]) 16:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :: Opps, how come your archive links to the article's talk page archive? I'm going to fix it for you, ok? ]] 03:38, 23 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :There is nothing to do with arrogance. I am neither pro nor anti-American. Personally I do think that it is quite fair to add the information of American performance on the table so that more readers from the US can get the benefit. To put the US on the table doesn't mean it is not netural anymore. I don't understand your logic. For me, I think that it provides more information to the readers. Period! ] (]) 16:55, 6 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::OK! ] (]) 04:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| thanks for clarifying that. but then what is your reason for deleting the information on the UK or Inodnesia. and you must see that by including this information it makes the article npov because it implies hat americans have a greater need to see their information than other countries on the list] (]) 17:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: Indonesian Chinese == | |||
| ::you can simply add all countries on that table if you want. I don't have time to build this because of Macau project. You go ahead. ] (]) 17:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Did you see the reference tag placed behind that sentence? Ya, these are called references and they provide a fact whether you like it or not. And you can't accuse someone having sockpuppet or meatpuppet unless you give concrete proof (such as wording, spelling mistake, identical phrases) ]] 16:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| you seem to have the time to continually undo my changes. and no i dont think it is nesecary to have all the countries listed, it is you who wants more information on the page so either do it properly or leave it, otherwise it npov. ] (]) 17:22, 6 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| : |
:I didn't object nor remove the tag they provided. What I objected is they keep reverting what I edited over there. What I edited didn't make a conflict with the reference they provided. ] (]) 16:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :I would like you to check their edit histories (i.e. ] and ]) carefully and see if there are any identical phrases, words, etc. I highly suspect meatpuppet can be established. They always join hand in hand and edit all Indonesian articles and revert all those who are not from their ideas. ] (]) 16:50, 26 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| the tag points out there is a dispute over if it npov or not so i am going to leave it until other people have a say. even if you think it is contradiction you should keep it when you make your changes. and please tell me why you deleted the information about the UK and Indonesia, i did it so that more readers from the UK and Indonesia can get the benefit, or do you find that reasoning flawed? ] (]) 17:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :: You can try ] if you have strong evidence (e.g. provide evidences such as exact wordings/identical phrases with diffs). But that's only if you're confident if it's sockpuppet. If it's meatpuppet, nothing we (or checkusers) can do because they're editing from 2 different IPs. Right now, I would suggest you to take a break from editing that article. Right now you are alone in this issue and your record counts against you. If Caniago and Merbabu's behaviour continues and someone else thinks it's disruptive, they will file an report and you may provide your evidence at the same time. So in short, '''take a break''', ok? ]] 16:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::It is reported from PISA itself. It is not an original research. You can simply add your opinion below, and it is not NPOV. ] (]) 17:55, 6 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yeah, sure thing! Due to my heavy job here, would you please help me to check their histories and est if they are qualified as meatpuppet (most likely) or sockpuppet (most likely not, but still there are little chances). Regards! ] (]) 17:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| i know it is true, so was the information about the UK and indonesia but you still didnt think they should be there, please explain why. to make special mention of a country when they have done nothing to deserve it is to show a partisan point of veiw, to delete other countries who are in the same place is especially biased. please accept that although what you have done may not be because of your point of veiw it can be seen as others as being point of view and therfore it has no place on wikipedia. | |||
| :::: And don't do anything controversial. ]] 17:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| and leave the tag so that other people can see that there is a debate on the section, if you can find a better tag then put it there, just make sure there is some kind of pointer to the debate ] (]) 05:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: ]'s Topic ban issue == | |||
| ::it seems whatever I say is wasting my time. It is '''not''' my opinion, it is '''not''' your opinion, it is '''not''' from other opinion, it is the opinion from '''PISA itself'''. TThat page is only talking about the PISA report, nothing related to personal opinion or view (POV). You get it? just as simple as ABC!!! ] (]) 11:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Dear ], ], ], and ]: | |||
| i know that it is correct information that in itself is not POV the sublty you fail to see is that by including this information in that place it suggests that infromation about the us is more important than other countries, this is what is POV. your rejection of the information about the UK and Indonesia, which is also correct, goes even further to show that you feel the us is more important than other countries. if yyou dont understand this by now i dont feel you should be allowed to edit wikipedia. i also want to point out that the consensus on the discussion page is that the infromation is misplaced ] (]) 15:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :OK! let's add the info of the UK and Indonesia and I am not going to revert what you did. ] (]) 16:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| I know this notice is going to be long and involves a bit of philosophical thinking, so TRY reading it at least twice before replying. I would like to point out a few things: | |||
| you know that is not the point, i put them there only to show you just how flawed your reasoning is, the list shhould contain only the countries who are listed it should not contain any random add ons because any of these suggest that these countries are more important than others. just have the top 10 or 20 or the whole list but dont make special mention of any countries, this way no one can be offended. ] (]) 16:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| # Coloane's topic ban is very straight and simple. No nomination/review in GA and FA (as confirmed by community). It is suggested by Orderinchaos that this ban is extended to FT, FL, FP, FPORT, and FS (this requires community confirmation). However, Indonesian Chinese article is not in any of the aforementioned processes at the moment and I see Merbabu and Caniago are trying to discredit Coloane using the topic ban reason. This is nothing but ]. | |||
| :Again! I don't care what you showed me. The main point from that article is showing what PISA is. The table over there is just showing example only. Over there it already stated that top 10 countries were being listed. If you feel interested in looking at the whole list, you can simply click on the external links for more detail. Same case as "foreign reserve", few countries were listed over there to make sure the article is not over-informed. ] (]) 16:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| # Calling someone as sockpuppet/meatpuppet without concrete evidence is against AGF. BUT dealing with "uncivil" editors does not immediately grant you rights to be uncivil and not AGF. | |||
| # I am completely uninvolved regarding the topic ban issue or the ] article. It's unfair for me to be dragged in, when I have to go through hundreds of diffs in the article as well evidences presented by different parties. | |||
| My recommendation to all parties is to move this discussion from my talk page to ], which is the talk page of the article you guys are disputing on. Try drop your conflicts that you had with other people and work as a team. Think about it. Had the person who reverted is not the person you had conflict with, would you want to stir up so much trouble just to win an argument? If things doesn't work out at the end, then we have no choice but to send it to ]. | |||
| im glad you finally understand. only problem is that by adding the us to the list you are contradicting yourself and making the article messy, overinformed and opening the posibility of being npov. im happy that you have decided that i am right and that the us should not be part of the list ] (]) 16:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| This notice has been copied exactly to all 4 people addressed in the first line. | |||
| ]] 03:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :As a matter of fact, the consensus of so-called topic ban on ANI has not been made as the ] hijacked and terminated the discussion and proposal unmaturely. The ridiculous reason he gave was that he might see I may have more supporters after the question(s) asking by the ]. I never heard about this reason before. For the matter of sockpuppet/meatpuppet, I didn't formally accuse of the ] and ] being as sockpuppets/meatpuppets. I only suspected the likelihood of being meatpuppet could be well-established. That is why I discussed this matter with you personally. I didn't expect that they intruded my personal discussion with you and wrote down nonsense (i.e.topic ban which is completely unrelated to the issue I discussed with you) on your talk page. I think they are smart enough to know it is a straw man argument. The main purpose for them to write down this nonsense is to distract my discussion of meatpuppet with you. ] (]) 04:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==other comments== | |||
| I don't understand why the table should be listed alphabetically. If the table is listed under the "'''list of countries with RANKINGS'''" (see the title of table below), it should be listed as a top down ranking with the highest GDP PPP per capita listing first. Other lists of countries like ], ], ], to name a few, are not listed alphabetically just like this article. Why they are excluded?? any reason for this?? if not, then would you consider this table as an(or your) original research (please refer to ]) since this table was not specifically followed exactly what the sources provided like CIA or IMF? ] (]) 18:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :As you correctly indicated, your comment is really not suitable where you've put it, so I've put it here, and have replied here. | |||
| :*As to the alphabetical question: a). This is not me who decided to sort it alphabetically. b). see the ''note'' (in italics) above the table. c). We have '''one unified''' table (including different lists of different bodies) - rather than 4 different tables, so the table can be sorted alphabetically only. If not alphabetically - then how can one sort it according to ranking? whose ranking? CIA ranking? IMF ranking? WB ranking? c). However, your question is answered on the article itself: see the ''note'' (in italics) above the table. Anyway, I highly recommend that you ask the person who decided to sort it alphabetically. | |||
| :*As to the World Bank list: a) This is not me who added the WB list. b). Per capita values were obtained by dividing the by the . Anyway, I highly recommend that you ask the person who decided to add the WB list. | |||
| :] (]) 08:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Is that possible for you to restore the list which was ranked with the highest GDP PPP per capita listing first? ] (]) 15:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::: which sorted the countries according to ranking. ] (]) 16:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Thanks for your searching. I prefer this version. Would you please restore this version after the process of mediation? ] (]) 17:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Remind me then. ] (]) 18:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Personal attacks == | |||
| ] Please see Misplaced Pages's ] policy. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to ] for disruption. Please ] and keep this in mind while editing. <!-- Template:uw-npa2 --> I draw your attention specifically to the following: ''some types of comments are never acceptable: racial...epithets directed against another contributor'' and ''insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done.'' ] 01:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == February 2008 == | |||
| ] This is the '''last warning''' you will receive for your disruptive comments. <br> If you continue to make personal attacks on other people{{#if:User:Orderinchaos| as you did towards ]}}, you '''will''' be ] for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-npa4 --> ''disparaging comments including race, education and similar - as explained above - are never accepted. '''I ask that you please be kind enough to show us your good manners and apologise to the editor involved as soon as possible''''' --] <sup>]</sup> 01:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| This matter I already sent to Jimbo Wales. ] (]) 01:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Jimbo is not going to intervene for you. You need to stop making attacks against Orderinchaos immediately or you will be blocked. Orderinchaos is not bothering you, he was asked to comment on your community ban and he did so; leave it be. ] <sup>]</sup> 01:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::So let Jimbo make his own comment, you can't speak on behalf of him, am I right? ] (]) 01:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::No, not really. This is not a subjective matter. You cannot attack other editors, no matter what justification you may feel you have. Please see ]. ''']''' '']'' 02:02, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::*I note your message regarding Jimbo - and concur with Shell Kinney. I am more than happy for you to wait until Jimbo replies to you but in the meantime I have asked you to show the wikipedia community that you are able to apologise directly to Orderinchaos and I will be interested to see if you are able to bring yourself to achieving that request?--] <sup>]</sup> 02:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::You all don't understand! I am not talking about personal attacks. I am talking about: hijacking the discussion and disturbing my discussion with OhanaUnited. There is no format of apology and, apology has been made. Check the talk page of OhanaUnited. ] (]) 02:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::OhanaUnited asked Orderinchaos about the topic ban - this is the only reason he commented. Orderinchaos was not hijacking or disturbing your discussion. Your "apology" on OhanaUnited's talk page included another attack on Orderinchaos; it would probably be best if you sincerely apologized and ceased any form of attack on other Misplaced Pages contributors. ] <sup>]</sup> 02:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Slip sliding around is not going to assist you to show the community that you are prepared to change your ways. You have been particularly offensive to Orderinchaos and you have been asked to apologise personally to him. Whether you do or not will give everyone else watching an understanding of the type of editor you are - my point is to try to get you to understand the importance of a '''sincere apology''' - and not the off-handed comment you made at OhanaUnited. How you do or don't put that apology will speak to us very clearly. Would you care to consider my request?--] <sup>]</sup> 02:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::well, believe me or not, I don't know what do you mean by sincere apology. If you want, you can give me a format and let me fill and sign, what do you think? ] (]) 02:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| No Coloane if you don't know how to say sorry to a fellow editor or human being there is not much I can do to help you now. Thank you. Please note the warning will remain in effect and blocking will occur if you re-offend.--] <sup>]</sup> 02:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::yeah, I already read your warning message (actually two warnings gave me together immediately). Regards! ] (]) 02:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Your latest question on my talk page refers. My answer is: | |||
| *Would you be happy with such an apology if I commented on your education and racial background in disparaging terms? | |||
| *Would you be happy if I put that apology on another person's page or would you think me more polite and courageous if I put it on your page? --] <sup>]</sup> 02:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :well, I think Orderinchaos will keep very close eye on my edit history and I am sure he already read my message of apology, no matter where I put, am I right? ] (]) 03:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Retirement == | |||
| If you left permanently in January, then this latest controversy would not have happened. ''']''' '']'' 15:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :With the increasing groundswell of hostility he has created so far in the community, it's just a matter of time before he is being blocked indefinitely or faced a permanent community ban ultimately. No doubt about that. I had a good laugh when I stumbled upon his recent postings at ]. I almost fell off from my chair, especially by the closing remarks made by daveh4h. That was a classic! -- ] (]) 17:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Dear IP from Singapore, if you fall off from your chair, please fall off somewhere else. I am not sure if you are ] or his other followers, but please refrain from making unconstructive and provokable comments here on my talk page. I am still actively appearing in French Misplaced Pages and thus I check this talk page from time to time. ] (]) 19:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::If you are still writing you are not retired. Can you please change your retired notice to reflect today's date of February 28, 2008?--] <sup>]</sup> 22:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| *Change noted - thank you.--] <sup>]</sup> 00:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Well this is the real ], so what's the problem? I also had a laugh seeing how "active" a retired person is. So what are you gonna do from now? Make an edit, then change the retirement date each time?--] (]) 02:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::: Alright, fun's over. People, let's get this over with and go back to editing instead of beating a dead horse. ]] 03:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 17:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692057745 --> | |||
Latest revision as of 13:53, 4 March 2022
R E T I R E D
 Archives |
|
|
Welcome back!
Welcome back, I hope you still like Misplaced Pages after being temporarily blocked. OhanaUnited 22:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- Blocked? when? Coloane (talk) 23:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- Opps, how come your archive links to the article's talk page archive? I'm going to fix it for you, ok? OhanaUnited 03:38, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: Indonesian Chinese
Did you see the reference tag placed behind that sentence? Ya, these are called references and they provide a fact whether you like it or not. And you can't accuse someone having sockpuppet or meatpuppet unless you give concrete proof (such as wording, spelling mistake, identical phrases) OhanaUnited 16:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't object nor remove the tag they provided. What I objected is they keep reverting what I edited over there. What I edited didn't make a conflict with the reference they provided. Coloane (talk) 16:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- I would like you to check their edit histories (i.e. user:Caniago and user:Merbabu) carefully and see if there are any identical phrases, words, etc. I highly suspect meatpuppet can be established. They always join hand in hand and edit all Indonesian articles and revert all those who are not from their ideas. Coloane (talk) 16:50, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- You can try Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser if you have strong evidence (e.g. provide evidences such as exact wordings/identical phrases with diffs). But that's only if you're confident if it's sockpuppet. If it's meatpuppet, nothing we (or checkusers) can do because they're editing from 2 different IPs. Right now, I would suggest you to take a break from editing that article. Right now you are alone in this issue and your record counts against you. If Caniago and Merbabu's behaviour continues and someone else thinks it's disruptive, they will file an report and you may provide your evidence at the same time. So in short, take a break, ok? OhanaUnited 16:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, sure thing! Due to my heavy job here, would you please help me to check their histories and est if they are qualified as meatpuppet (most likely) or sockpuppet (most likely not, but still there are little chances). Regards! Coloane (talk) 17:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- And don't do anything controversial. OhanaUnited 17:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, sure thing! Due to my heavy job here, would you please help me to check their histories and est if they are qualified as meatpuppet (most likely) or sockpuppet (most likely not, but still there are little chances). Regards! Coloane (talk) 17:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: User:Coloane's Topic ban issue
Dear User:Orderinchaos, User:Coloane, User:Merbabu, and User:Caniago:
I know this notice is going to be long and involves a bit of philosophical thinking, so TRY reading it at least twice before replying. I would like to point out a few things:
- Coloane's topic ban is very straight and simple. No nomination/review in GA and FA (as confirmed by community). It is suggested by Orderinchaos that this ban is extended to FT, FL, FP, FPORT, and FS (this requires community confirmation). However, Indonesian Chinese article is not in any of the aforementioned processes at the moment and I see Merbabu and Caniago are trying to discredit Coloane using the topic ban reason. This is nothing but straw man argument.
- Calling someone as sockpuppet/meatpuppet without concrete evidence is against AGF. BUT dealing with "uncivil" editors does not immediately grant you rights to be uncivil and not AGF.
- I am completely uninvolved regarding the topic ban issue or the Indonesian Chinese article. It's unfair for me to be dragged in, when I have to go through hundreds of diffs in the article as well evidences presented by different parties.
My recommendation to all parties is to move this discussion from my talk page to Talk:Chinese Indonesian, which is the talk page of the article you guys are disputing on. Try drop your conflicts that you had with other people and work as a team. Think about it. Had the person who reverted is not the person you had conflict with, would you want to stir up so much trouble just to win an argument? If things doesn't work out at the end, then we have no choice but to send it to WP:AN.
This notice has been copied exactly to all 4 people addressed in the first line. OhanaUnited 03:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- As a matter of fact, the consensus of so-called topic ban on ANI has not been made as the user:Orderinchaos hijacked and terminated the discussion and proposal unmaturely. The ridiculous reason he gave was that he might see I may have more supporters after the question(s) asking by the user:josuechan. I never heard about this reason before. For the matter of sockpuppet/meatpuppet, I didn't formally accuse of the user:Caniago and user:Merbabu being as sockpuppets/meatpuppets. I only suspected the likelihood of being meatpuppet could be well-established. That is why I discussed this matter with you personally. I didn't expect that they intruded my personal discussion with you and wrote down nonsense (i.e.topic ban which is completely unrelated to the issue I discussed with you) on your talk page. I think they are smart enough to know it is a straw man argument. The main purpose for them to write down this nonsense is to distract my discussion of meatpuppet with you. Coloane (talk) 04:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
other comments
I don't understand why the table should be listed alphabetically. If the table is listed under the "list of countries with RANKINGS" (see the title of table below), it should be listed as a top down ranking with the highest GDP PPP per capita listing first. Other lists of countries like List of countries by birth rate, List of countries by GDP (PPP) per hour worked, List of countries by GDP (nominal), to name a few, are not listed alphabetically just like this article. Why they are excluded?? any reason for this?? if not, then would you consider this table as an(or your) original research (please refer to WP:OR) since this table was not specifically followed exactly what the sources provided like CIA or IMF? Coloane (talk) 18:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- As you correctly indicated, your comment is really not suitable where you've put it, so I've put it here, and have replied here.
- As to the alphabetical question: a). This is not me who decided to sort it alphabetically. b). see the note (in italics) above the table. c). We have one unified table (including different lists of different bodies) - rather than 4 different tables, so the table can be sorted alphabetically only. If not alphabetically - then how can one sort it according to ranking? whose ranking? CIA ranking? IMF ranking? WB ranking? c). However, your question is answered on the article itself: see the note (in italics) above the table. Anyway, I highly recommend that you ask the person who decided to sort it alphabetically.
- As to the World Bank list: a) This is not me who added the WB list. b). Per capita values were obtained by dividing the PPP GDP data by the Population data. Anyway, I highly recommend that you ask the person who decided to add the WB list.
- Eliko (talk) 08:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Is that possible for you to restore the list which was ranked with the highest GDP PPP per capita listing first? Coloane (talk) 15:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- This is the last version which sorted the countries according to ranking. Eliko (talk) 16:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your searching. I prefer this version. Would you please restore this version after the process of mediation? Coloane (talk) 17:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Remind me then. Eliko (talk) 18:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Personal attacks
Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. I draw your attention specifically to the following: some types of comments are never acceptable: racial...epithets directed against another contributor and insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done. Orderinchaos 01:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
February 2008
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive comments.
If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did towards User:Orderinchaos, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. disparaging comments including race, education and similar - as explained above - are never accepted. I ask that you please be kind enough to show us your good manners and apologise to the editor involved as soon as possible --VS 01:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
This matter I already sent to Jimbo Wales. Coloane (talk) 01:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Jimbo is not going to intervene for you. You need to stop making attacks against Orderinchaos immediately or you will be blocked. Orderinchaos is not bothering you, he was asked to comment on your community ban and he did so; leave it be. Shell 01:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- So let Jimbo make his own comment, you can't speak on behalf of him, am I right? Coloane (talk) 01:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- No, not really. This is not a subjective matter. You cannot attack other editors, no matter what justification you may feel you have. Please see WP:Civil. Enigma 02:02, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- I note your message regarding Jimbo - and concur with Shell Kinney. I am more than happy for you to wait until Jimbo replies to you but in the meantime I have asked you to show the wikipedia community that you are able to apologise directly to Orderinchaos and I will be interested to see if you are able to bring yourself to achieving that request?--VS 02:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- You all don't understand! I am not talking about personal attacks. I am talking about: hijacking the discussion and disturbing my discussion with OhanaUnited. There is no format of apology and, apology has been made. Check the talk page of OhanaUnited. Coloane (talk) 02:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- OhanaUnited asked Orderinchaos about the topic ban - this is the only reason he commented. Orderinchaos was not hijacking or disturbing your discussion. Your "apology" on OhanaUnited's talk page included another attack on Orderinchaos; it would probably be best if you sincerely apologized and ceased any form of attack on other Misplaced Pages contributors. Shell 02:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Slip sliding around is not going to assist you to show the community that you are prepared to change your ways. You have been particularly offensive to Orderinchaos and you have been asked to apologise personally to him. Whether you do or not will give everyone else watching an understanding of the type of editor you are - my point is to try to get you to understand the importance of a sincere apology - and not the off-handed comment you made at OhanaUnited. How you do or don't put that apology will speak to us very clearly. Would you care to consider my request?--VS 02:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- well, believe me or not, I don't know what do you mean by sincere apology. If you want, you can give me a format and let me fill and sign, what do you think? Coloane (talk) 02:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
No Coloane if you don't know how to say sorry to a fellow editor or human being there is not much I can do to help you now. Thank you. Please note the warning will remain in effect and blocking will occur if you re-offend.--VS 02:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- yeah, I already read your warning message (actually two warnings gave me together immediately). Regards! Coloane (talk) 02:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Your latest question on my talk page refers. My answer is:
- Would you be happy with such an apology if I commented on your education and racial background in disparaging terms?
- Would you be happy if I put that apology on another person's page or would you think me more polite and courageous if I put it on your page? --VS 02:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- well, I think Orderinchaos will keep very close eye on my edit history and I am sure he already read my message of apology, no matter where I put, am I right? Coloane (talk) 03:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Retirement
If you left permanently in January, then this latest controversy would not have happened. Enigma 15:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- With the increasing groundswell of hostility he has created so far in the community, it's just a matter of time before he is being blocked indefinitely or faced a permanent community ban ultimately. No doubt about that. I had a good laugh when I stumbled upon his recent postings at Jimbo's page. I almost fell off from my chair, especially by the closing remarks made by daveh4h. That was a classic! -- 165.21.154.116 (talk) 17:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Dear IP from Singapore, if you fall off from your chair, please fall off somewhere else. I am not sure if you are user:Huaiwei or his other followers, but please refrain from making unconstructive and provokable comments here on my talk page. I am still actively appearing in French Misplaced Pages and thus I check this talk page from time to time. Coloane (talk) 19:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- If you are still writing you are not retired. Can you please change your retired notice to reflect today's date of February 28, 2008?--VS 22:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Dear IP from Singapore, if you fall off from your chair, please fall off somewhere else. I am not sure if you are user:Huaiwei or his other followers, but please refrain from making unconstructive and provokable comments here on my talk page. I am still actively appearing in French Misplaced Pages and thus I check this talk page from time to time. Coloane (talk) 19:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Change noted - thank you.--VS 00:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well this is the real user:Huaiwei, so what's the problem? I also had a laugh seeing how "active" a retired person is. So what are you gonna do from now? Make an edit, then change the retirement date each time?--Huaiwei (talk) 02:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Alright, fun's over. People, let's get this over with and go back to editing instead of beating a dead horse. OhanaUnited 03:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well this is the real user:Huaiwei, so what's the problem? I also had a laugh seeing how "active" a retired person is. So what are you gonna do from now? Make an edit, then change the retirement date each time?--Huaiwei (talk) 02:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)