| Revision as of 20:42, 16 January 2008 editTheBilly (talk | contribs)2,468 edits +suspected meat puppet← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 19:01, 13 April 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{meatpuppet2|Robertptolemy}} | |||
| {{#if:DarkOrchid|__TOC__|}} | {{#if:DarkOrchid|__TOC__|}} | ||
| {{#if:DarkOrchid|<div style="background:white; border:2px DarkOrchid solid; padding:12px;">|}} | {{#if:DarkOrchid|<div style="background:white; border:2px DarkOrchid solid; padding:12px;">|}} | ||
| Line 26: | Line 24: | ||
| For information on how to contribute to Misplaced Pages when you have conflict of interest, please see ]. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see ]. Thank you. —] <small>(] ])</small> 20:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)<!-- Template:uw-coi --> | For information on how to contribute to Misplaced Pages when you have conflict of interest, please see ]. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see ]. Thank you. —] <small>(] ])</small> 20:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)<!-- Template:uw-coi --> | ||
| == |
==Warnings== | ||
| <!--begin:template:s/wnote--><div class="plainlinks" style="background-color:#F9F9F9; border:1px solid #AAA; padding:5px; font-size:0.9em; line-height:1.2em;"> ] '''Note:''' Always remember to ]. For help on user warnings, see the ].<br /><!-- | |||
| -->''Older warnings may have been deleted, but are still visible in the .''<br /><!-- | |||
| -->] | / Info: ] | | | ]</div><!--end:template:s/wnote--> | |||
| ===January 2008=== | |||
| #{{{icon|] }}}You currently appear to be engaged in an ]{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|  according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the ]. If you continue, you may be ] from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. If necessary, pursue ]. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ''Remove the COI template one more time and you'll be in clear violation of the 3 revert rule. Your overall behavior makes a strong case that your edits are in bad faith, and the 3RR does not entitle you to 3 reversions, it merely sets an absolute limit. This is fair warning, because you're very close to being blocked'' — <span style="background:#FEC">]<sup>(])</sup></span> 02:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| #{{{icon|] }}}Please do not delete content from pages on Misplaced Pages, as you did to ]. Removal of clean up templates is not constructive, and your edit has been ]. If you would like to experiment, please use ] for test edits. Thank you. —] <small>(] ])</small> 03:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)<!-- Template:uw-delete2 --> | |||
| == COI == | |||
| You keep demanding an "explanation", but none is needed. You are "Felicia Ptolemy", according to how you credited yourself on a photo you uploaded. You credited it to "Felicia Ptolemy", and released it into the public domain, asserting yourself as the copyright holder. You are the producer of this film, and obviously you and the other "ptolemy" user have a distinct conflict of interest. The COI template alerts others to that fact, that the article may be biased because of the close connection to this film that the primary contributor(s) have. As the user who has the conflict of interest, you are not a proper judge of whether there is such a conflict. As I explained in my edit summary, a number of editors have raised the COI objection (by warnings on the talk pages of both of you), and a second user re-added this template when you removed it. I'll be reporting you on the 3RR noticeboard and an admin may or may not choose to block you for your behavior. I'm running out of patience explaining the rules to you, and the way that you blank out these notices (of course, you ''are'' allowed to remove content from your own talk page) shows that you want to ignore the issue that is trying to be raised. I'll also be alerting others on the COI noticeboard, so rather than "win" some sort of victory you've only brought attention to your unconstructive behavior — <span style="background:#FEC">]<sup>(])</sup></span> 03:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == COI == | |||
| This is absolutely the last warning you'll get for removing the conflict of interest template from ]. You are blatantly edit warring — <span style="background:#FEC">]<sup>(])</sup></span> 01:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| FYI: Transcendent Man has been created using the criteria for FUTURE FILMS that has been established by Misplaced Pages, from a template provided here on Misplaced Pages. A future film CAN NOT have a conflict of interest, because there is no one but the producers who know anything about it. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
| :: Hello – I'm the admin who is dealing with the ] report made against you for repeated removal of tags. I declined to block you based on that report because it was made too late, but I would have blocked you had the report been made in a more timely manner. You may have created this article, but no one ]. All editors are entitled to review and edit the article as they see fit. This includes ] edits to add appropriate notices such as {{tl|COI}} and {{tl|advert}}. | |||
| :: I have to say that your comment above this one, about a future film being unable to have any conflicts of interest, is patent nonsense. The ] state that such films should not have articles '''unless''' they meet the ], which requires significant coverage in multiple, independent, ] ]. A few ELs can be found in the article to support that claim (although some are about the man or the producers instead of the film itself). Obviously, if the links are valid and true, this means that more people than just the producers know something about the film. | |||
| :: However, you state that "no one but the producers know anything about it, so there can be no conflict of interest." There's a conundrum with that, isn't there? Either the ELs and articles provide us and Misplaced Pages readers with accurate knowledge about the film, meaning the film is notable and someone besides the producers knows something about the film – or they're _not_ accurate, meaning the article about the film does not meet the notability requirements, no one knows anything about the film, and the article should be deleted. Which is it? | |||
| :: Of course articles on future films can be edited by people with conflicts of interests. It happens regularly, and it's pretty clear this article is in that category because it's more about the filmmakers/producers than about the subject of the film. Editing articles on subjects with which you have a COI can be done, but it's difficult to do with a ]. I have recommended to the editor who made the 3RR report that he make a report at the ] about this article and its issues. | |||
| :: Please stop removing the COI and advert tags, because they're accurate. We welcome new editors and new articles on subjects that meet the notability standards. However, we will not tolerate ] or ], and your edits have become disruptive. If you continue this disruption, you can and will be blocked from editing. Thank you. - ]] 07:33, 19 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == File:Kurzweil at Lincoln.jpg listed for deletion == | |||
| An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} <!-- Template:Idw --> ] (]) 22:52, 27 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == ] of ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| The file ] has been ] because of the following concern: | |||
| <blockquote>orphaned image, no encyclopedic use</blockquote> | |||
| While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
| You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
| Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> | |||
| Also: | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| <span style="color:red;font-weight:bold;">This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual file for details.</span> Thanks, ] (]) 01:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC) | |||
| You are not allowed to edit on another person's behalf. You and "Roberptolemy" do not own any article, such as ], and should not undo the work of others just because you disagree with it. You didn't explain why you removed the "cleanup" template, when the article CLEARLY needs cleanup. Since you two edit the same articles and seem to assert a feeling of ownership - and of course seem to have a conflict of interest - it's apparent that you're editing on someone else's behalf, or perhaps are simply a regular sockpuppet — <span style="background:#FEC">]<sup>(])</sup></span> 20:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:01, 13 April 2022
Welcome...
Hello, Fjnainoa, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- How to edit a page
- Help
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 20:23, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Conflict of interest
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Transcendent Man (film), you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
- editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
- participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
- linking to the Misplaced Pages article or website of your organization in other articles (see Misplaced Pages:Spam);
- and you must always:
- avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.
For information on how to contribute to Misplaced Pages when you have conflict of interest, please see Misplaced Pages:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Misplaced Pages:Conflict of Interest. Thank you. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 20:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Warnings
Older warnings may have been deleted, but are still visible in the page history.
January 2008
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Remove the COI template one more time and you'll be in clear violation of the 3 revert rule. Your overall behavior makes a strong case that your edits are in bad faith, and the 3RR does not entitle you to 3 reversions, it merely sets an absolute limit. This is fair warning, because you're very close to being blocked — TheBilly 02:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Please do not delete content from pages on Misplaced Pages, as you did to Raymond Kurzweil. Removal of clean up templates is not constructive, and your edit has been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox for test edits. Thank you. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 03:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
COI
You keep demanding an "explanation", but none is needed. You are "Felicia Ptolemy", according to how you credited yourself on a photo you uploaded. You credited it to "Felicia Ptolemy", and released it into the public domain, asserting yourself as the copyright holder. You are the producer of this film, and obviously you and the other "ptolemy" user have a distinct conflict of interest. The COI template alerts others to that fact, that the article may be biased because of the close connection to this film that the primary contributor(s) have. As the user who has the conflict of interest, you are not a proper judge of whether there is such a conflict. As I explained in my edit summary, a number of editors have raised the COI objection (by warnings on the talk pages of both of you), and a second user re-added this template when you removed it. I'll be reporting you on the 3RR noticeboard and an admin may or may not choose to block you for your behavior. I'm running out of patience explaining the rules to you, and the way that you blank out these notices (of course, you are allowed to remove content from your own talk page) shows that you want to ignore the issue that is trying to be raised. I'll also be alerting others on the COI noticeboard, so rather than "win" some sort of victory you've only brought attention to your unconstructive behavior — TheBilly 03:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
COI
This is absolutely the last warning you'll get for removing the conflict of interest template from Transcendent Man (film). You are blatantly edit warring — TheBilly 01:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI: Transcendent Man has been created using the criteria for FUTURE FILMS that has been established by Misplaced Pages, from a template provided here on Misplaced Pages. A future film CAN NOT have a conflict of interest, because there is no one but the producers who know anything about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fjnainoa (talk • contribs)
- Hello – I'm the admin who is dealing with the 3RR report made against you for repeated removal of tags. I declined to block you based on that report because it was made too late, but I would have blocked you had the report been made in a more timely manner. You may have created this article, but no one owns it. All editors are entitled to review and edit the article as they see fit. This includes good faith edits to add appropriate notices such as {{COI}} and {{advert}}.
- I have to say that your comment above this one, about a future film being unable to have any conflicts of interest, is patent nonsense. The notability requirements for future films state that such films should not have articles unless they meet the notability guidelines, which requires significant coverage in multiple, independent, verifiable reliable sources. A few ELs can be found in the article to support that claim (although some are about the man or the producers instead of the film itself). Obviously, if the links are valid and true, this means that more people than just the producers know something about the film.
- However, you state that "no one but the producers know anything about it, so there can be no conflict of interest." There's a conundrum with that, isn't there? Either the ELs and articles provide us and Misplaced Pages readers with accurate knowledge about the film, meaning the film is notable and someone besides the producers knows something about the film – or they're _not_ accurate, meaning the article about the film does not meet the notability requirements, no one knows anything about the film, and the article should be deleted. Which is it?
- Of course articles on future films can be edited by people with conflicts of interests. It happens regularly, and it's pretty clear this article is in that category because it's more about the filmmakers/producers than about the subject of the film. Editing articles on subjects with which you have a COI can be done, but it's difficult to do with a neutral viewpoint. I have recommended to the editor who made the 3RR report that he make a report at the conflict of interest noticeboard about this article and its issues.
- Please stop removing the COI and advert tags, because they're accurate. We welcome new editors and new articles on subjects that meet the notability standards. However, we will not tolerate disruptive or tendentious editing, and your edits have become disruptive. If you continue this disruption, you can and will be blocked from editing. Thank you. - KrakatoaKatie 07:33, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
File:Kurzweil at Lincoln.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kurzweil at Lincoln.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Jordan 1972 (talk) 22:52, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of File:Barry in Rio Christ.jpg
The file File:Barry in Rio Christ.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
orphaned image, no encyclopedic use
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
Also:
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
