| Revision as of 21:28, 18 March 2008 editHanvanloon (talk | contribs)175 edits →Quality management page← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:16, 25 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (92 intermediate revisions by 25 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ==santa rita jail rules== | |||
| ==Quality management page== | |||
| Sbowers tagged the page requesting citations. I added several inline references and you deleted the lot. I am now confused. Can you please explain? --] (]) 20:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| whats edit warring ? ] (]) 09:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| There's a big difference between citations and spam. The sooner you learn that, the better for all of us. As has been suggested by several people already, go read ], ], and ]. You've been doing this for about 3 months now, and the patience of the other people editing this subject is running very thin. I'd say this is just about your last chance to learn these lessons before we no longer assume good faith.] (]) 21:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Hi Sickero, edit warring is what you and 74.228.158.68 were doing, reverting each other's edits repeatedly without discussing on the talk page or working towards consensus. If you guys both do that, the article suffers and consensus is never reached. In regards to the santa rita rules, if you have a source for it, I would definitely recommend putting it in, but I would summarize it, instead of just pasting the whole thing into the article. Thanks and please let me know if you have any other questions.] (]) 18:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ::I understand, i didn't know it had a name. ] (]) 11:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Sorry, I posted just after, my mistake. | |||
| == |
== Assistance == | ||
| Browsing your history of this page, I see that Daniel Penfield wrote the following: | |||
| ]. Regards, ]] 11:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| 1. What's the point in having a ] policy if you're just going to roll over when a spammer complains that vigilant editors have removed his website/publications for sale from articles after repeated warnings? | |||
| 2. What's the point in having a ] policy if you're just going to give in when a crackpot complains when his pet theory is challenged? | |||
| 3. What's the point in having a ] policy if you're going to look the other way when a spammer complains when sham articles set up by his crony/sockpuppet/shill account are deleted '''per Misplaced Pages policy''' (viz., ]). | |||
| ==Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Xlibris (2nd nomination) == | |||
| I would like to inform you why I believe that Daniel Penfield's arguments are incorrect, and honestly seek a dialogue with an editor/administrator who can correct the problem. I have found his attacks to be rather offensive at times. To answer his allegations: | |||
| The page on ] has been totally rewritten. You might want to reconsider your !vote ], especially given that I've withdrawn. ] <small>and his otters</small> • <sup>(]•])</sup> 18:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | :Thanks for the heads up, the article looks better.] (]) 19:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
| ==Email== | |||
| 1. The STARS methodology is published under GNU Free document license, it is an openly accessible methodology. Users can take what they want to use without having to buy anything from me, the web pages make this clear. I do not deny that I provide consulting services if people want to use them, but there is neither obligation nor restriction. Furthermore there is collaborative output of many people (from knowledge cafés) also freely available under the same GNU Free document license on the site. As I understand ], providing free and factual information cannot be considered SPAM. | |||
| Did you email me about the ] article? ] | ] 05:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| 2. Articles on the STARS methodology have been published in the American Society for Quality (ASQ), Quality Progress magazine as well as other acknowledged sources. I think it is reasonable that ASQ are considered to be a reliable source from an NPOV and I have asked other editors/administrators to clarify how such a body cannot be so considered (without response so far). ASQ use editors to carefully check all articles published - they do not publish 'a crackpot's pet theory' as Penfield alleges, because it would damage their reputation. In addition, the university at which I teach would probably dislike having their reputation damaged. So I find Penfield's allegation of breaching the ] policy to be unfounded. | |||
| :No, not me, sorry. Didn't even know you could email editors off-wikipedia?] (]) 03:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::In the toolbox box on the left panel of your wikipedia browser window, when looking at a user page or a user talk page, there should be link for 'E-mail this user' if that user has e-mail enabled. ] (]) 12:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks.] (]) 06:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Ronan O'Rahilly and Condom edits (objections) == | |||
| 3. The person who wrote the page (Isabel de Pablo) is a user of the methodology, so yes she has an interest (obviously otherwise she would not have written it :-). She has clearly stated on her talk page that she has no commercial interest with me, which I can confirm. We are not related, married or have any other intimate relationship. Yes she told me she was writing an article and made sure I had placed no restrictions on her. Yes she used some material from the ASQ articles and my web site and what she knows about me. If you can check IP addresses you will find I cannot be in Switzerland and in Spain (her address) at the same time, so accusations of sockpuppetry are clearly false. I find Penfield's allegations not only to be incorrect but to be offensive to her. I cannot see any breach of ] policy. | |||
| Dear Helixweb, I have responded to your objections on my My Talk page. I would greatly appreciate if you would consider them and respond. | |||
| I do find it interesting that Daniel Penfield has authored only one page, which is about a person of the same name (a relative?). I have not tried to attack him in the manner he has attacked me and Isabel de Pablo. | |||
| ] (]) 09:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| I would appreciate your considered response as I am sure Isabel de Pablo would like to know how to resolve this issue in a fair and equitable manner. --] (]) 21:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Thank you for the response, but I believe the consensus is that most of what you have contributed is faulty information sourced from old or inaccurate or unsubstantial sources. I do like your edits on ], however. ] (]) 06:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==] nomination of ]== | |||
| ] | |||
| A tag has been placed on ], requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages for multiple reasons. '''Please see the page to see the reasons'''. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on ]. | |||
| If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{tlc|hang on}} to '''the top of ]''' (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on ''']''' explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact ] to request that the administrator ] the page or email a copy to you. '']'' <sup>]</sup> 21:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi,<br> | |||
| You appear to be eligible to vote in the current ]. The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to ] and submit your choices on ]. For the Election committee, ] (]) 13:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692203726 --> | |||
| == RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey == | |||
| ] | |||
| <big>'''''Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!'''''</big> | |||
| This is a '''one-time-only''' message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the ''']''' that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for: | |||
| # ] | |||
| # ] | |||
| # ] | |||
| # ] | |||
| # ] | |||
| Further, there are ] that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis) | |||
| Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016. | |||
| <small>Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{tl|User wikipedia/RC Patrol|}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.</small> | |||
| Best regards, {{u|Stevietheman}} — <small>Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)</small> | |||
| <!--Sent per Special:PermaLink/753582870#Request_for_mass_message_delivery:_December_6.2C_2016 at WT:MMS--> | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Stevietheman/RCPatrollers_list&oldid=753533319 --> | |||
Latest revision as of 15:16, 25 February 2023
santa rita jail rules
whats edit warring ? Sickero (talk) 09:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Sickero, edit warring is what you and 74.228.158.68 were doing, reverting each other's edits repeatedly without discussing on the talk page or working towards consensus. If you guys both do that, the article suffers and consensus is never reached. In regards to the santa rita rules, if you have a source for it, I would definitely recommend putting it in, but I would summarize it, instead of just pasting the whole thing into the article. Thanks and please let me know if you have any other questions.Helixweb (talk) 18:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- I understand, i didn't know it had a name. Sickero (talk) 11:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Assistance
Thanks for the quick overview. Regards, Rudget. 11:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Xlibris (2nd nomination)
The page on Xlibris has been totally rewritten. You might want to reconsider your !vote here, especially given that I've withdrawn. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 18:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up, the article looks better.Helixweb (talk) 19:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Did you email me about the Maria auxiliadora article? Tan | 39 05:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- No, not me, sorry. Didn't even know you could email editors off-wikipedia?Helixweb (talk) 03:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- In the toolbox box on the left panel of your wikipedia browser window, when looking at a user page or a user talk page, there should be link for 'E-mail this user' if that user has e-mail enabled. Narson (talk) 12:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks.Helixweb (talk) 06:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- In the toolbox box on the left panel of your wikipedia browser window, when looking at a user page or a user talk page, there should be link for 'E-mail this user' if that user has e-mail enabled. Narson (talk) 12:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Ronan O'Rahilly and Condom edits (objections)
Dear Helixweb, I have responded to your objections on my My Talk page. I would greatly appreciate if you would consider them and respond.
Aimulti (talk) 09:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for the response, but I believe the consensus is that most of what you have contributed is faulty information sourced from old or inaccurate or unsubstantial sources. I do like your edits on Soho, however. Helixweb (talk) 06:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:124.149.83.104
A tag has been placed on User talk:124.149.83.104, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages for multiple reasons. Please see the page to see the reasons. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on my user talk page.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Swarm 21:57, 20 March 2011 (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) 13:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
- Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
- Editor-focused central editing dashboard
- "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
- Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
- Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list
Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.
Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)