| Revision as of 07:22, 2 February 2006 editATren (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers6,279 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:22, 21 March 2023 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,670,225 editsm Bot: Fixing lint errors, replacing obsolete HTML tags: <center> (1x)Tag: Fixed lint errors | ||
| (308 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ] contains earlier material from the talk page; August 2005 -- |
] contains earlier material from the talk page; August 2005 -- February 2006. ] <small>(])</small> 20:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ] contains earlier material from the talk page; March 2006 -- June 2006. ] <small>(])</small> 23:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ----- | |||
| ] contains earlier material from the talk page; June 2006 -- September 2006. ] <small>(])</small> 22:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Sago == | |||
| ] contains earlier material from the talk page; September 2006 -- January 2007. ] <small>(])</small> 23:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| My apologies for not getting back to you sooner; I just lost track of a few pages over the last few days, and Sago was one of them. In any case, I think the article has been greatly improved since my last edit, and I no longer have any objections to the paragraph in question. (I'm still rather strongly against the use of blogs as sources in general, but there are other, better places to have that debate, I think.) Best, --] 23:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| : |
] contains earlier material from the talk page; January 2007 -- October 2007. ] <small>(])</small> 17:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ''Please'' post new comments to the bottom of the talk page; I will almost always respond to comments on this page itself (makes comments easier to find -- I encourage you to do the same) so check back! ] <small>(])</small> 22:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==New main page draft== | |||
| Hello! I noticed your negative comments regarding ], and I'd like to invite you to review a ], and to post your opinion at ]. Thanks! —] 22:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Don't turn this into an ]. Please explain your wikilinking of ], in contradiction to Misplaced Pages standards for ] to an article which do not ]. Do you honestly think there will ever be a Misplaced Pages article with that title? And please start using appropriate ]. Thank you. ] 16:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I reverted my deletion after finding a new article for the wikilink. What I find ironic and even mystifying, is that you wrote an essay for Misplaced Pages on resolving conflict, yet you decided to deal with this issue by making a personal attack ("grumpy person") rather than providing adequate edit summaries which could have avoided the confusion in the first place. ] 17:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Web specific content, false claim of site rank== | |||
| You voted to keep ]. I've already offered ample explanation on the vote page, but I want to clarify my stance, since I've been one of the major editors in the article I voted to delete. I did not vote to delete the page because editors acted badly, I voted to delete it because it doesn't meet the Misplaced Pages ]. The arguments I offered in my lengthy explanation explained why those criteria are useful guidelines. | |||
| ::Come on Ward; you were being grumpy, and I called you on it. Now that I've created the article, I don't anticipate further conflict. ] <small>(])</small> 17:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Being ranked second most popular mental health site on the Web by an automated ranking system doesn't comprise a major award, which would meet the guidelines. Instead, the rank is an artifact of the forum owner's savy in presenting his particular forum to the ranking engine, and to some extent his authoritative declarations contrary to fact that the status is solely a result of traffic at his forums. | |||
| == Flagged revs == | |||
| The ranking software used to describe Psycho-Babble as second most popular does not distinguish the Psycho-Babble forums described in the article from any of the other sites in dr-bob.org domains. Traffic in the dr-bob.org domains ranked second most popular mental health site includes visits by students to the doctor's virtual pamphlet collection, which is not part of the subject of the article. Other schools offer on-line health assistance to students, but don't include the Alexa toolbar in their site code, so they are not ranked along with other ostensibly "mental health" sites - they are academic sites. What's more, the doctor has claimed contrary to Alexa's explanation of how they rank sites (by domain only) that the data that make his site second in the ranking is not the same as the data that indicates his is now only the 90,000th most visited site, and declining in rank. What these statistics don't tell us is how much of this traffic is the result of persistent activity by a comparatively small number of visitors to his site. His site has gained ranking in Alexa because he uses the Alexa toolbar, which other sites don't, because he operates his site as an open site for search engines, whereas other virtual self-help communities operate behind passwords or as e-mail lists. We have no good information about the scope of on-line self-help groups, and the editors from Psycho-Babble have show no interest in contributing to general articles about virtual communities or about on-line self-help groups other than Hsiung's. The ] attempt to explain how automated statistics for Web sites can construct a false notion of notoriety. | |||
| Thanks for your nice note. I hope the idea is dead, but I'm afraid that the next Seigenthaler-style hoohah will push it through. Anyway, nice to know that somebody besides Larry Sanger reads the blog! ] 19:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Without the "second-most-popular-mental-health-site" claim, there is nothing about this site that meets the criteria for articles on Web content. The psychiatrist writing here about his own site has not participated in editing articles about a broader topic about which he could potentially contribute expertise, thereby immersing himself in a community of similarly qualified editors who could balance whatever narrow focus his expertise might offer. Instead of contributing to an article about virtual self-help communities that could be a hand-out at the his public presentations, he encouraged members of his group to edit an article specifically about his site. His involvement then needs to be considered in the context of guidelines against vanity editing. The difficulty of balancing vanity edits is also well understood among Misplaced Pages editors. ] 22:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Multiple Theories == | |||
| :Sorry to wax so wordy, but '''I checked some facts more carefully''', because you said "if the following is correct" that Pscyho-Babble is the second-most-popular mental health site, it is noteworthy. If you revisit the vote for deletion, you ] that the among 5,710 Alexa-ranked mental-health sites was based on the site's standing among only 20 of those sites. ] 00:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| If you wish to amuse yourself (and possibly me) by sharing your hypotheses, you are welcome to email me as (all one word, no caps or spaces) at btinternet.com ] (]) 17:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Hi ProveReader -- thanks for the info; I've changed my vote on the AfD. Yours, ] <small>(])</small> 01:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: Pheonix Labs == | |||
| ==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:2005riot shooting.jpg== | |||
| The legal threat was made off-Misplaced Pages, on ]. Ask ] for the specifics. Thanks.--]|]<font color="green">]</font> 07:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at ] carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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. | |||
| :Like I said, I don't know the specifics. Please direct any other questions ]. Thanks.--]|]<font color="green">]</font> 07:05, 20 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->] (]) 04:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == You bastard! == | |||
| It's not like I didn't pull an allnighter to find a new medcab coordinator last night, but you're gonna set me to work in my half befuddled and mindspilled state? Sounds like Elian and Jimbo. I'll have you know that jimbo ultimately rebelled Elians dictatorship however :-P | |||
| ==Fair use rationale for Image:Brattlebororeformer.gif== | |||
| Now then hush about dragging me in, I'll just saunter on by... :-) | |||
| Thanks for uploading ''']'''. You've indicated that the image meets Misplaced Pages's ], but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to ] and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at ]. | |||
| Stick around and help out if you can, please :-) | |||
| Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. ] (]) 14:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ] 23:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Image:Stonewalldb.gif listed for deletion == | |||
| :Hee hee, poor Kim. If it makes you feel any better, I have a dissertation as well! Just turned in a final draft to my advisor, which is why I've had time to ball around on wikipedia. I won't judge you (you bastard) if you bail on the DPT case! ] <small>(])</small> 23:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| 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 --> ] (]) 17:39, 2 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == ''Ichthus'': January 2012 == | |||
| :: You mind if I get some sleep? :) I'll look into the case some more tomorrow. I've already speed-read some stuff on it. :-) ] 23:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> | |||
| :::Yes, you may have four hours. :) I don't know if we can do anything, those guys have already been through an RfA. ] <small>(])</small> 23:15, 26 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| {| style="text-align:center; border:10px solid black; background-color:black; width:100%;" | |||
| |- | |||
| :::: One way to find out, but tomorrow :-) ] 23:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| |] | |||
| |- padding:15em;padding-top:5em;" | |||
| And then the first thing you do in the morning is tell everyone I'm a mediator. (see above under "hush about dragging me in"). You enjoy punishing me, don't you, young padewan? Now I immediately get told off, -as a mediator- for interfering in the page. Ah well. In the old days we did this 20 miles both ways, uphill, in driving snow, so what the hey. | |||
| |style="font-size: 350%; color:gold; "|<br>'''<big>I</big>CHTHUS''' <br><br> | |||
| |- padding:15em;padding-top:5em;" | |||
| Oh, but what's this about "best of luck"? You will be mediating here. Now's your chance to relive those good old days. ] 15:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| |style="color:gold;"|'''January 2012''' | |||
| |} | |||
| : Alright, since we're cooperating on this, it might be handy to discuss on irc or aim, or msn. Do you have a client for any of those? ] 15:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| <div style="background-color:#FFF; font-size: 120%;font-weight:bold;"> | |||
| ''In this issue...'' <br /> | |||
| : Oh yeah, and I love grumbeling. So take the above with a couple of shakers of salt, if you hadn't already ;-P ] 18:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| Oh dear, I'm new at this so didn't realize how touchy these things could get! I will do my best to help out; I don't actually IM or even e-mail that much -- try to keep wp time to editing alone. I will be around though, and watch the page on my watchlist; I'll try not to step in for a little bit! ] <small>(])</small> 20:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| == Long Live the Mediation Cabal == | |||
| </div> | |||
| ----- | |||
| Thank you for your help mediating on the ] page. I know it wasn't easy. -- ] 23:42, 26 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| <div class="center"><small>''Ichthus'' is the newsletter of Christianity on Misplaced Pages • It is published by ]<br>For submissions contact the ] • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list ]</small></div> | |||
| </div> | |||
| == Seconding Gnetwerker == | |||
| <!-- EdwardsBot 0237 --> | |||
| And what a rare pleasure it is to do so. My only problem is that you have (inadvertently I think) archived discussions that were not directly related to the drug use section under that heading. You may not have noticed amid all the back and forth between Gnetwerker and myself, but I took strong exception to his having done something similar a few days ago, and made it clear that, while I fully endorse the drug use section we all agreed on, I did not endorse moving my comments about subjects other than the drug use section hidden elsewhere. What complicates the issue slightly is that, for example, the discussion regarding Gnetwerker's official position with the college and my request that he recuse himself morphed into a discussion of the drug policy. I have, therefore, gone through and culled out any reference to the drug section, and left the parts unrelated to that discussion. (At least, I hope I have. If I made a goof and left something in/took something out I shouldn't have, it was inadvertent.) If you have concerns about this, Sdedeo, I hope you won't hesitate to let me know. ] 03:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Thank you very much both Gnetwerker and IronDuke. Being "on the other side" is very interesting, and I encourage you to try your hands at medcabal yourselves. It is definitely a learning experience. IronDuke, re: archived comments, I don't have a strong position on that sort of thing, and in general if someone objects to a talk page "refactoring", it's best to err on the side of not archiving stuff. ] <small>(])</small> 04:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Sorry, Sdedeo. Despite your excellent efforts, after you left, Gnetwerker deleted all of my comments from the talk page, and has now begun to systematically revert all the other edits I made. I think the easiest way to resolve this is to go to arbcom, which is what I'm doing. Hope this doesn't waste too much more of your time. ] 16:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Some of the new edits seem to have some NPOV problems, but I believe it's nothing that couldn't be resolved with patience and respect. I don't believe either of you have bad motives. I would suggest bringing it up on the talk page and doing your best to be conciliatory; try reading the "tips" after my signature. Arbcom results are in my experience mixed: they generate so much bad will that little changes after the fact. Best of luck to you both. ] <small>(])</small> 17:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Please read the (one) finding and remedy of ]; as I read them, the approach you proposed is what ArbCom had in mind. It is also what I have long desired for this article, so I may be misreading; do let me know. ] 04:16, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Yes, that's pretty much it. My guess is that Ultra is very attached to his version of the article, and is unwilling to "let go." It can be tough to deal with this aspect of wikiness. ] <small>(])</small> 04:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == JW mediation == | |||
| Greetings Sdedeo, | |||
| In the Mediation Cabal, the Jehovah's Witness mediation is still active; what is the reason for moving it to the archive? | |||
| Thanks, | |||
| ] 17:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Hi SteveMc -- sorry, made an error! I'll move it back; just was trying to do a whole bunch at once. ] <small>(])</small> 18:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == == Request for Mediation Assistance == == | |||
| Sdedeo, I need to ask for your help to mediate a minor dispute between myself and a user called Exploding Boy. I made a post earlier today to the ], which Exploding Boy removed. He claims he archived it, which from what I can see, he did not. I replaced it, and he removed it again and left a note in the edit history to state He had archived it. I asked on his talk page, and again, he has denied deleting my comments. His claim to have archived the page as a whole does not stand up, since mine was the only comment which disappeared. | |||
| He also states that maybe someone else removed the comment. This also does not uphold, since between my comment posting, and me replacing it the second time, the only editor was Exploding Boy. I feel that the user is not being entirely truthful with me, but I cannot state this directly to him, since it would amount to a personal attack, which I will not commit. | |||
| Your assistance in mediating with this user would be welcomed. | |||
| Regards, Thorsteinn A. D. Malmjursson 01.02, 29th January 2006 (UTC) ] | |||
| :Hi Thor -- I looked at your comment . Please remember that wikipedia is not a ; it is generally not appropriate to use talk pages to discuss your own personal feelings about the subject of the article. I can't tell if EB made a mistake in thinking he had archived something, but in general, your comment (as well as AFAICT many other comments there) do not belong. ] <small>(])</small> 07:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == NYT links == | |||
| Okay, that makes sense. Bye ;) --] 13:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == CS mediation == | |||
| Just wanted to say thanks for taking the time to deal with the ] mediation. It no doubt required a lot of patience on your part, and I for one appreciate it. Nice work! --] 05:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Thank you, Allan; I find mediating a very interesting experience, and I encourage you to try your hand at medcabal yourself! Yours, ] <small>(])</small> 06:09, 30 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I second that, thanks for efforts, I believe they will lead to a lasting solution. --] 19:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Hello, | |||
| An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: ]. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, ]. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, ]. | |||
| On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --]|] 08:56, 30 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Sdedeo: Thanks for checking in and giving your thoughts. I admire the spirit behind your proposal, but don’t think it will work in practice. For starters, I very much doubt that Gnetwerker will voluntarily give up editing the Reed College page for any length of time, and even if he did, what would happen when he and I returned? I supposed you could argue that by then tempers may have cooled, but, speaking for myself, I think I can say that this isn’t a matter of temper or ego. Also, and this may be less clear, the main thrust of this RfA is not to “punish” Gnetwerker, it’s to settle a question that WP should be addressing: how close is too close when it comes to editing a page you have a personal stake in. Even if arbcom reject my thoughts on this, it will still be valuable as a signpost for what is and is not acceptable. | |||
| :On a more minor level, there are the civility and personal attack questions. Again, this is not about me having bruised feelings, but rather, I see instances on WP where people become discouraged with editing because they are dealt with harshly or in a nasty manner by other editors. Lest you think I’m just picking nits, you should check out the evidence page as far as NPA goes ]. If I thought Gnetwerker was going to change, I’d probably forebear from the RfA. The amount of time I spent just finding the diffs has about sucked the brain out of my skull. | |||
| :Is it possible, as you suggest, that the arbcom will also chastise me for personal attacks? Indeed it is. Is it likely? Perhaps I’m not the best judge, but I doubt they will, unless they accept Gnetwerker’s argument re: affiliation as a personal attack (which I think would be odd). And if they do, perhaps it is because (without ever meaning to or intending to) I ''did'' somehow attack Gnetwerker in a proscribed way, and being told this by a neutral party could help me see the error of my ways. | |||
| :Thanks again for your input. ] 02:50, 1 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == PRT mediation == | |||
| Sdedeo, | |||
| Avidor has added the NPOV to the personal rapid transit page again, along with a new set of demands. I have written a long note detailing my argument on ]'s page. The basic complaint is that Avidor is an extremist and will never stop attacking this page. Please help if you can, because unlike him, I and the other people involved ''want to do it right'' and Avidor is turning it into a mockery. | |||
| Please, read carefully what I have written on KrazyCaley's page. Avidor stops at nothing. He will do ''anything'' to advance his extremist cause. Last week, just after he challenged neutrality, he posted on at least one blog that ''the article was written by PRT crackpots, its neutrality is being challenged.'' He never mentioned that '''he''' was the one challenging! He was using the neutrality challenge to ''advance his extremism'' by implying that some neutral body had declared the article biased! | |||
| Do you not see the duplicity in all this? He is using this neutrality challenge as a tool to advance his cause! ''That's why he was so vague in his demands,'' because he ''wanted'' the challenge to stay! He is turning Misplaced Pages into his own personal propaganda weapon. | |||
| And Avidor has a history of doing this kind of "double-talk" in order to make it look like there's a consensus pushing an argument. For example, he has been known to register with multiple usernames on transportation forums, so he can gang up on PRT supporters. ''This is how this man works.'' Please do not allow it to go further. | |||
| == ]: ] == | |||
| He is using Misplaced Pages as a propaganda tool. Please stop it, not because it hurts PRT (which is going to happen whether Avidor likes it or not), but because, fundamentally, it hurts Misplaced Pages. He is dragging it through the mud. | |||
| Hi - an article you contributed to has been nominated for deletion. Feel free to comment. Thanks, ] (]) 08:41, 13 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you. | |||
| == ] == | |||
| ] 07:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Hi ATE -- I am all tied up with other mediations right now, but I would bug the person officially in charge of the mediation to get going. I strongly suggest reading my "tips"; I have found that following them religiously leads to solutions. However, you and Avidor may have sufficiently angered each other that it takes a long time; calling someone an "extremist" is not going to help you solve problems. ] <small>(])</small> 07:08, 2 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=691963760 --> | |||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
| The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
| ::Really, Sdedeo, how can someone come to consensus with someone who is incapable of reasoned discussion? I honestly don't have time for this anymore. Really. | |||
| Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> —]_] 14:41, 3 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
| ::You evaluated the page, removed the NPOV, made suggestions, and we worked on it. That's the way it's supposed to work. And now here we are, back at square one: him challenging and making demands. | |||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
| The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
| ::Forget it. As far as I'm concerned, let him turn Misplaced Pages into his own personal blog. I'm done with it. | |||
| Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> ''']''' (]) 23:53, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :] 07:22, 2 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:22, 21 March 2023
archive contains earlier material from the talk page; August 2005 -- February 2006. Sdedeo (tips) 20:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
archive2 contains earlier material from the talk page; March 2006 -- June 2006. Sdedeo (tips) 23:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
archive3 contains earlier material from the talk page; June 2006 -- September 2006. Sdedeo (tips) 22:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
archive4 contains earlier material from the talk page; September 2006 -- January 2007. Sdedeo (tips) 23:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
archive5 contains earlier material from the talk page; January 2007 -- October 2007. Sdedeo (tips) 17:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Please post new comments to the bottom of the talk page; I will almost always respond to comments on this page itself (makes comments easier to find -- I encourage you to do the same) so check back! Sdedeo (tips) 22:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
General intelligence factor
Don't turn this into an edit war. Please explain your wikilinking of The g Factor: General Intelligence and Its Implications, in contradiction to Misplaced Pages standards for links to an article which do not add content or meaning. Do you honestly think there will ever be a Misplaced Pages article with that title? And please start using appropriate edit summaries. Thank you. Ward3001 16:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted my deletion after finding a new article for the wikilink. What I find ironic and even mystifying, is that you wrote an essay for Misplaced Pages on resolving conflict, yet you decided to deal with this issue by making a personal attack ("grumpy person") rather than providing adequate edit summaries which could have avoided the confusion in the first place. Ward3001 17:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
- Come on Ward; you were being grumpy, and I called you on it. Now that I've created the article, I don't anticipate further conflict. Sdedeo (tips) 17:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Flagged revs
Thanks for your nice note. I hope the idea is dead, but I'm afraid that the next Seigenthaler-style hoohah will push it through. Anyway, nice to know that somebody besides Larry Sanger reads the blog! Casey Abell 19:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Multiple Theories
If you wish to amuse yourself (and possibly me) by sharing your hypotheses, you are welcome to email me as (all one word, no caps or spaces) at btinternet.com Myopic Bookworm (talk) 17:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:2005riot shooting.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:2005riot shooting.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Brattlebororeformer.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Brattlebororeformer.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Misplaced Pages's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Image:Stonewalldb.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Stonewalldb.gif, 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. PhilKnight (talk) 17:39, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Ichthus: January 2012
 |
ICHTHUS |
| January 2012 |
In this issue...
- From the Editor
- What are You doing For Lent?
- Fun and Exciting Contest Launched
- Spotlight on WikiProject Catholicism
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
2nd nomination for deletion: Heim theory
Hi - an article you contributed to has been nominated for deletion. Feel free to comment. Thanks, Maschen (talk) 08:41, 13 December 2012 (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) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Nomination of Quis-ego for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Quis-ego is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Quis-ego until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —me_and 14:41, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of New Wittgenstein for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article New Wittgenstein is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/New Wittgenstein until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 23:53, 29 March 2017 (UTC)