Misplaced Pages

User talk:Moonriddengirl: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:05, 2 August 2011 editRashersTierney (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers24,046 edits →British Isles Topic Probation - edit review: not from nowhere← Previous edit Latest revision as of 10:18, 25 December 2024 edit undoVoceditenore (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers123,168 edits →Merry Christmas: new sectionTag: New topic 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{atn}} |archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
|maxarchivesize = 250K |maxarchivesize = 250K
|counter = 38 |counter = 62
|algo = old(5d) |algo = old(10d)
|archive = User talk:Moonriddengirl/Archive %(counter)d |archive = User talk:Moonriddengirl/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}

{| style="width: 100%; background-color: #FFFFF0; border: 3px solid #E2725B; padding: 10px; margin-bottom: 8px; vertical-align: top;"
| colspan=3 style="vertical-align:top" |
{{User talk:Moonriddengirl/header}} {{User talk:Moonriddengirl/header}}
{{archive banner}} {{archives|banner=yes}}
{{Quote box2 {{Quote box2
|width = 30% |width = 30%
Line 18: Line 17:
|title_bg = #F5DEB3 |title_bg = #F5DEB3
|title_fnt = |title_fnt =
|title = Hours of Operation |title = Reaching me
|halign = top |halign = top
|quote = During my current work interim position, I have found myself with not a lot of spare time that isn't consumed by family. I can go long periods without logging in to Misplaced Pages. If you have an urgent note for me here, please consider alerting me via email at {{nospam|mdennis|wikimedia.org}}. (This is my work email address, and I do not mix work and volunteering, but mailing that address makes sure I will see it promptly, usually within a day.) If not urgent, I'll come by as soon as I can, and I heartily welcome talk page stalkers. :) Oh, I have discovered that sometimes when people don't ''tell'' me it's a volunteer contact, I have handled it with the wrong hat on. Please make which "me" you want clear!
|quote = In general, I check in with Misplaced Pages under this account around 12:00 ] and 21:00 ], on weekdays. On weekends, I'm here more often. When you loaded this page, it was {{Time|UTC}}. ] your page to see what time it is now.
|salign = |salign =
|source = |source =
}} }}
{{bots|deny=DPL bot}}


== Records ==

{{archive top|I have informed you how to appeal your ban. It is not through me. I will not be discussing this matter with you any further. --] <sup>]</sup> 11:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)}}
Re this section ] (no. 59, 10th July), I took your advice and look what happened MuZemike, no. 20.

You've previously said that it's important for us to keep accurate records, so can you restore my evidence to the record of the community ban discussion? ] (]) 11:47, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

: was not advice, but a simple statement of fact, unless you're talking about a different talk page. Clearly, ] is not your talk page, and you are unwelcome to contribute to it so long as you are blocked and particularly now that you are banned. While I feel it inappropriate to remove a section that includes comments from others, removing ''your'' comments is in keeping with policy until you negotiate a return to Misplaced Pages. Because you are banned, I will not be talking to you further about this, but please see ] for accepted procedures for appeal. --] <sup>]</sup> 15:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Margaret, as I have neither a computer nor an email account, the guidance to which you refer is of little use to me. The following remarks are addressed to you as Liaison Officer with the WMF and thus have nothing to do with membership of the project.

The following false and damaging claims have been posted on this website: ] and references in the banning log to "vandalism", sockpuppetry and a link to the above. Both documents are permanent records, visible worldwide. They are partisan and inflammatory and the allegations are untrue. In particular, the word "vandalism" nowhere appears in the discussion, and in the log the link is held out to be a full and accurate record of the discussion, which contains not one diff to back the allegations. It is in fact a vote - stacking exercise by corrupt administrators desperate to save their own necks.

You say that "removing comments is in keeping with policy". I do not think so. A ban comes into effect when the discussion is closed, and the comments were posted before it was closed.
In any event, Courcelles was not qualified to close it, being "involved" as (s)he had a few minutes earlier blocked me while the SPI remained open. The guidance requires the subject of the discussion to be notified for the purpose of filing a response. It is implicit in that that once filed the response must not be tampered with.

The "sockpuppetry" allegation should be balanced by reference to the following. No administrator may ban unilaterally. The so - called "indefinite" block was intended to be infinite and therefore invalid. The attempt to validate it by the ban discussion initiated last year failed.

As indefinite siteban is the ultimate sanction it can only be enforced if specifically asked for. Consensus is never a simple tally of votes - it is affected by the severity of the sanction proposed and duplicate or involved votes are discounted. Although the guidance does not set a fixed tariff, for bureaucratship the level is 90%, and for an indefinite siteban it must be at least that.

Please let me know how you wish to handle this. Can you (in order of preference) provide me with (a) your telephone number (b) your email address (c) your mailing address? If you do not wish to reveal your telephone number publicly it may be possible for me to get someone to email you with my telephone number. If I do not hear from you it will be apparent that you recognise that the "ban" is invalid. Best wishes. ] (]) 09:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

By replying to my post Margaret has already indicated that she wishes the thread to remain. Please do not hassle her. Also do not hassle me - comments such as "borderline threatening MRG -- toddle off now" are very juvenile and your removal of her comment is blockable - I would advise you not to try that stunt again. ] (]) 11:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Every corporation must provide a physical mailing address to which communications may be sent. Please provide yours, preferably with the name and department of the person who will be handling this. Best wishes. ], 16:45, 25 July 2011.

To SpacemanSpiff -- England 474 - 8 dec & 269 - 6 dec bt India 286 & 261 by 196 runs. (I used to work in the tickertape room). Hope you enjoyed the cricket. The inflammatory material has been taken down but there is still a link to it which needs to be removed as well. Over here we are told to be wary of websites which do not provide a physical mailing address - Misplaced Pages doesn't. There is a local contact, who bid to bring the Wikimania conference to Oxford a few years ago, but it seems that all we can do for the moment is await Margaret's return. I note that ErrantX, who is a key player in this, unsuccessfully ran for the Board a few weeks ago :)] (]) 20:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Margaret, Have you been following what's been happening on ANI? They have now started removing other editors' comments from the page. Can you step in and restore order? ] (]) 15:36, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
{{archive bottom}}

:See , specifically the information at "Contact Us." I am an independent contractor and do not work at the Foundation's home office. I cannot tell you who will reply to your contact to that address. --] <sup>]</sup> 20:45, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== Anatolia ==

It seems that good chunks of this article: ] are copy/pasted from this copyrighted source: . I was going to slap a <nowiki>{{subst:copyvio}}</nowiki> template on the article, but thought I'd ask about it first.] (]) 01:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
:Hi. :) That one looks like a problem under ] rather than a copyvio, since the source is public domain. It should have {{tl|Country study}} at the top of the reference section. I'm not sure how long ago this content was placed--it might have predated that guideline. Alas, I don't have time to check it out further. I've got to run finish packing! But I've placed the attribution tag, even though doesn't seem to be working. :/ --] <sup>]</sup> 11:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

::You were missing the abbr parameter ("abbr=tr"), apparently it's required even if you have the country name. I've fixed it and moved it to an inline reference at the end of the climate section though if others sections also copy it they should be go the footnote as well. With the exception of that (and it could be separate templates linking to the individual sections of the work if someone wants to go that far), I believe it is as fixed as is necessary per ].--]<sup>(] <small>•</small> ])</sup> 12:23, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

:::Thanks! So... I got a few more but it looks like you're quite busy. <s>What should I do with them?</s> Honestly, I have a suspicion that with everything going on right now (DYK etc.) once people start scratching the surface they'll find out that half the Misplaced Pages is all copyvios, plagiarism and close paraphrasing. Which would mean way too many problems and way too few resources. Don't know if I want to wish that upon you. Again, thanks!] (]) 16:24, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, here's another one (two actually), and this one's a GA: ], stuff taken from and (both websites indicate their sources which appear to be copyrighted and checking the Wayback Machine at least the first one dates back to 2000, whereas the article was created in 2009), and maybe here . I haven't checked the other sources used in the article. Since this is a GA I listed it for review (I'm not clear on the exact nuts and bolts of the GAR process so I'm not sure if I followed it correctly). However I thought you might want to take a look since the whole GAR process may take time.

The same user also created ] in december 2008, which is verbatim from - this site existed in December 2007 with that text . In this case though I'm not sure what the exact nature of the site is, it appears to be at least partially user generated content so I'm not sure what the copyright status here is (it may even be possible that the same person created both entries).
] (]) 06:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

=== More CV GAs ===

In addition to the GAs I brought up above , ] also appears to be mostly copied verbatim from (DD: ), which predates the creation of the article on Misplaced Pages ( vs. ), and which is a copyrighted source . I think. I really could use a second pair of eyes to make sure I'm checking these things correctly.
:I found additional copying from other sources. The article is now blanked. I also found a ] copy (]) which I also blanked. ] 09:44, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
::Massive sigh. :/ I don't know what to do about this widespread problem, frankly. ] helps in theory, but it's so understaffed that all we're doing is just creating a bigger and bigger list of people whose edits need checking. I've been urged by a number of people to push for more aggressive deletion in these cases, but I'm loathe to do so. Maybe I'm part of the problem for that reason. :P --] <sup>]</sup> 20:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== Quoting without intext attribution ==

=== ] ===

Hi MRG.

*{{user|Miradre}}

This user has been adding non-free content to the article ], Four of their edits have essentially copy-pasted segments from journal articles, where there was no reason not to paraphrase. Miradre's native language is not English and they do not write fluently in English. They have adopted the policy of adding some content to articles by copy pasting content and placing it in quotes, without direct attribution; there has been no attempt at paraphrase. The four edits that were copyvios are all described on the talk page of the article. The fourth edit was made even after the precise policy for directly quoting text had been explained to Miradre. In this fourth edit they simply added quote marks around the copy-pasted passage with no attribution. I have not looked carefully at whethe Miradre's other edits have followed the same patterrn. I do know that exactly the same problem of copy-pasting instead of paraphrasing occurred on ]. Because of the quality of Miradre's written English, copy-pasting of this type is easy to detect. After Miradre's wikibreak and enforced change of subject, following a topic ban, I have the nagging doubt that many of their edits are being done in this way. What is the best way to proceed? ] (]) 23:23, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

:Hello, Mathsci. Hopefully, the problem is more limited than that. I did a spot-check of contributions and didn't find any issues in the six or seven articles I looked at. If issues prove to be more widespread, of course, a more systematic approach to evaluating and fixing issues may be needed. That said, I've dropped a note at Miradre's talk page discussing in some depth how non-free content is handled on Misplaced Pages. I realize that you've laid the groundwork for that on the talk page of that article, but this can be very unfamiliar ground for those not used to it. :) --] <sup>]</sup> 19:29, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

=== Complaints about Mathsci ===

If you look at Mathsci's edit the last 3 days he has done little except followed me around Misplaced Pages. Including to articles he has never edited before and made complaints and reverted my edits (almost never due to copyright claims). As well as making complaints to several different noticeboards. This seems to me to be just another, new part of his harassment campaign. But I welcome any scrutiny. I may certainly on occasion have made unintentional mistakes, such as missing direct attribution for quotes in addition to the footnote, but if so they are IMHO rather minor. I have always marked sources and certainly not copy-pasted lengthy texts.] (]) 00:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

:Anybody can edit wikipedia articles. I have made hardly any edits to articles recently (indeed this year). I added a tag about the inadequate lead of ] after Miradre's removed most of it. It is an article that many people watch. With Itsmejudith I monitored Miradre's controversial changes to ]. I am unaware that I have reported Miradre at multiple noticeboards. Miradre did suggest that Itsmejudith and I, as presumed academics, should not be editing academia because of a ]. Itsmejudith and I then both separately and independently queried Miradre's charges of COI at ], Miradre's position was not supported; he was given a warning by Atama not to harrass me. ] (]) 01:20, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

::<s>I fear that Mathsci's answer misses some of the points. Le me help to elucidate.
::* ''Anyone can edit Misplaced Pages articles'' (unless they are banned) but not every edit is therefore permissible.
::* ''I have made hardly any edits to articles recently (indeed this year)'' regrettably true but Mathsi has followed Miradre to ], ], ], ], ] in the last week.
::* ''I am unaware that I have reported Miradre at multiple noticeboards.'' is contraicted by edits at ] and ]
::Need I go on? ] (]) 21:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)</s> <small> Comment by sopckpuppet of A.K.Nole</small>

:::Hi. I'm afraid that I don't see any mention of Miradre at . The COIN listing Mathsci already mentioned. However, while I can well understand that working on articles can become heated and that it can be uncomfortable to feel scrutinized, I'm afraid that I would just have to recommend ] if these problems cannot be resolved through cordial conversation. While I do work extensively with copyright concerns on Misplaced Pages and am happy to help out with issues in that area, the overall topic is certainly outside of my area of work, and I have no special authority to resolve questions about interaction. :) --] <sup>]</sup> 19:41, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
::::Moonriddengirl, per checkuser and ], A.B.C.Hawkes appears to be a sockpuppet of A.K.Nole, a long term wikihounder, who is known to the current ArbCom. Before seeing this comment, his name was brought up by a checkuser as being related to another presumed sockpuppet of A.K.Nole and the above edit confirms that. I have accordingly scored through the edit (previous disruption of this kind has occurred during ArbCom cases). ] (]) 16:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:::::Seems reasonable. :) Certainly, his contrib history would have suggested he's a sock of ''somebody''. --] <sup>]</sup> 16:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
::::::Indeed. Please see ], which is awaiting for an administrator to take action. This is unfortunately what happens during the holidays :( ] (]) 16:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

== May I have a deleted article, please? ==

I noticed you are part of this ]. I was wondering if it would be possible to get this ] (and its history for attribution purposes)? Perhaps it could be placed ] for 24 hours so that I may have a chance to recreate it at another website. Thanks for your time. ] (]) 05:05, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
:I moved it for you.--<font style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:15px;">]]</font> 22:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
::Thanks, Sphilbrick. I got the article and history, so I marked it {{tl|db-u1}} since I'm done. ] (]) 01:01, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
:::Whoot! Thanks, Sphilbrick. :D --] <sup>]</sup> 18:39, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== Assistance ==

Hello Moonriddengirl, a user has reccomended you to check over my free use rationale... if you don't mind :) My image is not yet uploaded, and I want to place it on a certain article, but a user states that I'm not giving enough reasoning for placing a non free image on the page.

{{Non-free use rationale
| Description = This is a picture from the movie, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole. © Warner Brothers Pictures
| Source = This image can be found at the website, www.movies.about.com ()
| Article = Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole
| Portion = The entire image is used to convey the meaning intended and avoid tarnishing or misrepresenting the intended purpose of the image.
| Low_resolution = This image is of a caertain size and resolution sufficient to maintain the quality intended by the company or organization, without being unnecessarily in high resolution.
| Purpose = An images that specifys other characters in the film. This should be adressed to readers when reading the plot to identify the characters with their names, (with the exeption of one character in the image). Other than the current image in the infobox, this picture gives clear names to define the four main characters in the film.
| Replaceability = Any substitute that is not a derivative work would fail to convey the meaning intended, would tarnish or misrepresent its image, or would fail its purpose of identification or commentary.
| other_information = © Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole, is a copyright of ] All rights reserved.
}}
] (]) 21:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

:Hi. Sorry I could not get back in touch with you more quickly, but I've been traveling and had only been able to respond to one message during my trip. (I generally work from the bottom up.) I'm afraid that I'm really not the best person, though, to give you feedback on this. I don't do that much work with non-free image rationales. I would myself wonder why we need an image of these owls, when there are owls depicted in the non-free poster already in use in the article. :) But you may get more valuable feedback if you ask at ]. --] <sup>]</sup> 15:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

:::No worries, it is summer after all :) But may I ask, why do other movie articles have images other than the image in its infobox, for instance, ]? Wouldn't the page look better with an image or two added? Regards, ] (]) 21:49, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

::::You got me! I'm a bit thrown off by our NFC guidelines sometimes. That's why you'd be better off asking somebody else. :D For instance, I don't understand why we can't use a non-free image of ], but we can use a non-free image of her for ]--even though the only thing remarkable about her is that she, well, that she's a teenage girl. (I can kind of understand needing a non-free image of ].) --] <sup>]</sup> 21:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

:::::Yes, it is all very confusing! (Even gets to the point where it is VERY annoying.) So would it be better if I just put this problem with the non free image for ] behind me? It looks like it will only get more complicated anyway. :( ] (]) 21:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

{{unindent}} I don't think I'd go ''that'' far. :) If I were you, I would at least try asking at ]. If they say it doesn't work, they may be able to explain why. And you may be able to explain it to me someday. :D --] <sup>]</sup> 21:59, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

::I think that is a great idea. :) I will be sure to ask the ] and maybe just get back to you to explain why if it doesn't work :) ] (]) 22:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== Is this a case of closeparaphrasing? ==

Ref ]. Using Duplicate detector on the very first source itself, I a slew of commonalities of very short phrases. Is it a case of fair use or copyvio? ] (]) 18:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
:If I may interject as a an editor who has contributed to many botanical articles and created some, it is extraordinarily difficult to come up with totally new ways of saying things about plants and their distribution that do not use the same words as other sources. If a flower spike has up to 100 individual flowers, that what all the sources will say, but it doesn't make it a copyvio. If it only lives in a particular locality then all sources are going to call the place by the same name. I think the editors here have done a pretty good job of re-phrasing and re-organising information to keep as far from copy-vio as possible. That my personal opinion but I won't be offended if other think I've got it wrong! <span style="background-color:lightblue">'''''&nbsp;]&nbsp;'''''</span><span style="background-color:lightblue">&nbsp;<sup>''] Talk ''</sup>&nbsp;</span> 22:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
::I'm inclined to agree with you in this case, ]. Mind you, I've just flown back from a trip and am a bit hazy, but it looks to me like an occasion where scientific language limits diversity to a certain extent. While we still have to watch out for following more closely than necessary in such cases, I think this one is probably okay. :) --] <sup>]</sup> 18:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== Reminder: New Page Copyright Issue ==

Hi, earlier last month ] how to best rewrite an article I was creating in order to answers copyright and notability concerns. I think I have fully addressed those concerns, but since the article had been removed once previously I was hoping to get your opinion before trying to re-create the page. I just wanted to give you a kind reminder that the proposed page is available on my user page. Thanks again for all of your time and assistance. It is sincerely appreciated.] (]) 19:52, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
:Oh, thank you for the reminder, although this is a ''little'' longer than I expected when I asked you to remind me again in a few days. :D I'm afraid that this is twice now that you've caught me traveling. I think the copyright concerns are addressed, but notability concerns are far more difficult to predict. It seems like, aside from primary sources, you've got two news articles-- and ? Can you find any more? I personally tend to be very conservative with that in terms of creating my own articles, and the more indepth references there are to this in secondary sources, the less likely you are to run into trouble! --] <sup>]</sup> 16:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== Wrestling with the best approach to some apparent copyvios ==

Hi, Moonriddengirl – Atama offered your name as someone who might be able to help on a copyvio issue that I’ve encountered. (She did not actually recommend you as a first choice, you being as busy as you are, but her praise was high and I am lazy. Feel free to push me off in another direction if you haven’t got time.) An editor appears to have used too-closely paraphrased copyrighted material in more than one article he has created; but because I’ve been in content and other disputes with him, I think it’s inappropriate for me to try to remedy the situation by myself. In addition, he has already filed one ANI report on concerning me, ], and he’s got a quick trigger finger. I have little appetite for another even if it is swept away as easily as the first. Finally I’m uncertain about where or how to report the problems I suspect but haven’t got evidence for. ] seems right, broadly, but the instructions seem to counsel against my filing anything based on what I’ve got, and the dispute (which I’m assuming for now to be continuing).

The disputes and their resolution are all pretty well laid-out in the ANI. It’s not that long; let me know if you want to see more.

] created an article last week, ], which was a close paraphrase of Mitchell’s . Text was reordered, but sentences or phrases were often left largely intact. Upon realizing this, I blanked the page and put up a template notice. Within a few hours and despite a copyvio warning from ], Ken restored the article to more or less the same state it had been in before I'd blanked it, arguing that facts can’t be copyrighted (well, true) and that his (lightly) revised version of the Post’s obit was fine (I disagree). He’s now blocked for a week. Since then Ken, still with access to his Talk page, has challenged Sarek to address Ken's assertion that the reintroduced text is fine under the copyright laws.
This unapologetic response made me wonder if perhaps the Mitchell article was not the only instance in which he’d copy & pasted material, and a quick review of just some of the 40+ turned up one clear instance of shuffled paraphrasing, ], (the "Nature" section in particular) taken from , as well as a fragmentary example of close paraphrasing, ] from . I am guessing that other parts of that page are not original, and came from sources covering other decades. Several other articles, including ] and ], are written in a style that does not seem to match the (admittedly limited) samples of Ken’s prose that I’ve seen in the course of my dealings with him, and while I’m suspicious of those, they cite extensive off-line sources and aren't as easily checked.

The upshot is that I have some but not a lot of evidence, plus some reasonable suspicion, that an editor has over a period of time been pulling together material from various sources, jiggering it around a bit and then adding it to Misplaced Pages. It's also possible that I'm making too much out of this and should find something else to do. In either case I think it’s inappropriate, in light of my history with him, to undertake remedies on my own; not to mention that I lack the expertise to detect and evaluate additional copyvios – if any – in any but the most blatant of cases.

What do you think is a proper course of action here? Thanks for any and all advice. ] (]) 02:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
:Hi. I am traveling (will be flying home today), but this is concerning. :/ Looking at ], I can certainly see the issue you find. His defense that facts are not copyrightable is a familiar one, but cannot be used to excuse such close following as "it's not uncommon to see deer, wild turkey or a great blue heron skimming the top of the Kokosing River in search of food" to represent the fact that deer, wild turkey and blue heron are local residents--not when the source says, "It's not uncommon to see deer, hear the gobbles of wild turkeys or see a blue heron skimming the top of the river looking for food." There's obviously been an effort to rewrite, but the evocative imagery of the herons skimming the river is highly creative.

:The proper course of action for you, in my opinion, was to do exactly as you have done--note the issue and point it out to somebody who is not involved with him to follow up. Needless to say, I'm going to have a lot to do when I get back to my desk, but I will add looking into his contribs to that list. :) Sarek has explained to him some of Misplaced Pages's norms, but there may be additional cleanup to be done.

:(Anybody waiting for an answer from me above, I have only a few minutes before I have to get ready to fly home, but I hope to be able to catch up over the weekend.) --] <sup>]</sup> 14:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

::Thanks. This is helpful and reassuring. Let me know if there's anything else I can do. ] (]) 20:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

== Re BOI again ==

Hi MRG :)

I've received a reply from the BOI admin. He has some trouble filling in the blanks of one paragraph:

"I agree to "

Also, he wonders whether he really is not going to have any chance of withdrawing the agreement in the future, which he thinks is a little problematic as there can always happen something unexpected. I also think it's a bit weird because after all he's making us a favour and I understand why he would not like to be "trapped" forever.

Thank you. ] • <sup>'']''</sup> 17:43, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

:The standard choice is perfectly fine, if he wants to go for that. :)

:In terms of it being irrevocable, I'm afraid that there's nothing we can do about that one. :/ Content that is published on Misplaced Pages, as you know, is widely reused elsewhere and it could even be fixed in print, which is one reason why the license cannot be withdrawn. It's the same for each of us; every time we hit save, we "irrevocably agree" to license our content. --] <sup>]</sup> 15:58, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== Non free use rationale ==

Hi, I don't know if you missed my comment above, but could you please check over my rationale? I need to know if it is good quickly, as I need to respond to another user. ] (]) 00:29, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:Hi. I'll answer up there. :) --] <sup>]</sup> 15:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== (insert generic topic name here) ==

(Yeah, I was too lazy to make up a section name) I keep forgetting to ask this, but I just wanted to make sure of this for once. ] was a alt account I made, simply because that username is what I use on youtube. (not trying to advertise) (basically, I don't want someone impersonating me by using my youtube username) Since this is the case, would it be a allowed legit alt account, even though I'll likely never use it? ] (]) 00:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:Not explicitly, but I doubt that it's a ''harmful'' use of a secondary account. What you do need to do, though, is claim it. :) See ]. Step 2 is the way to go here. It can help you avoid misunderstandings down the road. --] <sup>]</sup> 15:42, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
::Well, thanks for letting me know! :D Yes, I know there are other admins out there I could <s>annoy</s> ask these questions to, but I guess I prefer to just ask you them. ] (]) 02:05, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

== Looking for TPS with merge/cut and paste experience ==

This is not so much for MRG as for her knowledgeable TPS. I want to do something, while preserving the history, and I have no experience with the cut and paste and merge techniques designed to preserve editing history.

I'll try to give a short summary here, but the longer details are at my talk page: ]

Short version:
The current text in ] was added by a single editor with two edits in history, both on 4 July 2011. The first edit blanked the page, the second add the text you see now. (other minor edits has added cats etc.) I don't think it would survive a BLProd, but if it did, it would almost certainly fail an AfD. I do think the redirect of Haroon Rashid ]. However, if the current version is deleted, the edit history would be lost. What I would like to do is carve out the existing text into a new article, Haroon Rashi (engineer), let that one stand or fall on its own merits (BLProd, and AfD if needed), and restore the main article to the status of a redirect.

I don't know how to do that and preserve the edit "history" of ].

Suggestions?--<font style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:15px;">]]</font> 13:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:Wouldn't the simplest thing be to move the entire page to the new article title (reverting to the proper version if need be), then recreate the redirect at the current title? <font face="Lucida Calligraphy">]<font color="#0095c6">of</font>]</font> 13:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
::If I'm following you, that was my original plan. However, I anticipate that article being deleted. The article has a long history including an original formulation as a (non-notable) security manager. While not much would be lost, I'd hate to lose that history, in case someone whats to know what happened. The ne redirect would have no history, and if someone came along to add the security manager or the engineer, the page history would give no clue. Maybe that's not the end of the world, but I hate to through away the institutional history (I realize it wouldn't be totally gone, but what are the odds, a year form now, that someone would know to search for the deleted article Haroon Rashi (engineer) and review that history to find the real history of the page? Or maybe that's not a big deal? I'm probably making a bigger deal of it than it deserves, but I didn't want to do something and find out there was a better way. --<font style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:15px;">]]</font> 14:29, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:::I'm a bit jet-laggy (and just got back from a vet visit, as my pet sitter apparently didn't notice that my dog was getting ]), but if I'm following this correctly it seems like the thing to do is ] the article. I'm going to look at it more closely and make sure that I'm not missing something...entirely possible under the circumstances. :D --] <sup>]</sup> 15:01, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
::::All right; I've separated out the four different articles that have existed at that title (!) and turned the page itself into a disambiguation page. It may well be that every one of those four should be deleted, but I'll leave that to others to work out. :) --] <sup>]</sup> 15:25, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:::::Thanks, I'm in the middle of some template work, but when I finish that I'll come back and take a look at the results, and start the deletion process where warranted. (I knew merge wasn't what I wanted, but I had a mind blank and didn't think about Split, partly cause I've never done one.)--<font style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:15px;">]]</font> 15:31, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
{{unindent}} Understood. :) I've had to do a fair number of them; for some reason, I've come upon a lot of article hijacking in my career! --] <sup>]</sup> 18:35, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

== Your input appreciated ==

Hi MRG, you may remember a while back the issue we had with foundational copyvio at ], where we found text in the first diff identical to that on a government biography in 2004. It now appears this same text is available on his personal website licensed under a CC license. A number of anonymous IPs, likely the same user on a (very) dynamic IP, has repeatedly reinserted this material, going as far as ] that the text "was obviously written by him too". My opinion is that we should err on the side of copyright and I absolutely do not buy what the anon editor is saying (there has been a much larger issue of pro-government POV pushing going on), but I will defer to your copyright expertise on whether or not this text is legit. Please be aware that the article currently contains this text, as it was readded today.

Thanks, ] (] • ]) 15:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

:It would be helpful here to date , but I haven't been able to get WhoIs information on it. :/ If you could ask somebody at the help desk, maybe they could help come up with that info, which would advise us how to proceed? --] <sup>]</sup> 15:49, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
::There are no Wayback Machine archives for the site, which leads me to believe it is a fairly recent creation. Certainly, I don't think it was around in 2004. ] (] • ]) 15:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:::That would be my expectation as well, but it's hard to say for sure since I can't get any WhoIs information coughed up for the site. :) It would be best if we could find out more definitively the age of the website, and I'm afraid I've got quite a lot of backlog to take care of after traveling this week. :/ Maybe a talk page stalker will know? --] <sup>]</sup> 15:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
::::If it's of any use, the most simplest of checks shows that the archive of blog posts on his website show the first post being in July 2010. That would seem to suggest the site did not exist prior to that, at least in its current form. ] (] • ]) 16:09, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:::::That may be what we have to settle for, then. --] <sup>]</sup> 16:15, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
::::::Please check the legal position. The original author has published his updated CV under Creative License on his own website. He is a politician holding public office in Singapore. The purpose of this publication (and that of earlier government versions) is to provide relevant information to the public. The government must be aware of the fact that he has published his own CV on his website and has never objected given his authorship and purpose of publication. It seems strange for Misplaced Pages to now be unable to rely on WP:ABOUTSELF to use the material. Apart from legal perspectives, there is the question of common sense. How many ways are there of saying "His early education was at Anglo Chinese School and National Junior College"? Thank you very much. ] (]) 00:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

::::::NPOV - La goutte de pluie accuses many editors of COI. However, a detailed look at the history shows that she has consistently been pushing her own POV in the ] page since 27 April 2011, the Nomination Day of the Singapore General Election of 2011. Her pattern of edits show her political bias and obsession with one issue. Furthermore, she has abused her admin rights in making questionable edits and even resorting to protecting the page when other editors intervene. This behaviour should make her subject to recall - which she has consistently declined. I am forced to use IP because of the risk of her targetting my contributions to Misplaced Pages ] (]) 00:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:::::::You should be aware by now that by doing so, you are ]. Considering your edits are controversial and often contested, this is a problem and could (should, imo) lead to blocks. ] (] • ]) 01:55, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

::::::::There is nothing controversial about restoring material from verifiable sources to the article. This does not constitute ]. Everyone on wikipedia, including you, has the right to use pseudonyms. Your threat to block illustrates why I have to use IP. I hope the full history of edits on ] (dating back several years) will be reviewed by an impartial panel. The pattern of POI pushing by La goutte de pluie and allies will be obvious to a neutral observer. Thank you. ] (]) 03:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
::::::::::I am not the anonymous IP above, just so you know. La goutte de pluie removed the entire biography section in late June claiming it's copyrights violation and protected the page. She did not even try to put it back. When the page was unprotected, I rewrote the section in early June and placed it back up. La goutte de pluie once again started accusing the same thing about sockpuppets and copyrights violation. I am merely replacing my work because I do not see what is wrong. I am not related to the group of IPs/editors who have been trying to add ] photos and replace text with that from his blog. I would also like to highlight that when the page was protected, I had asked La goutte de pluie to add new information on the page. She simply refused it, challenging me to be the one doing it, even though she knew the page was protected. People make edits to make the page more informative. For La goutte de pluie, I don't see how she's contributing. She just keeps expanding all the trivia sections and focus on the negative issues. I have seen no effort on her part to contribute, if she even knows what the word means.] (]) 09:00, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

::::::::::] is a self-declared lesbian - see her user page. Now we know why she is so fixated on a vendetta against ]. She removed long standing material, and single handedly wrote the section on so called Electoral Issues - with ] and tried to paint Balakrishnan as anti-gay. ] has a bit more careful in his edits, but clearly knows ] personally. So who are the people with a real COI ?? ] (]) 11:07, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
{{unindent}} I see that the content has been rewritten; this is always a good alternative when we can't be sure of the copyright status of the original. We can't assume that "the government must be aware" and that their lack of reaction indicates they don't care. The stakes particularly for our reusers are too high if we are wrong.

In terms of protection, if the page is semi-protected, you have the option to use your named account to edit it. You have no explicit right to expect others to edit it on your behalf if you're not willing to do so.

"Logging out to make problematic edits as an IP" is specifically mentioned as a form of sock puppetry. If you believe that any administrator is abusing his or her authority, you need to take action under ] rather than violating policy yourself. Please be careful to follow ] and ]. It's rather tenuous to suggest that EditorA must be biased because she is a lesbian and EditorB must be biased because he may know EditorA. --] <sup>]</sup> 14:04, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

:The evidence for the biased behaviour of ] is overwhelming if you take a look at her over aggressive POI pushing on this particular page since 27 April 2011. She had no prior interest in this page, but has since become obsessed. I notice that you removed the original page on the 17 May 2011. Although attribution remains, the actual edits prior to 17 May 2011 are not available to normal Misplaced Pages users. Please restore ] entire history so that the Misplaced Pages community can see how much ] has pursued this action and judge her, and I can then take action under ]. Thank you. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 18:10, 1 August 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Ritz-Carlton Hotel (Atlantic City) ==


{{-}}
Is there a reason you have chosen to gut this article rather than address copyright issues? Thanks ] (]) 19:07, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
:I ''did'' address copyright issues, by removing the text in accordance with procedures at ]. You were given the standard notice of issues - including notice that the entire article could be deleted - and allowed time to propose a rewrite. You didn't. Neither did anyone else. It's unfortunate when that's the way it happens, but that's often the way it goes. --] <sup>]</sup> 19:12, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
<div class="afd-notice">
<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, including you, 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.
I do not find an explanation for why an entire article would be gutted of content and references including all parts which were not subject to questions of copyright. Can you point out that policy on the page you've cited. Thanks ] (]) 19:27, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:No one is able to determine how much of that content was copied by you as opposed to what may have been authored. It is undeniable that content was copied. After seven days, as you were advised, the entire article may be deleted if the problem is not addressed. See ] and ]. In this case, as I often do, I attempted to salvage at least a stub. It is ''not'' the responsibility of administrators or copyright clerks to rewrite problematic content. You should be aware that several other articles you've written are currently listed at the copyright problems board; if you do not take responsibility for repairing these issues, they will almost certainly be handled in the same way, if they are not deleted altogether. --] <sup>]</sup> 19:34, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


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 until the discussion has finished.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> ] (]) 12:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Both of the above seem to indicate that the investigator should ''thoroughly investigate each article before deciding to keep, alter, or delete it'' and that ''if there are clean versions in history or salvageable content on the page revert back to the last clean revision or remove the infringing text from the article, using an appropriate edit summary''. As the copyright clerk specifically cited the sources where there were copyright issues, why would you choose to delete material where there were was none? ] (]) 19:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:First, there is no clean version in history, as yours was the foundational edit. But beyond that, there is no reason to presume that you copied from only one source. You have multiple articles up for copyright cleanup right now drawn from multiple sources. ] discusses handling of contributors who have been shown to have extensive copyright issues; we cannot assume that content you have placed is safe. This is why there is a ] opened to evaluate your contributions. At this point, policy supports presuming that ''all'' content you have placed on Misplaced Pages is a violation of copyright, but in practice we do try to make sure there are actually issues with an article before deleting the content. --] <sup>]</sup> 20:18, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


== Invitation to participate in a research ==
One presumes a copyright clerk has does his or her work before tagging an article, would properly identify the section and/or text at contention, and then tag it correctly if a s(he) felt there was an issue. One would presume that the investigator would look at the text and sources noted by the clerk and report provided in the tag. Do you believe that has been done w/ the above or any other articles? Incidentally, where and why does the opening of an investigation establish a policy that presumes anything? How does ''remove the infringing text from the article'' translate to gutting a article? ] (]) 20:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
:It's understandable that you would think so, but perhaps you're less familiar with ]. I suggest you review the language at the top of your CCI. This community-approved process includes the following text: "If the contributor has added creative content, either evaluate it carefully for copyright concerns ''or remove it''." (emphasis added) I'm sure that you may have pasted content onto Misplaced Pages without realizing that this is against our policies, but unfortunately it does necessitate some clean up. I realize you may not always be happy with the process, and I'm sorry that we don't have enough people to carefully clean up such problems. Frequently, removal is the only option.


Hello,
:Incidentally, I am looking at the current crop at ], and you should be aware that another administrator has found problems with your proposed rewrite of ]. See ]. Please be careful if you ''do'' attempt to help clean articles to ensure that you are completely rewriting content in your own words. I have not looked closely at the rewrite yet myself, but certainly can understand her concerns. For instance, :
{{quotation|It was again burned in 1765 or 1766 when a man named Martin, angered by his earlier imprisonment in the City Hall on debt charges, allegedly set fire to the building.}}
:Your proposed rewrite at ] includes the following:
{{quotation|It was again burned in 1765 or 1766 when a man angered by his earlier imprisonment on debt charges allegedly set the building afire..}}
:This sentence is clearly a ] of the original, to the point that every word in the sentence is in the original source, in almost lockstep order, with the exception of your alteration of "allegedly set fire to the building" to read "allegedly set the building afire."


The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this ''''''.
:You may wish to review ], which includes some suggestions for how to rewrite content in a manner accepted on Misplaced Pages. --] <sup>]</sup> 21:13, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
== Vic Reinemer deletion ==


The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] .
Hi, I am one of Vic Reinemer's sons. I did not create the Vic Reinemer entry and was not aware of its existence. So now that I've come across an apparent deletion of it, I'm curious to know what it said, who had posted it and, specifically, why it was deleted. Is any of this information available?


Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
Thanks very much,


Kind Regards,
Steve Reinemer


]
] (]) 01:32, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
:Hi.:) The biography was a brief overview of your father's career. It was posted by an alternate account of contributor ], who has been indefinitely blocked from editing Misplaced Pages due to repeated copyright problems. Unfortunately, although he knows he is not currently welcome to contribute, he has persisted in doing so, creating new accounts against policy to add content. When contributors are no longer welcome to edit, their contributions are frequently deleted as a matter of routine, particularly when they have a history of copyright problems. The article on your father was one of hundreds deleted for that reason at the same time. The deletion of the article in no way reflects on your father; Misplaced Pages would welcome an article about him if created by somebody who was willing and able to comply with our policies. --] <sup>]</sup> 13:14, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins&oldid=27650221 -->


== Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research ==


Hello,
Is it possible to get a transcript of what had been posted for Vic Reinemer?


I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ].
] (]) 20:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


Take the survey ''''''.
:There are licensing issues with my providing you the full text, I'm afraid, but looking at it, it wasn't much of an article. It opened with the note that he was associate editor for his paper. It included a line about his college and three brief sentences about his political service to Lee Metcalf and James E. Murray, including note of his involvement in the ]. It gave the current location of his papers. It listed two books which evidently he co-authored and noted that he had received ] in 1954. The sources used in the article were the following: , , . Most of the biography seems to have been taken with minimal alteration from the last source. --] <sup>]</sup> 13:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


Kind Regards,
== ] ==


]
Would you mind adding your observations concerning Paul's inquiry about the COI tag on the article talk page ]? Thanks ] (]) 11:15, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:Weighed in there. :) --] <sup>]</sup> 13:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


::Thanks, that was a helpful intervention and I found it educational too! ] (]) 14:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC) <bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 -->


== If someone trouted Jimbo Wales... == == ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
If someone was planning to <nowiki>{{</nowiki>]<nowiki>}}</nowiki> Jimbo Wales, what would they use? I'd say they could use a barnstar on him, since he is a/the founder of Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 13:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
:I guess one would need to figure out ''why'' they wanted to trout Jimmy first and then check to see if he is open to trouting. Generally, a "trout" means "Hey, cut that out" while a barnstar means "Well done." I wouldn't leave either one without a clear reason. I myself wouldn't leave Jimmy a barnstar simply for having been a/the founder of Misplaced Pages, as he's probably gotten a few of those already. I'd give him one for something he's doing ''now''. :) --] <sup>]</sup> 14:08, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-text">
::When I said using a barnstar, I meant whacking him with one. (and I randomly feel like giving him a custom barnstar with this name: "The Barnstar of IMA FIRIN MAH LAZOR BLAAAAHHHHHH"; it picture would be a barnstar pic, with a Shoop Da Whoop in the middle, firin' his lazor to, say, the left) ] (]) 15:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
::And mainly, I think troutings are not only for that purpose that you mentioned, but just for general messing around and having fun with people. Though its not to be <s>used on me</s> abused too much. ] (]) 15:30, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:::If it helps, this user once "whaled" Jimbo. I happened to be around Jimbo's page at that time and got into a conversation about trouting. (It so happens I ended up getting trouted, too.) ] (]) 17:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
::::Proof that CycloneGU iss right is located ] :3 ] (]) 01:23, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
== ] (AN/I thread) ==


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
It's been suggested that, either in a volunteer or WMF position (use whichever is more appropriate), that you might want to observe ] proceeding. A BLP is complaining about a photograph taken of her; meanwhile, the copyright holder of the photograph took it legally at an event with about eight other pictures (see ). It seems that this BLP isn't aware of how Misplaced Pages works and is not happy with the fact that a picture and article about her are present on Misplaced Pages. Might it be prudent to take this one over? Your comments at AN/I are welcome. ] (]) 17:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:Hi. :) I'm happy to weigh in as a volunteer. (As community liaison, my job involves interaction with editing communities, not really BLP subjects. In fact, until my contract expires, there's a lot I'm not able to do anymore at OTRS. :/) I'll come take a look. --] <sup>]</sup> 17:56, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
::FWIW I wrote to her through the "email this user" function to encourage her to follow Voceditenore's advice. This is not the first time I've seen a BLP subject unhappy with an image of themselves; we can't always ''make'' them happy, of course, but even if we have to tell them that we can't remove the picture, it's a good idea to try to avoid making a hardcore enemy of Misplaced Pages. No reason to generate ill-will amongst readers and BLP subjects if it can be avoided. Hopefully if she does write to OTRS, she'll get somebody diplomatic. --] <sup>]</sup> 18:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:::I agree, that's pretty much what she has to do to verify her identity. On the flip side, I've been involved in a BLP dispute of my own choosing before (no picture issue, mind) with ] and - well - that didn't go well. He seemed most of the time not to acknowledge the efforts of myself or anyone else to help him, even calling out a newly appearing user as an enemy of his from his blog (and THAT is colourful, I think it's linked from ] or perhaps his archive). Most recently, I saw a remark (see linked talk page above) where he accuses us of hiding five years' worth of discussions (which is was ] that it wasn't, and it was necessary to create this archive only because Covington continually removed things he didn't like from people's posts as an IP). Quite a colourful two weeks on that article and talk page up to now. He now writes very disparaging remarks against Misplaced Pages off-site, and frankly, I gave up on him after a couple of days. I can be patient, but when someone spits in your face in response, patience wears thin. =) ] (]) 19:17, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
::::We can do our best, but it happens. :) We had one BLP subject write to OTRS who I ''was'' able to help (she had legitimate complaints, but the errors in her article were kind of mild), and she ''still'' talked about how awful Misplaced Pages is in her last letter. Didn't make any difference to her that I personally went out of my way to research and rewrite the problematic section of her biography. :/ Oh, well. I'm happy to say that more often than not, the BLP subjects I've encountered at OTRS have left happy with us, even if not always with their articles. Maybe those people will help counter the others. :D --] <sup>]</sup> 19:22, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:::::It is my opinion, faulted as it might be, that those who don't fully understand how Misplaced Pages works will never be truly happy with what goes on here. How many of these famous notable people are among our highly active editors? How many are administrators? We might possibly have a dozen on the former (though not likely, they have better things to do, like photo ops), but on the latter, I'd be surprised if anything greater than 0 comes up. =D ] (]) 19:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
{{unindent}} Depends on how you define famous. There's ]/] (an admin), but I doubt he has too m any photo ops, being a mathematician. :D (That said, there are a ''surprising'' number of transclusions to . 1914!) You're probably right about that; that's why one of the first things we usually do at OTRS is explain how Misplaced Pages works. Since I started my contract with the Foundation, I've been surprised by how many people call or write it, thinking that Misplaced Pages is professionally written and maintained! I thought ''everybody'' knew that Misplaced Pages was the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. --] <sup>]</sup> 19:42, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:In that case, I am a professional thread-closer at AN/I. =D But yes, I thought Misplaced Pages and what it is were common knowledge. I suppose a poll question should be used for a future game show regarding what people think of Misplaced Pages' it's been ten years now, it's good enough for trivia. =D ] (]) 20:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


</div>
== Copyright question ==
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1258243447 -->


== Long time no see! ==
I left a question about a copyright issue at ] and thought you might be able to provide an answer.<tt> </tt>] ] ] 20:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


Hi. A former helper of copyright clean-up here who last interacted with you ! I know you haven't been as active as you used to be, but thought I'd let you know that we have ] that's keen to help out in CCI. If ever you'd like to take an interest in Copyright cleanup again, I'm sure she'd be happy to collaborate with you. If not, that's OK, just saying hello to you. ] <sup>(])</sup> <sub>(])</sub> 09:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
== Dispute about acceptable level of source use ==


== Merry Christmas ==
Hey, MRG. Could you take a look at ] and either explain to him or the other editors who've chimed in (including me) what's wrong with their understanding of Misplaced Pages copyright policy? Thanks. --] 20:55, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:Sure. I'm pretty sure he's on my list of "things I didn't get to while gone last week." There's been a lot of that. :/ --] <sup>]</sup> 20:56, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
::Gracias. Sanity checks are good things -- after all, I might be setting the line too far to the side here.--] 20:58, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
:::No, you're not. Looking back at what happened to a bureaucrat and arb whom I quite liked makes amply clear that the community does not support his view. Policy is itself explicit; the word "only" in the relevant portion I quoted does not leave room to argue. --] <sup>]</sup> 21:16, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


]
== Corenbot crisis ==


'''Merry Christmas from London ...'''
New Page Patrol is a trainwreck and has been for a long time. It is most unlikely that the majority of those who purport to patrol new pages even bother to carry out the most simple of checks requested in the task list at ]. The only way to fix the copyvio problem is to turn New Page Patroller into a user right, for experienced editors only. CorenBot will just have to be fixed very urgently, while those of us in the minority who are admins and experienced users who occasionally have a stab at NPP, generally carry out the controls you suggested. --] (]) 16:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


'''and may the New Year be a safe one, filled with peace and plenty.'''
== ] - edit review ==


Best wishes, ] (]) 10:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. Sorry to bug you but I have a something I want a seond pair of eyes on. User:HighKing has been one of many parties involved with the disute over the inclusion/removal/alteration the term 'British Isles' from WP articles. This dispute is covered by ]. HighKing has a series of cautions from me about edits from June of this year to present. He was formally warned to stop edit warring with user Stemonitis in the last 24 hrs (see) and reverted him on a new article today spilling over from the dispute at the ] article. However (and this might seem wonky but I know this action will creat a s**t-storm so I want 'all my ducks in a row') he questioned my warning and made this edit while I was in the middle of confirming that warning. Thus I want another uninvolved admin to review and give another POV on whether sanctions are warranted. <br>I have come to the opinion that it has and have sanction TB01 (topic ban from article but allowed to discuss) from the list of remedies available at ] in mind. Sorry to dose this on you but I'd really appreciate some input--] <sup>]</sup> 18:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
:A history of this dispute can be seen at ] however it is a very long one--] <sup>]</sup> 18:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
:Please note also that HK as his self reverted - see here - this hsould probably be taken into account but I would still like your POV on this--] <sup>]</sup> 19:32, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
It should also be noted that this latest BIs 'drama' is intimately related to ]'s recent 'departure', and his determination to pull down the tent before he left. ] (]) 01:05, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 10:18, 25 December 2024

edit count | edit summary usage
Misplaced Pages ad for Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Copyright Cleanup
Misplaced Pages adsfile info – #178
Welcome

If you are here with questions about an article I have deleted or a copyright concern, please consider first reading my personal policies with regards to deletion and copyright, as these may provide your answer.

While you can email me to reach me in my volunteer capacity, I don't recommend it. I very seldom check that email account. If you do email me, please leave a note here telling me so or I may never see it. I hardly ever check that account.

To leave a message for me, press the "new section" or "+" tab at the top of the page, or simply click here. Remember to sign your message with ~~~~. I will respond to all civil messages.

I attempt to keep conversations in one location, as I find it easier to follow them that way when they are archived. If you open a new conversation here, I will respond to you here. Please watchlist this page or check back for my reply; I will leave you a "talkback" notice if you request one and will generally try to trigger your automatic notification even if you don't. (I sometimes fail to be consistent there; please excuse me if I overlook it.) If I have already left a message at your talk page, unless I've requested follow-up here or it is a standard template message, I am watching it, but I would nevertheless appreciate it you could trigger my automatic notification. {{Ping}} works well for that. If you leave your reply here, I may respond at your talk page if it seems better for context. If you aren't sure if I'm watching your page, feel free to approach me here.

Admins, if you see that I've made a mistake, please fix it.

Archiving icon

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Reaching me

During my current work interim position, I have found myself with not a lot of spare time that isn't consumed by family. I can go long periods without logging in to Misplaced Pages. If you have an urgent note for me here, please consider alerting me via email at mdennis@wikimedia.org. (This is my work email address, and I do not mix work and volunteering, but mailing that address makes sure I will see it promptly, usually within a day.) If not urgent, I'll come by as soon as I can, and I heartily welcome talk page stalkers. :) Oh, I have discovered that sometimes when people don't tell me it's a volunteer contact, I have handled it with the wrong hat on. Please make which "me" you want clear!


Nomination of Susan Alice Buffett for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Susan Alice Buffett 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/Susan Alice Buffett until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Clarityfiend (talk) 12:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Long time no see!

Hi. A former helper of copyright clean-up here who last interacted with you a long time ago! I know you haven't been as active as you used to be, but thought I'd let you know that we have a new candidate for adminship that's keen to help out in CCI. If ever you'd like to take an interest in Copyright cleanup again, I'm sure she'd be happy to collaborate with you. If not, that's OK, just saying hello to you. Am (Notes) 09:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas from London ...

and may the New Year be a safe one, filled with peace and plenty.

Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 10:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC)