| Revision as of 19:35, 3 May 2012 editHipal (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers137,861 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 01:14, 15 August 2020 edit undoJayBeeEll (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers28,146 editsm Reverted 1 edit by Keninkelak (talk) to last revision by MediaWiki message delivery (TW)Tag: Undo | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{retired}} | |||
| Archive ],], ] | |||
| == Mea Culpa == | |||
| {{busy|] (])}} | |||
| I wanted to offer you an honest apology for my behavior on the Anita Sarkeesian talk page. While I stand by my general stance, I was far snarkier than necessary (I blame it on editing while traveling, but that's no excuse). I confess I am kind of amazed there isn't more reliable critical reaction (positive or negative) to Ms. Sarkeesian and her project. I tend to think it's because the field has been so completely occupied by proxy battles that there's no room left for anything else, but that's for another day. I obviously believe your proposed text was unhelpful, but I wanted you to know that when and if you (or I, for that matter) find a reliable reaction--positive or negative--which adds to the article, I will absolutely support its inclusion. Thanks, and again, sorry for the snark. ] (]) 16:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==Alicia Silverstone== | |||
| ::No worries. ] (]) 09:40, 6 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| I think page protection is in order. It's more than undue, it's tabloid gossip. Besides, the source simply doesn't verify the information. He's also added it to with a gossip rag as an additional source. --] (]) 19:35, 3 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==WP:Reliability== | |||
| Is the Secondary Sources Reliability WikiProject still active? I remember you as being one of the founding members along with the (it appears also-retired) History2007 three years ago when I retired from WP for a few years. I don't really remember anyone else, nor am familiar with the new features of WP, so, apologies for bringing you out of retirement to ask. ] <sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 20:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692013717 --> | |||
| == Religious explanations of gravity listed at ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ]. Since you had some involvement with the ''Religious explanations of gravity'' redirect, you might want to participate in ] if you have not already done so. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 00:42, 14 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == ]: Voting now open! == | |||
| {{Ivmbox|Hello, Second Quantization. Voting in the ''']''' is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. | |||
| 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. | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review ] and submit your choices on ''']'''. ] (]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| |Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/17&oldid=750571901 --> | |||
Latest revision as of 01:14, 15 August 2020
Retired This user is no longer active on Misplaced Pages.Mea Culpa
I wanted to offer you an honest apology for my behavior on the Anita Sarkeesian talk page. While I stand by my general stance, I was far snarkier than necessary (I blame it on editing while traveling, but that's no excuse). I confess I am kind of amazed there isn't more reliable critical reaction (positive or negative) to Ms. Sarkeesian and her project. I tend to think it's because the field has been so completely occupied by proxy battles that there's no room left for anything else, but that's for another day. I obviously believe your proposed text was unhelpful, but I wanted you to know that when and if you (or I, for that matter) find a reliable reaction--positive or negative--which adds to the article, I will absolutely support its inclusion. Thanks, and again, sorry for the snark. Dumuzid (talk) 16:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- No worries. Second Quantization (talk) 09:40, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
WP:Reliability
Is the Secondary Sources Reliability WikiProject still active? I remember you as being one of the founding members along with the (it appears also-retired) History2007 three years ago when I retired from WP for a few years. I don't really remember anyone else, nor am familiar with the new features of WP, so, apologies for bringing you out of retirement to ask. St John Chrysostom τω 20:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Religious explanations of gravity listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Religious explanations of gravity. Since you had some involvement with the Religious explanations of gravity redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 00:42, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Second Quantization. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)