User talk:Bbb23: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 16:57, 1 October 2012 view sourceAvanu (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers6,600 edits →What you used to say: new section← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 22:54, 3 January 2025 view source Bbb23 (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators270,627 edits →Is all caps OK?: re
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{NOINDEX}}		{{NOINDEX}}
			<!-- {{Wikibreak\|message=On vacation from October 15 to November 1. I'll be on-wiki much less than usual and possibly not at all. Certainly, don't expect a prompt response to any questions or requests.}} -->
			<!-- {{Retired\|date=June 22, 2020,\|reason=due to ArbCom. I may edit once in a great while}} -->
			<!--*After a protracted absence, I returned in the spring of this year, although I'm not sure exactly why. I'm still deeply disturbed by the governance at Misplaced Pages and the WMF, and I doubt that will ever change. I could say more but don't think it's appropriate. -->


	{{archive box\|search=yes\|auto=long}}		{{archive box\|search=yes\|auto=long}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|maxarchivesize = 200K		\|maxarchivesize = 200K
	\|counter = 12		\|counter = 63
			\|minthreadstoarchive = 1
	\|minthreadsleft = 10
			\|minthreadsleft = 0
	\|algo = old(7d)
			\|algo = old(5d)
	\|archive = User talk:Bbb23/Archive %(counter)d		\|archive = User talk:Bbb23/Archive %(counter)d
	}}		}}
	<table class="messagebox standard-talk">
	<tr><td>]
	<td align="left" width="100%">
	*Unless otherwise requested, I will respond on '''this page'''.
	*Please include links to pertinent page(s).
	*Click New section on the top right to start a new topic.
	</table>
	{{clear}}		{{clear}}

			== Ask for clarification on deleted page of Geert Claessens ==
	== Liberalism ==

	I would ask that you take the time to read the talk page. Thankyou. ] (]) 19:23, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
	:You need to stop edit-warring and stay on the talk pages. I'm not going to get into the merits of content disputes. You either use the ] methods available to you, or if you believe there is editor misconduct (probably unlikely), take it to the appropriate forum. You've been warned too many times now for continuing to revert on more than one article. You're lucky I chose to warn you again instead of blocking.--] (]) 19:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

	::I see. I would appreciate it if you would recuse yourself from involvement any further. The other two editors reverted as much as me, and yet for whatever reason, you've only seen fit to "warn" and then "block" me. I am editing in line with wikipedia's policies (i.e., using reliable sources). And now you've threatened me with further blocks. Essentially, you've said I cannot edit the articles anymore. You've lost all objectivity here, and I'd say you'd be well advised to quit while you're ahead, before you jeopardize your adminship. In short: this doesn't look good for you. ] (]) 07:43, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
	:::Please see ]. My only involvement with you has been purely administrative. The problem you have is that you were blocked for edit-warring and you return to the project and continue to do so. This is usually viewed very dimly by admins, and the threshold for a reblock is generally lower than it would be for a first-time offender.--] (]) 14:58, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

	::::Well, that would all be true - only I am not edit-warring.

	::::And I do think that hounding a specific editor with blocks and warnings and Talk page reverts, would amount to being "involved", yes I do. ] (]) 07:44, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

	:::::"'''Involvement is generally construed very broadly by the community, to include current or past conflicts with an editor''' (or editors), and disputes on topics, regardless of the nature, age, or outcome of the dispute." ] (]) 07:47, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

	::::::You must read the entire policy, including: "One important caveat is that an administrator who has interacted with an editor or topic area ''purely in an administrative role'', or whose prior involvement are minor or obvious edits which do not speak to bias, is ''not'' involved and is not prevented from acting in an administrative capacity in relation to that editor or topic area." My only involvement with you has been and continues to be in an administrative capacity.--] (]) 08:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

	:::::::"Administrative capacity" does not extend to hounding my Talk page, blocking me for editing (with no violation of policy), and threatening to block me if I edit again. That's harassment. ] (]) 12:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

	== Zscout's page ==

	I see you reverted my on Zscout's page. His notice violates ]. When a policy is violated, whatever it was that violated that policy needs to be off the page unless consensus declares otherwise. You follow ? Yes, I did add my voice to the AN board about this, but in the meantime, since he's clearly violating UP:PROMO, how about reverting your edit until consensus is declared ? <span style="text-shadow:black 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml"><b style="color:#000"><b>"....We are all Kosh...."</b>]</b></span> 19:59, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
	:If you read the discussion, you'll see that there are editors who do ''not'' believe that Zscout's notice is a policy violation. Until the discussion concludes, the material can remain on Zscout's user page.--] (]) 20:08, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
	::I know you saw the post, but the content has been removed not only from the live userpage but also from the history. Bbb23, did you get my email by any chance? ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 01:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
	:::Yes, I did, Zscout, thanks very much.--] (]) 01:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
	::::I know my removal didn't help with the long term issue, but honestly, this is going to be an issue that will be hard to solve overnight (and with what I was told recently about going-ons with Wikimedia UK and other newly discovered paid editing) a lot of discussion will be full with anger. However, as I said, I welcome an RFC about this subject and will be happy to participate when it is up. As I told other users that came to my talk page about this, this is no hard feelings or ill wishes against anyone. Consensus has changed and went a different direction than in 2009, so I will comply. Sure I might be entrenched in a view point, but I am not stubborn. Cheers. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 01:20, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
	:::::I'm glad there's no hard feelings as my interest in raising the issue went went beyond you. And I thought you behaved well at AN, particularly considering some of the comments. We'll see what happens going forward. Trying to change policy is always a touchy business.--] (]) 23:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

	== edit summary? ==

	Re; ] edit.
	] reverted (my edit to get it to NPOV/accurate) citing "more info" (which in this case would be wikilinks) in previous version; addressed concerns of other editor by reinstating edit but with asked for wikilinks , AND refs. Not exactly misleading. Inclined to revert your revert, possibly adding another ref ], asking for clarification first to avoid non-productive revert war. Will check your page.--] (]) 13:43, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
	:Your initial edit changed the status quo. Fred reverted you. You then edited the article again with the edit summary "fix refs and wikilinks". However, you actually added material to the article and instead of adding a real reference, you imbedded a bare URL, which is not appropriate. Putting aside the issue of your edit summary, this part of the Issa article has withstood a great deal of scrutiny and been much discussed in the past. Therefore, regardless of how you think it should read, and even assuming you fixed the bare URL issue, I strongly urge you to open a topic on the material you want to add/change on the article talk page pursuant to ], among other reasons. Two editors have now reverted you. I wouldn't suggest continuing to battle in the article.--] (]) 23:22, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
	::Hi, B; just FYI, was a little confused by your comment that I hadn't contributed on Talk: extensive justification is there, then reminded self that it was pre-registration. If you feel re-posting material already there under ] would be useful, OK. Also just FYI, although I participated extensively on Talk during your revert war of July, didn't actually edit Article then; the current changes were merely putting the ideas already on Talk for 3 months into Article space. --] (]) 16:23, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
	B; you are misreading the source. There is no ambiguity that Fluke was "submitted"(that she was actually ever submitted is disputed) in time, in time meaning the previous Monday. Democrats never disputed that she was submitted late, just that Issa had the discretion to add her. They vehemently contested that she COULD not or SHOULD not be added. Every source and the transcript and video confirm this. The source in question says "Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who chaired the hearing, said the minority party had submitted her name too late to be considered (Democrats contest this).", the "contest this" referring to the "to be considered", which is accurate. The WP Article takes the quote and changes it to say something that the source did not; that the Democrats "contest" the "late", not the discretionary powers of the Chair, which they do. --] (]) 18:55, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

	Hi, B; reposted the justifications on the Talk page as you requested; have seen that you have been editing since - can I take the non-response as no response? Don't forget, the non-NPOV version of that paragraph and the rationales and justifications for improving it have been, uncontested, on the Talk page for 3 months; don't want to accept your inaction as a veto vote for inertia.--] (]) 17:49, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

	:I responded just now on the talk page. As you'll be able to see, I'm a bit lost as to what it is you want and why.--] (]) 23:36, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

	== Heads up ==

	Just wanted to make you aware of this in case someone makes an issue of this. I can't self-revert now in any case, but no EW intended.  ]{{SubSup\|\|]\|]}} 14:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

	== ATI Automation Honors ==

	The ATI Automation Honors, 1st Annual ATI Automation Honors, 2nd Annual ATI Automation Honors wiki pages I created were speedy deleted due to copyright questions on the image and questions about company promotion. These articles are relevant given that test automation is a huge part of the overall IT industry. There are thousands of test automation tools, and people typically have a lot of questions about where to start, or about what tools the test automation community recommends. The ATI Honors provides answers to these questions, much like the Jolt Awards which also has a wiki article and the Test_automation wiki article that lists tools for people, but the ATI Honors article does it in a much more expensive, useful way, by listing useful tools by type and technology. The ATI Honors cost no money and generates no profit. Nominations come from anyone via the internet and all the results are posted via the internet. The Automation Honors has already been quoted by other people in various existing tool related articles including the Ranorex article, TestComplete article and the SoapUI article. This is what prompted me to create the ATI Automation Honors articles that other articles could reference within wikipedia. the pictures used in the article were distributed to the community by the organization that organizes the awards. But if necessary, I can either get an email from the organization, or remove the pictures entirely. For these reasons I ask that the articles be reinstated to Misplaced Pages. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:32, 25 September 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	:] was deleted by me for two reasons, copyright infringement and promotion. ] and ] were deleted by ] because there was no credible claim of importance of the subject. For my part, I see no basis for restoring the article I deleted. For the other two articles, you should contact Malik on his talk page. If you don't receive satisfaction from Malik, you can go to ]. If Malik decides to restore the articles, please let me know, and I may reconsider my decision as the articles are related. Thanks.--] (]) 23:32, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
	::Isn't being an admin awesome? :P ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 18:56, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
	:::LOL, my poor mop is wrung out.--] (]) 18:59, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

	== Please explain, and fix if possible. Thank you. ==

	Hello.
	This is in regard to http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:GeorgeLouis_reported_by_User:Rhode_Island_Red_.28Result:_Stale_.2B_note.29.

	You made the statement "It looks fairly clear to me that GeorgeLouis canvassed." I am sure puzzled by this. What canvassing? The only other place I mentioned the ] page was , which of course is OK because Frank VanderSloot is a darling of the conservatives. And I linked to his article, not to any mention or dispute about "edit warring." Your statement is a serious slur on me as an editor and seems to be stated by you as a fact, which it is not. Can you provide any information or maybe a diff that would lead you to such a conclusion? If not, I would appreciate a retraction. Sincerely, yours in Wikidom, ] (]) 20:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
	:Sorry, but I stand by my statement. I understand the part of ] that you're relying on, but in the context here, it would appear that your intent was to get others to support you in the dispute, not to improve the article or obtain comments from uninvolved editors. The wording of your notification was neither helpful nor neutral. The timing was suspicious. Finally, as Collect pointed out the conservativism project wasn't even listed on VanderSloot's talk page. Did you notify anyone else?--] (]) 21:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
	::No, I did not notify anybody else. I believe my notice was very brief and very neutral. It was helpful in that it would direct people of the Conservative persuasion to go over to the article and see what was happening. Is it Canvassing to notify ONE interest group of an article that is in their bailiwick? I still don't get it: Your comment is really hurtful and damaging to me considering how long I have been editing and how careful I have been to be polite and cautious in dealing with others. Maybe you can direct me to a Policy for me to study. How can you judge my "intent"? Are you assuming Bad Faith? Thanks again. Yours, ] (]) 21:21, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
	:::"Finally, as Collect pointed out the conservativism project wasn't even listed on VanderSloot's talk page." I'm not sure what that has to do with anything? Why should I list that project when I am not a member of that group and have only stopped in there twice for assistance? Still really puzzled, I am, ] (]) 21:25, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
	::::The only relevant guideline is canvassing, which speaks of "intention". Obviously, neither I nor anyone else can ''know'' what your intention was, but one has to judge based on the circumstances. Otherwise, it becomes impossible to apply the guideline. As for Collect's point, no one says you have to list the conservatism project; rather, it would arguably make more sense to notify a project already listed. Remember, this isn't just one item on whcih I based my statement, but several items I've already listed. Finally, it was my view in closing the report, and I commented on it because it had been brought up by others. Other editors, including admins, might feel differently. I didn't sanction you for canvassing, so it remains my view and perhaps the view of others, but not necessarily a consensus.--] (]) 21:39, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
	:::::I've outlined the key details and chronology of events on the project conservatism talk page. Doesn't leave much room for doubt that this was a violation of ]. Asking for an apology for calling a spade a spade? Very inappropriate. We could always move the discussion over to ] or a user conduct RfC instead if need be. ] (]) 22:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
	::::::Frankly, both of you should let this go. It's possible that GeorgeLouis did not leave the message on the project talk page with the intent to canvas. That's what he says. RIR thinks otherwise. GeorgeLouis was not sanctioned for canvassing, and it is unlikely he would be sanctioned if this were escalated. Generally, sanctions are only meted out in cases of ''repeated'' canvassing (see the section "How to respond to inappropriate canvassing" in the guideline). Do we really need to create more drama? I suggest you both move on.--] (]) 22:11, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
	No, I am not going to "let this go." Bbb23 was totally wrong in his or her judgment — probably the best use of a ''post hoc ergo propter hoc'' rationale that I have ever seen. Rhode Island Red has already used Bbb23's (erroneous) statement that I engaged in edit warring and in canvassing by posting a diff regarding that statement in one of his arguments on another page – thereby repeating the libel. Bbb23 made that pronouncement without ever asking me for what I had to say about the matter. This smacks a lot of the kind of "trial" one gets in North Korea. Bbb23, if you will not reverse this calumny, then I would appreciate your guidance on how to appeal your action. Sincerely, ] (]) 01:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
	:See ].--] (]) 02:12, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

	== Your talk of 23:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC) ==

	Sorry for delay in getting back. The purpose of the edits you questioned, as with all appropriate Misplaced Pages edits, is to deepen articles with valuable information. Most entries about films on Misplaced Pages only list a release date in the US. A link to release dates in other countries seems entirely reasonable and of great interest to the many Misplaced Pages users who reside in other countries. Such information is encyclopedic in nature and reasonable as an External Link since setting forth release dates for multiple countries in the article itself would be unwieldy. Thanks for your consideration and concern. The entries you refer to are by no means spam.
	] (]) 02:56, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
	:This is what I wrote on your talk page:

	::Your only purpose at Misplaced Pages appears to be to add external links or body cites to jabcatmovies.com. See ]. Please explain why you are doing this and whether you have any relationship with the website, which appears to be a glorified blog. If you do not give a credible explanation, you risk being blocked for spamming.

	:Your response is insufficient. It is also the exact same response you wrote at ], who also reverted your edits. You haven't explained your relationship to the blog or why your only purpose here seems to be adding links to the website. Putting aside everything else, your explanation about release dates in other countries is not accurate. Generally, a film's release date is dependent on where the film is produced. Thus, if it's an American film, the important release date is in the U.S. If it's a British film, the important release date is the UK - and so on. Nor is there any basis to believe that your website would be considered a ] per Misplaced Pages's guidelines. I'm afraid you probably leave me no choice but to block your account. I won't do it tonight in case you have something to add, but unless you have something else to offer, it will probably be soon.--] (]) 03:56, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

	== Jerran carlin ==

	Since you deleted the article the hoaxer who created has created a talk page ], can you delete it too? Thanks in advance, ]] 15:32, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
	:I've deleted it and indeffed the editor. Thanks for the heads up.--] (]) 23:30, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

	== Your username ==

	What is the genesis of your username? It's been bugging at me for a while :)  ]{{SubSup\|\|]\|]}} 04:51, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
	:I'm going to politely decline to answer (as they say on questionnaires) and leave it to your imagination. :-) --] (]) 12:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
	::He's a big bad bobblehead, like his 22 predecessors. :-)] (]) 04:52, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
	:::See what one's imagination can do for one. However, I disagree, at least partly, with Anything's guess. I would like to think that I'm bigger and badder than my 22 predecessors. I've tried to learn from their mistakes. BTW, Anything, why do you have a Retired notice on your user page? You don't seem retired anymore.--] (]) 13:47, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
	::::It's just temporary.

	Your bra size? :D.   ]{{SubSup\|\|]\|]}} 14:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

	== Sjones killing lawyers ==

	Re your response to "the first thing we do is to kill all the lawyers" — in most jurisdictions, judges have to be lawyers, so we wouldn't have functioning courts. Either there wouldn't be justice, or it would be largely mob justice, or it would be dictates from on high, and none of those need lawyers :-) ] (]) 23:50, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
	:Poor Sjones, my comment was largely tongue-in-cheek, but he felt the need to apologize. As for your comments about judges, have you ever watched '']''? I don't think I've seen a legal show that pillories judges more than that show (not counting shows that are clearly intended to be satirical). Either none of the writers likes judges, or they think it sells ads, dunno.--] (]) 23:58, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

	== ] editor continues to revert ==

	Please see the new reverting added to the existing complaint . Do you a recommendation for what to do next? Thanks, ] (]) 06:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
	:Thanks, Ed, I've commented at ANEW. If you think I'm cutting him too much slack, please let me know.--] (]) 14:26, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

	== LACMTA page... ==

	http://en.wikipedia.org/Los_Angeles_Metro_bus_fleet

	So its says that "I" may have been involved in a editing war... Why don't you tell the other useers that edited as well, I wasn't the only one!

	Also what is the point of the "Talk page" if mostly no one knows about it can you put more info about that on the page, or do something for users to know about it, because even I didn't know about it before... UNTIL now. (] (]) 18:53, 29 September 2012 (UTC))
	:If you're referring to ], both their conduct and yours were discussed, and Asloge was also warned, although not with a template. This all happened two weeks ago, and it looks like you haven't edited since. Asloge claims they left Misplaced Pages, and there's no evidence he has edited since, either.

			Dear Sir,
	:As to your question about talk pages, you're supposed to familiarize yourself a little bit with Misplaced Pages and how it works. I understand that for a new user it can be hard, but in August a Welcome notice was posted on your own talk page. Did you look at it? The very first link under "Getting started" ia a tutorial. Did you try that? Among many other basic things, it has information about article talk pages and what they're used for.

			I noticed that the page Geert Claessens was deleted. I was still editing it in my sandbox and was in the process of adding external references to the text to underpin what was written. Kindly ask why it was already deleted. Thank you for your clarifications. ] (]) 22:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
	:I don't know what your objectives are now, but if you want to continue editing at Misplaced Pages, I suggest taking some time and reading the tutorial and some of the other links in that welcome notice. No one expects you to absorb all of it immediately, but if you go slowly and cautiously, things may work more smoothly for you. Even without knowing how Misplaced Pages works, you can imagine that it's not a good idea to get into a battle with another editor, and that if you do, you should probably step back and ask yourself whether there's a better way to go about improving articles here.--] (]) 13:41, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

			:{{tpw}}The link is ]. ] (]) 22:28, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
	== Scientom ==
			:I deleted it because it was blatantly promotional. Looks like you have a ] with the subject. What is your relationship to him?--] (]) 13:12, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
			::Dear Sir, always ready to take advice on how to write this. I am his younger brother, but wanted clearly to add all the necessary references and have it as factual page. He (Geert) died 2 years ago and i wanted to get a digital trace of him and his carreer as a classical guitar player, no itention to have a promotional page. I also have newspaper articles on him, but they are dating from a while back and so they need to be scaned. How can i include them as a reference ? Thank you for your opinion and time. Kr, Kris. ] (]) 16:17, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::First, you need to declare your conflict of interest following the procedures in ]. Second, the problem isn't your "intention" but the language you use in drafting a page for your brother; it must be neutral and encyclopedic. Many people who have no experience with Misplaced Pages have trouble drafting new articles that comply with our guidelines. Third, you would be better writing an article in ], not your sandbox, and using ]. You will then get feedback from experienced users. As far as citing newspaper articles, please ask about that and any other things I've mentioned at the ]. As an administrator, my primary job is to prevent disruption, even if unintentional, to Misplaced Pages, not to mentor new editors. Good luck.--] (]) 17:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

			== A barnstar for you! ==
	It seems I'm not the only editor having issues with Scientom and BRD interpretation. .   ]{{SubSup\|\|]\|]}} 17:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
	:I've been kind of half paying attention to that discussion but chose not to inject my own views. Frankly, I'd prefer less discussion about policy and guidelines on editor talk pages (not that there's anything wrong with it per se) and more discussion about content on article talk pages.--] (]) 17:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

			{\| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
	== Kellyanne Conway ==
			\|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" \| ]
			\|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" \| '''The Original Barnstar'''
			\|-
			\|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" \| Happy New Year, Bbb23! In 2024, other editors thanked you using the ] on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the '''#8 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024'''. Congratulations and, well, ''thank you'' for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! ] (]) 19:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
			\|}
			:Umm, I had no idea. I have notifications for Thanks turned off globally. I should also add that I'm surprised. I ''do'' appreciate your thanks, though, and a Happy New Year to you, too. Be safe tonight.--] (]) 19:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
			::It only stops you from ''receiving'' thanks; it doesn't stop people from thanking you. But they won't know that you didn't see the thanks. See . --] 🦌 (]) 01:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::I know that. I just don't think of myself as an editor who would get thanked a lot. I ''do'' have one question: is there any way to look now and see what edit an editor thanked me for? I don't see any way to do that on the thank log. I'm just curious.--] (]) 01:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
			::::It's not in the thank log; it's only in the "in-tray" or "TV set" icon at the top (to the right of the bell icon). But that only shows the 25 most recent events that come within that icon; most will be thanks, but some will be other actions - such as when you ] somebody. So for myself, the list shows 25 events in the last 6 days of which 13 are mentions and 12 are where somebody else thanked me. If I click on one of those 12, I can see which edit (or loggable action, such as a block, delete or protection) that I was being thanked for, but once they are pushed out of the 25 by more recent events, the information is no longer retrievable. So checking out 1150 thanks is a long way from being possible. --] 🦌 (]) 02:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::::Heh, I wasn't going to check all 1150 entries, god help me, just a few out of curiosity, but it looks to me like even the recent thanks listed in the log don't show up when I click on the TV set icon; maybe that works only if you have thanks notifications turned on.--] (]) 02:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

			== Qubetics ==
	You wrote: ''Please stop adding material to the Kellyanne Conway article that violates WP:BLP. You also need to learn how to cite properly in Misplaced Pages, but the biggest problem is that the material is negative and controversial in its impact on Todd Akin. I'm going to revert your edit (again). If you want to reinsert the material, or some variation of it, start a topic on the article talk page to discuss it. Don't put it back in the article unless there's a consensus that it doesn't violate policy and is otherwise appropriate for inclusion in the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)''

			Would you mind draftifying or moving the contents of the recently deleted ] article into my userspace? I'm not the original author, but started looking into it a bit when I encountered it on NPP. It doesn't seem to have notability yet, but I'd like to have it on my list to keep an eye on for the future. Thanks.] (]) 02:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
	With all due respect,
			:{{done}} - see ]. I retained the infobox and the refs but took out the promotional language.--] (]) 15:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
	* this page is filled with poor citations.
	* I have modified my edit to address your concern re: Todd Akin by removing his identity from the page. If you are objecting to the "negative" information about Ms. Conway, I would suggest that, for example, the entire criticism section in the Misplaced Pages Frank Luntz article be removed.
	* This information is not only germane, but was voluntarily offered in an interview in a non-hostile venue. When a political consultant compares her client to David Koresh, that is a significant fact by any biographical or professional standard. The material may reflect negatively on Ms. Conway, but it is not controversial, since there is no controversy about the actual fact of the statement.
	* Furthermore, the entire article has been allowed to stand unedited until now although it was cited as being "written like an advertisement."
	* Finally, with all due respect, Ms. Conway is a public figure who frequently appears in the media as a political consultant and analyst. Restraining accurate comments about a public figure is, again with respect, a form of Wiki-censorship.

			== Lawrence bishnoi ==
	Thank you for your efforts on behalf of Misplaced Pages. My disagreement in no way suggests that your work here is not appreciated. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 17:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			Can I use the official chargesheets filed by ] against the Bishnoi for reference? like my sandbox ] (]) 14:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
	== IP hopper ==
			:The link to the report doesn't work.--] (]) 15:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
			::and other reference mentioned along? ] (]) 15:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
			::Because 80% of Lawrence Bishnoi's references are like this. ] (]) 15:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::The other ref works, but you can't add material based on a report without providing a working link to the report.--] (]) 15:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
			::::okay thank you for your guidance i will keep that in mind ] (]) 15:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

			=="Best know for" IP==
	Thanks for semi-protection. The article has no interest to me, but I've started keeping track of the editor, who keeps changing IPs. If they were never disruptive they wouldn't be noticed. Just the fact that they are (deliberately or not) "avoiding the scrutiny of other editors" by spreading their contribution history over numerous accounts creates a problem and violates our basic policy, which requires (with only a few exceptions) that we edit using only one account. One of the main purposes of registration is to avoid confusion, and this editor is doing creating it. Here's their sock category:
			Does {{noping\|62.3.99.94}} look like the BKFIP, or is is just me? Looking at their edit summaries ("biased and really barely intelligible", "removed pointless waffling", "first paragraph was basically garbage, unintelligible due to poor language skills on the part of whoever added the text, and poor reading skills by everyone who edited it subsequently", etc) it certainly fits their ''modus operandi''. - ] (]) 16:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
			:A bit, yes, but not enough for me to block. What do you think, {{U\|Favonian}}?--] (]) 17:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
			::Oh yes, that's him. Blocked for 3 days. Expect a fulminating unblock request, followed by a revocation talk page privileges. Happy New Year! ] (]) 17:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::The expert has spoken! --] (]) 17:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::Many thanks to you both. I was going to note that a few of their edits are removing things along the lines of 'best known for' phrasing, including , , and , but that seems a bit superfluous now! - ] (]) 17:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

			== Joaquim Nero ==
	* ]

			Hello Bbb23, I have noticed you often resolve things when I post in ] so I thought I would tell you directly here. Please tell me if that is not okay and I won't do it again. I noticed this user ] after a page he created ] was added to ]. It looks like many articles he has created have problems. Could you take a look please? ]] 18:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
	] (]) 04:41, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
			:Pardon my barging in: just noticed the link from ] here, and am happy to point out ], closed a few minutes ago. ] (]) 19:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
			::Hi Wikishovel, thank you for responding. Looks like I was right about the account. ]] 20:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

	== ~~What~~ ~~you~~ ~~used~~ ~~to say~~ ==		== Is all caps OK? ==

			? ] (]) 20:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
	''"My biggest disappointment with Misplaced Pages is the level of incivility and aggression on the part of some established editors and admins. I get the sense that some relatively new editors leave as a result of these attitudes, and I've already come perilously close to doing so as well on a few occasions. I find it ironic that many of these same editors happily display tags and comments about civility on their user pages. I guess they don't practice what they preach."'' Have a great day, Bbb23.-- ] (]) 16:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
			:(laughing) It's fine.--] (]) 22:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 22:54, 3 January 2025

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14	Archive 15
Archive 16	Archive 17	Archive 18
Archive 19	Archive 20	Archive 21
Archive 22	Archive 23	Archive 24
Archive 25	Archive 26	Archive 27
Archive 28	Archive 29	Archive 30
Archive 31	Archive 32	Archive 33
Archive 34	Archive 35	Archive 36
Archive 37	Archive 38	Archive 39
Archive 40	Archive 41	Archive 42
Archive 43	Archive 44	Archive 45
Archive 46	Archive 47	Archive 48
Archive 49	Archive 50	Archive 51
Archive 52	Archive 53	Archive 54
Archive 55	Archive 56	Archive 57
Archive 58	Archive 59	Archive 60
Archive 61	Archive 62	Archive 63

This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Ask for clarification on deleted page of Geert Claessens

Dear Sir,

I noticed that the page Geert Claessens was deleted. I was still editing it in my sandbox and was in the process of adding external references to the text to underpin what was written. Kindly ask why it was already deleted. Thank you for your clarifications. Claessenskris (talk) 22:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)The link is User:Claessenskris/sandbox . -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:28, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

I deleted it because it was blatantly promotional. Looks like you have a conflict of interest with the subject. What is your relationship to him?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:12, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Dear Sir, always ready to take advice on how to write this. I am his younger brother, but wanted clearly to add all the necessary references and have it as factual page. He (Geert) died 2 years ago and i wanted to get a digital trace of him and his carreer as a classical guitar player, no itention to have a promotional page. I also have newspaper articles on him, but they are dating from a while back and so they need to be scaned. How can i include them as a reference ? Thank you for your opinion and time. Kr, Kris. Claessenskris (talk) 16:17, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

First, you need to declare your conflict of interest following the procedures in WP:COI. Second, the problem isn't your "intention" but the language you use in drafting a page for your brother; it must be neutral and encyclopedic. Many people who have no experience with Misplaced Pages have trouble drafting new articles that comply with our guidelines. Third, you would be better writing an article in draft space, not your sandbox, and using WP:AFC. You will then get feedback from experienced users. As far as citing newspaper articles, please ask about that and any other things I've mentioned at the WP:Teahouse. As an administrator, my primary job is to prevent disruption, even if unintentional, to Misplaced Pages, not to mentor new editors. Good luck.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Happy New Year, Bbb23! In 2024, other editors thanked you 1150 times using the thanks tool on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the #8 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024. Congratulations and, well, thank you for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! Mz7 (talk) 19:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Umm, I had no idea. I have notifications for Thanks turned off globally. I should also add that I'm surprised. I do appreciate your thanks, though, and a Happy New Year to you, too. Be safe tonight.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

It only stops you from receiving thanks; it doesn't stop people from thanking you. But they won't know that you didn't see the thanks. See thanks log. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 01:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I know that. I just don't think of myself as an editor who would get thanked a lot. I do have one question: is there any way to look now and see what edit an editor thanked me for? I don't see any way to do that on the thank log. I'm just curious.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

It's not in the thank log; it's only in the "in-tray" or "TV set" icon at the top (to the right of the bell icon). But that only shows the 25 most recent events that come within that icon; most will be thanks, but some will be other actions - such as when you WP:MENTION somebody. So for myself, the list shows 25 events in the last 6 days of which 13 are mentions and 12 are where somebody else thanked me. If I click on one of those 12, I can see which edit (or loggable action, such as a block, delete or protection) that I was being thanked for, but once they are pushed out of the 25 by more recent events, the information is no longer retrievable. So checking out 1150 thanks is a long way from being possible. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 02:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Heh, I wasn't going to check all 1150 entries, god help me, just a few out of curiosity, but it looks to me like even the recent thanks listed in the log don't show up when I click on the TV set icon; maybe that works only if you have thanks notifications turned on.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Qubetics

Would you mind draftifying or moving the contents of the recently deleted Qubetics article into my userspace? I'm not the original author, but started looking into it a bit when I encountered it on NPP. It doesn't seem to have notability yet, but I'd like to have it on my list to keep an eye on for the future. Thanks. -- Fyrael (talk) 02:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Done - see Draft:Qubetics. I retained the infobox and the refs but took out the promotional language.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Lawrence bishnoi

Can I use the official chargesheets filed by NIA against the Bishnoi for reference? like my sandbox Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 14:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

The link to the report doesn't work.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

and other reference mentioned along? Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Because 80% of Lawrence Bishnoi's references are like this. Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

The other ref works, but you can't add material based on a report without providing a working link to the report.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

okay thank you for your guidance i will keep that in mind Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 15:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

"Best know for" IP

Does 62.3.99.94 look like the BKFIP, or is is just me? Looking at their edit summaries ("biased and really barely intelligible", "removed pointless waffling", "first paragraph was basically garbage, unintelligible due to poor language skills on the part of whoever added the text, and poor reading skills by everyone who edited it subsequently", etc) it certainly fits their modus operandi. - SchroCat (talk) 16:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

A bit, yes, but not enough for me to block. What do you think, Favonian?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Oh yes, that's him. Blocked for 3 days. Expect a fulminating unblock request, followed by a revocation talk page privileges. Happy New Year! Favonian (talk) 17:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

The expert has spoken! --Bbb23 (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Many thanks to you both. I was going to note that a few of their edits are removing things along the lines of 'best known for' phrasing, including this, this, this and this, but that seems a bit superfluous now! - SchroCat (talk) 17:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Joaquim Nero

Hello Bbb23, I have noticed you often resolve things when I post in Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard so I thought I would tell you directly here. Please tell me if that is not okay and I won't do it again. I noticed this user User:Joaquim Nero after a page he created Deebs Magazine was added to Category:Articles with a promotional tone from January 2025. It looks like many articles he has created have problems. Could you take a look please? 🄻 🄰 18:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Pardon my barging in: just noticed the link from Deebs Magazine here, and am happy to point out Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/3ydepartment, closed a few minutes ago. Wikishovel (talk) 19:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi Wikishovel, thank you for responding. Looks like I was right about the account. 🄻 🄰 20:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Is all caps OK?

? Knitsey (talk) 20:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

(laughing) It's fine.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)