| Revision as of 00:48, 27 February 2014 editPol098 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers118,294 edits →FRG again← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:04, 1 March 2014 edit undoGandon64 (talk | contribs)21 editsNo edit summary | ||
| (17 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == Welcome == | == Welcome == | ||
| '''Welcome''' | |||
| == ]'s issue with ]== | |||
| Hello and welcome to Misplaced Pages. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page ], seem to be advertising or for ]. Misplaced Pages does not allow advertising. For more information on this, see: | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| If you still have questions, there is a ], or you can write '''<nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki>''' below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Misplaced Pages: | |||
| *] | |||
| *] and ] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] for creating new articles | |||
| *] | |||
| I hope you enjoy editing Misplaced Pages! Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of ] if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcomespam --> | |||
| <font color="#500000">]</font><font color="#005000">]</font> 19:48, 26 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ] sometimes edits pages unnecessarily. One of these pages is ]. I have only made a few additions to Misplaced Pages in the last 5 years and not once have I removed someone else's work. | |||
| == December 2012 == | |||
| ] Hello, I'm ]. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page ], because it seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on ], or take a look at our ] about links. Thank you. ]<!-- Template:uw-spam1 --> ] (]) 01:47, 22 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :I (]) have repeatedly removed the following line, repeatedly inserted by ], from the ] article. According to guideline ] a disambiguation page should only include initialisms if they are used in an article. Others have in the past also deleted this line, some describing it as ]. See the archived version of this talk page for a 2012 comment by someone else (the content of this page was removed today by its creator). | |||
| == FRG again == | |||
| * FRG™ - Free Radical Gasification, a multi-patented ] to ] conversion process developed by Responsible Energy Inc. | |||
| :] (]) 10:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
| I have no ill will towards you ] but please stop being a ]. The issue that you currently have with the ] reference was long ago resolved. The repeated insertion of "FRG™ - Free Radical Gasification, a multi-patented ] to ] conversion process developed by Responsible Energy Inc." is due to it being an ]. If you would like to work together then please edit the FRG™ reference to your satisfaction other than removing it and we can build from there. Short of Misplaced Pages permanently blocking my account, I will not let it be removed.(] (]) 15:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)) | |||
| We seem to have got into a situation where an addition is made to the FRG disambiguation which doesn't relate to any article using the initials (the same issue as the previous section here), it gets deleted with an explanation in the edit summary, and reinstated without comment. This has happended more than 3 times recently (and happened several times in the past too), so I've raised the issue at ] under ]. ] (]) 00:43, 27 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == February 2014 == | |||
| <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''72 hours''' for ] at ], making improper edits to a disambig page, ], and threats of future disruption. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may ] by adding the following text below this notice: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}. However, you should read the ] first. ] (]) 02:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-block --> | |||
| {{unblock reviewed | 1=I fail to see why I am the only one here at fault especially when ] mass deletes content on pages time and time again. ]'s knowledge and experience with ] due to continuous conflicts with other editors (see ]) unfortunately easily suckered me in and I whole heartily apologize to you and Misplaced Pages for that and accept the block. Some form of help/effort from him/her would have be more productive vs the I'm better than you stance ] repeatedly takes. ] is there a way to rewrite this sentence so that it can remain on the ] page? :FRG™ - Free Radical Gasification, a multi-patented ] to ] conversion process developed by Responsible Energy Inc. Would this be more appropriate? :FRG™ - Free Radical Gasification, a ] to ] energy conversion process or :FRG - Free Radical Gasification, a ] to ] energy conversion process Your help would be very much appreciated. ] (]) 21:39, 28 February 2014 (UTC) | decline = If the only reason for the block were edit warring, then I would agree that you and Pol098 should have been treated the same, but it isn't the only reason. It was explained to you why your edit was mistaken, but you chose to ignore that, and keep on making the same inappropriate edit over and over again. Also, you concern to find ways to include the content in a disambiguation page gives all the appearance of confirming that your purpose is promotion. An entry on a disambiguation page should exist because there is a need for it to distinguish among articles which might all be searched for under the same title, not because someone wants it to be visible there. <small>''The editor who uses the pseudonym''</small> "]" (]) 15:10, 1 March 2014 (UTC)}} | |||
| :The second choice looks better to me (without having gone into it deeply) - we don't use ™ or similar things on Misplaced Pages. (It's usually taken to mean that the edit comes from the holder of the mark, and that as a result of that it is there to promote. Usually, that is correct, I'm afraid...) ] (]) 21:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
| As far as I know, neither is acceptable. Peridon is right about the ™, but the core of the problem can be found at ] and more simply at ]. The entry doesn't belong on a dismabig page as there are no blue links to any article. Linking to the words waste and syngas don't count as neither mentions the acronym.--] (]) 23:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you for your feedback. Would it be better if I attempt to create the ] wiki page (never done one before) or could I simply reference ]? (] (]) 23:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC)) | |||
| :] doesn't reference FRG, either. Whether you could appropriately add the acronym to the article or whether a new article would meet Misplaced Pages guidelines I can't answer as I know nothing about the subject. I know a little about political radicals if that helps. :-) --] (]) 23:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :No, it absolutely would not be better to do '''''any''''' of the things you suggest. An entry on a disambiguation page should exist because there is an article that needs disambiguation, and to think that an article should exist in order to keep an entry in a disambiguation page is to put the cart before the horse. Likewise, linking to an article that doesn't mention the acronym in order to justify the disambiguation page entry '''''does not''''' justify it. And, in case you think of it, putting content mentioning "FRG" into an article so that you can link to the article from the disambiguation page is no better. You have made it abundantly clear that your aim is to get a mention of Responsible Energy Inc's proprietary term displayed by Misplaced Pages. That is to say, you are trying to use Misplaced Pages for promotion, which is contrary to Misplaced Pages policy. Complying with Misplaced Pages policies is not optional, and editors who try to use Misplaced Pages for promotion are blocked from editing. <small>''The editor who uses the pseudonym''</small> "]" (]) 15:20, 1 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for the clarification. It must be painfully obvious to you all by now that I am very new to editing Misplaced Pages. There was no intension top put the horse before the cart other than writing a page on Free Radical Gasification will take a long time and I have not had the chance to do so. I am a specialist on the subject matter and would include many top scientist as references. I have no problem accepting your policy that the page cannot include any references to responsible energy or the ™. With that being said why are there are 1,000's of pages dedicated to companies and to trademarks. Should they not all be removed? I am still very confused about the rule of what constitutes a proper reference? If I were really trying to promote the company would I have not tried to put significantly more details plus a link to their website?] (]) 17:47, 1 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:04, 1 March 2014
Welcome
Pol098's issue with Gandon64
Pol098 sometimes edits pages unnecessarily. One of these pages is FRG. I have only made a few additions to Misplaced Pages in the last 5 years and not once have I removed someone else's work.
- I (Pol098) have repeatedly removed the following line, repeatedly inserted by Gandon64, from the FRG article. According to guideline WP:DABABBREV a disambiguation page should only include initialisms if they are used in an article. Others have in the past also deleted this line, some describing it as spam (electronic). See the archived version of this talk page for a 2012 comment by someone else (the content of this page was removed today by its creator).
- FRG™ - Free Radical Gasification, a multi-patented waste to syngas conversion process developed by Responsible Energy Inc.
I have no ill will towards you Pol098 but please stop being a WP:BULLY. The issue that you currently have with the FRG reference was long ago resolved. The repeated insertion of "FRG™ - Free Radical Gasification, a multi-patented waste to syngas conversion process developed by Responsible Energy Inc." is due to it being an initialism. If you would like to work together then please edit the FRG™ reference to your satisfaction other than removing it and we can build from there. Short of Misplaced Pages permanently blocking my account, I will not let it be removed.(Gandon64 (talk) 15:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC))
February 2014
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 02:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Gandon64 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I fail to see why I am the only one here at fault especially when Pol098 mass deletes content on pages time and time again. Pol098's knowledge and experience with edit warring due to continuous conflicts with other editors (see talk) unfortunately easily suckered me in and I whole heartily apologize to you and Misplaced Pages for that and accept the block. Some form of help/effort from him/her would have be more productive vs the I'm better than you stance Pol098 repeatedly takes. Bbb23 is there a way to rewrite this sentence so that it can remain on the FRG page? :FRG™ - Free Radical Gasification, a multi-patented waste to syngas conversion process developed by Responsible Energy Inc. Would this be more appropriate? :FRG™ - Free Radical Gasification, a waste to syngas energy conversion process or :FRG - Free Radical Gasification, a waste to syngas energy conversion process Your help would be very much appreciated. Gandon64 (talk) 21:39, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Decline reason:
If the only reason for the block were edit warring, then I would agree that you and Pol098 should have been treated the same, but it isn't the only reason. It was explained to you why your edit was mistaken, but you chose to ignore that, and keep on making the same inappropriate edit over and over again. Also, you concern to find ways to include the content in a disambiguation page gives all the appearance of confirming that your purpose is promotion. An entry on a disambiguation page should exist because there is a need for it to distinguish among articles which might all be searched for under the same title, not because someone wants it to be visible there. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:10, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- The second choice looks better to me (without having gone into it deeply) - we don't use ™ or similar things on Misplaced Pages. (It's usually taken to mean that the edit comes from the holder of the mark, and that as a result of that it is there to promote. Usually, that is correct, I'm afraid...) Peridon (talk) 21:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
As far as I know, neither is acceptable. Peridon is right about the ™, but the core of the problem can be found at WP:DABSTYLE and more simply at WP:DDD. The entry doesn't belong on a dismabig page as there are no blue links to any article. Linking to the words waste and syngas don't count as neither mentions the acronym.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your feedback. Would it be better if I attempt to create the Free Radical Gasification wiki page (never done one before) or could I simply reference Radical (chemistry)? (Gandon64 (talk) 23:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC))
- Radical (chemistry) doesn't reference FRG, either. Whether you could appropriately add the acronym to the article or whether a new article would meet Misplaced Pages guidelines I can't answer as I know nothing about the subject. I know a little about political radicals if that helps. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 23:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
- No, it absolutely would not be better to do any of the things you suggest. An entry on a disambiguation page should exist because there is an article that needs disambiguation, and to think that an article should exist in order to keep an entry in a disambiguation page is to put the cart before the horse. Likewise, linking to an article that doesn't mention the acronym in order to justify the disambiguation page entry does not justify it. And, in case you think of it, putting content mentioning "FRG" into an article so that you can link to the article from the disambiguation page is no better. You have made it abundantly clear that your aim is to get a mention of Responsible Energy Inc's proprietary term displayed by Misplaced Pages. That is to say, you are trying to use Misplaced Pages for promotion, which is contrary to Misplaced Pages policy. Complying with Misplaced Pages policies is not optional, and editors who try to use Misplaced Pages for promotion are blocked from editing. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:20, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. It must be painfully obvious to you all by now that I am very new to editing Misplaced Pages. There was no intension top put the horse before the cart other than writing a page on Free Radical Gasification will take a long time and I have not had the chance to do so. I am a specialist on the subject matter and would include many top scientist as references. I have no problem accepting your policy that the page cannot include any references to responsible energy or the ™. With that being said why are there are 1,000's of pages dedicated to companies and to trademarks. Should they not all be removed? I am still very confused about the rule of what constitutes a proper reference? If I were really trying to promote the company would I have not tried to put significantly more details plus a link to their website?Gandon64 (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2014 (UTC)