Misplaced Pages

User talk:Charles Matthews: 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 14:39, 17 August 2006 editJossi (talk | contribs)72,880 editsm →ArbCom case← Previous edit Latest revision as of 12:53, 23 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,292,044 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Charles Matthews/Archive 48) (bot 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User:MiszaBot/config
*] *]
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
*], ], ], ], ]
|maxarchivesize = 125K
*], ], ], ], ]
|counter = 48
*], ], ], ], ]
|algo = old(14d)
|archive = User talk:Charles Matthews/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{archives|auto=yes}}
*]
*]


== Drawshield File:Blazon of Champion de Crespigny baronets, of Champion Lodge (1805).svg ==
==Clean Up==
Can you just clear up swearing, personal refeneces here: . The swearing is libelous and the personal references are uncalled for. These are both covered by Oversight. Thanks! ] 12:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


Hi
== Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) ==
Hi you added some information to ] - it was not in accordance with the ]. I know you weren't the only culprit who didn't conform to the MoS on that page but I am trying to educate people about the style guide. Thanks--]\<sup>]</sup> 01:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
:I disagree with some aspects of that MoS page; and it is clearly stated only to be a guide. ] 07:36, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for uploading File:Blazon of Champion de Crespigny baronets, of Champion Lodge (1805).svg
== Uganda YMCA ==


As you will have realised the 2nd and third quarters (2nd and 3rd azure three bars argent)look distorted.
Heck, I'm probably wrong. Sorry. What do you want to do about ] then? ] 10:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


A workaround on Drawshield that produces a better looking result is 2nd and 3rd barry of 7 azure and argent
:I'm actually typing this in the office of the Deputy Sec. of the UYMCA. Just hold off while I go on explaining to her! ] 10:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


You can see the result at https://www.wikitree.com/photo/png/Champion_de_Crespigny-17
::lol. No worries, I'm sitting on my hands. btw Uganda's a gorgeous country. I do my best for the tourism industry by telling everyone. ] 10:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


I wish the lions in the 1st and 4th quarters were not distorted but ...


Regards
] <sup>]</sup> 04:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)


:{{ping|Matilda}} Thanks for getting in touch about this image from 2021. I have uploaded a new version at ].
==Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion==
:There are various improvements that can now be made, as Drawshield develops. On the 2nd and 3rd quarters, the blazon is definitely azure three bars argent, for Vierville de Vierville. Using barrulets doesn't look good, so there is a limit to what I can do there.
:The old image is now marked "superseded" on Commons. I am gradually providing replacements for Drawshield images such as this one. ] (]) 05:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks - my father has managed to adjust the lions (I htink using Microsoft Paint) so an improved version at Wikitree:https://www.wikitree.com/photo/png/Champion_de_Crespigny-17-1
::Drawshield is great but there can be limitations
::Regards
::] <sup>]</sup> 05:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Yes. There are people here who produce better shields with software, but I have covered a lot of ground with Drawshield. ] (]) 06:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)


== CorruptionOfEconomics ==
Hello! I noticed that you have been a contributor to articles on ] and the ]. You may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - ]. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand Anglican-related articles! Cheers! ] 23:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


Thank you so much, Charles, for creating the article page.
==]==
Is there a reason the ArbCom is not touching any pages other than the proposed decision? --] (] - ]) 01:33, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


If you are interested as a "lead author" there is a compiled version of the text here https://globalartscollective.org/corruption-of-economics.htm#top, or I cand lend you a copy of the second edition, 2022, from Shepheard-Walwyn Ltd.
== WikiProject Contract bridge ==
:PS. I just seen the latest version. You '''are''' obviously interested...
] (]) 23:10, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::I will be able to get a library copy of the book. ] (]) 05:29, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
== "]" listed at ] ==
]
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 12#Pregnant man}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 17:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC)


== Seasons Greetings!==
Hi. You might be interested in participating in new ]. Regards, ] 10:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#00A86B; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:7px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);;" class="plainlinks">]]{{-}}
== ] ==
{{white|{{big|'''''Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Misplaced Pages in 2024! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2025! ♦ ] 08:56, 15 December 2024 (UTC)'''''}}}}
</div>


{{-}}
Charles, a few of your user subpages link to this article, which has now been created as a one line stub. Please improve it if you have time, otherwise it will likely be deleted. Thanks. ]]<b>]</b> 00:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
== Precious anniversary ==
:I've done some work on this. --] 21:11, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Six}}

Best wishes for the season, and beyond! --] (]) 08:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
== Buffett and Buffet disambiguation ==

] and ] were merged per Misplaced Pages policy on disambiguation (]).
Hence your recent edits to those pages will be reverted.

If you wish to propose a change to WP:DAB, please head to ]. Thank you. —] 08:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

:Well, you have lost the links I added to ], namely to] and ]. Would you like to show me where exactly on ] it says it is policy to do that? 'Misplaced Pages policy on disambiguation' is a broad area, isn't it? And much of the manual page is at most guideline. But nowhere, I think, will you find trashing relevant links as policy. --] 21:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

== Maggie O'Sullivan ==


Hi Charles. I noticed you did a bit of editing on the Maggie O'Sullivan article. Anyone who enjoys Maggie's work can buy me a drink any day :)! The pub seat is pulled out and waiting for you to sit down. Cheers! ] 13:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

==Jeremiah Burroughs==
I just added a page for the Puritan preacher ], and I saw that ] links to him. I had trouble discerning if you would actually be interested in the article or not, but I thought I would mention it here just in case. --] 20:23, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks for prompting me. The list of names is from a book I no longer have - possibly ''English Puritans'' of 1910 by John Brown. I look to have the red links gradually filled in, over time, as a test of the completeness of the coverage here over various areas. --] 08:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. I also added ] and have compared it against your list and added names as appropriate. (Some of the names on your list point to the wrong people or disambiguation pages, to influencers of the Puritans , and to their opponents, so not all were added.) --] 13:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

:Yes, my lists have random stuff on them - they are magpie collections. --] 10:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

== Discussion at Village pump ==

Please have a look at ]. Please help me to find the answer to my questions. Thanks.

== Alienus RfC ==

Charles, would you consider changing your vote to allow an RfC to go forward? Alienus does have many blocks, but a few recent blocks have been controversial, some of which were eventually overturned, hence the heated AN/I discussions. I do think an RFC is in order, as there are some legitimate concerns that need to be worked out. As a few users have noted, Alienus has been getting better as an editor, not getting worse. As such, I think it's premature to go straight into RFA. Al has indicated that he is willing to abide by the outcome of an RFC. I'd like to see that he is given that opportunity before resorting to arbitration. Tony has suggested he won't stand in the way of this proposal. ] 23:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

:There is clearly a problem of his ''not assuming good faith''. --] 09:45, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

::I understand that. But consider that a number of users have indicated he has been improving as an editor, not deteriorating. Also, ] has been making an effort to mentor him: ''I suppose there is a personal aspect to this as I have tried to play a mentor role to Al and he has responded as well as you could ever expect someone to do in the short time we have been in communication. He still needs to work on his civility occasionally but I genuinely think sometimes he has no idea how his comments will be taken by others. These are errors everyone in the world is guilty of and a successful community will educate people and help them avoid problems in the future. Throw in the international element of this project and you have even more issues as culturally we do approach things differently.'' In my mind, arbcom is a last resort, to be used when other avenues have been exhausted. Considering his recent improvements, and the questionable nature of the recent blocks (which would challenge anybodys good faith assumptions, imho), I hope you will reconsider. ] 16:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

:Well, we'll see what comes out of the Fred Bauder suggestion of throwing this to an RfC. That could generate some discussion: I haven't yet had anything further out of Fred on it, but I'm certainly flexible if he thinks there is a good case. OTOH an ArbCom case could result in making a mentoring role official, which also has its points. --] 16:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

::It seems it was all for naught, as ] has decided to leave rather than face arbitration. But thank you for considering my request. ] 00:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

== Human-computer interaction, hyphen vrs ndash ==

Hi Charles, I don't know if you can help clarify a query. ] has reciently been moved to ], I suspect that the original punctuation is correct, but I'm no expert on these things and you seem to know about these things. Comment welcome on ]. --] (]) 10:41, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
:I'd say the move was good ] 14:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)



== A favor to ask ==

As I am in the US for te forseeable future, would you mind dropping by a local pub in Cambridge (preferably the Six Bells on Covent Garden, near Mill Road, but any pub will do) and having a Greene King Abbot Ale for me? Not a drop of Real Ale to be found in these parts, I'm afraid. Cheers. ] <small>(])</small> 16:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
:Sorry, no can drink alcohol ... ] 13:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
::Hmm, then one of the following would suffice: have a proper curry from one of the curry houses on Mill Road, enjoy some good fish n chips, slather HP sauce on something, or have a proper Sunday lunch. If you find those to be impossible also, just look outside and appreciate the fact that Cambridge is one of the nicest places on earth and you are lucky enough to be there :) ] <small>(])</small> 14:27, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

== Another favour? ==

Could you put <nowiki>{{WPCD}}</nowiki> on the talk pages of key maths articles for me? --] ] 15:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

== Integer square root ==

Is it appropriate to include any fast, tested, working language-specific code to calculate the integer square root in the ] article? ] 20:04, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
==Sam Sloan announcement==
"I did not 'attempt' to post 100 chess biographies on Misplaced Pages. I did post 100 chess biographies on Misplaced Pages. All but one of them is still there. I merely waited until ] ], ] ] and Louis Blair were not looking and reposted them. I added a new biography yesterday and no I am not going to tell you where it is for fear that they will vandalize it again." - ] (samhsloan@gmail.com, NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255, 11 Jul 2006 05:23:13 -0700) http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.misc/msg/f245a0650c22f010?hl=en

"My Biography of Dimitrije Bjelica" - ] (sloan@ishipress.com, NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255, Sun, 16 Jul 2006 19:09:34 GMT)
http://groups.google.com/group/samsloan/msg/eefc91bb2aeda9d0?hl=en
http://en.wikipedia.org/Dimitrije_Bjelica
- Louis Blair (July 19, 2006)

== Arbitration ==

Hello, please help with a case about alleged adminship abuse by ], which had been rejected by three arbitrators before an administrator warned the accused one and undid part of his actions. The conflict is going on and I do not know how to find a solution. The only arbitrator who has sinced voted on the case is one who in my eyes is in a conflict of interest as he did a very similar block on me in the past that I think was abusive and that was undone by Theresa as it lacked any evidence of wrongdoing by me. I had suggested a change to the blocking policy but the discussion about it has up to now been inconclusive due to a lack of participants. ] 02:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==
I have a question on the ] that I'd like you to take a look at, since you're the only name on ]'s discussion page. ] 19:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

== Forest-fire models ==

Hi Charles—I noticed you moved the article on ]s. I should point out the rationale for having the plural when I created the article: there are several of these models, although one in particular gets a lot of attention (the Henley-Drossel-Schwabl one).

You're a more experienced Wikipedian than I, so can you clarify the policy? —] 07:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

:This is discussed at ]. There is a strong preference for the singular form. ] 16:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

== Lyrics Policy? ==

Hi! I'm fairly new to Misplaced Pages and trying to learn from my mistakes. I posted a lot of sample lyrics on the ] page, and you took them off because they were inappropriate. I realize now that I should not put on so many lyrics. But why did you remove ''all'' the lyrics? They were not the entire songs, only portions--single verses, or even sometimes a couple lines--and I think that portions illustrated Mr. Alsop's style sufficiently to add to the usefulness of the article.

I want to find out more about Misplaced Pages's policy, or the copyright policy in general, surrounding the use of lyrics, so that I can consider whether or not to reintroduce (far fewer) lyrics onto the page, or leave them off entirely, and so that I don't make a similar mistake in the future. Thank you. ] 07:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

:See ], under the Text section, for a delineation. ] 15:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

==Lamech==
Hey Charles, I saw you've edited ] before. I merged info from ] to it awhile ago because of the similarities between the characters, but I think "Lamech" is the most intuitive title for the article. Could you move it over?--] ]/] 00:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

:Never mind, ] already did it.--] ]/] 03:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

== Elliptic rational function ==

Hi Charles - Are you certain that ] are ] (names notwithstanding)? ] 02:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

:They involve ], certainly, and are some type of division polynomial for the cn function. They belong in the category, therefore. ] 05:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

== Gauss sums and Kummer sums ==

Hi Charles, how are you enjoying the membership of the ArbCom? I'm glad to see that you still have time left to work on the encyclopaedia according to your list of contributions. I'd like to ask you to cast a look at the new articles ] and ]. I don't know anything about advanced number theory, but a 1979 article in Invent. Math. on Kummer sums which you may remember from a previous life, seems to state that the expressions treated in ] are the same as those in ]. I asked for clarification on ] (who wrote the articles), but that editor could only say that indeed, something seems to be not quite right. Thanks. -- ] (]) 12:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

:The definitions aren't the best. The quadratic Gauss sum is kind of OK, since the definition is equivalent; but the Kummer sum one is wrong, I'd say. There is, as it were, a Fourier transform involved, and we have got on the wrong side of it; the quadratic case can mislead, since there is the phenomenon equivalent to the FT of a Gaussian again being Gaussian. ] 13:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

For a moment, I was scared that you expected me to rewrite the article. Fortunately, you did so yourself; many thanks. I'm pleased to see that you put encyclopaedic value above modesty. -- ] (]) 05:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

== M/z issue ==
Hi Charles, I wonder what made you vote against me on this issue? I still think that I am defending the official notation and that Nick is defending a minority POV. Could you give me some hint where, you think, I am wrong in this issue? --] 15:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

:I voted to hear the issue, not ''against'' you. ] 15:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

:: Ok, I did not realize this. I will try to get better educated on this arbitration procedure. Thanks. --] 16:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

== Aurelian Townsend ==
Hi Charles,

I saw in August 2004 you began the article on Aurelian Townsend, the English Poet. I would like to challenge the spelling of his name, which I believe should be Townshend.

Firstly, Aurelian's father has been identified as John Townshend, son of George Townshend who was the brother of Sir Robert Townshend (whose tomb is located in Ludlow Parish Church, spelled Townshend).

Secondly, Aurelian's descendents, known as the Hem-House Townshends which then splits into two main groups - The Townshends of Trevallyn House and the Townshends of Wincham Hall. All these descendants spell their name as Townshend.

Lastly, it is known that Aurelian Townshend received permission from Horatio Townshend to rename his step-son Robert Agborough to Robert Townshend (later Sir). FYI, Sir Horatio Townshend (1st Viscount Townshend) was the father of the more famous ] (a.k.a. Turnip Townshend) of Raynham Hall.

If, by some chance, you are interested in Aurelian Townshend you may also be interested in knowing that he was a colleague and Steward of ]. This appears to relate to Turnip Townshend's neice, Letitia Townshend who married Brownlow Cecil, 9th Earl of Exeter of Burghley House).

In 1643 Aurelian Townshend, for some reason, was granted the freedom of privilege of Parliament.

Interestingly, ] admired Aurelian's talents and used them in his court ]. This is especially interesting from an architectural point of view, for it is believed but not proved that ] was the designer of Raynham Hall begun by Horatio Townshend's father, Roger Townshend, 1st Bt, in 1619.

] <sup><small>]</small></sup> 15 August 2006

:It turns out that ] already existed, so I have merged the Townsend page into that. ] 15:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

==Giano - pour encourager les autres?==
The original quote is by Voltaire in Candide

Dans ce pay-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres.
In this country it is good to kill an admiral from time to time, to encourage the others.

-Applicable in many situations when a punishment far heavier than is warranted by the offense is imposed in a politically motivated, and fairly cynical, attempt to prevent others committing the same offense, and to deflect blame. <small>copyvio'ed in haste from http://www.zanthan.com/itymbi/archives/000851.html </small>

Is this really how you would have wikipedia treat a well respected, productive, 'non-problem' user?
I urge you to rethink your vote in favour of banning Giano at ]. Many thanks. --] | ] 15:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

:It was a considered opinion. I thought about it for a day. I like Giano. That however would be a bad reason to go on easy on him. ] 15:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:::*"I like Giano" - What absolute rubbish! - People like me make you feel very uneasy indeed - you are never sure which direction we are coming from - out of sight and out of mind is your solution to the problem. Isn't it?......I can see it quite clearly. Where as EE you can guide and mentor. ] | ] 20:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
::::I have not the slightest idea why you are saying any of this, if not to let off steam. I remember looking up ]'s violin teacher for you, and that's about the size of it all. ] 22:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
*......and, I'm sure Olga Rudge is eternally grateful to you. You seem to forget that we are not here for our own ends and egos, but to unite in writing an encyclopedia. Sometimes a few eggs get broken, and personalities clash. EE was a menace, she hindered the development of the encyclopedia. That is not the title of a debate it is a proven fact - sad but true. Yet you wish to ban me for standing up to her - why I wonder? - I wonder it very deeply in fact. You are presumably not stupid, you know my comments to her would be laughed out of a common court of law - you know your findings hold no water yet you behave irrationally and illogically. EE has used the language of the gutter to attack and threaten, I have just made people laugh to quieten her down. Now why would you find that more frightening than EE's behaviour - so you see I wonder very deeply indeed. ] | ] 22:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:::Seems you see no need at all to apologise, and would do the same again tomorrow. See below where I point out that there is no foundation for ''standing up'' to difficult users by 'hitting back'. That's not the way. I would very strongly advise anyone faced with a difficult user to keep their comments very tight and formal. Not jibes, but references to policy. You see what I'm saying. If you engage with someone who is quite likely to end up in a dispute, subject to our quasi-legal processes, you make it harder if you indulge in what you see as jokes at their expense. It muddies the total position, if you put yourself in a false position. It makes that much harder ruling on who's right and who's wrong. ] 09:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
::::*Spot on. I have repeatedly said I see no need to apologise, nor shall I - and, incidentally, to whom exactly do you feel an apology should be directed? - To EE? I'm sure half the encyclopedia is watching to see if you think that. For God knows how long Misplaced Pages's police force had the opportunity to stop EE and her antics - they did not. Having missed that boat it is now rather late for you to start handing out wise advice and telling us how the problem could have been solved. She was disrupting the Encyclopedia, I attempted to stop her - you and your colleagues did not even try, and she ran rings arownd the few admins who did attempt to control her. Now tell me where apologies should be coming from and directed. I am completely in the right, and yes I would do the same thing tomorrow. She is gone, and I am glad but she will be back and I look forward to seeing how you deal with her, in fact I can hardly wait. I shall look and learn. ] | ] 14:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

:::::So, the proposition 'Giano (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) has engaged in taunting of Eternal Equinox , , and ' has the support of six Arbitrators. Ir is a misconception to talk as if the ArbCom was a 'police force'. It rules on matters as and when cases are brought. I shall note for future reference that you would act the same way. It tends to strengthen my view, that people like you taking matters into their own hands is quite a serious issue. ] 14:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
::*Mr Matthews, please just answer the question "to whom should an appology be directed?" ] | ] 14:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

:::Thought I heard a door slam as you left. ] 14:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
::::Oh, I never slam a door - but I note your inability to answer the question. ] | ] 14:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

::Banning Giano, and Giano only (for I see you oppose banning Eternal Equinox) is an excellent idea, a real inspiration of Fred's, and I'm glad to see it getting some support at last. The users opposing it on the workshop page have surely reckoned without the ''in itself'' valuable effect of humiliating a conceited and touchy user (what do you mean, not a problem user?). That'll cut him down to size. Well, and make him (and me) leave the project, but what the hell, omelette, eggs, other pests like him will have learned a lesson for it. Anyway, to ''encourager'' EE is surely the main thing here. ] | ] 16:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC).

Hang on. You can say what you like to me here. But a one-month ban is a holiday, a one year ban is a maximum sentence. ] 16:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:Are you serious? A ban is a humiliation, not a holiday. 15 minutes would be too much. ] | ] 16:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC).

Oh, I'm serious. I've always been a hawk on behavioural matters. What does it take to make people hesitate before tapping 'Enter', on that just-the-nasty-side-of-witty remark? Hesitate as in count to ten, before entering something snide into the record of enWP, permanently. ] 16:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:::? You're answering the wrong question. "A one-month ban is a holiday"--"Are you serious?" ] | ] 17:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC).

That too. I had a compulsory month off recently when my PC was sick. ] 17:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:You choose not to understand me. Fine, I'm done on this page. ] | ] 17:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC).

::But a good reason would be that the case should be judged on it's merits, and the principle of ] should be applied. Especially in consideration of the thousands of excellent edits Giano has made for the encyclopedia, it seems <s>anachronistic</s> incongruous in the extreme to 'throw the book' at him for something which nobody really believes involved a serious death threat - merely a barbed satirical comment.--] | ] 16:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

You don't mean 'anachronistic', I think. ] 16:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

:you're right 'incongruous' - out of place (rather than time), that's it. Regardless, as I recall, Giano suggested EE try Fugu. Is this seriously being considered a 'taunt including a suggestion of death'? As made clear in the article on ] it is considered a delicacy in Japan. 'Since 1958, only specially licensed chefs can prepare and sell fugu to the public' and as a result the reports of the number of fatalities are small 1-100 per year. If I suggested to you whilst you were visiting ]'s ] farm that you try his peanuts - would this be a 'taunt including a suggestion of death', because anaphylaxic shock causes some 125 deaths a year in the US as a result of peanut consumption?

:The charge is badly written; really it wants to say 'taunting including a death threat' but cannot through lack of evidence - Giano did not say 'I wish you were dead' - the charge is written to ''allude'' to such threat, but cannot explicitly state it. The case should be tried on the evidence not vague allusions of impropriety. There is no evidence for a 'suggestion of death' only to try a risky delicacy.

:Pedantry aside, Giano's evidence states that he was really trying to catch EE out in a lie - after she had said she had departed for Japan. Caution him for taunting - as you will the others - but to ban him for this tenuous 'suggestion of death' is unfair and doesn't hold up to any scrutiny.--] | ] 18:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

One doesn't lobby arbitrators, but I deeply disapprove of this vote for the reasons discussed on the Workshop page to the EE case. So far as I am aware, there is a total absence of ArbComm precedent for a ban based upon a single edit intended as humorous, and rightly so. True "aggressive taunting with a suggestion of death" is to be found in another pending case, and if a point is to be made, it should be done in that case, not here. ] 18:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

::Precedent is not recognised as binding Arbitrators. And it is nonsense to say we can't start in on sanctions in some area if needed. The remit is to keep good order, not to erect some elegant bit of case law. ] 14:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

:Why doesn't one lobby arbitrators - what happened to 'justice must be done and seen to be done' - the process is going wrong here, and everyone should speak up.--] | ] 18:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

::I was expressing the view that the arbitrators' responsibility is to make an independent assessment of the facts and equities and not simply to defer to the number of comments they receive (notwithstanding which the number of uninvolved users who have weighed in against the proposed ban of Giamo is a significant datapoint). That was a bit of introductory throat-clearing, I suppose. Of course I expect that the arbitrators should consider the substance of arguments presented to them, or I would not have posted multiple times in this case, both here and on the Workshop page, even though I don't know Giano or anyone else involved from ]. I hope it is clear that I strongly urge the arbitrators who have voted in favor of the remedy in question to reconsider their positions on both the remedy and the underlying facts for the reasons expressed by Mcginnly and others. There is a pending ArbComm case involving "aggressive taunting with a suggestion of death" and it is not this one. ] 19:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

People can write here, naturally. But arbitrators do develop a thick skin. The only thing that gets through to me is suggesting that I have misread the diffs. The crack about ''fugu'' is quite nasty, in my view. I wish to discourage people from doing this, i.e. being unpleasant to others they see as problem users. ''There is no basis at all in our policies for being nasty to others, to hasten their departure, or to make sure they stay away.'' None at all. ] 19:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

:It's not clear at all to me that Giano's "just-the-nasty-side-of-witty" should ellicit a ban. The punishment seems totally inconsistent with the offence, particularly as the remark can on the one hand be taken as witty and on the other as nasty - there's some room for interpretation - and as such, shouldn't he be given the benefit of the doubt? --] | ] 19:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
::Let's see - who reads WP these days? Alexa says that nearly 5% of Web users, daily, are somewhere on WP. Do we want equivocal remarks? Do we want things that could cause offence, or be misinterpreted? Actually, no. We want people who are thoughtful about their use of language, and who eschew point-scoring, and so on. Basically, this place is not for kiddy attitudes. I think people who are careless should become more careful. ] 22:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:::I'm sure that with all this hullabaloo, your point regarding carelesness has been made. But to vote for banning Giano and not vote for banning EE is still a very peculiar stance. You won't ban EE because you think that a ban will be ineffective in preventing him or her editing under another sockpuppet, but you will ban Giano because you trust him to abide by your decision. Overt offensive behaviour is rewarded with a slap on the wrist, a single incident of an equivocal, exasperated outburst is punished in the most severe terms. Equivocal remarks, things that ''could'' cause offence or (heaven forbid!) misinterpretation aren't wanted in an ideal world, I'd also like to see an end to war and the loving unity of all mankind, but until my shot at ] I'll accept the fact that I'm unlikely to be able to change human nature. This verdict will be ineffective at changing peoples behaviour and will serve only to punish and alienate those who hold the project dear. Your tone is defiant to these arguments now and I know you won't change your vote. Someone wrote on the EE case talk page - 'Misplaced Pages is not a maiden aunts' tea party. We debate issues fully, frankly and robustly', to which we should add courteuosly. I hope you haven't taken any of this personally, but the issues here needed to be aired.--] | ] 12:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

::::Obviously my point has not been made long and hard enough - see Giano's sign-off comment above. I arbitrate rather than campaign. But I'm against vigilantism, when there are 100s of admins with proper powers and a brief to see policy is enforced here. I'm also against the undue vehemence, which people seem to think is a way of life around here. No reason for that, and far too much of it on the site, quite generally. ] 14:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Let's see...are there any other hawks on behavior issues? Hmmm. We could call on Bishonen or Geogre. Those guys are fairly tough about it. Oh, oops. They both think that Giano's behavior was witty rather than wounding. We could call on ALoan, Bunchofgrapes, Lar.... Rats! All of them, too. I don't like theology by "proof text" (citing a single verse as proof of a universal principle), and I don't like judgment by a single diff, either. If you weren't there, taking any measures at all to deal with Eternal Equinox, then you cannot assess the strength or mildness of any comment to him without reading ''all the exchanges.'' These go back about 6 months, cover dozens of name changes, threats by him, departures, stalkings, etc., and, amid all of that, you can take one witticism as proper for a month's sanction and a history of vote stacking, block evasion, and destructive editing as a case for mercy? That's astonishing. It's simply astonishing. I, too, would be willing to take very strong measures if this were to be implemented, and I'd like to think that there are few greater process freaks on the site than I. ] (the ] dude) 20:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, you would actually be wrong about wishing an accidental death by nerve poison on someone as an exhibition of wit. I can do without that. The rules on personal attacks are not for gaming, by wry metaphyical conceits or otherwise. And if it becomes fashionable to threaten arbitrators with all sorts of dire things, if they call them as they see them, matters on the site will not get better. My Sunday paper listed the 15 essential websites; and, hey, there was Misplaced Pages and a photo of Jimbo at #2. So, does this mean I should reckon on backing off from sanctions if a few buddies pile up on my User Talk? No, it means that Misplaced Pages has global recognition. Behaviour has to improve. People have to straighten up and fly right. ] 21:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

::Ah, yes, it's just a group of cranks and buddies! Nicely turned. The reason that what Giano said was not a threat and was wit is that it was literally true. I shouldn't have to explain this, but, apparently, misunderstanding is now so rife and so ''actionable'' that it's required. Giano recommended that EE try the blowfish, after EE said that he was going to Japan. That is not a death threat. It is a wish that EE have ], which is, as Giano said, delicious. The statement was entirely true, entirely non-threatening, and, in fact, it requires not only reading between the lines but reading between them ''with attribution of malice'' to get it as a threat at all. The straight reading is literally earnest. It is the secondary reading that shows the dark wish. There was no threat. There was only an inferring of threat made by a "third party" later. For you to rule that this inference is iron clad, apparent, and sufficient to block someone for a month is astonishing. Dismissing all of us who, ''without supporting Giano's statement or action,'' are appalled at Fred's staggeringly inappropriate suggestion as "few buddies" is one of those things that shows that, indeed, you ought to back off from enforcement if you cannot tell those who have made Misplaced Pages in the top 13 from those who keep it from being better. What this sanction would show, definitively, is that the current members of ArbCom cannot tell good from bad sufficiently to have our faith or trust. ] 21:25, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

:I suppose part of what bothers me about this situation is the seemingly ''random'' nature of the case in which two arbitrators have decided to make their "point." EE was a notorious problem user who was saved from a probable community ban only by her frequent changes of username and occasional disappearances. Had Giano made his comment to a user without a history of issue of her own, it would probably not even have warranted a short-lived thread on ]. Had EE pushed her luck just one step farther, the EE case would have been rejected under recent ArbCom precedent that cases are not taken simply to reconfirm community bans (as with ] and ]. Instead, Giano is in the wrong place at the wrong time and two arbitrators have voted to take a step that would drive several long-term and valued contributors off the project for a single intended-as-humorous edit three months ago. I do not believe that the proposed remedy here will ultimately pass, but am stunned that it is still under consideration. ] 21:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:P.S. after edit conflict: The odd thing here is I agree with CM on 90% of what he's written. Much behavior ''does'' need to improve. I just feel that he and Fred have picked a very odd starting point. I will add, however, (1) I am a relatively new user and not a "buddy" of anyone involved here, and (2) that no one to my knowledge has threatened any arbitrator with "dire things" (or with anything at all). ] 21:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I would say that threats to leave the project unless some or other votes is changed are, well, threats. I don't think I'm inconsistent in my own approach: I have probably voted for every personal attack parole available since January. I'm all for the use of limited bans. Arbitrators get to vote on the cases and proposals in front of them, and only those. This is not about process, and not about fallacious equations between users X and Y. It is not about precedent, and the interpretation of 'proportionality' is personal and has to respond to the needs of the project. ] 21:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

*Charles ''should'' know that I'm pretty hawkish about behavior. It's on wiki that I have urged Giano to temper his language. It's on wiki that I have insisted, over and over again, that everyone follow our process. However, WP:NPA is a policy that merely says that we don't make personal attacks. It has no sanctions adherent to it. Further, anyone is free to ask me what my "dire" actions are planned. I'd be happy to talk about them, as they're entirely in process as well. <shrug> It's beyond me that anyone can actually review the situation with EE and not see a very long block warranted or review Giano's ''single witticism'' and decide that, oh, yes, no doubt, that's just way cross the line: we must institute a block. ] 21:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
**It occurs to me that I should be explicit, given everything else: I have not intended any threats to anyone. I have stated that wider support would ''require'' dire responses, but dire is not to be construed as illegal, illicit, or inappropriate as much as "causing delays and normally unncessary actions." I have to say that, since telling someone to enjoy a hamburger could be understood as wishing them to eat raw meat and die from e coli infestation. ] 21:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually I've not discussed this with you. I spend most of my time on WP doing labour-intensive dab pages for surnames, not hanging out. ] 21:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

:Hi, Charles. I think I should post again despite my dignified exit, because I honestly think there's a misunderstanding. Nobody was threatening to leave the project unless your vote, or some vote, was changed, that I can see. I sure didn't, and would not, try to pressure you to change your vote (and would merely look a fool if I did). I said I'll leave if Giano *is banned*, which is a pretty theoretical contingency, looking at the arb voting so far. But I'm sorry I mentioned leaving at all, it wasn't even relevant. ] | ] 10:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC).

== Alexander Grothendieck ==

I see that you are interested in this article. Can you please help with the editor who keeps trying to deny that Grothendieck and other mathematicians are Jewish?

:I am very willing to help. I would not say that the evidence about Grothendieck's mother is at all clear. Cartier says one thing; but the AMS biography seems quite thorough and mostly points the other way. All we can do here is to summarise the evidence. That is why I made a separate section for the family background; under the NPOV policy we have to report fairly on this issue. ] 15:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

::Thank you for being so fair. The point I have been bringing forward is that aside from Cartier's article, which the Grothendieck Circle states has biographical inaccuracies, other sources seem to say that Grothendieck's mother was Lutheran. However, there are several editors who have decided to side with whatever Jinfo says, which strikes me as dubious given the fact that Jinfo provides neither credentials nor the name of any real life individual behind the project. ] 15:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

== ArbCom case ==

Charles, could you please read this: ]. Thanks. ] <small>] &bull; ]</small> 14:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

:Read it. I think your point is a stretch. ] 14:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks for looking into it. My concern is that the ArbCom is making a distinction between students/disciples of spriritual leaders, and ex-disciples that are engaged in active critical activities against their former spiritual guide, as it pertains to theit ability to edit neutraly about the subject. Wouldn't you agree that ''both'' will encounter challenges when attempting to edit articles about their association with the subject? Should not be both warned about it? ] <small>] &bull; ]</small> 14:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

::Also note that the ruling reads (my highlight):
:::"Editing an article concerning a guru you are a disciple of is governed by the principles in Misplaced Pages:Autobiography. Briefly, such editing is discouraged due to inherent bias. '''If you do edit, Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view, Misplaced Pages:Verifiability, and Misplaced Pages:No original research remain in full effect'''.
::Is it not the case that we ''all'' need to abide by ], ] and ]? Editing of articles in which we have vested interests (political, religous, economic and otherwise) is always difficult, but we have our policies to guide our editing, and these apply to ''all subjects'', including this one. Why making this distinction? ] <small>] &bull; ]</small> 14:39, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 12:53, 23 December 2024


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


This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Drawshield File:Blazon of Champion de Crespigny baronets, of Champion Lodge (1805).svg

Hi

Thanks for uploading File:Blazon of Champion de Crespigny baronets, of Champion Lodge (1805).svg

As you will have realised the 2nd and third quarters (2nd and 3rd azure three bars argent)look distorted.

A workaround on Drawshield that produces a better looking result is 2nd and 3rd barry of 7 azure and argent

You can see the result at https://www.wikitree.com/photo/png/Champion_de_Crespigny-17

I wish the lions in the 1st and 4th quarters were not distorted but ...

Regards Matilda 04:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

@Matilda: Thanks for getting in touch about this image from 2021. I have uploaded a new version at File:Escutcheon of the Champion de Crespigny baronets of Champion Lodge (1805).svg.
There are various improvements that can now be made, as Drawshield develops. On the 2nd and 3rd quarters, the blazon is definitely azure three bars argent, for Vierville de Vierville. Using barrulets doesn't look good, so there is a limit to what I can do there.
The old image is now marked "superseded" on Commons. I am gradually providing replacements for Drawshield images such as this one. Charles Matthews (talk) 05:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks - my father has managed to adjust the lions (I htink using Microsoft Paint) so an improved version at Wikitree:https://www.wikitree.com/photo/png/Champion_de_Crespigny-17-1
Drawshield is great but there can be limitations
Regards
Matilda 05:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes. There are people here who produce better shields with software, but I have covered a lot of ground with Drawshield. Charles Matthews (talk) 06:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

CorruptionOfEconomics

Thank you so much, Charles, for creating the article page.

If you are interested as a "lead author" there is a compiled version of the text here https://globalartscollective.org/corruption-of-economics.htm#top, or I cand lend you a copy of the second edition, 2022, from Shepheard-Walwyn Ltd.

PS. I just seen the latest version. You are obviously interested...

Janosabel (talk) 23:10, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I will be able to get a library copy of the book. Charles Matthews (talk) 05:29, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

"Pregnant man" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Pregnant man has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 12 § Pregnant man until a consensus is reached. LIrala (talk) 17:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings!

Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Misplaced Pages in 2024! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2025! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:56, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!

Best wishes for the season, and beyond! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)