Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:36, 15 March 2008

• If you have copied text to which you own the copyright: Please read the guide to donating your own copyrighted material to Misplaced Pages. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest.

• If you have been given permission to reuse someone else's text: Please read the guide to requesting and formalizing permission to use copyrighted works on Misplaced Pages. As above, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest.

• If you were attempting to rename an article or create a disambiguation page: Compliance with the GFDL requires that the article be actually moved rather than copied with cut-and-paste to preserve editing history. Please tag the new copy with {{db-move}} and an administrator will be able to assist you.

• If the original source was itself a copy of Misplaced Pages text: Reusing the text is probably okay, but make sure you link back to the original article to comply with the GFDL. If the site CSBot found is a Misplaced Pages mirror, you may want to notify me so I can add it to the list for the future.

• If the original source is in the public domain: Reusing the text is okay, but you almost certainly want to attribute it with an appropriate template (such as {{DANFS}} or {{1911}}); this will cause CSBot to leave the article alone.

  If you did attribute it with an appropriate template, but it was still flagged as a copyvio, then it's probable the bot does not know the template you have used. You might want to tell me on this page so I can add it to the list.

Otherwise, remember that text found on other web pages is copyrighted by default. Unless there is an explicit permission on the page (or site) allowing reuse without conditions (or under the GFDL) you can not use that text in a Misplaced Pages article!

Thank you!

((older cruft/undated messages moved to User talk:Coren/old stuff))

Lane Bryant

Since Lane Bryant, Inc. and Lena Himmelstein Bryant Malsin are two seperate entities, I split the page. I also added more information from other sources (such as the census). betselu 2-4-08

Xtrakter

Hi There,

You have deleted our page from Misplaced Pages, we are a market utility and are entitled to coverage.

We accepted that copying and pasting text was not sufficient so the section was amended and now you have blocked it again.

Please resolve this situation or provide agreeable edited text.

User: CapitalMarket

Nabari no Ou

Coren, the contents of the Nabari no Ou page in Misplaced Pages does not include a substantial copy of: http://www.xanadu-dreams.net/timcampi.html Your bot should take this into consideration.

RMLRAG212 (talk)

Lough Gara

• Lough Gara

I have got premission from the webmaster of http://www.ogara.org/ to use this information as it relates to Monasterdaen OzEire (talk) 15:16, 6 March 2008

{{NCI-cancer-dict}}

Your bot is still not registering the presence of the {{NCI-cancer-dict}} template. Please fix it! -- The Anome (talk) 13:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

SikhiWIki

Dear Coren

I am sorry to say that this is my second message regarding the above wiki. SikhiWiki is a Web-based, free content encyclopedia on Sikhi and that material at this site is copyleft and GFDL licence.

Please can you re-programme your bot to recognise Sikhiwiki as such and stop it marking articles with the template.

Many thanks, Hari Singh (talk) 21:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

BJ Orion

Hello Coren, http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Bj_orion The copyright text about the web page was removed. So would you please remove the text you left on the above link ? Thank you.

(talk)Bj orion (talk) 01:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Block of MM and SH

Gutsy call :) You may want to leave a note on the talk page of the RfAr's proposed decision to note your action. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 03:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

g'day coren

I saw your post about Mantan et al - and per the above, I also wondered if I could ask you to pop a note onto the relevant talk pages (user and RfAr maybe?) - really just echoing what you've already said at the noticeboard... it actually really helps in keeping the temperature down at a difficult time! - thanks for thinking about it, and best regards - Privatemusings (talk) 03:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I need to go to sleep, so for a few hours my note on AN will have to do— but I'll certainly keep an eye on both as soon as I return to conciousness. — Coren  03:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

sleep well! - (if you do take two sec.s to drop a talk note before dropping off, that would be cool, otherwise upon return will have to do!) - cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For going through with it. Durova 03:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

• There isn't a barnstar big enough. Put your seatbelt on... Noroton (talk) 03:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I hereby present you with ...

... These Baoding Balls, renowned in China and wherever Chinese products are sold, in grateful recognition of your recent block. Baoding balls are a tool for injury recovery or as an exercise tool to improve manual dexterity and strength, according to the Misplaced Pages article I stole this pic from. I expect you'll be typing more for a little while after this block, and therefore these might come in handy. Although somehow I get the impression you have a pair already, they do get banged up with frequent use, so please consider these replacement brass balls. Noroton (talk) 04:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll go one better. ~ Riana ⁂ 11:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for clarification

Please comment at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#Request for clarification: Mantanmoreland. Jehochman 13:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Shego

Back in January you closed Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Wade Load as merge all articles. Since then the article Shego has been reverted to its former state despite there being pretty much no change from its pre merged form (see for a direct comparison). I do not think any of the original issues have been addressed, the article presents no reliable independent secondary sources, it is full of original research and it does not meet the general notability guideline. On top of that the article Kim Possible is relatively short (13Kb) and the (proposed) notability guideline for fiction clearly says that articles on non-notable topics should be split of for size reasons. No effort was made by interested parties to develop the list into which the character information was merged (List of characters in Kim Possible) and I think that reverting the article as it was goes against consensus. I have in the past tried to discuss the issue with opposing users but I feel that we have come no closer to an agreement through it. As closer of the original AfD I was wondering what your thoughts on the matter were. Guest9999 (talk) 18:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

About the tag on Early languages, it's in that page from Misplaced Pages. Regards.--Damifb (talk) 15:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

CBRT (TV)

hi i just moved the article CBRT to CBRT (TV) and made the original CBRT as Disambiguation, i received an auto message from CorenSearchBot telling me that the article is duplicated (when i was working on it)and asked me to "drop a note" about it here.--MJKubba|talk|contributions 22:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Zedla RfA

Sorry for the delay, just want to say a quick thank you for your support and participation in my RfA which passed & closed earlier this week. – Zedla (talk) 03:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

MTP-II_MATER

may i ask to remove the deletion flag from the article MTP-II_MATER. this text is the description of a 10 year old eu-project, which was copied to various web pages of all partners and which is not copyright protected at all. thank you Hannes Grobe (talk) 09:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Mikiel Gonzi and Michael Gonzi

The similarity existed for a few seconds while i was moving articles of two relatives who share relatively the same name, so I removed the similarity tag. Tsum60 (talk) 10:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Please undo it now

Please unblock him immediately. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

As I said on the AN/I, I will do so with swiftness if he just agrees to not use the tools until this is cleared up. I will state so on his talk page as well. — Coren  19:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I see someone else has already done it. Take my advice will you. Blocking an established user is a serious matter and should be done only as a last resort and with due care and consideration. Blocking hastily is itself an abuse of admin power. Note that being blocked does not stop an admin using the admin tools! Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

No, but it makes it an immediately unsysopable offense. However, I strongly diagree that my block was over hasty - there should be no wiggling room or allowance for using the tools in a content dispute. At all. Ever, and with no exceptions. — Coren  20:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

The are several admins on the noticeboard who disagree. You have to work with the community. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:04, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure, admins who agree with the point Arthur was trying to make. I stand by my block as appropriate, backed up by policy and common sense, and will defend it if my involvement is put in question. I don't beleive that's required at this time; the community does indeed appear to have decided an unblock was appropriate and I will respect that as well. — Coren  20:09, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

here should be no wiggling room or allowance for using the tools in a content dispute—I've never known it to be a blockable offense, however! El_C 20:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I can think of no behavior more destructive to the encyclopedia. — Coren  20:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't be so bloody pompous! That block stays in his block log for ever. His error will always be with him. Your's you can lose. Think on that. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:12, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

You are making three presumptions which are not borne out by facts. (a) His block message prejudges his behavior (I was careful to write it so that it would not) (b) His error *should* be ignored and (c) I have made one of comparable magnitude or severity. If it makes you feel any better, I will gladly archive this exchange and keep a handy link to it so that anyone who wishes to scrutinize my actions has no trouble finding it. — Coren  20:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

No need for that.I just want you take more care over your blocks. Note that I don't think his error should be ignored. I do however think it should be delt with by talking rather than blocking. There was no urgency here. You could have taken the matter to AN/I first then blocked if others agreed. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I was not involved in the dispute, so I was able to look at it from an outsider's eye. What I saw was (a) apparent abuse of deletion in a content dispute, (b) continuing dispute and (c) threats to continue using admin tools (blocking) in that dispute. Acting to stop further action immediately, and bringing the matter swiftly to AN/I seemed to me to be the most straightforward and obvious reaction. — Coren  20:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that tense tone is helpful, Theresa. Anyway, we all know my block log wins! El_C 20:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm just saying that we all see the occasional use of admin tools in content disputes (say, once or twice a month), and usually it just gets reversed fast, but does not result in a block. I'm only describing what the conventions strike me as. You're fairly new admin, right? El_C 20:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Fairly, yes. Just a couple of months. And I must disagree very strongly with any kind of slack given to admins in such cases, even if it's traditional to do so. We have no authority, and have been given a great deal of trust by the community. It is entirely possible that Arthur having "strayed" was eminently forgivable (we are all humans), but he should not have been allowed to stray further, as it were, before some sort of review had taken place. — Coren  20:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

You do know that blocking yourself is an abuse of admin tools! I've a good mind to punish you for having such a long block log ( Hmm what can I do?) To Coren, sorry about my tone earlier. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not good. :/ El_C 20:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I knew what I was about to do would rock emotions, and I was ready for the heat. The Right Thing (and let's agree that while you may not have agreed, my position is entirely reasonable shall we?) is rarely the Popular Thing. Anyways, I don't hold grudges, and even if I did it would take much more than an understandably curt tone to make me dream of revenge and vendettas.  :-) — Coren  20:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Fun fact: for instance, I'm pretty sure I once was in a dispute with El_C, but for the life of my I couldn't even tell you what it might have been about.  :-) — Coren  20:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh? It's not coming to me. I don't think you blocked me! Anyway, I've seen my shares of disasters strike when one's Good Thing turn out to be other's Bad Thing, or tang, even... That's why, I feel, that more-often-than-not, discussion is key. El_C 20:35, 15 March 2008 (UTC)