Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:29, 22 April 2008

• Archive 1: 2005-10-07 — 2007-04-04

Greetings

I'll be checking this page about daily and will reply promptly. Thank you for taking the time to post. — MAR

Useful links

Editing The Five Pillars of Misplaced Pages How to edit a page Help pages Manual of Style Help desk Templates Citation templates Source templates Talk page templates

Wikepedia policies and guidelines Attribution No original research Neutral point of view Dubious sources Cite your sources Reliable sources Misplaced Pages Manual of Style Other

Misc List of colors Web colors Reverse DNS lookup Misplaced Pages:Requests for CheckUser Misplaced Pages:Rouge admin

Wikepedia Administrators' Noticeboards Incidents 3RR Fringe theories

Treatment of Bahá'í subjects in related articles

For anyone who's interested in collaborating, I'd like to try to address the treatment of Bahá'í subjects across various articles in Misplaced Pages. In reviewing some of these there appear to be, in my opinion, some questionable presentations. These seem to fall into these areas:

• Undue weight
• Weak or absent references
• Poor references
• Original research
• Flat-out wrong
• Tangential to the subject
• POV or hyperbole
• Needing a closer look

You'll find a complete list on the project page linked to above. Please feel free to log you own articles and/or grab a few and fix them.

Thank you

Thank you for wished me to come back. best wishes. --- ALM 17:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Ishmael

I was editing the page as you were editing. Take a look at what I've added and see if it's correct. -- Jeff3000 13:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Baha'i Stuff in Alchemy

not a problem. i've noticed a certain upsurge in Baha'i-related posts on the internet in general (most recently, a short article praising Baha'i for wanting an international language over at langmaker). i'm supposing that they are stepping up their online efforts. Whateley23 06:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the support

Thanks for the words of encouragement, they are truly appreciated. By the way, have you ever had a chance to see the Baha'i temple in Chicago? Its truly an amazing building, the only synthesis of Sullivanesque ornament and Middle Eastern aesthetic. Only in America do we have these beautiful fusions resulting in these diverse architectural hybrids as different groups 'import' the language of their sacred architecture into new surroundings. Incredible.--Orestek 00:42, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

WP from China

Look at me I'm in China editing Misplaced Pages! I'm leaving tomorrow but I thought I'd check anyway. Let's hear it for freedom of information! Wait... never mind, the Chinese WP is blocked still. Cuñado - Talk 02:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

A36 steel

Out of curiosity, what's your source for A36 no longer being the most common structural alloy?

I don't find it unbelievable, but I would like to know where the data is coming from. Thanks... Georgewilliamherbert 02:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Citing Sources

Thank-you for your Message. I appreciate it and will keep the idea in mind. Matarael 00:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Changing bibliographical reference in Baha'i divisions

Thanks for your note. I understand your concern and I have changed the reference on the nature of splits in religious traditions and particularly in the Baha'i Faith.--jofframes 09:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Somewhat related, shouldn't Baha'i divisions, be renamed to Baha'i sects? I realize that Baha'i forbids sectarianism, but this is what the article is about, no? <<-armon->> 01:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

"Baha'ism"

I edit this article with great diffidence, as it is so outstandingly good (not to mention the most important article in the whole of Wiki to me, as a Baha'i) - BUT...

I really think that this term (which is very highly POV) does not deserve a mention at all - the brief note I suggested explains that the terms concerned are unacceptable, without repeating the two patent untruths that the terms were "formally in use" (NOT so, at least in English) and that they are "fading from use" - also NOT true - their use is if anything increasing (as pejorative "deliberate error"), with increasing opposition.

I am certainly not going to go into revert war mode over this - but I would appreciate your comment, please! Soundofmusicals 09:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

John Esslemont

Hey MARussellPESE - hope things are going well with you. I've backed into doing some work towards the Esslemont article. I was doing some non-wikipedia work when I ran across the Esslemont family website which had/has a poor page about him. However they were very welcoming of the information from Misplaced Pages and Momen's article about him and have proposed a revision to their webpage. All well and good and nothing about Misplaced Pages really. I then began to beet the obscure parts of the web for information about Mr. Esslemont and compiled some tidbits in the talk section of Esslemont's page. One tidbit explicitly references him as someone knowledgeable enough about Esperanto as instructing Abdu'-Baha in Esperanto. I then saw a reference in the history of the article where you removed the category of Esslemont as an Esperantist. I'm not saying it's right or wrong but I think it's worth asking the question and since you thought it clear enough to remove the entry you might know more to bring to the case. So - comment?--Smkolins (talk) 03:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Architectural engineering

Hi Mike. I noticed you have contributed to the AE article and wonder if you can help clarify some issues I have. As a non-American engineer, the article does not tell me what this engineer is or does. The article takes a "matter-of-fact" approach to the description, but it gives no answers. I've also tried to stir some discussion on the talk page, but it is ignored (I wonder how much traffic it gets?). As a last resort, I've changed some of the article to remove unsubstantiated statements with hope someone with actual knowledge would fill in the gaps (simply undone twice as "I disagree- period"). I don't wish to start an edit war. As an American engineer, would you be able to shed some light on this confusing situation? I'm not looking for someone to "back me up"... I really don't have a stance but I'm interested in finding answers. Mariokempes (talk) 19:09, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Removing original research on "Bahá'í Faith and science: Life on other planets"

I am removing your interpretation of "creature" as "anything created" or "anything not self-existent". You are relying on an ambiguity of the English word "creature" that we have no reason to believe exists in the Persian or Arabic word that was used by Bahá'u'lláh. It is original research. Be careful in using a synthesis of different sources to make a point because that is also original research. Regards, -- Mavaddat (talk) 06:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Muhammad

I think it's in your interest to know that due to a petition, we're getting a huge wave of anons rushing the talk page in support of removing all pictures of Muhammad. You may want to come before a huge edit war ensues. Zazaban2 (talk) 22:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi there

Greetings. I scored a 37% (well, a little more than that, but I don't recall the rest of the decimals) on the geek test, by the way. Boo-yah.

All kidding aside, it's nice to know that there's another NU engineer out there who's not your typical apathetic engineer. And yes, I spent a great deal of time south of North Campus, though, since my advisor was Tai Te Wu (you may have heard stories about him), I usually went to Dean Holtgreive for advice instead. Hey, when you live in Plex (you might have called it Foster-Walker; I've found that there's no particular consenus, but "plex" is easier for me), you can't help but go south. And how could I leave out Chipotlé, my most favorite restaurant (franchise or not) ever?

Thanks for the congrats, and thanks for even considering my time in the Marines, even if it was short and in the Reserves. I'm not sure what you mean by "Rumsfeld's watch," but I assume that you're asking me if I was in the military while he was in the Cabinet, and the answer to that is yes, I was. I was not ROTC, but enlisted at the end of my senior year in high school (which was in 2001, shortly before 9/11). Being in the military (from boot camp and beyond) was an eye-opening experience, but I might have gotten more out of it had I actually been more careful about everything else I was doing as well (as you might guess, military service and a Northwestern education are difficult to juggle, and I had trouble doing that). Even so, I loved the Marines, and had things worked out better, I could have probably gone to OCS and made a great officer too.

Re:User:Thamarih

The page in question has not been protected. If you have evidence of sockpupeteering, and wish to post such a warning on his user page, I will not stop you... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Maitreya

It's obvious that User:Thamarih is not going to stop deleting your material from the Maitreya page. So, I have placed a vandalism warning on his page. I will place a new level of vandalism warning each time he vandalizes the page until he reaches the limit. I will then report him to the admins in charge of blocking vandals. It appears he has been blocked 3 times already. I have a feeling that he will be blocked indefinitely this time. Just thought you might like to know. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 00:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I Wholeheartedly Agree.....

...with your sentiment about Wiki. I have been a member for about 6 months or so, and from what I have seen, if I were a teacher, I would not accept any type of research or essay that relies on WP for information. Some of the edits I have made have been either reverted or flat out removed because (and this is just a perception on may part) the editors removing/reverting are pushing an agenda.Hx823 (talk) 20:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

CFD

Hi, you previously commented on this CFD, and a similar one is up for deletion here. Please comment when you get a chance. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 06:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Side Project

Allah-u-Abha! Thank you for inviting me to be included in your project. I will gladly participate, but I would like to mention that I have come to be of the opinion (largely because of this) that perhaps there should be a Bahá'í Faith Wikiproject that would encompass this capacity as well as others.

I would also like to thank you personally for the dedication and effort you have put into wikipedia articles in particular expanding the coverage of articles pertaining to the faith. I am quite firmly of the opinion that in the long run that Misplaced Pages shall become a truly dominant source of information to which people will turn, and that through these efforts that perhaps those truly hoping to learn about the faith shall be assisted. May you go in God's care. Peter Deer (talk) 04:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

WARNING!!!

These are hilarious! Thanks for the hearty laugh. The funniest being the double standard that you lavishly bestow upon your fellow editors. I'm sure the Incident Review Board will find it compelling that you believe you can snidely reply to my challenge for a reference with sarcasm, but me calling you Mr. Smarty in response is a personal attack. You think you have the right to call my reasoning puerile (you're spelling that wrong,btw), and turn around and extol me to be civil for how I respond? Saying you made something up is an attack? YOU DID MAKE IT UP!!! I didn't realize that was a valid debating technique, or that I wasn't allowed to point it out.

Mike, you're hardly living up to these lofty ideals you expect from the rest of us, so spare me the lectures. You have the nerve to respond to me in a discussion with snide sarcasm, and turn around and issue threats and warnings on my talk page for my equally sarcastic reply? You're being absolutely hypocritical about this. If you squint your eyes and look closer at these last few discussions we've had together, you might notice that the exchanges are always confrontational from both sides; yet your sarcasm is justified, while mine is uncivil? What a farce.

Look Mike, my primary interest, namely seeing that our views aren't entirely sanitize from Misplaced Pages, are increasingly being chipped away and vanishing. After more than two years of revert-warring with Cunado, and being challenged and spoken down to by the likes of you, who could be expected to assume good faith? A better question is why should I care, when you don't extend the courtesies you demand from others? If you intend on dealing with my concerns by intentionally mis-characterizing them in your responses, ignoring and not responding to direct challenges to your reasoning, and consistently speaking down to me with an heir of superiority, then you can expect more of the same from me.

If you really want to make a case to have me blocked on how I choose to call you out for being disingenuous by making things up, then you have my blessing. I find it utterly amusing what you choose to define as a personal attack; I define them as stating facts. By all means go to the Alert board with me describing your repeated unfounded "warnings" as whining in my talk page edit summaries, and with me calling you a "smarty-pants" while responding to your demeaning sarcasm. Oh the humanity! I'm sure the damage I've done to the Wiki-community has been irreversible. I'm sure to be banned for life. If nothing else I do want to thank you for the hearty laughs your "warnings" have brought me. Cheers. _{Baha'i Under the Covenant} 06:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You're not supposed to delete things off your own talk page. I got in trouble for that once. You can archive it if you don't want to see it or if it's bothering you. If you don't know how I'll do it for you. Also, referring to my response to your comments on my talk page as vandalism is considered uncivil. Consider this a warning. _{Baha'i Under the Covenant} 03:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

This is your 2nd warning. The policy for user talk pages says content may only be removed by making arequest for oversight.. Curious why you would be so anxious to excise this content? Its merely a response to what you yourself posted on my talk page. How can it be vandalism to respond to something you initiated? _{Baha'i Under the Covenant} 04:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)