Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:24, 3 October 2008

Welcome!

Hello, Collect, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Prescott Bush

Hi. I'm pleased that you finally chose to edit this page using non-conversational, non-inflammatory language. I don't personally know the truth of the skull story, and it's possible we may never know -- this is why we used the word "alleged". There are many "scurrilous" charges about public figures out there and sometimes, Misplaced Pages has to report the charges without benefit of knowing the truth or having a court judgement. This is when we point to credible sources outside Misplaced Pages. Finally, please be aware of Talk page etiquette. It is perfectly valid on Misplaced Pages to organize Talk pages so that conversations are together. I have not deleted anything you have put on the page, I have simply moved it to the conversation marked "Geronimo skull". See Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines for the advice given to all Wikipedians. Making personal attacks on other editors is also a sure way to diminish your credibility, so don't do it, in your own self-interest. --Dhartung | Talk 05:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Anchorage, Wasilla, and the Second Bridge to Nowhere"

I see you added "although Wasilla is not near the bridge" to "to spur development and provide an alternate route between cities such as Anchorage and Wasilla"

"Near" is kind of a weasel word, but I get your point. How would you feel about changing the sentence to:

"to spur development and provide an alternate route between cities such as Anchorage (5 miles from the bridge) and Wasilla (40 miles away)" That way we don't have to argue about near or far.

I consider 40 miles to be "not near."Collect (talk) 20:00, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry to see you that you've come to a point where you can no longer view some of these issues with an open mind. I really think you're taking the dynamics here a bit personally. Aprock (talk) 02:49, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Huh? 40 miles is "near" to you when it would add time, distance and costs to a commuter using the bridge as a link between Anchorage and Wasilla? Did you read the tollroad cite I gave? Thanks! Collect (talk) 03:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

In making your edits you removed a sentence that has nowhere been disputed on the talk page at any time.

In 2006, Palin ran for governor on a "build-the-bridge" plank in her platform, attacking "spinmeisters" for insulting local residents by calling them "nowhere" and urging speedy work on Alaska's infrastructure projects "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist."

I assume it was accident. Care to stick it back in?GreekParadise (talk) 00:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

As you ought be aware, the changes made by vandals included material in that section. Including the "spinmeisters" stuff, which had been removed quite awhile ago now. Did you miss that one? We in consensus decided to keep the section short. Adding images and editorial material back in does not make the section short. Is this a difficult concept? Collect (talk) 23:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC) (PLEASE sign on this page!)

Collect, at NO time was the spinmeister quote EVER removed. It has been there consistently for two weeks. Please show me a single editor that removed it prior to you at any time. I'd genuinely like to see it. I'll revert. If you have a problem with saying that Palin once supported the bridge, let's have a source off. I'll give you 1,000 sources. You show me one. GreekParadise (talk) 00:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I know she supported getting the money, which was the primary reason for having am appropriation. Whether "spinmeister" is actually of any importance, I would demur. Collect (talk) 01:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

That's HER quote. Please read the source and then tell me if you think it should be removed pre-emptorily without any discussion whatsoever.GreekParadise (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 02:09, 20 September 2008 (UTC).

WP practice is opposed, as far as I can tell, to using single word quotes from articles. I would think something more than single words would be more acceptable to me at least. Collect (talk) 02:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Eponym

Could it be ...epithet--Buster7 (talk) 23:45, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that is quite it either ... nor is nickname right. I am sure we will find it, though! Collect (talk) 00:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Demonym? (I know, that's a latin/greek combo, but it sounds a lot better than "populonym") Homunq (talk) 01:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, in this context, epithet is pretty darn good. Homunq (talk) 01:17, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Demonym sounds rather demonic ... I am looking for a word which more conevys "newspeak" as a renaming form ... Collect (talk) 01:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

You're Welcome

No problem. I'm happy to put in my two cents. I've been silently reading these discussions for weeks now, more fascinated than anything by the sudden interest in my state, (not just the usual questions about ice bears and igloos :) ), but after seeing that same topic brought up time and time again, I felt it was time to step in with a fact or two. I can't always be near a computer, but if I feel I can be helpful to a discussion I will. If you have any specific questions about Alaska, feel free to ask. Thank you for standing up for the facts. Zaereth (talk) 18:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. (Not sure if I should respond on your talk page or mine ... ) Yes, the push on each side to insert every little rumor just amazes me, but somehow the truth becomes apparent doesn't it, thanks to people such as yourself. I'm more than happy to point a finger toward the right direction if I can. It's easy to overlook simple details if you've never been here. For instance, many people I know in Wasilla are against the Knik Arm Bridge, (Don Young's Way? What's that? Is that something like the Bush Doctrine? :-) ), because tens of thousands of tourists flocking to Denali National Park every year would be able to bypass Wasilla altogether. But, of course, that's not well documented and counts as original research.Zaereth (talk) 23:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I think perhaps there should be a special "original research" site -- it would give pause to those who regurgitate every internet rumor mill. And I have decided "Don Young's way" will be as well known as "Yankee Division Highway" (the Connecticut Turnpike). Collect (talk) 20:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Just In case you missed it

Retreived from Sarah Palin talk:

Collect..just yesterday you said my claim of paid operatives at work here was, let me think, o yea....reprehensible and that I was not editing in good faith. My claim was, as it turns out, verified by this 44. My POV is that Kelly and ferrylodge were editing the Sarah Palin article in mid-July---5 weeks before she was a twinkle in the eye of Americans. Ok....maybe they are not paid. But someone would have to have blinders on to not realize that this article needs to be controlled by the Republicans. And, the Democrats need to do their best to counter. It only makes sense in this CyberAge. Perhaps you don't agree. But you needn't condemn me and call me heinous. War is reprehensible and heinous. I edit in good faith!!--Buster7 (talk) 03:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC) --Buster7 (talk) 12:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Show me where I said anything opposed to WP:AGF. I did state that it was improper of you IN TALK to claim that editors were paid by the Republican Party. That statement stands. Please do not misstate my clear statement, which did not ascribe anything about you other than what WP:AGF requires! Collect (talk) 12:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Liebman sock

Liebman wrote:

"In view of your plans to possibly retire, a Cubs-White Sox World Series (or any Series involving the Cubs) would be agood way to go out --Davey Collect (talk) 21:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)"

You wrote:

"Note that someone is apparently seeking to either stalk me, or just annoy me. The above "user" is someone's sockpuppet, and ought to be slapped down. Thanks! Dave Collect (talk) 11:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)"

Unless you've got other examples, I don't think anyone's trying to annoy you, and they've already been slapped down, but when someone edits in the New York Public Library system, it's hard to totally choke them off. This latest nonsense is either User:Ron liebman, a banned user who keeps turning up using that schtick, or it's (ironically) someone imitating Liebman. Baseball Bugs 12:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I would, moreover, note that some of the editors involved in Sarah Palin have exchanged messages calling me "Dave Collect" in a disparaging manner which is what aroused my suspicions. Collect (talk) 13:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Unless someone is consciously imitating Liebman (which would certainly be a waste of one's precious time), then I think it's just a coincidence. But your heightened sensitivity to it is understandable. It could be worse. At least your first name isn't "1-800-" Baseball Bugs 22:58, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Muthee Palin

I added a comment for you, and moved thread to my own talkpage, so as not to junk up this one. And I added a section on "Collecting". 14:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

"Stalking"?

I check out PB's BLP and its talk pages to see if Bush 43's family history is being sanitized in preparation for his departure, I reply to another editor there--and I'm "stalking" you? (Hm. When you jump to the conclusion that it's you who are the subject of a passing editor's scrutiny, it implies an inflated sense of self-importance and/or a guilty conscience.) You will recall that my note at Talk:Prescott Bush was in reply to 84.30.88.83's "Misplaced Pages becomes more laughable by the minute." 84.30.88.83 could be forgiven for thinking you have just corroborated the observation. For future accusations please use my talk page. And for entertainment's sake, please maintain the same high standard of absurdity. :~) Regards, Writegeist (talk) 20:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Prescott Bush's page is being heavily vandalized, and your post unfortunately came in at the precise same period of time. Thank you most kindly. Collect (talk) 20:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Sarah Palin

Edit summaries like this one are entirely inappropriate. Please curb your tone when dealing with other editors and please stop edit warring. Grsz 01:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you should look at the edit summaries from the past in Talk: Sarah Palin. And kindly note that my edits are uniformly made with an attempt to find common ground, not to take over a page. My sole effort has been to make this article conform tothe highest possible standards. Thank you most kindly. Collect (talk) 01:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I removed your references Palin support of the bridge to two Democrats because it was wrong. Two Democrats were interviewed for the article, but they make no reference to the governor. Grsz 01:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

The only ones cited in the article were the two Democrats.c EVERY other Democratic official site only claims June 2008. I suggest that this is moot as the Palin article is now under GP's control, as he desired when he got blocked for edit warring. I won;t play that game. Good luck when he adds the other silly stuff which he got blocked on in the past. The Palin article is now going to be the laughing-stock of WP. Thank you most kindly. Collect (talk) 02:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

You aren't getting what I'm saying. The two interviewed don't mention Palin. They say other things, but the artictle in it's own prose sources that she still supports "with reservations." Grsz 02:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

THE ONLY TWO MENTIONED ARE DEMOCRATS, PALIN IS NOT QUOTED. Is this abundantly clear? The article does not claim any source from Palin. At all. Clear now? Collect (talk) 02:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

1. ^ Tom Kizzia (2008-08-31). "Palin touts stance on 'Bridge to Nowhere,' doesn't note flip-flop". Anchorage Daily News. Retrieved 2008-09-08.: "Congress eventually removed the earmark language, but the money still went to Alaska, leaving it up to the administration of then-Gov. Frank Murkowski to decide whether to go ahead with the bridges or spend the money on something else."
2. Dilanian, Ken (2008-08-31). "Palin backed 'bridge to nowhere' in 2006". Gannett News Service. Retrieved 2008-09-08.
3. "Where they stand (10/22/2006)", Anchorage Daily News, August 29, 2008{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)