Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:47, 28 July 2009

Archives

January 2008 | February 2008 | January 2009 | February 2009 | March 2009 | April 2009 | May 2009 | June 2009 | July 2009

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

I use WikiBiff to monitor my watched pages. If I leave a message on your talk page, I will watch the page. When you reply, WikiBiff will pop up an alert letting me know!

Julian and Ageism

Hey Mike,

Just as an FYI, the reason why Ageism is such an issue with Julian is more a factor of Julian's previous stances on the subject as compared to his actually being under the age of 18. Age was not an issue just a few months ago when we promoted another user who was under the age of 18. The reason why it is different here is because Julian is one of the most vocal voices against ageism. He is the admin I quoted in the essay on Ageism who compared ageism to racism. A claim he made on several occassions. He also made the same statement about sexism. His issue thus isn't that he is under 18, but rather that he is one of the loudest voices on the subject. And the monster of the debates that stem from the subject, he's often at their core.---Balloonman 01:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 01:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

La Coka Nostra

Thanks for the protection of La Coka Nostra but its not really helping. The guy who was hiding behind a rotating IP address is now logging in and continuing the personal attacks and aversion of our editorial policy.  :( JBsupreme (talk) 03:45, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, not a whole lot I can do at the moment, as I don't see an explicit 3RR violation there. I've put the page on my watchlist, so I'll see if anything further happens with it. However, as a side note, edit summaries like this and this are inappropriate (the latter because all it does is goad them on...don't goad them on). Mikaey, Devil's advocate 04:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

On second thought, given the circumstances (e.g., registered users are involved, something I didn't pay that close of attention to the first time around), I've upped it to full-protection. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 04:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

New histmerge list

• See Misplaced Pages talk:New histmerge list#Cases tagged with Template:Nahmc but should be histmerged. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Mill Hill external links

Several unregistered users keep adding external links to Mill_Hill#External_links which i think are spam. Could you have a look at the history and see if we can do something about it. Grim23 (talk) 12:01, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 18:19, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

De Baca County

What happened here: were there parallel De Baca County and DeBaca County articles? Thanks for fixing it, whatever was going on. Nyttend (talk) 16:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Back in November of 2006, someone started De Baca County, New Mexico by cutting and pasting the text from DeBaca County, New Mexico, and then turning that page into a redirect. What I did was a history merge, which merges the histories of the two pages together, so that all of the history of the page is in one place, and all of the authors are properly attributed. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 17:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Tothwolf

The user in question has "disinvited" me to post on his talk page but continues to post on mine. He's trolling me and he can go fish. Yworo (talk) 02:30, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, missed that one. Have you thought about seeking an outside opinion on the matter? Mikaey, Devil's advocate 02:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Uh, there really is no "matter" at all, if you mean the POV pushing by Grandscribe, something with which Tothwolf is completely uninvolved (as I said, he's trolling). That case is pretty cut and dried. There is no problem whatsoever with describing Linux distributions as Free software. The problem is the context in which GS is doing it. There is a template which has a source model field. Source models are primarily open source and closed source. A source model only has to do with whether the source is released or not. Another related but distinct property of software is its license. The terms public domain, free software and proprietary software describe the license. These are license models, not source models. GS misrepresents me as removing material without support, but in reality GS is adding without either support or citation. He's also been making POV changes to related templates, etc. So... whatever... Yworo (talk) 02:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

P.S. If you look through the history of say Ubuntu, you will see that GS has been for days (weeks?) adding this, only to have one or another editor remove it with the explanation that it is not a source model. He's not attempted to discuss it on the talk page, but simply puts it back the next day, and the next, and the next, despite a clear consensus (based on the number of different editors reverting him on different days) that the placement of the term is not appropriate. Yworo (talk) 02:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'll tell you from what I've seen that you both are seeing each other as trolling the other one. I suspect, since you both seem to have similar interests, that you both have a lot of the same pages watchlisted, but Tothwolf sees it as you stalking him and edit warring on pages that he's worked on. I'd like for the two of you to be able to cooperate, and Tothwolf has admitted to me that he sees a lot of good edits in your contribution history, so I'm looking for ways to try to mend the differences between the two of you -- that's why I suggested using 3O to help settle those disputes. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 03:05, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd prefer he just leave me alone. Yworo (talk) 04:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)