Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:36, 24 November 2009

hither (2012) | lither (2013) | auver | dauver | dic

Please click here to post a new message. You'll be joining these people. If you leave me a message on this page, I will reply on this page; if I have left you a message on your talk page please reply there, I will be watching it. There's no need to leave one of those ugly {{talkback}} messages. You can email me if you wish, however I prefer most wp communications to remain on-wiki and also only access this address between about 20:00 and 23:59 Zulu on (most) weekdays; response may be slooooooooow. This page was last edited by Jack Merridew.

Nandamuri Balakrishna

Hi pablomismo...I have sited references for many of the statements in nandamuro balakrishna ( http:http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/button_italic.png//en.wikipedia.org/Nandamuri_Balakrishna), But why are you deleting the whole article, If you feel something is biased, please let me know, i will try to get the referece for that.Please let it have atleast biorgraphy and filmography, which cant be biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.88.33.254 (talk) 13:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Nobody's deleting the whole article. NBK is a notable actor, and deserves an article.

However - his fan site is not a reliable source, neither are blogs, nor is the likes of Telugupedia, or the IMDB. So we then have a problem - we need to find sources that are unbiased, reliable, and give us a high degree of confidence that what they report is fact.

I agree that there should be biography and filmography sections, but we need to take out opinions that are not written from a neutral point of view. For instance

• he is good in all types of roles
• Balakrishna always experimented with roles that would inhibit other stars
• This is one of the unique feats that none of his contemporaries would ever dare to try

are all opinion rather than fact.

In addition claims that are made such as

• Film pundits thought Balakrishna deserved a Nandi for his Peddannyya performance

claim to know what "film pundits thought". We need a reference so that we can read what the pundits thought rather than having an interpretation of it presented to us as fact.

Do you see the problem?  pablo_hablo. 20:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Update - I have added some suggestions, and sources, to the talk page - these only go up to 2005 so far, there is much more out there.  pablo_hablo. 20:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Tootsie Duvall

Hey there. I just saw that you removed the prod tag from Tootsie Duvall, I was just wondering if you could explain your action a bit more. Thanks, NW (Talk) 12:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I think there's a fair chance that she is sufficiently notable and intend to research further (though probably not today). If I come up with nothing I'll AfD it (unless someone else has in the meantime).  pablo_hablo. 13:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing then. I didn't find anything that I considered evidence of notability, but perhaps you will have better luck. NW (Talk) 18:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Agency

Anthony Giddens gives a good view on structure/agency problems. The idea is that there are multiple feedback loops between agency and structure (both positive and negative). Some actions generate structure but other actions may take structure as a given (in a nested sense, you can consider the structure creating actions as taking some other structure as given). It is a nice escape from the obviously incorrect enlightenment view of rationality and individuality and the stifling post-modern Foucauldian view of structure as dominating and totalizing. Protonk (talk) 00:21, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I will read up on this a bit, it is certainly an interesting (and intuitively sensible) view. pablo_hablo. 08:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

This may help you

I noticed that you added the reference to Camponotus saundersi, it looks like by hand. First of all thanks for adding this reference.

This: User:Ikip/ref may help you a lot! I love this tool, it makes life so much easier when adding references. Ikip (talk) 20:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

No I use the cite tool, space the lines out by hand because I find it easier to check and spot references later.
I noticed you'd changed 'poison' to 'glue', I was considering doing that but it seems that there are some varieties of this ant who have one, and some who have the other (see article talk page.) Know any antologists?  pablo_hablo. 20:56, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft

At 09:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)Anna Lincoln approved this change. See discussion on her talk page. I will now make the change again.Bobbieball (talk) 10:35, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Anna may have, however I believe that her first actions, when you were editing under IP address 80.41.73.114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), were correct. You should not be censoring this article, and you should definitely not be edit-warring to do so. I will seek another opinion.   pablo_hablo. 10:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

RFA spam

Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3
Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing

—Kww(talk) 18:19, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Rajkiya Pratibha Vikas Vidyalaya

OK I wont put the promotional stuff but the info. regarding admissions was not anything like an advertisement...so why was that deleted?

-Jatin SHRIDHAR 06:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jatin Shridhar (talk • contribs)

Now I have deleted the stuff you had objection on...I hope my edits are not reverted this time once again.The stuff that exists there is cent percent true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jatin Shridhar (talk • contribs) 06:47, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I have replied on your talk page, let's keep this in one place.   pablo_hablo. 09:01, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

a possible sockpuppet speaks ...

Hello, why am i a sockpuppet? what is that? I've never used wiki b4 untill now, i made an account to stick up for GPRO.... so why have i been made a sockpuppet? Peterjr-07 (talk) 13:08, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

You, and those other two accounts, turned up at the same time and focussed on the same AfD. A sockpuppet is the same person operating more than one account.

However, given the amount of canvassing that you and others have been doing here maybe the sock allegation is moot.   pablo_hablo. 14:12, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Dont ( a definite troll speaks)

Edit My Profile Please you didnt even spell encyclopedia right lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.153.11 (talk) 22:25, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Did I forget to thank you? ..

Pablo X ,Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 06:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Human suit recreated as Human disguise

This is a notice to all who participated in the recent AfD of Human suit, here, that resulted in a consensus for delete. This article has been recreated as "Human disguise", and has been nominated for deletion: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Human disguise. Thank you. Verbal chat 21:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:30, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Prook

Hi, don't forget to actually add the AFD tag to the article Prook! +Angr 15:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Yikes! I was relying on Twinkle to do that, looks like it's failed! Done now, thanks for alerting me.   pablo_hablo. 15:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Central link to unsourced articles

{{helpme}}

If you view Category:Articles lacking sources from March 2008, there is a box entitled "Articles lacking sources" which appears to the right of the page. I would like to transclude that box directly to a userpage, but I can't figure out where it comes from. Thanks!   pablo_hablo. 12:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

It's {{Articles lacking sources progress}}. Regards, AJCham 12:31, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's here: Template:Articles lacking sources progress, which (when entered on the page as {{Articles lacking sources progress}} gives the following:

{{Articles lacking sources progress}} ta steve - I've got it!   pablo_hablo. 21:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 12:34, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Great - ta for the speedy response.   pablo_hablo. 12:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD

This did my heart good to read. Heh. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:09, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you kind sir/madam; I'm not sure how helpful it was though ...   pablo_hablo. 21:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Islamabad Capital Territory Police

Ok, I copied the article from website but it is also on article Pel (Pakistan).Why you don't delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuopuo (talk • contribs) 11:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

zOMG!!! I see everything twice!!!!

The article Pel (Pakistan) appears not to exist, so let's not worry about that one.   pablo_hablo. 12:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Incivility

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Sincerely, --A Nobody 20:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Please provide a link to this alleged attack. Oh there it is. Please explain the incivility.   pablo_hablo. 20:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Abductive attacking Dream Focus in a discussion by referring to him as a radical revolutionary responsible for the deaths of thousands is itself not constructive and only invites escalation. To make matters worse, you followed up Abductive by calling Dream Focus a "stooge". Please note WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL, and WP:BATTLEGROUND. Sincerely, --A Nobody 20:50, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Abductive's comment was apposite; you, Ikip and Dream Focus were huge fans of Fences & Widows until he quit the ARS. Then, lo and behold, you appear at his RfA to denounce him for having the temerity to think for himself and not toe your party line.   pablo_hablo. 20:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Um, no, I have always been wary of Fences. If we are going to talk about partisanship, see my message below. Ikip (talk) 21:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Why do you see Misplaced Pages as being about parties? We are all a community working colloboratively on one project to catalog human knowledge. I do not at this time trust Fences and Windows's judgment and as such opposed him just noting as much. Dissenting opinions expressed in a civil manner is a hallmark of free discourse. I sure in heck do not think he is comparable to someone whose policies a la Marat or Robespierre resulted in thousands of executions via guillotine or mass drowning and endosring such a hideous allegation is unconstructive at best and disruptive at worst. Then, trivializing those with whom you disagree as mere "stooges" is further unproductive and not conducive to building a community environment. Moreover, it does not help the candidate as it potentially baits those being attacked, which can turn an RfA into an insult exchange, while certainly not giving those mocked the incentive to want to switch to support. Sincerely, --A Nobody 21:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

But that's the thing - I don't see Misplaced Pages as being about "parties", but you do. So does Ikip, who probably remembers that one of his many previous usernames directly referred to this. And it looks increasingly that those who perpetuate the i/d schism are those who feel that it validates them. Such behaviour certainly does the encyclopedia no favours.   pablo_hablo. 21:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

See the excerpt from One Tin Soldier (The Legend of Billy Jack) on my user page; your use of "validates" maps directly to the word "justify"; and the other mapping should be apparent enough to any biguns about ;) Sincerely, Jack Merridew; tin soldier, sockpuppet, rogue. 07:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Seriously now. You have shown up trash talking me and others in various venues now that I have by contrast stayed out of and by and large just ignore and do not play into. It is always baffling how even when I ignore people and their drama boards, they still have something to say about me. How dare any of us not want to play these games! That more than anything else is why I cannot take criticism from such accounts as valid. I am here to help build the paperless encyclopedia that anyone can edit and not to feed into all these discussions in which everyone tries to get everyone else, not continue to acknowledge anyone who follows me around maliciously, and so on. Instead of arguing with me, just do the same. Do not fall into the trap of losing time and effort adding to commenting on users rather than improving articles or if anything making users feel welcomed. It accomplshes nothing beyond raising tensions. It certainly does not improve articles, which is supposed to be the main reason why we edit after all. Sincerely, --A Nobody 22:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Please stop accusing me of things, particularly 'trash talking you' in venues that you "just ignore". I think its pretty evident that I have not done that (unless, of course, you are psychic, in which case I will think you an apology). I am aware that you do not accept any criticism that you do not choose to accept. I even believe that you think you are here to build an encyclopedia. But do not whine when you are called on your bad editing.   pablo_hablo. 22:14, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Lumping me together as a "stooge", for example, as you admit above is not exactly whatever the opposite of "trash talking" is. I accept good faith suggestions to improve my editing; I only have and will reject bad faith or hypocritical commentary masquerading as something else. Sincerely, --A Nobody 22:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I can see you may feel that as a tad unfair, especially as you were the first opposer. But it does seem to me that quite often when you, Ikip, or Dream Focus post anywhere, at least one of the others will shortly follow. I suppose there are other examples of triumvirates that I could have used which you might have found less offensive, the three musketeers perhaps (although Dumas seemingly couldn't count, there were four of them) Gilbert, Sullivan and D'Oyly Carte, or Manny Moe and Jack. But it's done now.   pablo_hablo. 23:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

The bottom line is Fences will win handly. Retracting the comment will only make you look good Pablo, and not hurt Fences. Ikip (talk) 21:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Pablo refers to the personal attack as brillant. Ikip (talk) 21:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

It was indeed a brilliant analogy. Now, I am not interested in 'looking good' (same as you two, it seems, so we have some common ground there) I do not believe that either Abductive's or my comment will 'hurt' Fences & Windows. So are we done here, or am I still waiting for Dream Focus to chime in? If so, could you e-mail him and give him a heads-up? (I know you know how to do that).   pablo_hablo. 21:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

In the future just remember that we are here to build an encyclopedia, not play games poking fun at others. Sincerely, --A Nobody 21:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Back at you, feel free to get on with it.   pablo_hablo. 21:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

It would be much easier to do if others would join in that effort to improve articles rather than focus so much on attacking others. Sincerely, --A Nobody 22:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

And yet - you're still here.   pablo_hablo. 22:14, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Just to confuse matters, I'm a member of ARS and I think you're swell (to use a vulgar Americanism), and hope to see you around editing. The opposes at the relevant AfD are telling. Verbal chat 22:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Verbal, I love you man.

Pablo, who is the monkey in the picture?

um this is to a nobody, you can listen into Pablo, since it is your talk page. The conversation here is why I try to avoid editors talk pages. I would suggest in the future a nobody, post the warning, let the editor post a snarky reply, and move on. Otherwise there is always a risk that editor will make you say something in a heated argument that you will regret saying later.

I see warning messages as only help for future editors, in case the information is needed.

So post, and ignore. Ikip (talk) 22:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Not sure who the monkey is, or the organ-grinder.

Cheers Verbal, I love you too, despite the vulgarity (chill out Ikip, I know you saw him first!) but did you mean AFD or RFA?   pablo_hablo. 22:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

yes. Verbal chat 22:52, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up!   pablo_hablo. 22:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

O Hai ;) It's just so-kewl to see all the shite that goes down while I'm asleep — all on a plate for me to review over early afternoon tea. RFA/F&W has closed as an obvious pass, so, as nyb said, "The opposers' concerns are unpersuasive." — IMHO this would apply to other venues, too.

Cheers! — Happy Editing!! — Have a nice weekend!!! — Best!!!! — Regards!!!!!

—Sincerely, Sockpuppet First Class, Jack Merridewthis user is a sock puppet 06:33, 24 November 2009 (UTC) —I'm an ARS member; where's *my* welcome, Ikip?

Who you choose to support

First you support AMIB, and now JM, both who have a long history of harrassment. A rather troubling record. Ikip (talk) 21:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

It's "whom". And - right back at you.   pablo_hablo. 21:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I wasn't planning on responding beyond this, but who have I supported which has anything close to this level of harrassment? I have never supported anyone misusing their admin tools, nor stalking other editors. In fact, I have gone up against some really, really powerful editors/admins for what I see as abuses. Ikip (talk) 21:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

One 'r' in harassment, Ikip ;)

*You* engage in extensive harassment as a capo for those whom you support. See here.

Cheers! — Happy Editing!! — Have a nice day!!! — Best!!!! — Regards!!!!!

—Sincerely, Sockpuppet First Class, Jack Merridewthis user is a sock puppet 06:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC)