Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:45, 14 January 2010

Welcome!

Hello, Jprw, 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
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! ➔ REDVEЯS has changed his plea to guilty 14:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I understand you

You are fixated on the topic on hand. I have seen the proof. But, I never lose with writing the never-ending process of adding information. Enjoying the game of who's entrie is better. I like writing exercises. Rereading items on Misplaced Pages is a weekly hobby for me. I keep rewriting something even after it is posted. I never post inaccuracies either. I am well informed on anything I do with Misplaced Pages. I honestly believe that it’s simply better to state the newest information on the subject than have your single opinion all over the page. There is a certain amount of justice in writng releavnt information on a subject that anybody can read for information purposes. Your not going to find the kind of information I add anywhere except perhaps an intense goggle search. I hope you understand this.

Thank you, Electric Japan (talk) 08:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure that an approach such as this is conducive to accurate and responsible editing on Misplaced Pages. If you're so keen to announce the latest news re: Alice Cooper (however insignificant), you may be better off doing so on a fans' website or blog. I fully applaud your enthusiasm for the artist; however, such enthusiasm should not form some justification for you to bypass the editing guidelines which are strictly observed by the majority of regular contributors to the Alice Cooper entry. Jprw (talk) 10:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

2008 News is Noteworthy

The latest news? The only news so far this year. A tour that goes beyond America is news for any Alice Cooper fan. He is huge outside America. Editing guidelines? This is about Alice Cooper, right? Not your idea on what to post or not. Misplaced Pages is based purely on its merits of outside contributers with details. Cooper is one of the rarest of singers. He has a big career outside America. Cooper has gained much momentum during his long career outside America,and people have the option to use Misplaced Pages to add a variety of noteworthy statistics on anything. Including Alice Cooper.

Have fun, Electric Japan (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Please see my remarks on talk page of 'Peter Hitchens'

Peter Hitchens, signed in as Clockback (talk) 13:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

and now please see my subsequent remarks in the same place

Peter Hitchens, signed in as Clockback (talk) 11:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Alice Cooper - please follow Manual of Style for titles

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Misplaced Pages has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia, as you did in Alice Cooper, makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Please note that song titles are enclosed in quotes, not italics; album titles and TV show names do go in italics as per the Manual of Style regarding titles. Dl2000 (talk) 02:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for info - will make changes accordingly on the Alice Cooper pageJprw (talk) 07:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

August 2008

Please don't change the format of dates, as you did to Ian Curtis. Most British people and many people internationally write dates in day-month-year order, e.g., 12 December 1904. Most Americans use month-day-year order, e.g., December 12, 1904. If the article is about an American topic, use month-day-year. If it is a British or European topic, use day-month-year. If neither, leave it as originally written. Many Americans or British people take offence if an article about their country, written in their local version of English, is changed around to a version they don't use. So please do not do that.

Dates are usually enclosed in two square brackets, as in ] or ]. This means that you can set your preferences (if you look around your screen you'll see the word preferences; click on it and follow the instructions) to ensure that you see all dates in the format you want, whether date-month-year, month-date-year or yyyy-mm-dd. The general rules on how Misplaced Pages articles are written can be seen in the Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style. Rules specific to dates and numbers can be seen in the Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (dates and numbers).

If you have any questions about this, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Enjoy your time on the web's fastest growing encyclopædia (or encyclopedia, if you write it that way!). Thank you. JD554 (talk) 15:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for this. What do people think the see also section is for??? Good call to rv. Have a nice day. Libs 17:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Alice Cooper Talk Page

Is there any particular reason you undid my archiving of old posts on the Alice Cooper talk page? I only archived old entries, I did not delete them. There was so much old material and conversations that it was difficult to find current issues. Note that I left current issues on the page for further discussion. -HamatoKameko (talk) 05:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

new labour marxists

please don't add your disputed comment to the Ainsworth article again without discussion, I have opened a topic on the talk to discuss it. Off2riorob (talk) 21:08, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

BTW we have a request for comment open on the talk page on this for a little while. Please join the discussion and put your case.--Peter cohen (talk) 00:20, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I think we have agreement on Bob Ainsworth. I think Off2riorob was generally in agreement if refs are in containing the spokepersons quote. I'm ok with including all 4, but have contacted him on his talk page. Do you want to make the edit? Mimi 12:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

L. Ron Hubbard

I've reverted your change of US English to British English. With L. Ron Hubbard being born in the US — and spending most of his time there — US English seems the appropriate form for the article. MartinPoulter (talk) 18:02, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Em dashes

Just under the text box that appears when you do any editing, there is a special character toolbar. At the start of that is a drop-down list. When that drop-down is set to "Insert", the first two characters on offer are endash and emdash. If still having trouble, just copy and paste from a relevant article, such as dash. Hope this helps, MartinPoulter (talk) 13:39, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

PH edit

Hi, just popped by to say that my login didn't work but that I made the last edit on the Peter Hitchens page. I reverted your last edits as citation needed and splitting early life section actually split personal life deatail. Regards, Mimi 18:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

References on P.Hitchens article

I quite see the problem with references to my expressed opinions, but I think I must in general leave it up to those who wish to provide them to do so. All I try to do in this entry is to ensure that it is accurate and representative. Google will rapidly and easily provide plenty of evidence of all the opinions cited, as I think I have dealt on my blog (now with three years of archives) with every subject mentioned in the summary of my views. If you are concerned, perhaps you would like to do this. I haven't the time, and think it would be improper anyway. You may be sure that if I were misrepresented, I should correct it. My open and unbothered preparedness to say that I edit this entry for accuracy is as good as a reference, in my view. Peter Hitchens, logged in as Clockback (talk) 20:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Also could do with your good offices at the article on my book 'The Broken Compass', if you felt able. I see you ahve been involved in this in the past. Peter Hitchens, logged in as Clockback (talk) 14:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, i see your help has already been requested. i have some refs, jprw, so if you edit the broken compass article can i give them to you here? I can edit slowly but you may be quicker. please read clockbacks talk page and the article discussion. many thanks. RSVP. Mimi 15:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Jprw - I did an undo until I could edit myself or ask you to help re-write. It was cherry picking as Gove is a personal friend of PH and there are other reviews. Incidentally my arm is in a sling hence being a bit slow. Have tested my talk page and it works fine. Mimi 19:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Managed to do edits. One is not exactly a review but features book and from respected writer so thought ok. Now you know why I couldn't work on PH main article - I need a rest! Thanks for your offer :-) Mimi 23:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

My thanks to Jprw. As usual, I try to limit my interventions to matters of fact and much prefer the crucial decisions to be atken by disinterested editors. On this occasion, it seemed to me that a lot of relevant facts were not known to the original writer. I do think the Private Eye parody is worth mentioning, but then I also think the index is the best chapter in the book. Peter Hitchens, logged in as Clockback (talk) 11:13, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Personal accusations against me on PH talk

Jprw - Here is a copy of my comment on the PH talk page:
I don't have "overt hostility" towards Peter Hitchens and in fact have been accused of exactly the reverse on Wiki before now. I've answered his call for help on Wiki and I too try to be an editor working according to Misplaced Pages guidelines. You haven't responded to my points and instead call me "difficult to reason with", "utterly steadfast", "prejudiced" and "almost hysterical". I have an opinion on the proposed changes, I've stated it, it hasn't changed and it doesn't agree with yours. As your objection now seems to be personal and is no longer discussing the content of the article, which this discussion page is for, I will go over to your talk page in the hope of resolving this. But as for the relationship bewteen the brothers section I really think you are missing my point. The interest lies in how they disagree not that they disagree. They are many things but their choice of words is a very big part of who and what they are. I'd like the chaler/froider quote to stay but that's just my opinion. I think we should gain consensus from other editors on this and the significant changes you are intending to make over Xmas. Regards
Jprw, I really don't have hostility towards Peter Hitchens, overt or otherwise, and wonder why you are so convinced of this? Have you communicated with any other editors on this point as I can't imagine why you are so convinced of this? Have you communicated with Peter Hitchens himself? Honestly I cannot see why you have this view and can assure you that no such hostility exists from me. Really. I rather think you are being hostile because I won't agree with the changes you want to make and I have explained why. Please be assured there is no hostility from me and I hope we can work together on Wiki in the future. Kind regards, Mimi 17:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

FYI

The following exchange appears on the 'Broken Compass' thread.

The following part of the discussion (made around 15.16 on 18th November) mysteriously disappeared. I do not think it is permitted to delete contributions to talk pages, and if it is, it shouldn 't be. So I am restoring it. "For the benefit of any disinterested person who may become involved in this, let the following information be taken into account. I read this entry for the first time on the evening of 17th November, and made some revisions to it (as I always do when editing here) under my own name, clearly identified. The sign-on 'clockback' has now been officially verified on Misplaced Pages as being mine. I am not'clockback'. That is a sign-on. I am Peter Hitchens (see Bob Ainsworth discussion for details). I removed no factual information. I did, however, remove the word 'lukewarm' as a general description of the book's reception. I did not think the general use of the word 'lukewarm' could be justified in relation to the reviews. Though it certainly could in relation to Anthony Howard's, it couldn't be applied to at least two of the others. Nor is the total boycott of the book by the pro-Cameron press necessarily an expression of indifference. I would argue the contrary (and am quoted as doing so). At 13.45 on Wednesday, 'Miamomimi', who so far as I can see has never previously edited this entry and has no special interest in it that I know of, simply reverted the changes. On discovering this, and on seeing what I regarded as insufficient justification, I undid the reversion (at 14.29) and opened the discussion page to explain my action. By the time I had returned to the article, 'Miamomimi' had again (at 1430, without any time spent considering the matter) reverted the entry again, and made accusations of edit warring. At 1435, I reverted it again. continuing to believe the reversion to have been inadequately explained. At 1436, again without conceivably having had the time to consider the matter or read what I had written here, 'Miamomimi' reverted yet again. At 1439, urging her to read the discussion page, I undid this extraordinarily and needlessly rapid re-reversion. By 1442, she had reverted once again, which did not seem to me to be the action of someone interested in discussion. I would add that I am most damagingly accused of 'cherry-picking' reviews of my own work. So far as I know, this expression means that I am selecting reviews which suit me. On the contrary, I have ensured that every mention of the book in the mainstream press, complimentary and uncomplimentary, is now recorded, as was not the case before (Michael Gove's article in the Times, the excerpt in the Mail on Sunday the Hannah Pool interview, the parody of the index in Private Eye). I have not removed any hostile review. I have added one link (I would have added more but my computer skills make this slow work) This accusation is definitely not an 'assumption of good faith'. She writes of 'expanding the article in a balanced way', but her only actions as I write this have been to cancel without any further ado an attempt to do just that, and to repeat, and again repeat that action without pausing for reasoned discussion. I urgently invite other editors to help. Peter Hitchens, logged in as Clockback (talk) 15:16, 18 November 2009 (UTC) Let us hope it is now left in place. Peter Hitchens, logged in as Clockback (talk) 10:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Clockback - I removed the comment as it seemed uncivil and there was an editing conflict which was explained so the comment seemed unnecessarily uncivil. There is explanation in my edits and as soon as I saw your comments in Talk I read them and replied. We are talking of a few minutes in which an edit conflict occured. You seem keen to gain support against me rather than addressing me personally and discussing any issue. It did look to me that you were cherry-picking and indeed edit warring as I said. I thought it would be helpful if others made the edit (as you are the author), I wasn't against the inclusion of that information as you can see. As the information you wanted included is in fact included then this is not a discussion of content. I was trying to be helpful but can see that I was in error. If you would address any issue you have with me, with me personally rather than as if you are talking to an audience and I'm on trial ("If 'Miamomimi' wishes to make constructive edits, then let her do so, and justify them") it would be helpful. Many thanks. Kind regards, Mimi (yack) 11:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockback (talk • contribs)

In answer to this person, I repeat, I am not called 'Clockback', which is my sign-in. My name is Peter Hitchens, a fact which I have always stated but which was formally verified under Wiki procedures when it became relevant in a discussion of the Bob Ainsworth entry(see discussion on that entry) . The deleted and restored comment is in my view purely factual, containing a log of the times at which each event happened. My constructive and open edit was abruptly reverted without explanation and then re-reverted without explanation or attempt at discussion. It is all very well 'Miamomimi' insisting that she planned to make constructive edits. She made none until challenged. Her first action was simply to revert without comment, while making an allegation of 'cherrypicking' that has not stood up to any test. The comment also needs to stand, as in it I defend myself against this unfounded allegation of 'cherrypicking' explain and justify my edits and my reversions (which I believe to be have been reasonable and fair and which I also believe subsequent events have shown to be so). It contains no expression of incivility. I note that the person calling herself 'Miamomimi', who removed a comment critical of her actions(and has now stated that she did so) is the same person who elsewhere on Misplaced Pages (notably the 'Comment' page on the 'Peter Hitchens' entry) makes unsupported allegations against me, among them a complaint that I censor critical comments made against me on my weblog. Peter Hitchens, logged in as Clockback (talk) 12:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Peter Hitchens, logged in as Clockback (talk) 12:56, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Editor Review: done

I have done a review of you at Misplaced Pages:Editor review/Jprw. Sorry for the delay in getting it done - as you may have noticed, there's a backlog on ER!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 18:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Kensington and Chelsea

The unnamed 'critics' who alleged in an unspecified place that I 'failed' to become Tory MP for Kensington and Cheslea have once again surfaced on the P.Hitchens entry. Can you help?

Peter Hitchens, logged in as Clockback (talk) 12:37, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again, I shall try not to pester you in future, but sometimes a swift deletion deters future mischief. Peter Hitchens logged in as Clockback (talk) 14:48, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Craig Brown

I'm so sorry, but can't remember exactly when this parody appeared. Isn't there a link to it on a historic version of the 'Broekn Compass' entry?

Peter Hitchens, logged in as Clockback (talk) 12:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Christopher Booker

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Christopher Booker, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Misplaced Pages:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you.

I'm notifying you because I've just added the article to the probation--somebody did a whole batch recently and for some reason this article was omitted.

This isn't related to your recent edits on the article, which are unproblematic and unrelated to climate change. I'm just being thorough. --TS 11:49, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

A Brief History of Crime

FYI I have begun, and posted, an article on this book. It seemed to me that after your work on 'The Abolition of Britain', it at last deserved a concise mention, and I didn't think anyone else would do it.