Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:21, 17 July 2006

Hi

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Sonofzion, 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!  ←Humus sapiens 03:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Apartheid

I'm not going to start a revert war, but History of South Africa in the Apartheid Era is a high-quality article, and South African apartheid is the only "indisputable" use of the term Apartheid, because that's where it was invented and officially used. The redirect to the specific name is to prevent the page being diluted with discussions of other countries, where the term has no official status. This is by far the preference of the editors of History of South Africa in the Apartheid Era and I respectfully request that you, in turn, respect this. Zaian 21:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The consensus, achieved after much discussion and upheld over several years, is that Apartheid should redirect to History of South Africa in the Apartheid Era as the article about the official use of the term. The longer name is to prevent confusion and controversial editing involving other countries (in particular Israel) from taking place at that location. That debate should not take place under the official Apartheid heading as it is very much secondary to the official historical use of the term in South Africa. If you would read the many archives at both Talk:Apartheid and Talk:History of South Africa in the Apartheid Era you would see that your recent editing of the page Apartheid is a perhaps unintentional hijacking of this topic. Again, I respectfully ask that you allow it to be returned to the previous status quo. Otherwise I've absolutely no doubt that a great many editors of the South African article will disagree with your move and see it as unilateral. Zaian 21:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I suggest that if you want to continue this discussion, we use Talk:Apartheid. I have copied our conversation there. Zaian 21:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Altalena

Please don't vandalize pages by blank erasing them or you will be banned from editing.

Guy Montag 21:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Friendly warning

Please be aware of WP:3RR and other WP:RULES. ←Humus sapiens 22:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing because evidence strongly indicates that you are a sockpuppet of Homeontherange being used to skirt a 48 hour 3RR block. If you want to be unblocked, you'll need to prove you're not a sockpuppet of Homeontherange. FeloniousMonk 22:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

If you're not Homeontherange, you could start by telling us who you used to edit as. FeloniousMonk 23:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand. This means what?

I used to edit without being registered for about a year. I forgot to sign in once today. This is why I'm blocked? You talk about evidence, please show it to me.

Why can't I edit? Is this because I opened a complaint against Jayjg?

I see now. Jayjg told you to block me after I complained about him. This is a conflict of interest. He doesn't give you any actual proof, just his view which was possibly biased by his conflicts and you accepted this. Sounds like you are his puppet. Can I block you now?

5 million people live within an hour of where I am. This city probably has the largest population of Israelis and Arabs outside of the middle east. Did Jayjg tell you this. No? Would that effect the interpretation of his data? Yes. Maybe you should have asked someone who is not involved with me to judge? Instead you asked someone with the appearance of bias. If this was a court and you were a police officer your action would be thrown out. Probably large number of people who edit articles on Israel live in my city. Are you going to block all of them now?

jayjg says on your website {Unsurprisingly, the CheckUser evidence was consistent and strongly suggestive (though not 100% conclusive) with them being sockpuppets of Homeontherange}

Show me this evidence or remove the block. You should have asked someone else ... why did you ask someone who is in a conflict of interest? He covers self by saying "not 100%" what does this mean, 20%, 50%, 60%? If evidence is not conclusive...and even with conflict of interest he says it is not, then you have no proof to block.

Feh. I will go back to editing without registering. Thank you for your waste of my time.

I would like to settle this false accusation that you are my sockpuppet> Could you please send an e-mail with your regular mail to Kim (mailto:kim@kimvdlinde.com) and I will do the same. As soon as she has both, she will run some checks. She only will report if we are the same, likely the same or not, without revealing any personal information or details about how this was checked (WP:BEANS). Ideally, if you could indicate your real name (which I will keep confidential at all times), that would be a good additional verification method. Thanks. Homey 12:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

And what difference will it make? All you have to do, Homey, is e-mail from a library or somewhere you don't normally post from. That kind of check is completely useless, as I believe Essjay has already told you. SlimVirgin 13:07, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe Essjay was responding to my request for Checkuser. Homey 16:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I've reinstated the block. Homeontherange unblocking his own alleged sockpuppet is a clear conflict of interest. This is obviously a sockpuppet account; Homeontherange needs to stop wasting everyone's time here. FeloniousMonk 16:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

If it's so obvious you wouldn't have left the door open when you blocked him/her three weeks ago or used weasal words such as "the evidence strongly indicates". I've posted my IP address on your talk page. It's obviously no where near the IP address this user was using.Homey 16:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)