User talk:SlimVirgin/History 2: Difference between revisions

< User talk:SlimVirgin Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 02:21, 16 August 2006 editVhgk3z5b (talk \| contribs)2,846 edits Archiving← Previous edit		Revision as of 03:38, 16 August 2006 edit undoFeloniousMonk (talk \| contribs)18,409 edits →Archiving: warning was the result of a cynical editor gaming the system, support removal of itNext edit →
Line 65:		Line 65:
	==Archiving==		==Archiving==
	you removed a large amount from your talk page with the summary ''archiving''. It appears that you did not actually create an archive of the discussion and that you simply removed it. The removed text contained warnings. As you probably know, removing warnings from your text page is considered vandalism. I will ] and assume it was simply an accident. Could you please restore the text (or even just the warnings) or properly ]? ] 02:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)		you removed a large amount from your talk page with the summary ''archiving''. It appears that you did not actually create an archive of the discussion and that you simply removed it. The removed text contained warnings. As you probably know, removing warnings from your text page is considered vandalism. I will ] and assume it was simply an accident. Could you please restore the text (or even just the warnings) or properly ]? ] 02:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

			The NPA report, ], was filed by {{user\|69.29.223.226}}, who is undoubtedly one of the editors locked in a bitter RFAr with SlimVirgin. This same editor also started an utterly baseless user conduct RFC against SlimVirgin and the other party to the RFAr Jayjg, ]. This compounds the evidence that user:69.29.223.226 is using Misplaced Pages's systems to settle scores and wage a personal vendetta against SlimVirgin arising out of the RFAr. SlimVigin's incivility clearly provoked and understandable to anyone who bothered to look beyond the diff, not to mention a very rare instance. The reaction at ] was over the top.

			Though I'm heartened to see there's such an abundance of good faith there that even a shady anon can game the system and malign a respected admin to such a degree that warnings are issued and threats are made when the misbegotten warnings are removed, but I'm saddened to see an absence of critical thinking and looking beyond the diffs. I'm unsure which is the bigger problem. I for one support SlimVigin's removal of the warning, it was clearly the result of a cynical editor gaming the system, and part of a greater campaign now taking place at ]. ] 03:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:38, 16 August 2006

Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper. — Robert Frost

Hello

My dear friend

Saw this and thought of you. Enjoy. Dakota ~

Mary Wollstonecraft

Hi Kaldari, thanks for your note about the above. I don't know whether the copyright issue was ever sorted out completely. I don't entirely trust the version that's on the page. It wasn't written by a regular editor, none of the references have been checked, and it does seem a bit POV. However, to check it all would involve a lot of work. I've been tempted to reduce it back to a stub, but haven't because that would be a lot of material to remove, so I'm not quite sure how to proceed with it. SlimVirgin 13:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

My impression is that the current version was written by an academic, probably someone in the Women's Studies department of a university, judging by the writing style and their talk page comments. Personally, I doubt it's plagarized just from their defense on the talk page. My experience is generally that copyvios don't get defended by their posters, much less discussed in depth. I agree, however, that it could use a bit of POV/OR cleaning. And, of course, someone should try to verify the sources at some point. Maybe next time I'm at the library :) Kaldari 16:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I may have spoken too soon. Although there isn't any blatant plagiarism in the article, there are definitely some borderline sections. See my comments at the end of the talk page. Kaldari 02:37, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Model wikipedian

		Model Wikipedian
		For being a model Wikipedian in many ways day in and day out with this simply a recent example. WAS 4.250 20:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Email

FYI, I've sent you an email. JoshuaZ 04:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

New userboxes

I have deleted a userbox template you recently created, as userboxes should no longer be created in templatespace per the terms of the German userbox final solution. Here is the userbox code so that you can recreate the userbox in your userspace ("userfying") if you wish.

<div style="float: left; border:solid black 1px; margin: 1px;">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #FFDCF8;;"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #dda0dd; text-align: center; font-size: {{{5|{{{id-s|10}}}}}}pt; color: {{{id-fc|black}}};" | '''2004'''
| style="font-size: {{{info-s|8}}}pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color: {{{info-fc|black}}};" | This user has been editing ] since 2004.
|}</div>

--Cyde Weys 14:18, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again

For looking into . :) RN 22:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Confused

In touch with other admins? This can include me if you like, I'd like to know how you figure out Gnetwerker's sockpuppets. Ashibaka tock 00:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, keep up the good work (^^; Ashibaka tock 01:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Article on terrorism

You may find the article Terrorists of Pakistani origin interesting. It may be deleted soon in perhaps a few hours.

If you have any views on having such articles on Misplaced Pages, please do share them at Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Terrorists_of_Pakistani_origin

--Robcotton 01:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Archiving

Here you removed a large amount from your talk page with the summary archiving. It appears that you did not actually create an archive of the discussion and that you simply removed it. The removed text contained warnings. As you probably know, removing warnings from your text page is considered vandalism. I will AGF and assume it was simply an accident. Could you please restore the text (or even just the warnings) or properly archive them? Paul Cyr 02:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The NPA report, Misplaced Pages:Personal_attack_intervention_noticeboard#SlimVirgin_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29, was filed by 69.29.223.226 (talk · contribs), who is undoubtedly one of the editors locked in a bitter RFAr with SlimVirgin. This same editor also started an utterly baseless user conduct RFC against SlimVirgin and the other party to the RFAr Jayjg, Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/SlimJay. This compounds the evidence that user:69.29.223.226 is using Misplaced Pages's systems to settle scores and wage a personal vendetta against SlimVirgin arising out of the RFAr. SlimVigin's incivility clearly provoked and understandable to anyone who bothered to look beyond the diff, not to mention a very rare instance. The reaction at WP:PAIN was over the top.

Though I'm heartened to see there's such an abundance of good faith there that even a shady anon can game the system and malign a respected admin to such a degree that warnings are issued and threats are made when the misbegotten warnings are removed, but I'm saddened to see an absence of critical thinking and looking beyond the diffs. I'm unsure which is the bigger problem. I for one support SlimVigin's removal of the warning, it was clearly the result of a cynical editor gaming the system, and part of a greater campaign now taking place at WP:RFC. FeloniousMonk 03:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)