Misplaced Pages

User talk:JzG/Archive 24: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:JzG Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:16, 30 January 2007 editJzG (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers155,070 edits →[]: O RLY?← Previous edit Revision as of 18:16, 30 January 2007 edit undoValjean (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers95,275 edits →Accusations: Please restoreNext edit →
Line 328: Line 328:


That deletion has naturally removed her actions from her own edit history as well. Maybe the whole thing should be restored until the RfArb is over. Can that be done? My timing was apparently bad, so maybe we can wait and do this after it's all over. It won't remove her revealing of our (several other editors as well) identities, which she has done on her attack websites (I have been sent a long list of them), but at least it will make it more difficult for various trolls and weirdos to hassle me. -- ] 16:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC) That deletion has naturally removed her actions from her own edit history as well. Maybe the whole thing should be restored until the RfArb is over. Can that be done? My timing was apparently bad, so maybe we can wait and do this after it's all over. It won't remove her revealing of our (several other editors as well) identities, which she has done on her attack websites (I have been sent a long list of them), but at least it will make it more difficult for various trolls and weirdos to hassle me. -- ] 16:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

: I really do want to have the deletion undone. Ilena should not be able to use my good faith attempts to protect my privacy as another excuse to exercise bad faith and accuse me of wrongdoing. -- ] 18:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:16, 30 January 2007

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:JzG/Archive-Dec-2024. Some may be manually archived earlier than that, if no further action is required or productive debate is at an end.


Archive
Archives

archiving policy
privacy policy

Guy Chapman? He's just zis Guy, you know? More about me

Thank you to everybody for messages of support, and to JoshuaZ for stepping up to the plate. I have written about what happened at User:JzG/Laura.

Read This First

If you need urgent admin help please go to the incident noticeboard. To stop a vandal, try the vandal intervention page. For general help why not try the help desk? If you need me personally and it's urgent you may email me, I read all messages even if I do not reply. If next time I log on is soon enough, click this link to start a new conversation.

Terms of Service
By posting on this page you accept the JzG Terms of Service. I endeavour to satisfy good-faith requests to the best of my ability, but if you act like a dick, I will call you a dick. If you act like a troll, I will probably ignore you and may tell you to fuck off. If you want something from me, your best bet is not to demand it on pain of shopping me to ArbCom, because that way is pretty much guaranteed to piss me off to the extent that I will do whatever I can to thwart your plans. This page may contain trolling. Some of it might even be from me, but never assume trolling where a misplaced sense of humour might explain things. I can be provoked, it's not even terribly difficult. You may find, if you provoke me enough, that I will do something I later regret. Only remember, you may regret it more. I am a middle-aged surly bastard who spends their working day wrestling spammers and beating Windows with a stick, but I am capable of seeing good in the most improbable people if they don't go out of their way to make me do otherwise. Guy (Help!) 22:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

This user posts using a British sense of humour and does not repress those instantenous motions of merriment.


Happy New Year!

File:1953 S Novym Godom.jpg
Happy New Year! (Template:Lang-uk, Template:Lang-ru). I wish you in 2007 to be spared of the real life troubles so that you will continue to care about Misplaced Pages. We will all make it a better encyclopedia! I also wish things here run smoothly enough to have our involvement in Misplaced Pages space at minimum, so that we can spend more time at Main. --Irpen

To-do

List of episodes for The Nick Cannon Show - dozens of one line articles need merging into the list. Shw cancelled due to low ratings, unlikely that there will ever be sufficient interest to justify articles on every episode.


WP:RFI stuck

Could you please take a look at this RFI mess and either handle it or delete it if you agree with me that this is all silly.

IMO, this whole board should follow straight the WP:PAIN's path into history 'cause those who used PAIN as the substitute for Misplaced Pages:Request to block my opponent now turned to RFI as the means to settle scores. Durova was investigating this "report" but she seems to be having hardware problems and this leaves the user under the threat of an "investigation" of an uncertain length. If you have time, please handle this issue to the best of your judgment. Once it is settled, I will submit this board for XfD. No need for shortcuts to win content disputes. --Irpen 17:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Now would be a great time to drop it. Please discontinue the argument at WP:RFI or I will drag the warring parties apart while adopting a policy of actively not caring who, if anyone, is right. Same goes for Piotrus. Guy (Help!) 21:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, did you actually read what I was saying? Shutting it down was what I was actually calling for all along! Thank you. --Irpen 21:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes I did. My view was that there is an issue with Dr Dan's behaviour which needs to be addressed. Unfortunately the whole thing is so messy and so bound up in the fight between you and Piotrus that I could not actually get to grips with it (I am a bear of very little brain). Durova's block of Dan was amply justified, and if that does not lead to a change in behaviour from that quarter then he can expect more trouble, but the real problem there was you and Piotrus going at it hammer and tongs. Please don't do that. Guy (Help!) 21:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

JzG, I will be happy to leave Piotrus alone. Moreover, what I would like to see is everyone leaves everyone else alone and goes back to editing. I have a big problem with Piotrus' going to all sorts of boards seeking for the blocks of his content opponents. That was the only issue I raised. Now we have Ghirla gone, thanks to the campaign of perpetual frivolous complaints Piotrus was running for at least a year. We need less of such boards and more admins like you who clean them up from nonsense. That's why I voted for you for ArbCom, btw.

Anyway, I hope Ghirla will come back at some point and Piotrus will stop bringing his complaints against everyone to all sorts of boards and stop inciting his friends to do the same.

At the side note, I am going to submit RFI for XfD. We do not need the kangaroo courts that will just attract all sorts of the individuals to act as judges and juries to provide their uninformed opinions on the long conflicts and inflame matters further. There is ANI and ArbCom. That's more than enough. --Irpen 21:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Feedback on Anal Stretching

Thank-you for your feedback and work on my rewrite on Anal stretching on my userpage. I was not prepared for any changes to the article because I need to set aside some time to work on the entire page -- which is obviously still in an early draft stage (very early!). I have read all of your comments thus far on that page and it seems to be quite constructive, although like I say -- I will need to set aside some time to work/read it all properly.
If you have any suggestions on where I can get some good sources/references for the article rewrite, please let me know, because Google is apparently not the most effective.
When I do get round to working on the article some more, I'll possibly call on you again if you're available for feedback.
Cheers Rfwoolf 16:46, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Rfwoolf

Hi Guy. What's the deal with this user's page protection? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

  • He was using it as a soapbox to tell us how evil and biased we all are (especially me) in suppressing the vital information on anal stretching for which the world is clamouring. Unprotect it if you like, but if he ocntinues to use it as a soapbox and attack then I shall ask an uninvolved admin for a block, because I have completely lost patience with him. Guy (Help!) 17:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I am an uninvolved admin, Guy. I don't like neither his attitude, nor the content of his page, but I am not sure that we should be censoring him. Let him dig his own hole, as they say. Anyone reading his "anal streching" diatribe, can reach their own conclusions, don't you think? I will not unblock unless you agree with it. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Like I said, unlock of you like. It's not censorship, though, but removal of outright bloody rudeness. Anyway, he seems to be calming down at the moment and finally understanding that when we said work on it in user space we meant work on it in user space. His idea of what constitutes sourcing and supporting content needs work, though. Guy (Help!) 00:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The_Lee_Nysted_Experience

I've been considering moving or refactoring the aggressive racketeering from the three odd editors that keep mucking up the place whenever anyone votes. Think I should? Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 17:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD Closure -- Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/F@NB0Y$

I just want to say I think you did an excellent job of closing the debate, summarizing the positions, and justifying your decision. I had started a batch delete of all the similar stub-class and totally unreferenced webcomics articles, however another admin convinced me to allow a rollback due to the difficulty of large batch AfD's.

There are dozens of webcomic articles that need to go, based strictly upon the merits of and precident set by this AfD. Do we have to go through a lengthy debate for each article, even when noncompliance is obvious and the opposition is not concerned with applying proper policies and/or are generally largely SPAs? /Blaxthos

Not really related to the above comment, but didn't want to start a new thread. I saw the storm building up at that page, a few days ago, and wondered what poor soul is going to close this, and how are they going to do it? That was an excellent closing statement -- shows both a familiarity with the discussion and a reasonable analysis of the points raised by a number of editors. Hopefully that softens the blow to those who are surely disappointed by the decision. Either way, I appreciate it. Luna Santin 08:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if I understand what you mean...

On ANI. In any case, advice, as always, appreciated.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I hope you do now. Please, please, just leave Irpen alone (and he you). If you need help with Dan, ask Durova or someone. It's bad enough with you and Ghirla, we can only fight so many fires at once. Guy (Help!) 21:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Guy, I asked others for help on the RFI, Durova replied and then Irpen tried to steer the discussion from Dr. Dan's behaviour to unrelated greviances about me. I don't need to leave Irpen alone as I do leave him alone - I did nothing to pull him into this discussion, he came into it on his own and instead of discussing Dr. Dan's actions he started to revive old RfC accusations against me. You will also note that unlike Irpen, with his plethora of accusations against me unsupported by diffs, I did not make any similar claims about him and only asked for an apology. As for the problem with Ghirla, as he has agreed to the civility parole (which was what I asked from the beginning) this fire is mostly out. PS. I find your threat of blocking us quite worrying: it would certainly be an abuse of admin's powers, and quite uncalled for. I don't think I have done anything wrong, and I don't think Irpen's actions in this discussion are blockable, neither - he is a usually reasonable editor and I although I feel offended by his accusations against me, and his actons on WP:RFI seem pointless, I would not ask anybody to block an editor whose only recent fault was offending me (I have thick skin, and can live through such torrents of slander occasionaly).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The point is, Irpen trolled and you took the bait. Which goes straight to the "oh no, not again" department. Please, please just walk away sometimes. People were tryng to look into the Dan situation, and then you and Irpen started a fistfight - bingo, trainwreck. You don't need any more battles. Solution: both stop it, or I make you both stop it. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe not. I suspect not. Guy (Help!) 21:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm. I do pledge guilty to forgetting about WP:DFTT, you are right there. Unfortunatly I have the mentality 'if I don't defend myself, I admit by silence they are right'. Is your advice that in such cases I should not reply to such posts? Again, my mentality is 'make them apologize and ensure they learn the lesson and don't do that again'.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
You get the idea. Not that Irpen is a troll, anything but, but Irpen did bait you, and you took the bait. Trust me, I know how hard it is to avoid getting sucked in, sometimes it's best to let others fight the battles and you watch from the sidelines. Guy (Help!) 23:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I trolled? I baited? Listen, JzG. Please read the discussion. If the thread is too sick for you to read, do not at least resort to uninformed name calling. Piotrus has been using various boards as a tool in edit conflicts. I am sick of it and I called him to order. I stand by my every word I said there. I did offer diffs and this was not trolling. If you want to start another ArbCom called "Piotrus/Irpen" as you did for Piotrus/Ghirla, go for it. The Piotrus/Ghirla was the last straw and Ghirla is gone. Now, Piotrus can do more editing like what he did with the Russian Enlightenment article.

I will not leave if you submit an ArbCom because I have a thicker skin than Ghirla. So go for it if you feel it warranted. I will present the evidence there and let ArbCom decide. Or, better yet, reconsider calling my activity trolling and baiting because it was none of that sort. I am fine working with Piotrus on the articles. It is just when he resorts to Admin boards as a workaround, that's where I have a problem with him.

The bottom line is that Piotrus uses all sorts of boards to shut down and eject his opponents. I am tired of it. If you don't see it that way, it is only because you edit articles in other fields of interest. --Irpen 23:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I have explained my reasons for my actions at the ANI discussion.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  01:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


My editor review

Thankyou Guy, for your kind words on my editor review. I am ready to truly put behind me the mistakes I've made in the past. Can you believe that WP:NCR is still around? I'm happy that I have made peace with both you and Tijuana Brass. Thanks again for your input, it means a whole lot more than two cents to me. Regards, Dfrg.msc 09:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

NLP, COI, and possible solutions

Hi Guy. It occurred to me to look into the NLP archives for some long term solutions. The problem seems to be long term promotional activities and incivility. The incivility is contained to some extent though on the main article so I believe can be easily managed as long as there are editors there willing to promote civility and get along.

The COI issues are becoming more clear. The anonymous editor (58.178.141.147) seems to be the most argumentative and uncivil at present – calling for blocks on the article and in edit summaries – and restoring argumentative phrasing and debate into the article. There seems to be 2 possibilities. It could be that 58.178.141.147 is the previous editor . The approach is the same according to a brief search: . The user is editing by presenting lists of non-conclusive articles, obscuring science views, and adding or restoring very argumentative phrasing into the article. Alternatively a brief Google IP check (giving an Australian IP (can’t be sure)) shows it may instead be a meatupppet of Comaze who was editing previously and has an obvious COI. They work in the same town and are part of the same organization as I presented before on ANI.

I understand that there will probably always be at least some meatpuppeting from the pro side and its easy to hide so there’s nothing much we can do about it apart from keep tabs on dominating groups and verbally discourage it.

COI issues will also be pretty hard to deal with as its even easier to hide.

The ANI notices seem to have helped to some extent. The basic fact (NLP is sci unsupported) has become easier to present now and the proponent group are presently not pushing to add argumentative information to it – though they are resisting to present the finding in summarized form. The basic criticism is still being denied though (that NLP is pseudoscientific/misleading and is inappropriate for clinical psych – HRM – self development…..). ANI seems to be a good place to present information for scrutiny – though I’m looking for other useful venues.

Presently the group seems to be quite dismissive of both ANI and non-promoters alike. For now though - I’ll continue to calmly point out the need to clearly present most relevant critical science views - and cycle the appeals to civility and the need to get along on Misplaced Pages. AlanBarnet 09:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

There are signs of agreement in some areas now (especially clearly distinguishing critical views). I have also had some helpful encouragement from Woohookitty with respect to summarizing the article. This is clearly summarizing with NPOV suppression of information taken into account. From what I have seen of Woohookitty's prior suggestions on the article - obscuring key critical views through promotion was a problem. User 58 (probably user FT2 I believe) is continuing to be dismissive of ANI assessments and those who hold a non promotional view - using slightly uncivil statements in edit summary also . AlanBarnet 06:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The Experience

Thank you for the advice, in re: The Lee Nysted Experience article. If you would be so kind, as "someone that has been around," maybe you could help to edit the article so it doesn't have too many links? I found that the vast majority of other articles here did not require what I have had to put in here. Most do not have any verification or back-up. My company likes the music area and we will be helping to clarify some other articles about other artists that we feature in our rotations. Be well, C.H.Huntress829 15:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Your Recent Deletion from My Talk Page

Hi, This is to thank you for what I believe was a well-meaning deletion from my talk page. Whilst I'm very sympathetic to the need to keep this business as narrowly dispersed as possible, and I see that you have placed the deleted comments in the discussion page of the AfD debate, I'm not completely sure that deleting comments before I'd even had a chance to see them is the ideal way to go. There is, I think, a risk of being perceived as censoring discussion, although I'm actually quite confident that this wasn't what you had in mind. I think you were right to put copies of all the participants' comments in one place, but I'm not sure about the deletion. I guess this is just a small quibble in the great scheme of things, though. I'm looking forward to seeing how this AfD debate turns out.

WMMartin 16:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

AfDs

Please vote at the AfDs for:

Thanks. -- Ssilvers

What do you think of the Cornell Savoyards article? -- Ssilvers 21:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Nothing on Factiva, a few hundred unique Googles, none of which appear to be reliable sources. Tag as unreferenced and if not fixed in a month nominate for deletion. Guy (Help!) 21:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Hi JzG just thought I should say that there are plenty of articles with only one source and sometimes none so why haven't you deleted them? And if it's because of the fanfiction in Electrosphere if you havn't noticed I remove all of that and have kept all the reliable information and some of this info can be found in the game by using the aitcraft. So what exacally is the problem?Sam ov the blue sand 22:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Question: how do you eat an elephant? Answer: one slice at a time. Unsourced articles are nominated for deletion one by one as they are found. The source you cite does not look reliable, and that is the sole source - plus the vast majority of the article is plainly written from direct observation (we call this original research and it's not allowed). Sorry, them's the breaks. Guy (Help!) 22:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I said I get rid of the fanfiction and other such things if you can piont out some of the problems that would be helpful to prove my piont.Sam ov the blue sand 22:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Problem one: total absence of substantial reliable secondary sources. First, find your sources, then clean up the article. No sources, no article. Did I mention sources? Guy (Help!) 22:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
And that is the only thing wrong with it? But like I said before I can't find any other sources all the other ones have things like "This aircraft is believed to be able to fly in outer space" or "This aircraft is believed to run on an atomic generator", and I can't use crap like that so Electrosphere is the only place I can find anything but I'm guessing that you don't care about what I'm saying and will just say what you said before like other admins (no offense to admins, they have stressful jobs). So there is absolutly no way to have an article with only one source? Not one way?Sam ov the blue sand 23:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
No, it's not the only thing, but it is the first and worst, because without sources we cannot have an article at all, so without sources it is simply not worth expending any effort rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. No sources, no article, no exceptions. So: first, find good sources. If you can't, then you've chosen the wrong subject, bad luck, pick another one. Multiple, non-trivial, independent sources is what's required, and your one source fails that test, so in fact you have no independent non-trivial sources. In point of fact there is precedent for deleting articles which have one reasonably good source, but your source is not reasonably good. Sorry. Guy (Help!) 23:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Whatever thanks for the help.Sam ov the blue sand 00:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Barrett v. Rosenthal

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Barrett v. Rosenthal. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Barrett v. Rosenthal/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Barrett v. Rosenthal/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad (Acting as Assistant to the Clerk) 23:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


That AFD

Huntress and Lee are sockpuppets, as established by checkuser, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Lee_Nysted I just thought you'd like to know. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 19:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Troll-B-Gon

Guy, excuse my ignorance but this new reversion tool seems to be a little inflammatory at worst and spam at best. The summary edit currently reads "Comment removed using Troll-B-Gon Professional v 1.0". i have noticed a few people using it today. Is there a way to turn off the troll-B-gon tag line? David D. (Talk) 22:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

So it's a joke? I'm confused now. David D. (Talk) 22:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
A joke it is. Satire on Popups and the like. Nysted is a vanity spammer. Guy (Help!) 23:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Sigh, hook, line and sinker ! Seeing two troll-b-gon edits by different users in the space of a few minutes really fooled me. Where did it originate? David D. (Talk) 23:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Where can I buy one of these? -- Steel 23:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

OMG GPL PLZ. —xyzzyn 23:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
In keeping with normal practice in user scripts, I have created a page for it at User:JzG/Troll-B-Gon, with download instructions. Guy (Help!) 09:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:You spat in my soup!

Very good. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Name

It's much harder to find your contibutions now your sig is an English word. And that's a shame because they are always interesting. Stephen B Streater 09:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Nicole Kidman

Thanks for protecting Nicole Kidman. I was alsointerested in whether the IPs were related, and why it seemed to be a coordinated attack? --Steve (Slf67) 10:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion Review

Guy, you restored histories for Bought Science and Problems with the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) while they are on deletion review. I've now cited the sources that they are copyright violations of there, so WP:CSD#G4 definitely applies, but I don't want to reverse another administrators actions. GRBerry 16:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete away, I was just ensuring that nobody could possibly filibuster the thing, one look at the content is more than enough to satisfy any rational person that this has no place here, copyvio or not. Guy (Help!) 20:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture assistance

Hi Guy ! Earlier, I had written to the University of Heidelberg for permission to use the picture of Gerhard von Rad but did not get any reply - I had matter-of-factly stated that I wish to upload it onto Misplaced Pages. After waiting for a while, I had uploaded the picture. As an Administrator, may I request you to suggest me possible ways to get back the picture. I've seen your edits on Victor Premasagar - thanks for the same.Pradeep 17:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand what you are asking. Have you lost the original, or are you trying to get an image with unknown copyright reinstated? If the former I can mail it to you, if the latter then I am not too comfortable with that. Guy (Help!) 20:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion Review

Hi Guy! You deleted the article for Dupobs on the grounds that it did not assert Notability. The band includes a member of A Spectre Is Haunting Europe (which was noted in the article), which meets Notability guidelines. I think it should be restored because of crossover in band membership (Notability Criterion 6 - "Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable"). Could you please restore it?--jeandjinni talk

  • That criterion is badly worded. These are not criteria for notability, they are indicators that notability criteria might be met. Notability criteria are, as for all articles, multiple non-trivial coverage in reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. Guy (Help!) 21:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I hate to jump in here, but the criterion has also been included in WP:MUSIC for quite a while with minimal complaint and no efforts to change it. Maybe there weren't sources, but that's not a speedy criteria. --badlydrawnjeff talk 21:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Jeff, I know you reverted the guideline back to allowing all these as criteria which on their own establish notability, but the previous version was correct, because without sources it doesn't matter how many records are sold, we can't have an article without violating fundamental policy. Guy (Help!) 21:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • But you're talking about two different things. Apples and oranges. Things can have the requisite sources without being "notable." Besides, I'm not even sure why WP:N is a guideline - it directs people to the specific guidelines for different subjects - and the way you changed it back - again without discussion - weakens the whole thing. And your speedy was still improper. --badlydrawnjeff talk 22:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Except that it wasn't without discussion. Can you come up with an example of something which has multiple non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources but is not notable? Guy (Help!) 22:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Considering that the WP:N page asserts that the N guideline "is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception.", a reasonable and prudent editor would defer to the more specific guidelines about Notability for music as indicated on WP:MUSIC, where any one of a number of criteria are acceptable as evidence of being notable. If the criterion is "badly worded", explain why, and make the argument to change it. As it stands the article was speedily deleted because you didn't agree with the wording on WP:MUSIC, not because the article was inconsistent with the guidelines. The article should be restored.--jeandjinni talk
  • Guy, please restore the article. First of all, dupobs contains a member of a group that meets notability guidelines. Second, I suspect the deletion was instigated by unfamiliarity with what concerns dupobs (i.e., their conceptual art take on the marketing of pop music), and their uniqueness. I think this is the case because a past contribution I wrote, on "man-made trance" was deleted: I didn't protest the deletion because the article was merely a stub, but the deletion of man-made trance was clearly a case of someone not being familiar with the concept, and the fact that there is little English language information on this topic: the term "man-made trance" was coined by the Japanese band Rovo. I believe something similar has happened with the dupobs article. In any case, please trust that many contributors to Misplaced Pages do have specialized areas of knowledge and that their contributions are made with good reason. I hope to see the dupobs article back up sometime soon.

Cube World

Why did you delete it man? I want to learn about it.Pendo 4 23:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)Pendo 4

Alientrap

You deleted the Alientrap article for lack of nobility, But it linked to this: www.alientrap.org/verm/nexuiz.jpg How is that not enough? Revert the deletion —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.64.168.4 (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2007 (UTC).

New Image for WP:NCR

I've made a new, free and more formal image for WP:NCR. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 22:53, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Yes ads

Jeffrey Gustafson recreated Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Yes ads. User:Zoe|(talk) 01:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

RFC proposal

FYI, this proposal is actually getting a bit of comment now, after a few days of gathering dust; however, the comments thus far seem to be indicating that I may have misread the desire for something to actually be done with RfC/User to make it work a bit more smoothly. (And one person called it added bureaucracy despite the numerous indications that it's not supposed to be one, of course; I should have expected that.) Tony Fox (arf!) 23:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Score (magazine)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Score (magazine). Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. (Additional) - I am requesting that recreation protection be removed. Although the previous version of the article was little more than a stub, this has been a major magazine for the last 12 years or so and is also a video producer. I could find no indication (via the history) that this went through AFD. I attempted to restore the page but it appears the protection must be removed by the admin who protected it. 23skidoo 17:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Laura

Hey there, I just read the page you have on Laura, and I must say, I feel your loss, and for what little it may be worth, I am sorry. I won't say I wished it turned out differently, or somesuch, because I know how empty those words seem when you've lost someone, but what I will say, is having lost many myself, I know how it feels. People say over time it fades, and maybe it does, but it never gets any easier to deal with. I'm not going to be around Misplaced Pages much any more due to personal problems, but I'll be keeping an eye on my talk page. Drop me a note if you ever need anything. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 21:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


RfArb regarding Lucky 6.9 (talk · contribs)

I have completely revised my statement in regards to this RfArb I started regarding administrator User:Lucky 6.9. In particular, given a couple days to reflect on others' comments, I make a substantially different point, completely unrelated to furthering accusations toward the administrator. I would appreciate if you'd take a quick glance. Link Reswobslc 00:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

The Senate of Serampore College (University)

You deleted this article as the pushing of a diploma mill - as the place is 200 years old and does appear to kosher this seems rather harsh! The author is re-working and tidying it as a sub page and them plans to re-introduce it - this sounds okay to me. Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! 07:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

  • The problem was that the senate of serampore university was being represented as an accreditation body. I'm sure Serampore University is valid, I am not sure that the senamte of that body is a separate entity and I am sure that the senate article was being used to Gastroturf unaccredited institutions. Guy (Help!) 09:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


User bazzajf vandalsim

Please, I am enquiring as to whether you can do anything with this user. The Research PC available to myself and my university colleagues for afterhours research is often used by this user bazzajf also. For whatever reason, whenever he uses this PC on Misplaced Pages for his editing, the whole IP address gets blocked once he has logged in as himself on this IP and my colleagues and I are unable to have editing privilege because of this, is there anything that can be done? 62.77.181.16 15:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

User:172.161.68.238

Removing his comments from my talk page will not prevent me from reading them, you know. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 16:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Didn't you warn Dino about legal threats?

I believe that, considering Dino claims to be a member of Free Republic/Jim Robinson's legal team, these two posts from today (especially the second) constitute 'vieled' implicated threats. LINK Please look at my latest edits to the Free Republic article. I've been a 'good boy'. - Fairness & Accuracy For All 20:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleting a redirect?

I'd imagine this would be largely uncontroversial. JB196's unpublished "book" currently has a redirect to the Xtreme Pro Wrestling article. The original article was deleted via Afd, yet a version of the article is in the page history. I can't see a relevant speedy category, but I'm sure one must apply? Thanks One Night In Hackney 21:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Not sure why it was created to start with, as the original article hadn't been deleted at that point anyway. One Night In Hackney 01:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

undo

Hi. I'm catching up a bit. What's with this undo option on diffs? Sometimes it appears and sometimes it doesn't. And the only time I've pressed it it refused giving an edit conflict. Stephen B Streater 22:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It's quite cool, it will undo a single edit provided there are no intervening edits which touch the same text. It doesn't work all the time, but sometimes it can save all sorts of effort. Guy (Help!) 22:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
That is cool. For example, some vandalism which has been missed can still be undone easily :-) Stephen B Streater 07:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Fensteren

Can you explain your block of this user? How was this user self-evidently a sockpuppet? Thanks, Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

  • See this thread - he was invited by one of the warring parties on the Free Republic article to participate in an RfC and other processes based on his sage input before he made his first edit to that article or its talk page, which makes him either a sockpuppet or a meatpuppet, I don't care which. Guy (Help!) 16:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
That was based on his "sage input" to a related meatpuppet investigation. It's unfortunate that your misunderstanding of what I was referring to has led to the permablocking of an intelligent contributor who never edited the Free Republic article, and was not in the slightest way disruptive. Anyway, your efforts to delegitimize the RfC have failed, and you are again cordially invited to comment there regarding the conduct of BenBurch. In light of your expressed concerns about WP:COI and his founding of a trying to prove the Bush Administration is fascist, BenBurch's editing of an article about an organization he describes as "a rubber stamp for Bush Administration policy" raises a legitimate WP:COI concern, wouldn't you agree? Dino 17:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
See Fensteren (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log). A couple of edits to Panther tank, one to M1 Garand rifle, nothing for a week, reply to a welcome message, and his sixth edit was to the vexatious BenBurch sockpuppet investivgation started by User:BryanFromPalatine using his block-evading sockpuppet User:ClemsonTiger and pursued by you. Actually that's not the whole story - on Jan 24, Fensteren created BenBurch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), using the RFCU boilerplate. You're asking me to believe that this is an independent user who just happens to know lots about Wikiprocess and pursue precisely the same vendetta as BryanFromPalatine? Seriously? Ask ArbCom to review that one, I'm not unblocking it. Guy (Help!) 18:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Accusations

Please take a look here and please comment.

I was acting in good faith when I requested you to delete the info as a part of my attempts to regain a bit of my privacy. Thanks for doing so. I wasn't aware you had done it until Ilena alerted me to it. I'll of course back her up about the fact that I have previously revealed personal info about myself. I have never denied that I have done so.

Since she has brought her Usenet wars here to Misplaced Pages, I have become more concerned about my own and my family's security and have begun deleting my uses of my own name, as well as other's use of it, as my edit history will reveal, starting about here. I searched Misplaced Pages and deleted several places where I have foolishly (in restrospect) used my real name.

It appears that the edit history of my user page has been deleted too far, so as to even delete the evidence of Ilena's vandalism of my user page!

That deletion has naturally removed her actions from her own edit history as well. Maybe the whole thing should be restored until the RfArb is over. Can that be done? My timing was apparently bad, so maybe we can wait and do this after it's all over. It won't remove her revealing of our (several other editors as well) identities, which she has done on her attack websites (I have been sent a long list of them), but at least it will make it more difficult for various trolls and weirdos to hassle me. -- Fyslee 16:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I really do want to have the deletion undone. Ilena should not be able to use my good faith attempts to protect my privacy as another excuse to exercise bad faith and accuse me of wrongdoing. -- Fyslee 18:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)