| Revision as of 10:58, 7 April 2007 edit128.241.105.205 (talk) reverting vandalism from an outof control dronebot← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:11, 7 April 2007 edit undoGamaliel (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators93,883 editsm Reverted edits by 128.241.105.205 (talk) to last version by VagishNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ]Hello |
]Hello, welcome to my talk page. To leave a new message, . Please try to keep it relatively organized by signing your posts, posting new topics on the '''bottom''' of the page, making relevant headings about your topic and using subheadings, not new headings, for replies. '''I will almost always reply on this page to messages'''. I reserve the right to make minor changes of formatting (headings, bolding, etc.) but not content in order to preserve the readablilty of this page. I will delete without comment rude and/or insulting comments, trolling, threats, comments from people with a history of insults and incivility, and comments posted to the top of this page. Also, I'm much more informal than this disclaimer implies. Thank you. Rock on. | ||
| '''Archives:''' ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | '''Archives:''' ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ||
| Line 668: | Line 668: | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| <small>You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the ]. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. ] 04:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC) | <small>You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the ]. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. ] 04:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ] 10:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:11, 7 April 2007
Hello, welcome to my talk page. To leave a new message, click here. Please try to keep it relatively organized by signing your posts, posting new topics on the bottom of the page, making relevant headings about your topic and using subheadings, not new headings, for replies. I will almost always reply on this page to messages. I reserve the right to make minor changes of formatting (headings, bolding, etc.) but not content in order to preserve the readablilty of this page. I will delete without comment rude and/or insulting comments, trolling, threats, comments from people with a history of insults and incivility, and comments posted to the top of this page. Also, I'm much more informal than this disclaimer implies. Thank you. Rock on.
Archives: 3-8/04 | 9-11/04 | 11/04-2/05 | 2-4/05 | 5-7/05 | 8-10/05 | 11/05-2/06 | 3-7/06 | 8/06-1/07
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Xanadumoviecover.jpeg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Xanadumoviecover.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 17:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
){kind=link}
Regarding my comments concerning Free Republic
They might have been slightly incivil - but certainly true. The site we're talking about has a documented history of being so extreme (up until 9/11 when they underwent a 'sea change') that they theorized that Clinton bombed the Murrah building in Oklahoma City so that he could pass anti-terror legislation....
The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Reichstag Fire
More nuttery from this time period
And even speculated that the US. Gov, not Al Qaeda, bombed The USS Cole : "IMO the Cole bombing, if not another American Reichstag event, is AWFULLY convenient for a lot of Clinton goals.."
Cole bombing - An American Reichstag?
From the Stony Brook Press on Dec 3, 2006:
"Free Republic. HOLY CRAP IN A GOVERNMENT-APPROVED HANDBAG!!! The people of www.freerepublic.com are as psychotic as can possibly be. Now I understand that there are many conservatives that support Bush, the Iraq War, or other Bush Administration policies. But this site, its founders, and its posters take this America-worship to a new level! A new level of psycho has been achieved! Free Republic is another one of these blog sites, a right-wing one, but it’s different from the others, mainly because these people aren’t conservatives, nor are they neoconservatives. They are complete and total fascists. They abhor, though they won’t admit it, every value America was founded on. The moderator and founder, Jim Robinson, deletes any post that contradicts the opinion of himself, his members, and the Bush Administration. If you question any American policies (as long as they are Republican-made ones), you get banned. No questions asked."
More recent criticism of Free Republic See ? Fairness & Accuracy For All 20:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Not that you need the help
Or would even welcome it from me, but I put in a good word for you. Good luck with this group. I don't envy you getting into the middle of it. - Crockspot 22:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your kind words. They are appreciated. I'm not looking forward to the inevitable shitstorm, but there's nothing I can do about that except put on my boots and hope for the best. Gamaliel 21:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Cabelas has reasonably priced chest waders. You'll need 'em!. - Crockspot 21:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 6 | 5 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
offsite contact
Love the ready to fuck you up oldschool. Have you a method of offsite contact (messenger, email, etc.)? Thanks. /Blaxthos 18:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Just follow this to email me. Gamaliel 18:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
semiprotection on Peter Roskam
Why did you sp the article? I see a lot of activity, but I wouldn't call it vandalism, and most of the editing is by established editors, with only one IP lately, and that editor seemed to be adding controversial content, but not vandalism. I added the {{semiprotected}} tag, since you forgot to --rogerd 21:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Persistent disruption by a banned user is the reason I semi protected the article. Gamaliel 21:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Roskam/Hinnen
I've had it with this nut and his threats. I am gone from there until he finally gets the community ban he deserves. Let him WP:OWN this thing. I am SO disgusted. --BenBurch 17:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please consider sticking around. I'm pretty fed up with his behavior to and I was going to smack him with a rolled up newspaper today. Gamaliel 17:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I am on semi-wikibreak, but I will not leave entirely. Now I have a radio network to go run. (BTW, if you want to hear about my several radio projects, just ask!) --BenBurch 17:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Check WP:AN/I Hinnen is self-destructing. Or not. Maybe he'll convince somebody to ban me. At this point I hardly care because he has sucked all the fun out of this activity. --BenBurch 23:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- you're fed up... a lot of good Republicans in the Sixth Congressional District, which read Misplaced Pages are fed up with you and your partisan agenda and bureaucratic bullying and partisan little childern. So, grow up and take responsibility for your little fifedom, and truly make the article encyclopedic and neutral in point of view, which should have been done almost a year ago. Your behavior, in that, to allow the Roskam biography to stand for so long in such shabby and partisan tone borders on malfeasance. You don't get it - You're playing in the big leagues with the big boys now.207.67.151.184 01:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Which might mean something if you were not posting from San Diego... http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/ipall.ch?ip=207.67.151.184 --BenBurch 01:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Eh, it's just baby Joe again. Ignore him. Gamaliel 02:29, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I am not sure that the dnsstuff.com thing is accurate. It says I am in New Jersey, but I am in Indiana --rogerd 03:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- DNS geo-location is only *mostly* accurate. --BenBurch 03:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- That IP is an anonymous proxy according to a source I just checked; http://www.maxmind.com/app/lookup_city --BenBurch 05:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Colbert vandal
Hi. You blocked Kione (talk • contribs). I think Neoist (talk • contribs) and NinePoundHammer (talk • contribs) are the same vandal as well; note their contribution histories. I'm not an admin or I'd block them myself. --A. B. 20:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Neoist has already been blocked by another editor, but I blocked NinePoundHammer. Gamaliel 20:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Kyra Phillips "criticisms" section
Hi. You reverted an edit of mine under the "Criticisms" section of the Kyra Phillips article. I deleted two of the "criticisms" for a good reason: 1) the link referring to the "gay parent" interview does NOT quote Kelly McBride (the person referenced in the Wiki article) as actually "criticizing" Phillips herself; it merely quotes McBride as making a general statement about anchors in general. The link article makes it sound as if McBride is referring to Phillips, but there's no way to ascertain that without a McBride quote directly mentioning Philips' name. As it stands, the gay parent interview criticism in the Phillips Misplaced Pages article is blatant, off-topic commentary residing in the middle of what should ordinarily be just a simple biography.
2) The included references to the other "criticism" I deleted -- on Phillips' comments during the 2006 French labor protests -- a) don't work (link #8); and b) can't be verified online (link #9).
Unless you can think of a compelling reason to retain the two aforementioned "criticisms" in the Phillips article, they should be deleted. J.R. Hercules 06:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- 1)It is not "off-topic commentary", it is a reliable mainstream source using a prominent Phillips gaffe as an example of a wider trend.
- 2)I can't speak to reference number 8, but reference number 9 is a reliable source and I have read the article myself. The fact that it "can't be verified online" is not a valid reason to remove properly sourced information. I will email you a copy of the Financial Times article if you wish. Just contact me via email with your email address. Gamaliel 13:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Tbeatty's deletion of my talk comments
Could you possibly ask Tbeatty not to continually delete my talk comments - ones that aren't directed at him with tenuous BLP claims?
I posted the following on the Roskam page regarding the well-documented homophobic breakaway faction of the Episcopal church that Roskam belongs to - and Tbeatty deleted it. He does this on a semi regular basis. tbeatty's deletion
- The leader of Roskam's sect, Peter Akinola, supports a Nigerian law that "levies a five-year automatic prison sentence not only on almost every expression of gay identity and sexuality but also on giving advice or support to lesbians or gay men." gay.com This guy is a serious homophobe ! : "UJA, Nigeria, Dec. 20 — The way he tells the story, the first and only time Archbishop Peter J. Akinola knowingly shook a gay person’s hand, he sprang backward the moment he realized what he had done." NYTimes Homophobic Bishop No wonder the Roskamites want to downplay his membership in this sect! - User:Fairness And Accuracy For AllFAAFA 05:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
The only thing that is possibly objectionable is my neologism 'Roskamites' - but he deleted the whole thing. (I posted this on Georgeherbert's page too) Thanks! - FAAFA 10:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- My suggestion is to repost your comments without the phrases "This guy is a serious homophobe" and "NYTimes Homophobic Bishop". If he removes them again after that, I'll have a chat with him. Gamaliel 13:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Controversy
I've noticed that many believe that some of your actions as a moderator are quite POV. Now, assuming good faith on all sides, might I ask what your opinion is? RW 09:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- My opinion is that many pov warriors resort to accusations of bias as a cheap debating tactic. I've found the quicker they resort to it, the more likely they are going to be an uncooperative and uncivil editor in the long run. Gamaliel 15:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Deletions at Peter Roskam
Calton is deleting well-sourced positive material about Peter Roskam: his legislative voting record, including an amendment that he authored on a bill that eventually passed 400-3. I believe that the legislative record should be the centerpiece of a biographical article about a legislator. But I've been told that if I want to balance all the criticisms that linger in this article from the campaign, I must delete the criticisms. Of course, that would start a dispute with Propol and Goethean. Calton doesn't care to discuss it; he prefers to just delete the material with a less than entirely civil edit summary. Your intervention is respectfully requested. Dino 13:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've added my comments to Talk:Peter Roskam. Gamaliel 22:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please review the edit I made. Thanks. --BenBurch 22:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Arrgh. Dean seems to have decided to make a WP:POINT point. --BenBurch 23:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, I've decided to make a consensus without you. Propol has been a very pleasant surprise, Tbeatty has been reliable as always, and the result is very exciting. Gamaliel, come on over and share our joy. I've asked for a review of the decision to deny Good Article status, and removed the NPOV header on the mainspace. Dino 15:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 7 | 12 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
My Talk Page
I you could please kindly point to the wiki-rule that says I can not blank my talk page and it is after all my talk page, this is my IP (though it's used by multiple users I come from this IP address and everything I do is under this IP) and I would be more than happy to cease if you would just please show me the wiki-rule that says I have no control over what people put on my talk page.--209.137.175.59 02:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Not even going to respond to my message? Just going to continue to edit my page? --209.137.175.59 07:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Since it was 2am my time I figured I had plenty of time to get around to it. But you want a reply, here it is: stop wasting everyone's time, including your own. It is not your talk page, it is a Misplaced Pages talk page. The needs of the project are more important than your desire for a blank page. If you want a clean page, get a free Misplaced Pages account. That's it. Gamaliel 07:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
You're a pretty sneaky guy, but I'm sure I can contribute now. Thanks for helping me see the light. --Socko111 08:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Deletion question
I was unable to follow the directions to recommend deletion of an article. I could not set up the entry page to receive comments. I found the Blalock article this afternoon; you must have removed it later.
Also, I cannot understand how to place photos in stories. I tried to do so by following an example of a photo in place on another article, but it would not work. Do you have two to five steps on how to do this.
Thanks,
Billy Hathorn 02:41, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Drnopenguin.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Drnopenguin.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:02, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
){kind=link}
Good Faith
According to your "tips for angry new users" you advise to always assume good faith. So, why am I a troller because I disagree with your opinion on Joe Scarborough? Mr. Ray Lopez 05:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Your long track of trolling? Just a guess, there. --Calton | Talk 05:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hrrm, Wikistalk much Calton? I guess that's why so many people have an issue with YOU on here. Mr. Ray Lopez 06:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Nope, given your track record, it's quality control. --Calton | Talk 07:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and your track record is so much better. How's your Cogsportif Sock Puppet Ring running for you Calton? Mr. Ray Lopez 07:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Nope, given your track record, it's quality control. --Calton | Talk 07:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hrrm, Wikistalk much Calton? I guess that's why so many people have an issue with YOU on here. Mr. Ray Lopez 06:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Mr. Ray Lopez
He's acting out again. A comment at WP:AN would be helpful right about now. --Calton | Talk 07:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Why do you continue to harass me? Mr. Ray Lopez 07:44, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Wow, looks like a lot of stuff happened while I was asleep. Good to see that this troll was quickly blocked this time, without having to put up with his crap for months again. Gamaliel 14:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 8 | 19 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Scottmckenziestainedglassreflections.jpeg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Scottmckenziestainedglassreflections.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Angr 07:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
){kind=link}
Wow, that was fast!
You just blocked a username that I was just posting a notice about on the Admin Noticeboard. GJ and thanks. :)
-- TomXP411 18:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
User: Getaway
We're having some trouble over at the Sam Brownback article. I think the real problem is that there aren't enough people contributing. Addionally Getaway has some interesting thoughts on what wikipedia is. Can you weigh in? Or suggest other options? I have requested contributions, put a NPOV tag on the page, and taken other measures, but we still have a pretty unproductive article. Jerimee 18:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- If you want more contributors, a good place to request assistance is Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment. Before I become further involved in this dispute, I'm wondering if you can sum up what you think is going on at that article in a couple of sentences. Thank you. Gamaliel 19:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- This comment was left on my talk page: I've been asked to take a look at the dispute at Sam Brownback, and I have to say that my initial impression of the dispute is not favorable towards you. The issues in dispute appear to be very minor matters that should be able to be resolved amicably, but your throwing out of terms like "POV pushing" and "censorship" certainly doesn't help matters, and is going to stop immediately. If you'd like to, please summarize your perception of the dispute in a couple of sentences and we'll see what we can do to bring this towards a resolution. Gamaliel 19:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC) RESPONSE: I'm fine with you taking a look at it. However, let me point out that I am not the only one who was crying "POV pushing" or even the first. Just for the record here are the edit history comments where Jerimee called my work "POV", etc.: Jerimee removes info again and calls my work "POV", and here: Jerimee removes all info again and once again calls my work "POV" and here: Jerimee removes all info again and once again calls my work "POV" and here: Jerimee removes all info again and once again calls my work "POV". But more importantly, Jerimee has removed information that is sourced and relevant and notable. Brownback's major claim to fame as a Senator is the Human Trafficking work, that needs to be clearly and fully outlined. Brownback worked as a broadcaster when he was younger. Jerimee has stated repeatedly that he is going to remove that from the article because in his opinion it should not be there. Brownback lists it in his literature, CQ Politics lists it on there site and I have placed in the article a quote, that Jerimee keeps removing, where he talks about broadcasting, in response to questions about his broadcasting. I have asked Jerimee several times to provide an independent third-party reliable source to back up his personal opinion that Brownback pads his resume and I will remove it. I have agreed to several of his edits, even though I have not necessarily agreed with them. I have compromised. Jerimee has not. I agreed to have the criticism of Brownback in the article about his Congressional attendance record even though it was only for one month and it might not meet the requirement of notability. I have agreed to several other edits. I have been talking on the talk page, but Jerimee has not been responding to me. Also, I am NOT the only one who is in violation of the 3RR rule. The edit history of where he takes them out, just today only, looks like this: First Removal Today and Second Removal Today and Third Removal Today and Fourth Removal Today and Fifth Removal Today and Sixth Removal Today and Seventh Removal Today and Eighth Removal Today and Ninth Removal Today and Tenth Removal Today. So to sum up, I tend agree with your comments above that you left on my talk page. Yeah, I my work here has not been favorable, but based upon the documented times that Jerimee has reverted me, in just one day, no one can state that Jerimee's work has been favorable either. I'm willing to compromise, like I have in the past, I would just ask Jerimee to attempt to compromise with me also. It should be a two way street. For example, the 3RR rule applies to him just as it does to me. Also, I have provided sourced, fully cited info for the article and he just can't remove item just because he does not want them in there. Have a good day!--Getaway 20:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- You are correct, the 3RR rule applies to all, and both you and Jerimee were blocked for it by another administrator.
- If I am reading the content dispute correctly, the objection to your edits seems to be that they represent "overkill" and "padding". Whether or not this is correct I do not know, but it is a legitimate point of dispute in a content discussion. Asking for a citation that "Brownback pads his resume" is a non sequitir. I think it would be helpful if both of you got back to discussing the content of the articles instead of who is or isn't "POV pushing", etc. Gamaliel 21:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Cause of death
Hi, I notice that you are a regular contributor to the List of Notable Deaths section. Could you please also add the cause of death when you make an entry? It is usually listed in the article that you have cited, and it saves the rest of us from having to edit the list. Thanks. WWGB 22:51, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 9 | 26 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Question.
You probably saw my message on User talk:207.195.245.205. Did I do the right thing? I know I'm not an administrator, but I have seen a non-administrator do that before. I was in the area at the time and was hoping to reduce the admins' backlog slightly. Acalamari 19:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think there's any harm done, though if he posts another request I'd leave it for another user to deal with. Gamaliel 19:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Okay. Thanks for clearing things up. Acalamari 19:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Social impact of H5N1
Well, you didn't like my intro/summary of the politics section of Social impact of H5N1. So how would you introduce/summarize that section? WAS 4.250 21:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- It seems fine as it is now, I just don't see any need to define spin in the introduction of an article. Gamaliel 21:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
LOTR:TT revert
You recently reverted an edit I made to the Two Towers page in the 9/11 Controversy section and therein reintroduced several inaccuracies in the article. I was a close friend of Klerck until his passing, and was in frequent communication with him when he created the 9/11/Two Towers petition. Klerck knew very well that The Two Towers was the name of the book (he read the series in high school for fucks sake) and intended the whole thing as a joke (he was a well known internet troll). Do you have some reason to dispute my edit? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.179.146.13 (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC).
- All edits to Misplaced Pages must be verifiable and have to cite reliable sources. If this account appears in a newspaper article or similar source, it can be included in the article. If not, then the edits have to stay out, sorry. Gamaliel 20:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Could we get a hand at Free Republic?
Could we get a hand from some Admins over at the Free Republic article? I asked for an Admin to weigh in 6 days ago. The specific issue is if a Free Republic rally that they hoped would draw 20,000 people and only drew 100 (AP) to 200 (FR) should have that aspect of the rally mentioned. I say definitely yes - and cite for precedent politician Katherine_Harris#Staff_resignations who had a campaign rally expected to draw 500+. When only 40 people showed up, it made ALL the newspapers and news shows. If 500 people HAD shown up, and she hadn't said or done anything controversial, it would not have been notable, and wouldn't have covered outside of local media. The lack of attendance is what's notable. Same with Free Republic's rally in D.C. Also - if a quote from Natalie Maines should be separated from the body of the text and paragraph and put in the lead to give it extra prominence. Thanks - FaAfA (yap) 02:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Mary, Mary
Thanks for catching the vandalism to this article as quickly as you did. To my way of thinking, people like that clearly are not serious about contributing to Misplaced Pages and should be blocked immediately, rather than be let off with a warning. SFTVLGUY2 17:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Cleanup templates
Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup" etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 13:07 5 March 2007 (GMT).
- Oh, crap, I had no idea. I was so used to people complaining that I didn't subst things that I started subst-ing everything. Thanks for the heads up. Gamaliel 18:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 10 | 5 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Jonah Goldberg question
Hi I noticed you were an admin and had edited on the Jonah Goldberg page so I wanted your advice. There's been an individual from multiple ips who's been vandalizing this entry pretty constantly (putting in LBJ as his dad) . Then he put a pretty nasty comment about me in the talk page. I was willing to let it go but someone rv'd it and I read the WP:NPA and as it was homophobic it was pretty clear that it had no place. They have also kept putting it in (so I've been taking it out). Anyway my question is what do you think a good course of action. Should I ask for it to be semiprotected? Makgraf 02:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Just FYI
I think the {{subst:testN}} warning templates have been deprecated in favor of the {{subst:uw-testN}} templates. I'm not sure what the advantage is. Misplaced Pages:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace#Usual_warnings. WP:UW is the project that made the changes. --Tbeatty 08:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Man, I can't keep up with this stuff. Too many templates! Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 23:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know. I wish there were more explanations as to why it needs to be updated or changed. Templates are supposed to make it easier to issue warnings, not harder. Now I have to look them up all the time. --Tbeatty 00:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 11 | 12 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
ninety-nine accounts of sockpuppets on the wall... ninety-nine accounts of sockpuppets...
thanks for the support on talk:fnc. patience and persistance have always been two of my strong points, but i'm glad when other editors step in and validate what i'm saying (because I do second-guess myself at times). thanks for keeping me oriented and voicing your support. on an unrelated note, how would you evaluate my chances as an RfA candidate? /Blaxthos 15:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late reply. Glad I could help in a small way over there. I've been staying away because I just don't have the kind of patience you have for dealing with people like that.
- I'm not familiar with your overall edit history so I can't say for sure. My advice is to see what kind of resumes the candidates currently up on RfA have and see if you measure up, statistically and experience-wise. For what it's worth, I'd vote for you. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 23:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
You're Going To Love This...
Take a look a this page. Spot anyone familiar? Acalamari 22:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Geesh. Some people need better hobbies. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 23:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Your attention to James Buchanan is requested
We have people attempting to insert Loewen's non-NPOV pop history into the article again. Any help you could offer at the Talk:James Buchanan page would be appreciated.K. Scott Bailey 17:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'll stop by in a day or two and add my comments. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 23:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- You may want to expedite your actions, as someone there has suggested that the editing block be lifted because they seem to have canvased likeminded folk in an attempt to get the POV-pushing allowed per consensus, but against WP policy.K. Scott Bailey 00:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Wow, way to assume good faith, K. Scott Bailey. -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Way to gather support for inserting material via consensus that is in violation of WP policy. And please refrain from following me around to other people's talk pages.K. Scott Bailey 03:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Wow, way to assume good faith, K. Scott Bailey. -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- You may want to expedite your actions, as someone there has suggested that the editing block be lifted because they seem to have canvased likeminded folk in an attempt to get the POV-pushing allowed per consensus, but against WP policy.K. Scott Bailey 00:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- They are now putting this to a "vote."K. Scott Bailey 02:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Never mind. I've withdrawn from the debate, and will be removing James Buchanan from my anti-vandalism watch list. I'm done fighting against the ones wanting to include POV-pushing "sources."K. Scott Bailey 04:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
conspiracy theory
I was just deleting the Mary O'Grady conspiracy crap as Mgunn did. 68.37.97.101 21:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Incorrect. You removed a link to her Wall Street Journal biography page. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 22:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 12 | 20 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" | News and notes: Bad sin, milestones |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Thought you might enjoy this comment on nonworking internal links
Per your discussion on the Rube Goldberg TALK page. SBHarris 21:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 13 | 26 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 13:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Wally Pleasant
hello, I have removed wally's last name from this page. We'd rather it not be posted for personal reasons. Thanks so much for the attention to his page! Miranda Records —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.22.239.226 (talk) 17:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC).
- I wasn't the person who added his real name, I'm just the last person who edited the article. You should probably leave a note on Talk:Wally Pleasant instead. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 17:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thanks for the help
SBVT page stuff
Hi Gamaliel - Having a bit of a kerfuffle over at Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. You will see from the edit history and some of the recent Talk page ("Book Section") discussion between another editor and me that there is some disagreement about what constitutes "original research," what is proper sourcing, etc. Maybe you will drop in and offer your reasoned opinion? Thanks --EECEE 01:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Good. I was just coming here myself to ask for you to weigh in. My compromise, so that I could end the argument and continue with the reference formatting, was to place an {{or}} flag on the sentence in question, and move on. But apparently that is not even acceptable to EECEE. I see it as clearly violating WP:ATT, but even if you do not see it so clearly, surely it is at least acceptable for me to flag it as possible OR. I agreed to assist Blaxthos in formatting the inline hyperlinks, and am mainly doing just that, but if I see something that I think is improper, I am going to act on it. I am willing to simply flag things I think are problematic, rather than remove them. But only if I have some assurance that my flags are not going to be immediately removed by the article's owners. I also don't appreciate having my good faith questioned by Derex by his implication that I was going to bring my wikicabal into this. I wonder if you were one of the names on his predictive "list". - Crockspot 14:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism warnings
Do you guys have a delay on your user warnings system?
I received 1 message today advising me to stop vandalising wiki pages. I then receive a 2nd message, on the same day, issuing a warning. Why send two messages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.31.65.25 (talk • contribs)
- Because you vandalized more than once. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 22:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 14 | 2 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)