Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:36, 23 June 2007

• Table of contents
• First discussion
• End of page
• New post

• WP:VPA
• WP:VP/A

If you wish to report vandalism, please go to Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism instead.

If you have a specific question to ask, you may go to Misplaced Pages:Ask a question or MediaWiki Help instead.

These discussions will be kept archived for 7 more days. During this period the discussion can be moved to a relevant talk page if appropriate. After 7 days the discussion will be permanently removed.

Image needs adjustment

This is a good photo, but the lighting has made the colours awful. The ice should be white, not brownish-yellow. Could someone with Photoshop (or whatever) give this some quick attention? -Joshuapaquin 01:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Is this better?--72.81.33.113 01:48, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I've uploaded a new version with autocorrected white balance over the original. I also scaled the image down by 6, since it seemed to have been previously scaled up by that factor; this did wonders for the file size. (In the future, Misplaced Pages:Graphics Lab may be a better place for requests like this.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism of my user page

A few hours ago, an IP vandalised my user page as seen here, adding "This user is a Rank 5 rapist!" to the top. I've reverted the change, of course, but I'm not sure what to do. First: what warning should be left for the IP, which has never had a message on its talk page: Template:Uw-npa1, Template:Uw-npa4im, or something else? And who should leave it: is it appropriate for me to leave such a message, or is it better for someone else to do it? I'd like to leave the npa4im myself, but I'm not sure whether either one would be the best. Nyttend 04:17, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

You can probably use Template:Uw-upv1 as a starting point; going to a fourth-level warning right away might be a bit sharp as a first warning. Misplaced Pages:Template_messages/User talk namespace has other options. I note the IP has done a few other dodgy edits; I'll sort those out as well as I can. Tony Fox (arf!) 04:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree, use Template:Uw-upv1, and if the ip continues, increase the severity of the next warning. --Tλε Rαnδоm Eδιτоr 19:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

For "rank 5 rapist", I'd say skipping a few levels would've been quite acceptable. In any case, the IP appears to have been blocked for their other edits anyway. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Copyright help

Image:Main_Page_Uncyclopedia.png --> the logo and content of this image are creative commons, and the softwre is GPL. So surely this is a free image. I just don't know what to call it :( What should I do? It's all freely licensed material, but different components are released under two different licenses. Milto LOL pia

Bump. Milto LOL pia 21:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia's license is By-NC-SA 2.0, which is not considered to be a free license by Misplaced Pages due to the NC part. So the image, as a whole, is non-free. (This neatly sidesteps the issue of the copyright status of an image consisting of elements that are all free but incompatibly licensed. For one possibility, see Image:Admin logo.gif, although it's arguable whether the reasoning used there would apply to cases where the differently licensed parts aren't so clearly separated.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Being reverted twice while editing Jackie Chan

I'm in the middle of editing Jackie Chan to reach Good Article Status. However, my edits have been reverted twice by another user, asking me to "use the talk page before you even think about editing a section that has been there for years" and telling me not to "edit so fast". The thing is, having listed my reason on the talk page, no one responded. Therefore there really is nothing wrong with me making good faith edits in an attempt to improve the article. Is there anything that could be done by such potentially possessive behaviour? Thanks.--Kylohk 08:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, DaliusButkus (talk · contribs) has responded to you on the talk, though I note that user has already been warned for reverting Jackie Chan to his preferred version. I also note that he has no edits besides to his user page and Jackie Chan. It is perhaps unusual for someone who has never used a talk page to demand that you use one. I further note that his dismissal of your edits as "previously discussed" references a older section in which two of three users express support for the type of edits you have made. I'll drop a note in support of your position. - BanyanTree 10:27, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll drop in a note as well in favor of the guy backing off, as it seems he doesn't want anyone else to edit the page and has no good reason. "It's been here for years" doesn't make the content good or worth keeping, if its copied from another source. Dreadnaught 12:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

If anything, being bold should be welcomed, not stuffed back into obscurity. x42bn6 Talk Mess 21:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks like the other user is insisting on keeping the trivia section, in spite of my asking him to avoid it in articles. The user has continued to revert it again to that previous version. Although he hasn't technically reverted more than 3 times in a day, could anything be done about this?--Kylohk 09:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFC. Corvus cornix 23:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't matter much now, the other user has backed down.--Kylohk 15:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Can someone review this?

Can someone review this: , please?

And, does someone understand what happened?

To me it looks like it's edits by multiple unregistered users who all live in Toronto, Canada (i.e. right next to each other), is it some sort of Wiki edit party? Also, is it neutral? Thanks, Jeffrey.Kleykamp 13:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Unbelieavable , I actually see some major pretty neutral good contribution to an article done by some anon. I will stop from this day to filter out the registered user from vandal proof and will lit a candle to the neerest Cathedral.

Needless to say I'm in shock from now and my faith in humanity has been renewed. — Esurnir 02:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Probably a longtime user who's too lazy to log in. ;-) Dcoetzee 07:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there are multiple intermediate IP addresses that aren't shown. Jeffrey.Kleykamp 22:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Need help from someone who knows Misplaced Pages better than I do

Hello all,

On Sunday I thought I'd be helpful and look for misspellings to correct and I arrived at these two articles (versions as I saw them): Chris Gore and Philip Zlotorynski. As they both appeared to be talking about the same person I added merge tags to both articles suggesting that they be merged into one.

Since then I have received a threatening email from someone claiming to be Chris Gore (User:GBone77). The email is threatening legal action against me for libel, saying that I have written vindictive things against the subject in the article, and demanding that I give him my telephone number to discuss further or he will bring the issue up with his lawyers and with Misplaced Pages management.

Apart from the obvious distress that this has caused me (I don't like being threatened, especially for things I didn't do) I am concerned that this person feels slandered by Misplaced Pages and don't know enough about Misplaced Pages policy in order to take this further. How can this be resolved?

All I did was suggest the articles be merged.

Roleplayer 11:44, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I think he didn't like the article in general rather than the idea of a merger, and so he complained to the first person on the page's history, i.e. you, just don't give him your phone number, I just gave him a conflict of interest warning and I'll see what else I can do, e.g. complain to admins. Jeffrey.Kleykamp 13:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Once legal action is threatened, it is no longer appropriate for a normal editor to be handling the matter. Refer the user to Misplaced Pages:Contact us/Article problem/Factual error (from subject), which specifies how to contact people who are authorized by the Wikimedia Foundation to deal with such matters. I will go inform the user in question now. - BanyanTree 04:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks to both of you. -- Roleplayer 12:46, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Request for a female model

If you are a woman with a camera and an extensive enough wardrobe:

Some of the articles for items worn (such as camiknickers and alice band) could use photos of a model wearing them.

In my personal opinion, it would be a good idea if all of the clothing and accessories articles had photos of the same model wearing each of the items, except for items customarily worn only by the opposite gender.

I wonder who would be our WikiModel?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.214.66.45 (talk • contribs)

That would be an expensive role to fill ! :-) Sancho 17:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not expecting @#$% Gisele or her ilk to fill the role, of course. Nearly any woman in her 20's, and most women in their 30's would be suitable. You don't have to be beautiful to model for this purpose. Why would you have to be? The aim is not to sell anything (or to sell anyone on anything).

No, I meant it would be expensive for the model to get access to all of the clothing and accessories that have articles on Misplaced Pages. Sancho 18:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

For cost-effectiveness, I nominate Wikipe-tan. –Pomte 21:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I have already asked User:Kasuga about this. He said he would make such drawings if necessary. What say you?

Manikin. — RJH (talk) 14:48, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Woman.

Why can't models be past their 30s? SharkD 18:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

My image was deleted!

And I can't see the deletion log! Argh! This was fully copyrighted and referenced, Fair used, blah, blah blah. WHY? Image:Takashi_Murakami_c.jpg This is so frustrating! There was no discussion and I got no warning. Please can an admin help me? --Knulclunk 02:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

You didn't mention that the image was on Commons, which would have made the search much quicker. See the Commons deletion log. Normally there's a bot that removes images deleted on Commons, but it would be impractical for the Commons admins to notify everyone who might be affected by a deletion on all the projects. - BanyanTree 03:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use images do not belong to Wikimedia Commons. Upload them here instead.--Svetovid 11:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Serious login problem

I just tried (and failed, mysteriously) to log in. So I asked for a new password; it was emailed to me, but I couldn't log in with that one either. Would someone please see whether something is screwed up with my account, and then leave a note on my user talk page? Thanks. Obviously, at this point I've clobbered my old password, but I need some way to get my account working again. Jmabel | talk / 66.212.79.108 21:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, seems to have worked 30 minutes later... - Jmabel | Talk 21:50, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

problems with template

Would someone with experience in creating templates please assist us in fixing a problem with Template:Freemasonry2... it is 1) capturing all the text that comes after the inertion of the template (essentially this means it is capturing most of the article), which 2) causes the template to expand right across the page instead of nesting at the top right the way we want it to. No one can figure out what is wrong. For an example of the problem... see: York Rite. Thanks Blueboar 00:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Tra (Talk) 00:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks... such a simple thing... if only we had known. Blueboar 00:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

What to do when article deletion policy does not seem to be followed?

What do you do when the proper proceedure does not seem to have been followed in an article deletion? The article on Disappearance of the Universe had a deletion discussion already, and the conclusion was to not delete it. It's now been deleted without even having been marked for speedy deletion.

I find the book to be an annoying book by an annoying idiot, but judging by sales figures for it and the sequel, a significant book. The criteria for quick deletion fail, and in any case, were not even involed. Gene Ward Smith 04:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a link to the Articles for Deletion discussion? I can't seem to find it. Tony Fox (arf!) review? 05:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

There wasn't one for the book, only the author. Relevant dialog here. The article about the author was kept at AFD, but later redirected to the book article, which was deleted. I've already asked Pilotguy to restore the article.--Chaser - T 05:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

The article is still gone. Where do I go to get the attention of an administrator? Gene Ward Smith 23:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Pilotguy's page indicates that he's gone on a wikibreak. The article looks like it could use a lot of work, but it's not obviously non-notable (especially if it's had good sales as Gene indicates) so I'm going to undelete it. Bryan Derksen 06:47, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's an article on Renard's successful spam campaign when the book moved to a bigger publisher:

http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA508787.html Gene Ward Smith 07:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

This item appears resolved. User:Pilotguy speedy-deleted the the article on the book The Disappearance of the Universe. on 13 June 2007 with the comment "Article about a non-notable individual, band, service, website or other entity". It is not clear why he would have chosen speedy deletion to deal with an article with such a long history and so many contributors. Then, as a result of this WP:VPA posting, User:Bryan Derksen undeleted the article. Since the book article was deleted on Pilotguy's own initiative, and there is no current AfD open or even any Talk page discussion running, I see nothing more to do here. User:Chaser has already notified Pilotguy that there is a VPA discussion of this deletion. In terms of earlier history, there was an AfD on Gary Renard which closed with a Keep in June 2006. Gary Renard remains a redirect to the book article. All the useful info from the author article seems to have been merged into the book article (you can still see the history under the redirect). Now that we can trace exactly what happened, WP:DRV would have been a more orthodox way to handle the undeletion than WP:VPA. Anyone who still has concerns about the article quality can comment at Talk:The Disappearance of the Universe. EdJohnston 03:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Help - Is this ok?

I have just added the paragraph "transfer speculation" on Fabio Quagliarella after reading headlines in the british press this morning, this is my first addition on wikipedia and if i am any policy breach or doing anythin illegal, please let me know at your earliest convenience. Regards, Simon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.231.161 (talk • contribs)

It would be fine if you could cite a source for it.--Chaser - T 14:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, although it seems to have been removed now, the source was the daily mirror

Which I don't think is the most reliable source in the world, given it is a tabloid. Either way, it's probably recentism. x42bn6 Talk Mess 16:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Suspected copyright violation

The article The Boston Cecilia has several excerpts taken directly from the page . Suspecting a copyright violation, I placed a speedy delete tag on the article. However, the author claims ownership of the copyright. What is the appropriate action to take?

Senordingdong 18:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Point "the author" to WP:COPYREQ. If they are genuine, they will follow its instructions to give their permission formally. Or they might wish to add a GFDL license to "their website". The burden of proof is on them. See also WP:COPYVIO. Adrian M. H. 21:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Senordingdong 09:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

" Images"

How would you enter a image into Misplaced Pages? And how do you type in the proper components as to mkae the image seen alike any other posted?

See Misplaced Pages:Images. If Misplaced Pages does not yet have a copy of the image, you need to upload it (link on the left sidebar). Once that's done, you insert the code into the article. Look at the source code of other articles to see how it's done. For example,

]

gives you this:

YechielMan 21:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Opinions

I am currently not a registered Misplaced Pages person (?), but I do make edits to articles when I think they are appropriate. My edits are usually limited to grammatical/spelling/technical fixes, and an occasional, obvious NPOV issue. I recently read the wikipedia article on George Meade. At the end, there was a cited sentence that suggested that his strategy employed during the American Civil War should have been studied more closely by generals during WWI. Now this seems more like an opinion than the sort of reference material that would seem appropriate for a wikipedia article. However, before I go off half-cocked making revisions to the article (and most likely stepping on someone’s toes), I thought it would be best to ask if this sort of content is acceptable. Thanks for your guidance!

June 15, 2007

Despite the cite, the wording is an opinion. If it said something like, "historian X has said that ..." then it could be kept. Corvus cornix 16:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Vulgarity at user pages

Should this type of vulgarity and comments disparaging the project be allowed at a user page? See . --Kevin Murray 16:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes I think so, but then I'm against most forms of censorship. But an individual carrying around an attitude like that is bound to get himself banned at some point. — RJH (talk) 20:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

He is voicing an opinion, and his strong feelings, about a policy decision. This is well within the scope of user pages per Misplaced Pages:User page. Dcoetzee 07:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

per Misplaced Pages:User page.

Inappropriate content

There is broad agreement that you may not include in your user space material that is likely to bring the project into disrepute, or which is likely to give widespread offense. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox is usually interpreted as applying to user space as well as the encyclopedia itself. You do have more latitude in user space than elsewhere, but remember: don't be a dick about it. Extremely offensive material may be removed on sight by any editor.

--Kevin Murray 12:35, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

There is a lot more to that than any of you realise. Viridae

Jeff's behavior has been disruptive in his participation, and now he seeks to be disruptive in his absence. If he wants to make a mature critical comment fine, but this sensational vulgarity should not be tolerated. --Kevin Murray 12:29, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Infobox alignment

Why do the infoboxes seem to be out of alignment today? Instead of being to the right, they appear to be at the top left side with the article below the infobox. NorthernThunder 20:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Example? –Pomte 21:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

West_Norriton_Township,_Pennsylvania Here is an example. When I view it, the Geobox Township box is on the lef-hand side and the rest of the article is directly below. NorthernThunder 22:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I've checked that article on Mozilla Firefox and Internet Explorer and the infobox displays on the right hand side on both browsers on my machine. Does the same problem occur on a different browser? I'm suggesting it may be a problem with your browser. Have you tried doing a forced refresh of your browser? If that doesn't work, clear your cache as instructed on the linked page. --tgheretford (talk) 22:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed it. Thanks. :) NorthernThunder 01:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Smooth jazz - where to go next?

(edit conflict) I have a bit of a dilemma. I was alerted to the smooth jazz article because of a number of problems. Because of the long history of disagreement on the article alongside its other problems, I asked for help from Misplaced Pages:Cleanup, Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Jazz and Misplaced Pages:Cleanup Taskforce to no avail. It's way too big a task for me to cover and looking for references on Google isn't helped by the large numbers of smooth jazz radio stations on page after page of results.

The article violates most of Misplaced Pages policy, including WP:RS, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, WP:NOT#DIR, WP:EL and now I also believe the article also contains some peacock terms. I explained all in a bit more detail at Misplaced Pages:Cleanup Taskforce/Smooth jazz. My ideal situation would be to have the article deleted and start again from scratch, but I believe the subject is notable because of its role in radio history and being a major, if commercial fork of jazz (even if others may not agree), and so deletion shouldn't be an option (I hope!). What do other people suggest I can go from here? I and other people are stumped! --tgheretford (talk) 21:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any problem with going ahead and rewriting the entire article. Cut down all OR, POV and inappropriate external links, then start sourcing specific claims. The article and task force aren't exactly active, and if someone shows up to stop you, then refer them to policy. –Pomte 21:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Not a promising start, but it is proving difficult to find articles online to cite references from, only weblogs, personal opinions and short generic passages amongst the number of smooth jazz radio station sites. I'll have a sleep, come back tomorrow and see where to go from here. --tgheretford (talk) 22:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Help needed at Drawing board

Hi all. Help by experienced editors could be used over at Misplaced Pages:Drawing board. The new header has been attracting more submissions and there's still an old backlog too. Thanks! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 22:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't know what to do with apparent COI at Scientology

I've let myself get drawn into an edit war over on Scientology with User:COFS who I believe, as a self-described Scientologist, has a clear conflict of interest. I'm going to step back from editing and posting on Talk:Scientology for a while, in the hope that everyone's tempers can cool a little, but if a more experienced editor could review the situation, I would appreciate any offer of advice (to anyone involved). Thanks! SheffieldSteel 23:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

As the Scientologists have a notorious history of tightly managing their public image, it is hardly a surprise that they would continue such practices on wikipedia. Given the open nature of wikipedia, I'm not sure what can be done. — RJH (talk) 15:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm currently pursuing a resolution through community enforcement. Thanks for your reply. SheffieldSteel 17:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

For related, information, see Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/COFS. Smee 22:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC).

• The community enforcement discussion is at Misplaced Pages:Community_sanction_noticeboard#User:COFS. Smee 22:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC).

Signature

I see that signatures have recently been limited to 255 characters. Is there a way for me to still use this signature: ---Signed By:]<span style="color:#000000;">fan71</span><small>(]—]—])</small>

It has 326 characters with spaces, so you know. Thanks! ---Signed By:KoЯnfan71(User Page—My Talk) 00:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes.. but do you really need to? –Pomte 01:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I've shortened it down to:

—Signed By:]<b/>fan71<small>(]—]—])</small>

But it's still six characters over the limit. To get it within the limit, you would need to alter the signature, perhaps by removing the contributions link, or by having 'fan71' link to your userpage instead of the 'User Page' link. You could also consider abbreviating the words used or removing some of the colour. Tra (Talk) 01:51, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thanks Pomte. I was able to slim it down a little more, then count it in Microsoft Word. It came it as 254 characters! ---Signed By:KoЯnfan71(User Page—My Talk) 00:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Eh, never mind. I'll just have to go with Tra's plan. Too many characters again! So this is my sig. ---Signed By KoЯnfan71 (User Page—My Talk) 00:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages help forums
• To Village Pump (miscellaneous)
• Non-talk pages automatically signed by HagermanBot