| Revision as of 10:06, 10 December 2008 editJack Merridew (talk | contribs)34,837 edits →Greeting from Bali: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:11, 10 December 2008 edit undoFram (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors246,742 edits →Greeting from Bali: No thanksNext edit → | ||
| Line 275: | Line 275: | ||
| ].]] | ].]] | ||
| Hi. I've noted your comments a few weeks ago and earlier today. I recall agreeing with you on some issues previously and posting replies to that effect. I'd like to assure you that I'm a reasonable fellow and that I'm back with a sincere interest in doing what's right for the project; this has always been my intent. Perhaps we could chat a bit? Email's fine, if you prefer. I've had quite a bit of dialogue with a great many folks prior to my return; talk does wonders. Cheers, ] 10:06, 10 December 2008 (UTC) | Hi. I've noted your comments a few weeks ago and earlier today. I recall agreeing with you on some issues previously and posting replies to that effect. I'd like to assure you that I'm a reasonable fellow and that I'm back with a sincere interest in doing what's right for the project; this has always been my intent. Perhaps we could chat a bit? Email's fine, if you prefer. I've had quite a bit of dialogue with a great many folks prior to my return; talk does wonders. Cheers, ] 10:06, 10 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :No thanks, I'm not interested. If you behave reasonably, I'll leave you well alone. Your behaviour (pre-block I mean) was appalling, even if we agreed on some aspects of the fiction discussions. I don't like White Cat at all (as an editor here, I have no idea what kind of person he is and it is utterly irrelevant), but how you treated him was despicable. You are unblocked, you can edit productively now, but that does not mean that I'll change my opinion of you or have any interest whatsoever to chat with you. ] (]) 10:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:11, 10 December 2008
Template:Archive box collapsible
Danger City Rebels
Hello I have updated the Nick Danger and the Danger City Rebels page and added sources and I was wondering if you could coach me a bit on this article as I am new to writing on Misplaced Pages. - Jamie
Deleted as wrong namespace
You deleted a proposed policy, Misplaced Pages:Project Leader, I was writing on the grounds that it was in the wrong namespace?? I'm sorry if I put it in the wrong place. What is the correct location for proposed policies? --Alecmconroy (talk) 05:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
haha--- my bad, I caught it. it was in Wikiedia:Project Leader. :) oops. --Alecmconroy (talk) 05:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Could you please recover the deleted contents from Wikiedia:Project Leader and place them on my talk or on Misplaced Pages:Project Leader? thx --Alecmconroy (talk) 05:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC) no worries-- got it elsewhere. --Alecmconroy (talk) 06:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Deleting our page (Senario)
Hey Fram,
why did you delete our band page on Misplaced Pages? I was still editing it, it wasn't even remotely finished...
Could you be so kind and get it online again, so I can complete editing it?
Thanks in advance and best regards from Germany, Andy Beireran (talk) 16:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Please read ] and WP:MUSIC. It does not seem likely that the band meets our inclusion guidelines. Fram (talk) 16:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages talk:Biographies of living persons#BLP prod
I thought you'd be interested in and might like to comment on the above. RMHED (talk) 21:33, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Flemish, not Dutch
Thanks for your involvement in this discussion. My vantage point is as a Fleming living in the USA for 50+ years. We considered ourselves either Flemish or Belgian, but never Dutch. --Buster7 (talk) 12:41, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- I can understand that. My experience in Flanders is that people identify as Flemish, Belgian, ... (taking often different identifications, being both Flemish and Belgian and so on), but never Dutch (excepting those of clearly recent Dutch ancestry, and someof those supporting the unification of the two countries). So I beleive that while an article on the Dutch as an athnic group should mention (at length) that while a number of people believe that Flemings are part of the group, many people disagree with this, both among the Flemish and among the independent researchers / literature. Fram (talk) 12:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
BTW...The recent archive (#6) doesnt work right when accessed from the User box....I think you have Capitalized some of the letters. I would fix but I don't know how.--Buster7 (talk) 13:35, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hello Fram. I have an idea (see light bulb above my head). Instead of arguing with good faith editors at the Dutch (ethnic group) article, why not create a seperate Flemish (ethnic group) article. When a reader searches for Flemish in the Main list of Ethnic Groups the closest he/she can get is Dutch.
- I don't mean to point an accusation but I think the Dutch have a difficult time understanding the position of the Flemish. It has to do with their self-proclaimed feelings of superiority, IMHO. I will copy this idea to SPQRobin for his thoughts.--Buster7 (talk) 20:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- A separate article about the Flemish group may be useful, but I don't like articles about ethnic groups in general, since these labels are becoming more and more meaningless. However, whether we ave that article or not, the article on the Dutch should contain correct and balanced info, not the one-sided view it has now (or had in a number of recent versions, I haven't checked the version of today yet). Fram (talk) 08:07, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Wallonia
I don't understand why you removed immediately the image of Tintin. Casterman in Tournai is very famous and there is a book of Hergé translated in the regional language of Tournai. I don't say that is the most important, but I edit this image in order to have images linked to some companies which have often no images. And I put this image before developping two or three lines about Casterman. But... What do you think of this page in general? Now? Sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 16:17, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- We may not use fair use images outside aticles which deal directly with the subject at hand. To use it here would be an illustration, not a necessity to better understand the article. Of course Casterman and Tintin and Hergé are very famous, no need to convince me (hey, I wrote the "Le Petit Vingtième" article and many others on Belgian comics), but that is not sufficient to have such an image. (By the way, there are also Tintins in Ostends, Brussels, and Antwerps dialect).
- As for the current state of the article: while it is a lot better than a few months ago, it is not very good still. Way too many images for starters, no really logical structure, Culture and History sections which aren't truly started yet... There is a lot more information than there was a while ago, but it is hard to digest in its current form. Fram (talk) 07:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Self-published material
Fram: You have bias against self-published (print-on-demand, or POD) books, and I think you are dead wrong.
My experience is different: I am a book reviewer for bookpleasures, and I have read many books. Most of the self-published books that I read are of high quality, they are simply published via a different channel. The authors for these books put in a lot of time and effort.
The traditional publishers are NOT better than self-published books, in fact, they are NOT sensitive to market demand, and take too long to produce books, and most of them do not sell anyway. The main purpose of a book is to provide good information to readers in a timely manner. What is the point to produce a lot of books by traditional publishers but cannot sell them?
Traditional publishers use off-set printing, i.e., they need to print a large quantity (for example, 2,000 to 5,000 copies) for each print run. The problem is 90% of the books published by traditional publishers. What are they going to do with all these books that they cannot sell? Throw them away or recycle? So, they killed a lot of trees for no good reason. POD books will be printed only after a reader orders it, sometimes, Amazon or the publishers may stock a small quantity of the books that sell well. So, POD books will have a much smaller environmental impact than the books published by traditional publishers.
I have dealt with both traditional publishers and "self-published" publisher. The traditional publishers only pay author one or two dollars per book, how can you attract talented writers if you only pay them that little?
Misplaced Pages is a self-published encyclopedia, does it mean it is not as good as the traditional encyclopedia? You are an editor for Misplaced Pages, does it mean you are not as good as an editor for traditional encyclopedia? Think about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plantingdesign (talk • contribs)
I moved this from your userpage, hope that's not a problem. --Cameron Scott (talk) 00:57, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages is a self published encyclopedia, and Misplaced Pages is not considered a reliable source by Misplaced Pages itself. Furthermore, my position on self published sources is the standard Misplaced Pages policy, as established in WP:V#Self-published sources. If you want to change that policy, you will have to take it up at the talk page of that policy.
- I have no objection to the existence of self-publishers, and can see why people use it. That does not mean that we should accept such sources as reliable sources though, since the risk of unreliable information in such sources is much higher. If I find evidence that a self-published source has received mainstream attention or is used as a reference by reliable sources or publications, then we have established that said self-published source is of sufficient quality or importance to be included. This is however the execption to the default position of excluding them.
- Finally, please check WP:COI. You should not add links to your own books. Fram (talk) 08:00, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Any thoughts?
I need your advice. Please refer to the Dutch (ethnic group) article/Modern Era section and one of my edits of Nov 7th . Would it not be factual that those Belgians that fled into The Netherlands spoke various Flemish dialects rather than Dutch. Am I wrong to think that at the time of the First World War, the fleeing Belgians spoke Flemish, not Dutch. This is the kind of pretentiuosness of Dutch-oriented editors that prevent a simple mention of anything remotely Flemish. Months ago, I had a very lengthy and uncomfortable confrontation with the editor that reverted my attempt at clarity. I don't want to start another if I am off-base (wrong). Thank You. --Buster7 (talk) 22:59, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Robbie Green
Hi, I see you reverted my edits regarding Robbie Green and his failed drugs test and sponsorship. They were provided in an external link which I have turned into a reference. I hope this is helpful to you and the article itself. I would advise you to please read through the article carefully which fully explains his failed drugs test, his fine and suspension and his loss of sponsorship.
Thanks! Raphie (talk) 02:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- See User talk:Raphie#Robbie Green. The edits do appear verifiable, but newspaper sources (of which there are plenty) would be more credible than the website of a darts company. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 05:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Done :) I just took one from the BBC. The other one regarding sponsorship I just deleted it. Cheers! Raphie (talk) 14:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Mark Canton
|
On 10 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mark Canton, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Gatoclass (talk) 10:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Accusations of misleading Edit Summaries
I did not mislead anyone. The edit summary notes that "as explained in article" the Flemish are more than a mere related people, whereas the Frisians were removed (why?) and I'm reinstating them.HP1740-B (talk) 14:55, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- The edit summary does not mention either "Flemish" or "removal". I have no idea who removed the Frisians or why, and have no objections to reinserting them, but your summary was clearly misleading. Fram (talk) 14:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- No it wasn't. I think this largely depends on your prejudice when reading it.HP1740-B (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Believe whatever you want... Fram (talk) 15:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- That was my point. HP1740-B (talk) 15:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Believe whatever you want... Fram (talk) 15:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- No it wasn't. I think this largely depends on your prejudice when reading it.HP1740-B (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
3RR
I agree, I will continue to make a number of changes, but I will not revert you any longer.HP1740-B (talk) 15:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
212.68.199.178
Ik heb gezien dat je ook overhoop ligt met 212.68.199.178, kunnen we die niet ergens aangeven voor permanente blokkering? Die werkt mij zodanig op de zenuwen dat ik er grijs haar van krijg. --Hooiwind (talk) 19:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- (I'll reply in English :-) ) I'll try to keep an eye on him. If he (or she) would only try to discuss the edits, we might get somewhere... As for blocking: the edits are not bad enough (or frequent), and he is using a number of other IP's anyway, so a block may be a nuisance to him but won't stop him. Fram (talk) 20:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Mark Turner's birth date
You removed the reference to NationMaster claiming it is a copy of Misplaced Pages. Obviously it can't be an exact copy of Misplaced Pages since it has additional information on some topics that Misplaced Pages doesn't have. Even the Misplaced Pages article on NationMaster says they take data from many sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/NationMaster I'm putting it back for the time being. --Andreic777 (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
You may be right though... I found an old version of this page on Misplaced Pages that is identical to the one on NationMaster. So the NationMaster page may be a copy of this older version of the page. --Andreic777 (talk) 22:07, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, Nationmaster is a copy of an old Misplaced Pages version (often from 2005). I have not checked the origin of this Natinamster article, but all these articles are straight Misplaced Pages copies. Fram (talk) 07:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Latino sandbox
Yeah, I suspected that. But I didn't want to make it a subpage of mine lest the other editor think it somehow belonged to me. Thanks. SamEV (talk) 14:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
- If you prefer, I can move it to his userspace, or project space. Fram (talk) 14:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, please move it to the project space, which is neutral. SamEV (talk) 14:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Wolfberry again
It's late here, and I'm working full-time for the next few days, but I think the referencing/linking needs serious cleanup too. I'm not strictly clear on image link policy, but I'm fairly sure it's not considered good practice to hyperlink out to lots of photos on random websites just so we know (in case we've weak powers of imagination) what wolfberries look like in a bowl of rice or a cup of hot water. Also, too many links to commercial sites ... HTML hyperlinks for internal Misplaced Pages text ... and news stories in External links that aren't actually used as references. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 03:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, they need much more work and cleaning. Way too much emphasis on the superfood angle anyway, they are plants first and potential health foods second. Fram (talk) 08:23, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Lex Wotton
Hi Fram, don't know if you were watching the AfD but you have a message from the re-creator. StarM 13:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, I have discussed it on his talk page. Fram (talk) 13:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Saw that a few minutes after I left this, was chasing the discussion all over the wiki, it seemed. Glad you found it. StarM 01:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Sascha Luyckx
Hi! I noticed that you speak Dutch. If you get a chance, could you take a look at this article? I'm not sure which language it is in, or if the subject is notable enough for an article. Thanks! TN‑X-Man 16:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the notification. Barely notable, but just passes IMO. Translated, still unsourced, but has some articles in e.g. De Standaard. Is a member of the provincial council... Fram (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for the translation! I've added the bio template to the talk page, but will leave for others to decide notability. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 19:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Dr. T.V. Rao
Hi! This article, which you deleted under G11 at 12:25 GMT today, is back already. What's the best appraoch here - to keep tagging for speedy, or to take it to AFD (and risk there'll be no consensus to delete), or what? Philip Trueman (talk) 17:58, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- I think it is best to take it to AfD. The article has a number of sources and some claims to notability. If it is kept at AfD, so be it. It needs to be moved and cleaned of course. Fram (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Wikian
Not really. Pages are only marked that are taken under "the Empire's" wing. Look past the corny empire thing and please see the true potential of this project. Imagine a Misplaced Pages where every page has a guardian, and you will understand my project. The Empire bit is just to make it more enjoyable (like a game).
| His.Wikian.Majesty,Emperor.Victor.of.Misplaced Pages |
09:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- You are contradicting yourself. "Imagine a Misplaced Pages where every page has a guardian" => every article is tagged for this project... Fram (talk) 09:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- That is because of the bias that "advanced" users develop against these sort of new ideas. Why don't you tag the Misplaced Pages Fun Committee with deletion? Oh, because its an established idea. Give my idea a chance as well!
| His.Wikian.Majesty,Emperor.Victor.of.Misplaced Pages |
09:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- You are contradicting yourself because of the bias of advanced users? I'll continue this discussion when you have better arguments... Fram (talk) 09:44, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- No, I simply ignored that quip about contradicting myself because your statement failed to explain itself so that I could understand it. 09:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperor.of.Wikia (talk • contribs)
- You are contradicting yourself because of the bias of advanced users? I'll continue this discussion when you have better arguments... Fram (talk) 09:44, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Languages of Belgium
Hello, Fram. Can you take a look at the above and my suggestion of today? I believe it is a better explanation and clearer Lead. I feel it is necessary to inform the reader of the subtle and yet important difference between Flemish and Dutch. The "Dutchification" of everything Belgian/Flemish is difficult to explain to the casual visitor.--Buster7 (talk) 14:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Bayan Knights article
The article I was currently working on for Bayan Knights has been deleted with the reason: "Bayan Knights" (A7 (web): No indication that the article may meet guidelines for inclusion)
Bayan Knights premiered Nov. 22 and is considered a milestone in Philippine Comics history as the first time a single comic involves creations of individual authors are joined as a team with individual rights retained. Admittedly the article is a work in progress, however the notability is unquestioned as it has been recognized notably in a major article of a National broadsheet. See here for the link to the story: http://showbizandstyle.inquirer.net/sim/sim/view/20081026-168534/In-Search-of-Real-life-Heroes
If I have to start the article over, that's fine. I would like a detailed explanation however as to why it would be deleted in the first place.
Borgy (talk) 10:34, 27 November 2008 (UTC)GeoffB
- I'll restore the article. In the future, please try to make it clearer how the subject of an article is notable. Now all there was, was the link to a blog, without any claim to notability or any link to a reliable source. Fram (talk) 10:39, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Although I had contribued before to other articles, admittedly this is the first time I actually created one from scratch and left it a couple of days. For that I apologize. I have updated the article and I hope it meets the basic standards at least. If there is anything that needs to be improved on , your feedback would be most appreciated. Thank you.
Borgy (talk) 13:47, 27 November 2008 (UTC)GeoffB
- It certainly is no longer speedyable, and it looks notable to me. Thanks for arguing against the deletion and improving the article! Fram (talk) 13:49, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Suspicion
Suggest you file a checkuser - what was the link to the older checkuser request? Cirt (talk) 16:47, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree
Thanks!
Nice of you to take the time and effort to respond! Best regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 20:46, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out the Nationmaster/Wikipedia "violation"!
I confirmed that those entries (Fasanenstrasse Synagogue} actually ARE identical, then found what I hope is a better reference - at least it is significantly more detailed! - http://www.bh.org.il/Communities/Synagogue/Fasanenstrasse.asp (I noticed that I could find no mention of WP on the Nationmaster page, but that is S E P (SEP)!)
I love this process…putting the article up (though I still want to do more on it) has led to quite a number of small, helpful changes — yours, and others! — Martha (talk) 00:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! The source you give there is at first glance a very good one, a Museum website should be reliable and relevant for the subject. As for Nationmaster Encyclopedia, normally they reference Misplaced Pages at the very bottom of the page, in small grey print, so I think that is nominally allright (although a mention at the top would be more visible and obvious). And every editor willing to look for good sources and taking civil criticism so positively is a benefit for Misplaced Pages, so welcome! By the way, I don't know if you noticed the page yet, but an admin has created a page with pageview statistics. Ilse Stanley has received over 5,000 viewers the day it was on the main page!. Fram (talk) 07:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Fram
Sorry, Fram, comments were addressed to you because I thought yours were addressed at me. My recent wiki-experience is dominated by nutcase users and negativity, and I'm seeing things like that too quickly. I'll remove the whole correspondence, if you don't mind, as it's a distraction. :) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 09:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Fine by me, and no problem! Fram (talk) 09:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Done. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 09:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Selective deletion
Hello, I am new to Misplaced Pages, but was researching an article recently about a new opera house which mentioned the key firms involved in its design, development and building. Each one had a link describing the company concerned, but one link for a company I knew well was empty with an invitation to add details, which I did. I then found it had been removed with the aggressive comment of 'blatant advertising'. So why weren't the other similar entries from similar companies within the same article faced with the same rejection and abuse? My entry was simple straightforward explanation of what the company did. There was no soliciting for business. I had been impressed with Misplaced Pages in the past, but this is sad. It was the first and the last time I try to contribute. I can only guess the selective nature of this administration was based on commercial preferences. RegardsADCollier (talk) 18:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- I was going through the new pages. Since the other companies did not have new pages, I never looked at them. We have 2.5 million articles, I can harly check them all. As for the article: the company is not notable, and the text you wrote was a near-copy of their own commercial listing at e.g. . The company has never been in the news. And a sentence like "they deliver a tailored service to ensure well-functioning stages, practical backstage facilities, comfortable auditoria and excellent audience circulation areas." is pure advertising. I'm sorry if this will mean that you will stop contributing, but we are an encyclopedia, not a list of all companies, and the article contained no encyclopedic information whatsoever (History? Achievements?). Please also check WP:COI: if you have a link to the company (writing press releases for them or so), it is best if you don't write articles on them on Misplaced Pages... Fram (talk) 20:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi
Sorry, I created the page : List of people from Lahijan and added names of some people who had lived in this city to it , but you said they are "unsourced", I wanted to say that if you go to pages related to each of those people in wikipedia , you could see that they are from Lahijan. so Why should I give more refrences ? If I cite the wiki pages of them , would it be enough to verify ? Sicaspi (talk) 20:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- In general, every page needs to have their own sources. Other Misplaced Pages pages canget changed, people can get added to your list where the corresponding Wiki page is not adequately sourced, ... The list can stay without sources, it will not get deleted for that reason, butit would be better if it was sourced anyway. Fram (talk) 07:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Concerning Michel Coiffard
Before I wrote and referenced this article, I inquired about using Wikipedias in other languages. I am quoting you the guidance I was given:
"Anything on other language Wikipedias is just as free to use as anything here, so feel free to translate and use at will. It definitely won't get deleted for any copyright reasons, and the question of notability is helped by having articles in other languages. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 14:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)"
It is obviously illogical for an administrator to say I can use a source, , and actually encourage it, and then say I can't cite it. I do believe you erred when you deleted my citation to French Misplaced Pages. There is no question of faulty or ambiguous translation in a date.
Would you care to correct yourself?
Georgejdorner (talk) 08:53, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
- You are free to translate articles (or parts of them) from other Wikipedias, as long as you indicate that you have done so. However, that does not mean that Misplaced Pages (or any wiki) is a reliable source. WP:V, our main policy on this, states (in "Self-published and other questionable sources") that "self-published books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, knols, forum postings, and similar sources are largely not acceptable to cite in Misplaced Pages." Misplaced Pages is an open wiki, so it is not acceptable to cite Misplaced Pages (or a copy of it) as a source for another Misplaced Pages article. Fram (talk) 09:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Vandal
I just read this... so you think I am a sockpuppetteer, how nice is that! Why did you not tell me, I mean - you made those comments on me over a week ago. How am I linked to vandals - all I do is promoting some articles of a Native American figure, is that such a terrible thing to do? This seems like overreacting to me. Jouke Bersma Contributions 10:53, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
- We'll see... And as I have pointed out on your user page, you have repeatedly vandalized articles. Fram (talk) 10:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
As I've tried to tell you, Fram, I have never intentionally vandalised anything! All I have ever done has been done in good faith. I came to this website to edit seriously. I have removed a citation template because I saw the statement made in the article already was covered by the given references - the one that put it there in the first place has not thoroughly read those and is to blame. And I made a redirect which I considered appropriate - so what? That does not sound like any serious vandalism in my eyes! I've even made an article here recently, William Gentles which was well referenced and has been greatly expanded by user Ephriam with whom I have worked on Touch the Clouds. Please go ahead and check user me whatever that may be and let me edit as I've always done - with an edit summary that is right in 99.9% of the cases and a clean record over all. I mean - I gave a false edit summary once and of course that is no good thing but my edit summary gives options of my older edit summaries every time a type a word and so I could have accidently put in a wrong one. Jouke Bersma Contributions 11:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
- This whole thing is seriously disturbing! Jouke Bersma Contributions 12:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Belgian?
You Belgian? Cool... I am Dutch. We could just talk in our native language. :) Jouke Bersma Contributions 12:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
List of archaeological sites in Thurrock
You recently tagged this article as requiring a cleanup. I'm happy to attempt this (for example I have expanded the lead para to include definition and order), but it would be helpful if you could let me know what aspects particularly need cleaning up. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 11:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
- It was (and is) mainly the intro. It has significantly improvedn but needs some expansion and wikification. The list is also an orphan (meaning that no other articles link to it) and almost a dead end (meaning that it has no bluelinks, you can't go from this page to other Misplaced Pages pages by links except for the Thurrock link (added since) and the Mucking excavation link (already there when I tagged it). Linking to things like East Tilbury would help, but certainly when you hace words like "tessarae" or "kiln", a link is useful (even if it is a redlink, then at least we know that it needs an article :-) ). Don't get me wrong, it is an interesting article, and very well sourced, but it could use a lot of work, and can still use some basic work. Fram (talk) 12:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
- I've removed the tag following expansion of the lead and increasing the links to other articles. Have a look and see whether it needs more. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 14:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, that will do. Normally, something should be bolded at the start of the intro, but with lists, this is sometimes harder to achieve in a natural way. Thanks for all the work on this! Fram (talk) 14:25, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
- I've removed the tag following expansion of the lead and increasing the links to other articles. Have a look and see whether it needs more. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 14:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Shaun Costello
It appears the deletion of that article as "personal attack page" was for the wrong reason. There is currently a discussion about this at WT:P*#Shaun Costello. Do you see any objection to undeleting this page so that people there can discuss it properly? — Sebastian 04:13, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
- Replied there, thanks for the notification. Fram (talk) 07:47, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Greeting from Bali
Hi. I've noted your comments a few weeks ago and earlier today. I recall agreeing with you on some issues previously and posting replies to that effect. I'd like to assure you that I'm a reasonable fellow and that I'm back with a sincere interest in doing what's right for the project; this has always been my intent. Perhaps we could chat a bit? Email's fine, if you prefer. I've had quite a bit of dialogue with a great many folks prior to my return; talk does wonders. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:06, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
- No thanks, I'm not interested. If you behave reasonably, I'll leave you well alone. Your behaviour (pre-block I mean) was appalling, even if we agreed on some aspects of the fiction discussions. I don't like White Cat at all (as an editor here, I have no idea what kind of person he is and it is utterly irrelevant), but how you treated him was despicable. You are unblocked, you can edit productively now, but that does not mean that I'll change my opinion of you or have any interest whatsoever to chat with you. Fram (talk) 10:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)