Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:38, 26 May 2009

Archive 1

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. A page you recently created may not conform to some of Misplaced Pages's guidelines for new pages, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Correct me if I am wrong but I think the page you are talking about is Tylenol overdose witch stated "See tylenol and drug overdose", you deleted it, it was in my opinion a useful redirect,witch is why I made it. did you delete it because in your opinion it was hamful of just not helpfull in conjunction whith violating a policiy or guideline, or just because it violated a policiy or guideline (and I did not know this violated a policiy or guideline), because if you deleteted it just because it violated a policiy or guideline, but it impoveved Misplaced Pages, You violated Misplaced Pages:Ignore all rules witch is a policiy.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:02, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be blocked from editing. I refer to your bizarre and implausible redirects. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I have been in good faith making these "bizarre and implausible redirects" sense 2008 and until now no one has complained until now (or at lest not on my talk page and not that I know of). Isn't this a bit harsh for no prior warning, now I am afraid to do much of anything for fear of being blocked.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:02, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

• OK, then I'm sorry if I came off harshly. It's often difficult to ascertain where a user is coming from during the creation of articles and such. If you made these edits in good faith, then again, I am genuinely sorry. You needn't ever fear editing in good faith. It's just that some of these redirects were really, really implausible, but again, no good faith edit will ever get you blocked. Promise. Regards, PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:18, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

PMDrive1061 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Apology accepted--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:21, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

It seamed to me that a misspelling redirect, even a very rarely used one was might still useful because it helps someone who has spelling difficulties, including people are learning English, and at worst, did no harm. Because of doing no harm, it semed safe to add thees. May I still add them?--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:34, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

You certainly may. Thanks for being gracious and thanks for your contributions. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The reason I have bean making redirects such as Misplaced Pages:Ignore all rules/Archive 15 redirecting to Misplaced Pages:Ignore all rules in this case is so from Misplaced Pages talk:Ignore all rules/Archive 15 you could click "Project page" and arrive at Misplaced Pages:Ignore all rules. Is it ok to make these kinds of redirects?--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:47, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Of course. Believe me, you don't need my permission to edit. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I know that I don't need your permission to edit, but I see how what I said cold be misunderstood to sound like I thought I did(Our 2ed misunderstanding). Our 1st misunderstanding (the block threat one) aside you you had issues with my bizarre and implausible redirects so I was expelling them.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 04:20, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Does this take care of all bizarre and implausible redirects concerns? Also I redirected Misplaced Pages:Flaming to Misplaced Pages:Civility but on second thought I probably should have not, as you did not quite say that the original message does not apply. I unfortunately tend not to react without more clarity then most people would need, sorry.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 08:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Question for administrator

{{adminhelp}} I would like to redirect User:Essjay to User talk:Essjay with the edit summery:"This page is redundant and the talk page has more information." but the page and it's talk page are fully protected. --Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 19:36, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think that user wanted his user page to be shown like that. See WP:USERPAGE for more info. Users can select what they want on their userpage and talk page (within certain limitations). As such, I believe we should respect his desire to have his userpage shown as such. You can look at the logs for that page and see a few edits down the page this summary: "1 revisions restored: Selectively restore last edit, per Essjay's request". Killiondude (talk) 21:25, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

To clarify; I'm not an admin, but I'm pretty sure any admin will state something similar to what I just said--that Essjay's request should be honored. Killiondude (talk) 21:29, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Killiondude, usury I would agree with you but Essjay has bean retired sense 2007, so the change can not be suggested to Essjay, and the user page contains only a notice that he is retired. The talk page contains that same notice and a final message from Essjay.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 22:09, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Not changing it. No point, if Essjay had wanted it that way he'd done it himself. Bjelleklang - talk 22:24, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Essjay may have not done it that way because he had not thought of the idea to do it that way. The talk page contains all of the information that the user page contains, witch is the retirement notice, and the talk page has the final message. And there is a point, so people can more easily find the final message, and know there is one.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

He was a very experienced user, so I think he'd have done it himself if he wanted to. Even if he didn't think of it (there's not really any way we can be certain of this), I still won't do anything about it as this was how he left it. Bjelleklang - talk 22:51, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I apologise in advance if this sounds harsh but I can not think of a less harsh wording. If you have not looked at User:Essjay and User talk:Essjay would you please do so. You may agree with me if you do so. And again I apologise in advance if this sounds harsh.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 23:08, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

And I am not saying you did not read it--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 00:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Essjay clearly wanted his final message to be accessible, redirecting "User:Essjay" to "User talk:Essjay" would make his final message more accessible, and might he object to us not doing it out of fear he would object. I would say it is more likely he would object to us not redirecting "User:Essjay" to "User talk:Essjay" out of fear he would object then it is he would object to us making his final message more accessible, so we should be on the safe side and make his final message more accessible.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 22:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

(outdent)Please stop speculating. We'll leave it how Essjay left it, because it was/is his/her userpage. Thanks. Killiondude (talk) 00:55, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Killiondude, in response to your saying "Please stop speculating" I am not sure what you mean. If you are arguing that speculation is a weak argument, I partly agree. In my opinion speculating has inherent flaws, but can be a convincing argument, but proof is allot more convincing then speculation. In response "his/her" being in bold, I was not assuming that Essjay was male, I was using "his" in a gender-neutral way to refer to someone who's gender is not known. To the best of my knowledge, this usage was almost universally accepted before the 1970s, but since then, the correct singular pronoun for someone who's gender is not known has been disputed.--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:36, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

No, I bolded it to emphasize that it is their userpage. Not for anyone else to manipulate (as long as they aren't breaking any rules, which it isn't). Feel free to post on WP:AN or elsewhere if you don't agree with what Bjelleklang and I have stated. Killiondude (talk) 02:41, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Oops...!

Hi, Emmette. I think I may have deleted that sandbox back when I incorrectly thought you were editing contentuously. Sorry about the mix-up. I've restored it for you. Thanks for letting me know and please don't ever hesitate to ask me for assistance. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

THIS IS TOTALLY NOT URGENT!!! IMMEDIATE ACTION NOT REQUIRED!!

United States government in Jericho is on my watchlist, so I'm sure to see your comments within a few days. —Tamfang (talk) 18:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

OK--Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 19:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

About Jimbo's userpage

Moved to User talk:Jimbo Wales#About Jimbo's userpage.

Whales

Hi. I've undone some dubious edits you've made. You should not doing things like wrapping plainlinks around others' comments and you have some odd ideas about the local God-King's userspace. I'll assume good faith for now but will also suggest a healthy interest in Whales. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)