Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:11, 20 September 2009

Only twenty dollars!

(But maybe there's also postage?) http://www.zazzle.com/custom_urban_dictionary_mug-168243605698579412 ↜Just M E here , now 13:53, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey I'd paypal ya the funds if you'd be interested. It would be so cool! ↜Just M E here , now 21:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I think we should start a gifting program on Misplaced Pages. We could give wiki article mugs too. Wikidemon (talk) 00:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I think this should be brought up with Jimbo. I'm going to do this right now. (Dirty filthy lucre.) ↜Just M E here , now 12:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Hampster dance.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Hampster dance.gif. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. macbookair3140 (talk) 18:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Obama article probation and the "beer summit"

Hey Wikidemon, there is some question being asked on the "Gatesgate" talkpage about whether discussing the White House meeting with officer Gates and the president's friend Professor Gates is part of Obama articles probation and I'd really appreciate it if you could chime in there. The link to the discussion is here: Talk:Henry Louis Gates arrest incident#Note: Features of "Obama article probation" that pertain to this page. ↜Just M E here , now 12:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

(Note: I also have opened up a discussion here (WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Is Crowley-Gates an Obama related page?) I hope that would be an appropriate venue for such a question. Please advise!) ↜Just M E here , now 14:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

You might want to move your comment, or repeat it, at the AN/I thread to avoid having the discussion in 2 places.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. Wikidemon (talk) 15:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• What percentage of Bill Ayers presidential election controversy genuinely concerns Obama? Not much, truth be told. (But then, that was a trick question! ) ↜Just M E here , now 16:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Family Guy template

Hi there, Thanks for commenting on the delete log I started (Misplaced Pages:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_August_10#Template:Family_guy_road_trip). Just thought I'd point out that you mentioned you'd vote for delete, but you started your entry with the word "Keep". Just thought I'd point this out :P. Ta, Cooltrainer Hugh (talk) 21:51, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

DOn't remove my edits

Not fair. We need to protect gates from those racists who want to make him look bad. He was railroaded buy the police. It's wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.107.115.2 (talk) 22:56, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Please join us on the talk page of the article and explain your concerns. As a very strong suggestion, please don't accuse other editors here of being racists. That violates a couple principles around here, especially "no personal attacks and "assume good faith". You'll find it alot easier to get along here if you assume the best of people. To be sure, there are probably some racists on Misplaced Pages but it's a careful group and probably less racist than most of society. I doubt that's why they added the photograph. The event itself had some racial overtones, which is a problem. But we're just reporting the event. Perhaps the editors who wanted the photographs in the article are upset too, and the photos help illustrate for them the troubling aspect of the arrest. I've started a section to discuss this. You might want to review WP:BLP, a "biographies of living people" policy, which might suggest why the photos should be removed. It's not racism as such, but just that it's unfair to an innocent person to post their arrest photos. I'm not trying to get into an argument with you, just trying to keep things stable on the article page. Hope that helps. Wikidemon (talk) 23:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I've read other editors say its hurt gates - why would they say that if it's not true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.107.115.2 (talk) 23:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I think they may be right - you'll see the message I left on the article's talk page that I agree with the concern. There's a good question of whether the photo hurts gates by showing him in an unpleasant situation, or maybe it helps him by showing people the truth of what happened. You could argue that it's the arrest itself, not the photo documentation, that hurt him. I guess you would have to ask yourself, do you think Gates wants this all to go away or would he want the photo to stay here? My real concern with your comment wasn't that you think the photo should be gone, just that you're accusing Misplaced Pages editors of racism. That usually doesn't go over well, nobody likes to be called a racist (even if it's true). Best, Wikidemon (talk) 23:16, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The whole article hurts gates. If the arrest is wrong - we should not write about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.107.115.2 (talk) 23:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Socratic barnstar

		The Socratic Barnstar
		Wikidemon, for his kindness shown editors he has reverted, giving exacting details of whatever the rationales. He certainly deserves one! ↜Just M E here , now 23:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

A fine way with words.

Wikidemon will you be my spokesperson, you have a very fine way with words.:) Respect. Off2riorob (talk) 00:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the head count, could you perhaps leave a note on perhaps a couple of other pages to let as many people know and add their comment. This is an important decision for the community and we need a wide response as possible. Off2riorob (talk) 00:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I left a note here Misplaced Pages:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Arrest_of_Henry_Louis_Gates any ideas where else would be good to leave one? Off2riorob (talk) 00:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I also left one at ANI. Off2riorob (talk) 00:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Conspiracy

Q

(While we're at trying to figure out consensus in the in/out poll wrt arrest photos... )

What would you venture is community's consensus as to the Q of whether Gatesgate is on article probation?? (That is, supposing the ANI thread's closing admin doesn't discern a consensus therefrom: since I'm in favor of it, should I re-template its talkpage and see if it holds? or would I then best be served by posting up yet another poll on the topic on Gatesgate's talkpage? ↜Just M E here , now 11:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I've striked the above cos I've now got some direction with regard to this same question from xeno on his talkpage. Thanks! ↜Just M E here , now 16:08, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:NOTIFY

I was sure that this existed. As I said at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Separate_report, I had understood the warnings on the various noticeboards (AN, ANI, WQA, SPA, etc.) that you should notify an editor if you are reporting their conduct there to be manifestations of a deeper policy, or at least community norm, of notification. Viz. that as a matter of wikiquette if nothing else, if you are trying to get someone into hot water, you should notify that person so that they have basic due process (notice and opportunity to be heard). Thus, whether you are asking for sanctions against someone at ANI or on an admin's talk page, or anywhere else, you should let that person know.

I therefore have three questions. (1) Is my understanding correct, in your view, that there is a broad community norm of notification? (2) Is this reflected in any existing policy? (3) If the answer to 1 is yes and to 2 is no, how do I go about proposing such a policy? Do I just create WP:NOTIFY and slap the "proposed" tag on it?- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 14:32, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think there is a broad norm (I would call it a convention, or expectation) that an editor bringing a complaint against (or involving) another editor should notify that person on their talk page or, if they are not getting along well enough for that, in a place where they are sure to see. But it's usually not a big deal, because if the complainant forgets someone else will usually do it, or else the person usually finds out one way or another. The penalty for failing to do so is usually just a gentle chiding, or statement of exasperation if the discussion goes too far without hearing from the most important person because they weren't told. There's a feeling that it's unfair to discuss someone's behavior (or content up for deletion, or other matters involving someone) without giving them a chance to respond. I'll bet this is written up somewhere but I'm not sure. Personally, I learned from being gently chided and observing that with others. New guideline proposals can be brought up at one of the "village pump" pages, but there's a strong reluctance to add new pages because of WP:CREEP and other sentiment against adding rules. You might look at the pages for how to file an AN/I report, I think they mention notification as one of the steps. The Obama probation notice board is very new so nobody has written instructions for filing one. That may be the issue right there. Also, you can always write an essay on any topic you want then ask around at the village pump to see what people think of it. Hope this helps. Wikidemon (talk) 18:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you. It is sincerely appreciated. I'm sorry about what happened last night, I don't think I handled the situation the best I could, so hopefully we can move on from this. --William S. Saturn (talk) 19:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Rapleaf logo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Rapleaf logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Moshe Ya'alon misquote

Wow, I don't know how you're able to put up with this Moshe Ya'alon misquote issue. I stumble into it a few weeks ago, and it just seems crazy. Especially as I really do think Moshe Ya'alon was treated unfairly by the misquote, but some of the editors are taking it to such an extreme POV point... Anyway, I thought I would draw your attention to this. Singularity42 (talk) 18:28, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

don't get it

You are attacking me with comments like that!

I don't get it. Why would people want Misplaced Pages to be less accurate? It is very plausible that some people want the most favorable article even if it is somewhat inaccurate. I am not saying that the President is a rapist. I am just advocating the most accurate information. Gaydenver (talk) 19:06, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Let's keep this on your talk page. Wikidemon (talk) 19:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Gates postscript

Hiya, I noted that you were wondering above in a discussion with an IP, "do you think Gates wants this all to go away or would he want the photo to stay here?" Just with respect to the latter question, Gates was quoted at the time as saying, “Because of the capricious whim of one disturbed person . . . I am now a black man with a prison record,’’ Gates said. “You can look at my mug shot on the Internet.’’, which I think made his feelings clear.

I am just posting this in case it's of interest to you; I recall you argued against having the mugshot in the article at the time anyway (I am not trying to reopen that discussion at this time ...). Cheers, JN466 12:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

ChildofMidnight topic banned

As a party to the Obama articles arbitration case, you are notified as a courtesy of this amendment to the final decision.

By motion of the Committee at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification,

Remedy 9 in the Obama articles case is replaced by the following (timed to run from the date the case closed):

ChildofMidnight (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is topic-banned from Obama-related articles for six months, and any related discussions, broadly construed across all namespaces.

Discussion of this motion should be directed here.

For the Arbitration Committee,
AGK 12:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Just Happenned to Notice Your Comment Here

I think that it's highly commendable of you to be active in regards to that article. I, myself, no longer have the energy to do battle in such fora anymore. It's so exhausting.
--NBahn (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Your note

There are no Obama articles on my watchlist. I came across the violation while watching for vandalism on RecentChanges, and reverted it as an obvious BLP vio. My sanction states "except for undisputable vandalism and BLP violations" so I saw no issue with it. -- Scjessey (talk) 15:39, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. In retrospect, it is probably better for me to stay away from those articles even in cases of vandalism. It's not like there isn't going to be someone else ready to invoke Twinkle about 5 nanoseconds after me! -- Scjessey (talk) 15:48, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

LOL ...

VERY good! I hereby vow to never use my powers for evil! ;) — Ched :  ?  09:42, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Obama and Godwin

kthx. Sceptre 15:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Columbia grad without honors

Howdy. I too have never heard of "graduating without honors," I always thought that was just plain old graduating. Thanks for posting that link to the TNR article; they seem to have really gone off the deep end since Buckley passed away. On the other hand, it illustrates quite clearly why many of us here in NYC haven't used Sulzberger's fishwrap for anything but theater listings and book reviews for many, many years. Cheers. L0b0t (talk) 19:12, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

The name is suspiciouly like ass-fucking-ski. I´d report it, but am too lazy.--Die4Dixie (talk) 06:09, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

It is a funny name, no? I googled a bit and it does not seem to be an actual last name, nothing like Phuc Nguyen. Wikidemon (talk) 07:18, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

If he continues to be disruptive ( blanking pages, and other stuff) it might be an account that has nefarious purposes.--173.20.157.45 (talk) 16:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Generous

You were quite generous on ANI. I did go off the deep end a little last month after I was initially right about a subject and ended up saying a couple of things for which I apologized ( and some that I will not). The bottom line is the fellow might need a little direction. I was to the point with him, butremained civil. The behavour is problematic. I just want it to end. I am willing to work towards a concensus about the issues there, but certian behavours are disruptive.--Die4Dixie (talk) 21:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now

Google news links rot quickly. Do you have another? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I took that link from an earlier article edit - it's an AP story so it should be available on the AP site, and if not yet it will soon be reprinted by traditional newspapers. Incidentally, I'm thinking of asking for page semi-protection if things don't calm down fast. Lots of IP and SPA editors doing vandalism, bad edits, and stuff that just doesn't make sense. Wikidemon (talk) 01:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

There's a NY Times link now, so all is well. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikidemon, why remove the paragraph I added to the lead, and the video links I provided at the end? I don't understand this decision? The lead of the George W. Bush biography cites a "close and controversial election," "increasingly heated criticism," and "widespread criticism," also mentioning that Bush's "popularity declined sharply." And ACORN has been indicted in Nevada. Bush was never indicted for anything. George W. Bush, unlike ACORN, has been rated as a Good Article. I believe we should try to emulate the Bush biography since it has been rated as a Good Article. 71.57.8.103 (talk) 14:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I think your question reveal the answer about the controversy / scandal. The Bush article mentions that his administration faced a popularity decline and had a controversial election because those in summary are the main issues - it doesn't detail the specific events that made the election controversial, or that lead to the popularity decline, because that would be shoehorning the article into the lede. Also, with ACORN it is not the specific facts (specific incidents of fraud, the fact that the video was made) that affected the organization directly, it is the scandal that arose out of those incidents. If four low level employees are arrested and convicted, the organization keeps functioning as if nothing happens. It was not until the activists raised the issue, the press covered it, and the revelations of these problems mounted up, that something happened. You might want to take a look at WP:LEDE and WP:COAT if you haven't. If you do want to mention the controversies in the lede, I think a better approach would be a shorter section, 1-2 sentences, that says something like "From 2005 through 2009 ACORN was the subject of a series of scandals involving embezzlement, management fights, voter registration fraud committed by its workers, and the release of an undercover expose, leading to public controversy and the loss of its contract with the US Census Bureau". That's not worded perfectly, I'm just trying to show an approach. Then you would have to make sure all of that material is supported and cited in the body of the article. I wouldn't object to that kind of mention. In fact, I won't revert anything at this point because I'm at my quota. In case you don't know, take a look at WP:3RR and be sure not to violate that -- reverts to different sections all count! About the links, this is a slightly different case but normally you wouldn't post links to videos about an organization in the external links section. For example, if there is a documentary about General Motors, you wouldn't use the external links section to link to that, or to an interview with the CEO, etc. These may seem helpful, but if you start linking to sources like that there's no real way to manage that section. That's all probably covered in the WP:EL guideline. If a reader does want to see the videos, most of the news sources already listed as citations will link to them. It might also work to put the links in a footnote. I'll see if I can do that in just a bit. Thanks for asking. Cheers, Wikidemon (talk) 15:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Ooops, I think my recent edit just removed that new paragraph. I reinserted a re-worded version: ACORN has been the subject of public controversy involving embezzlement, management fights, voter registration fraud committed by its workers, and an undercover expose on employee misconduct that lead to the loss of its contract with the United States Census Bureau.

I took out the 2005-2009 part, because it has been the focus of criticism and controversy much longer than that. However, the publicity does seem to be growing in step with its size and importance in the political arena. In my own opinion, it appears as if ACORN's woes all stem from personel problems which are exploited by critics to maximum effect. One person embezzles, so obviously the whole organization is corrupt. A couple dozen workers over the past decade try to make a fast buck by filling out fake forms, so obviously the whole organization is trying to steal elections somehow. Another part of the problem is that much of the ACORN workforce is derived from the very communities it is trying to help -- lower class, under educated, socially depressed -- I doubt there are a lot of Ph.Ds on the payroll. They are an easy target, which elicits a certain amount of sympathy, but at the same time I'm hoping some of these recent hard knocks will motivate them to shore up some of their weak points. Xenophrenic (talk) 16:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. The way you reworded the sentence looks good to me. We'll see over at the article whether that meets with approval from others. Wikidemon (talk) 20:20, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters has now unilaterally removed the paragraph that was added by the consensus of no less than three Misplaced Pages editors: Xenophrenic, Wikidemon and myself. Please resolve this situation. Thanks. 71.57.8.103 (talk) 18:47, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

The consensus is only the consensus until it changes. Just because a couple editors expressed mild support for having something in the lede section, that doesn't mean other editors won't disagree or have better ideas. Nothing is set in stone. Your best course of action would be to start a section on the article talk page and lay out your best reasoning for your edits, and see what most editors say. Three people discussing possible edits on a user's talk page doesn't equate to final judgement on an article. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 01:37, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I'm leaning slightly in favor of a brief mention in the lede, and am okay with the version discussed above (as subsequently improved on the article page). However, other people have different opinions, and we won't know for some time how important this is in the long run to the organization. It could blow over, or it could cause the organization's downfall. Only time will tell. Wikidemon (talk) 04:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

User:71.241.218.107

NB: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:71.241.218.107 — hard-core PoV-pushing anon. —12.72.73.42 (talk) 11:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

re: your recent vandalism

Please refrain from your continued vandalism of my talk page. Since you are a firm believer in the law, please take up your concerns with whatever forces are generally appealed to in such matters. If you believe that I have committed a crime, it is your duty as a law advocate to see to it that I am arrested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.218.107 (talk) 18:36, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Note - above IP editor subsequently blocked for tendentiousness, edit warring, COPYVIO, incivility, etc. - Wikidemon (talk) 04:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey there

Hey Wikidemon! I've been out of the game for awhile and missed all the Obamadrama. Would you mind pointing me in the direction of the final result/decision to the Arb case, and then the follow-up as well. Thanks! Grsz 14:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

The case and decisions are at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Obama articles. I would prefer not to comment on the specifics because I (along with three other editors so far) are currently under a "no interaction" injunction arising from this. However, as a general matter the ruling was very superficial and narrowly drawn to several incidents and user behavior taken in isolation, with relatively little guidance or review of the larger issues of Obama articles. It has probably done a little good to stabilize the articles but there have already been 4-5 trips back to Arbcom and several to AN/I on enforcement. You can see those in the archives of requests for clarification, requests for enforcement, requests for amendment, and of course AN/I and the talk pages of the editors involved. Wikidemon (talk) 20:35, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Your Handling of ACORN and Nonpartisanship

An excellent piece of work, in both conception and implementation. It's particularly good that the new article will be referred to regarding other organizations. PhGustaf (talk) 02:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I could use some help creating links from all those articles, and also adding some representative cases where nonpartisan orgs have been accused of violating, or found to be violating, the restrictions. It's actually a pretty important subject with no Misplaced Pages article until now. Wikidemon (talk) 19:28, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Notification

Please see WP:AE - I intend to interpret the mutual interaction restriction between you and ChildofMidnight to include making reports. I have also filed for a request for clarification. Your input at both is welcomed.--Tznkai (talk) 16:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)