Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:00, 30 December 2009

Welcome

Welcome...

Hello, PilgrimRose, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Aramgar (talk) 22:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Aramgar (talk) 22:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Comment on Splitting Articles

An author should receive some prior notice of such a major change to his or her own article involving a split of the article. There should be a rule about that. It is just basic courtesy. PilgrimRose

As far as I know, the best way to do that is to place an article on your watchlist. That provides a single page that you can skim and see if changes have been made.

Note that you are making a distinction that Misplaced Pages doesn't: differentiating between "author" and "editor". Once an article is started, it is generally fair game to anyone. --Dcfleck (talk) 17:36, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

• PilgrimRose, you are correct about the initial-author-verus-other-editors viewpoint: when an article is tagged for WP:AfD, the original author should be notified, so there is, in fact, a long-term precedent for acknowledging the initial (or most-active) author of an article (as "somehow" more important than others). Most everyone finds out about the history-tab and "earliest" revision to inspect how an article began. Also, I think many people would agree about the "basic courtesy" issue: at the end of 2009, we still have "Rude-ipedia" as a poor system of collaboration where 98% of users have quit, many of them in disgust at insults and hacking. More about this, below, at #Wackipedia. -Wikid77 (talk) 17:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Kercher Murder Trial

I am sorry that you thought I was being very insulting, my use of the term arrogance was not meant as a personal attack but a reference to the way you were treating the page. Anyway enough of that, you have your opinions and you are entitled to them and I would defend that right on your behalf anywhere else. You should know that my only interest was and is in trying to maintain a neutral Misplaced Pages, I have grave concerns about the appearance of a USA "slant" in much of Misplaced Pages and the Kercher page is a very good example. However, believe me when I say that I have nothing personal against you (or anyone else for that matter) and I apologise for any offence I might have caused you.

On the subject of how the USA is perceived in Europe, you might like to have a look at the editorial pages of various news agencies over here. Many people feel that the USA has an arrogant and bullying approach to other countries. There has often been much disquiet about various activities and policies of the USA government and major corporations.

I hope that you will take the time to look at some of these links as I offer them not in any attempt to dispute with you or even to try to influence your views. They are offered in a genuine attempt to inform.

I have attached a partial quote from the UK's SKY News website as an example of some of the feelings you might discover from Italy:

Some in Italy were annoyed by criticism in the US media..

Corriere della Sera, the country's leading newspaper, claimed that “in America, the passport is more important than an alibi.”

“They cannot close Guantanamo, yet they find the time to think about Perugia," it went on.

Recent history is full of cases that have stirred tensions between the two countries including the 2005 shooting of an Italian intelligence officer in Iraq by an US soldier.

In 1998, after a US jet cut through a ski gondola's cables in northern Italy, killing 20 people. A US military jury acquitted the pilot of manslaughter.

Just recently, an Italian court convicted in absentia 23 Americans, most of them CIA agents, on charges of kidnapping an Egyptian terror suspect.

You can read the whole article at: http://blogs.news.sky.com/americanpie/Post:2f5ae419-8f37-40c0-8923-6640ece2349b

A more UK oriented view is in the Daily Mail, a large circulation national daily in the UK, where Richard Littlejohn writes: Whether or not the furore is justified by the evidence, one thing is for certain: if Foxy Knoxy had hopped on a plane back to Seattle after the murder, she would never have been extradited to Italy to stand trial. The Americans have a chauvinistic world view which holds that no country on earth can dispense justice as fairly as the good old U.S. of A. The whole article is worth reading as it really does show what some people in the UK feel about the USA's attitude: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1234025/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Say-like-Foxy-Knoxy-Yanks-stand-own.html

A popular local London newspaper site's latest item is a reaction to the news that Hilary Clinton is getting involved: http://www.metro.co.uk/news/805290-kerchers-angry-at-knox-family-s-political-ploys

Another view that you might find illuminating is in one of the UK's most popular newspapers: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/12/08/think-of-meredith-kercher-not-bambi-eyed-killer-amanda-knox-115875-21880718/

Finally, in the Guardian, the UK's most liberal of quality national newspapers, you will find (and generally approve of) many balanced articles that show how most of us here actually viewed the trial with misgivings and apprehension: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/meredithkercher

Anyway, enough of all that. I just wanted to let you know (away from the Kercher talk page) that there was nothing personal meant from me. I hope you will take this message in the friendly spirit in which it is offered. I also hope that you do take the time to look at some news articles and videos from over here in Europe to see how things are perceived away from the "friends of Amanda" PR machine. rturus (talk) 01:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Wackipedia

11-Dec-09: I've been editing over 15,000 articles/pages for 5 years, but I still believe that the system is a Wack-ipedia of unrestrained people who abandon common courtesy, or form some POV-slanted wiki-gangs (Clique-ipedia), and are often allowed to proliferate trivia such as 1,900 articles about asteroids (Nerd-ipedia), but only 1 article will be allowed about two students sentenced to 25/26 years in prison at Perugia. Among the subjects that are most-lacking in Misplaced Pages are: legal terms, financial calculations (credit life insurance), and how adults cooperate in professional groups (collaboration). Many of us have concluded that there must be systems of censure for trouble-makers, and hence, a system of restricted access as the way to block them. So, the key problem is the current anonymous or WP:sockpuppet editing that allows a banned user to re-appear a day later, as an "assumed nice-guy", who then resumes slowing deleting text to cause a POV-slant by omission. I finally see how the Meredith Kercher article has been systematically pruned to leave only the slanted prosecution claims. However, please don't abandon hope: many of us, in other forums, have repeated the need for anonymous "registered IP addresses" who would have a proven, long history of non-slanted edits, while allowing the blocking of new IP addresses or continual censure of some usernames who have been found to repeatedly omit opposing views. Because Misplaced Pages already has a username database of 11 million users, it would be easy to implement the trusted-user levels to allow blocking thousands of troublemakers. Please don't feel that your time has been wasted, but consider every struggle as more proof that the problems persist. People born in fascist areas might not even realize the scope of the problems. It a way, it's sort of interesting: being in the frontier days of worldwide data-collaboration to create a better future for others. However, I do understand that the numerous problems have been demoralizing for many users who do not have time for wiki-scams. -Wikid77 (talk) 17:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments Wikid77. Your comments mean a lot to me. It seems that Misplaced Pages is such a great idea, but that there are some who don't care if they destroy the experience for other people---which could eventually destroy Misplaced Pages itself over the long run. There are definitely some people using intimidation tactics such as hurling insults and reporting people unjustly for alleged abuses. It is not an atmosphere conducive to collaboration and good writing. I don't know how you have survived for so long in such an atmosphere. But I hope that you will continue with your efforts because without good and honorable editors such as yourself, Misplaced Pages would be lost. Thank you. PilgrimRose (talk) 18:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Some coping strategies

I've used several methods to survive this long:

• Remember there are 200,000 active wiki-editors, and probably 198,000 are good, only perhaps 2000 inhibit progress.
• Even if your edits get reverted, Misplaced Pages helps focus on curious topics, but with no permanent commitments. For example, I never would have "understood" the legal loopholes & unreal no-DNA/hair (after a sexual assault?) in the Knox case, if you hadn't posted on that talk-page. The news I saw in the U.S. just didn't fully convey those issues, nor denote a case that will echo for decades.
• There is a long-term audience who will be reached: even if the rascals slant a page during a whole week of news, such as nearing a conviction, then very often just as many readers will read that article during the next 2 months, as the number who read during the first week. Distortion during a news event has limited impact, so edit a month later and provide balance for another year.
• When opposition becomes a waste, work on non-news articles: at any given time, there are over 50,000 important articles to consider, such as writing the history and major issues about a "New trial" in countries other than the U.S.
• A few common articles can reach as many as a top-news article: such as the article "Indictment" read one thousand times per day (500-1500 pageviews daily). Adding some related remarks in several legal articles, such as issues concerning an "Amena Knoksall", could reach just as many readers, without all the opposing hype. There's more than one way to skin a cat. Combine the interest of several articles and compare the daily readership:

"Indictment" (Aug.): http://stats.grok.se/en/200908/Indictment

"Change/venue" (Aug): http://stats.grok.se/en/200908/Change_of_venue

"Intimidation" (June): http://stats.grok.se/en/200906/Intimidation

"Trial de novo" (June): http://stats.grok.se/en/200906/Trial_de_novo

Once seeds are planted, then more people become curious about the related subjects. If interest in an article falls below 10-per-day, then I usually avoid editing, unless it is a historical town or site (Mabila).

• Avoid befriending troublemakers: Beware the adage "where there's smoke there's fire". Some initially gruff people might seem to become friendly, but that initial behavior is still waiting under the surface. There's the old Johnny Rivers song which ends with the woman being bitten, while told, "You knew darn well I was a snake before you took me in" (The Snake (song)).

Those are some of the many ways to avoid frustrations, and join into the productive majority of WP. I'm glad you didn't give up in 2008. -Wikid —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.78.83.144 05:33, 13 December 2009

Wikid, Thanks so much for sharing your survival tactics. I will try them out for myself! PilgrimRose (talk) 18:37, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Continued shrinking of article

There is simply not enough time for normal people to fight wiki-censorship, and there are no policies, nor even an adequate method, to restrict the current, continual erosion of content. When reader interest drops to 100x fewer readers, as it has, then it is a good time to move on to other pages. This is WP at its worst. Some people are OCD-relentless in their hackings to pages, perhaps like a hyperactive dog that constantly bites at a toy wanting to sustain a struggle. And for the mainstream users, there is simply not enough time to fight any get-a-life attitudes who wake every day to remove text from Misplaced Pages, as though they have "won a battle". This is the dreaded en-psycho-pedia situation, of totally bizarre behavior, that would make colleagues cast a sideways glance at anyone "caught" working on WP. In the past, many users have quit after just a few dealings with the men-behaving-badly aspects of WP. On the opposite end of the spectrum, when access has been totally restricted, then groups of holier-than-thou users have typically denied others the "privilege" to add text, so that situation was even worse, because a restricted-access encyclopedia has very few users able to handle the vast scope of topics: expect them to have perhaps 30,000 articles, compared to WP's 6,929,976 articles (live count ). I suppose the explanation would be: the people who censor 24-hrs-per-day are, in general, the same mindset as the people who push to gain power in a website that has exclusive access for writers. Censorship is rampant in many websites, so just try to spread the word in as many places, or pages, as possible. In terms of guessing psychological projection, while some people strive to expand knowledge, perhaps others delight in trashing it, like stomping a sandcastle on the beach out of pure spite. When people seem shocked that I am still working on "that lowly" Misplaced Pages, I just reply that I am studying human nature of how thousands of people co-exist in a virtually lawless society (like the Law of the Old West). Hence, WP is also a fascinating, long-term experiment of large, semi-chaotic groups of people, where most law enforcement has been abandoned. -12.78.83.201 23:55, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikid:

I totally relate to what you are saying. Some on the Kercher article seems especially vicious and intolerant of minority views. Stay strong. The article is a lot better than it was two weeks ago. PilgrimRose (talk) 03:19, 22 December 2009 (UTC)