Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:02, 31 December 2009

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. RxS 02:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Jacket ca.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Jacket ca.png. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 02:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Jacket ca.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Jacket ca.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BetacommandBot 14:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Ignorance is strength, 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:

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Marlith /C 00:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Overuse of wikilinks

I reverted virtually all of your wikilink edits on iPod touch. Please read the official policy regarding wikilinking WP:MOS#Wikilinks, as overuse of wikilinks is considered disruptive. Also, much of your wikilinks were incorrect or were pointed to disambiguation pages. Groink (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

9/11

You appear to be edit-warring to imply a different origin of the attacks than that supported in the mainstream media. See the article talk page for relevant discussion and consensus. Please stop inserting variations on "allegedly." Acroterion _(talk) 13:06, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Blocked for disruptive editing

You have clearly established that you are only using Misplaced Pages to try and force fringe viewpoints, unsupported by reliable sources which we can verify.

This is a violation of our policy against using Misplaced Pages as a battleground or soapbox for spreading your ideas around. That is not what Misplaced Pages exists to be. Please see our five core project policy pillars and policies such as neutral point of view in articles, don't give undue attention in articles to minority viewpoints, don't overemphasize fringe viewpoints.

As your edits only seem to be on these topics, and are all violating the policy, I have blocked you from editing indefinitely.

Indefinitely is not permanently. If you are willing to abide by Misplaced Pages policy and work within our community, towards our project goals, and without further disruption of articles, any administrator can unblock you.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:40, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Ignorance is strength (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Contrary to what is indicated on the block, I edit a wide diversity of articles. A cursory check of my edits will reveal this. I don't believe I violated any of the five pillars. My most recent edits are backed by a published book which made reference to CIA documents released under FOIA, and my knowledge of the physical limitations of cellular phone technology.

Decline reason:

You're responding to issues the block didn't raise. It doesn't matter how many articles, or how few, you edit for that editing to be disruptive. Contrary to your claim, your most recent edit to article namespace prior to the block cited no published book. Your knowledge of the physical limitations of cellular phones is original research without an independent, reliable citation to that effect. Restoring that over and over with minimal discussion (merely restating it on the talk page doesn't count) is disruptive. — Daniel Case (talk) 18:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

}

Ignorance is strength (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I promise to to abide by Misplaced Pages policy, and to refrain from editing the 9/11 article

Decline reason:

The problem is not which articles you edit, it is how you edit them, and this request does not indicate to me that you understand what the problems with your mode of editing are. For instance, taking an edit at random from your contributions, why is this not how you go about writing a reliable, neutral encyclopedia?  Sandstein  20:08, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

{{unblock|OK, I get your point. I am willing to abide by Misplaced Pages policy and work within your community, towards your project goals, and without further disruption of articles. The gag makes it difficult to respond to individual admin comments, but I would like the opportunity to do so before you flush my account completely. Please also note that there was no warning before an indefinite block; I would like my case to be judged on the basis of my body of contributions. Finally, I would like to say that I am a professional editor, and would like to continue improving Misplaced Pages.}}

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Other editors failing WP:V and WP:UNDUE at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/September_11_conspiracy_theories#Log_of_blocks.2C_bans.2C_and_restrictions had a 48hr block, It would seem reasonable not to be excessive here, especially in the light of the lack of any single 1-2-3-4 warnings to this page. Please be more careful in future and find reliable sources for your edits - especially any that are likely to be controversial. Request handled by:  Ronhjones  01:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC) Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

How Misplaced Pages policy was not followed in my case (see italicized phrases)

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/September_11_conspiracy_theories#Discretionary_sanctions

Discretionary sanctions

1) Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict (defined as articles which relate to the events of September 11, broadly interpreted) if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.

Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.

In determining whether to impose sanctions on a given user and which sanctions to impose, administrators should use their judgment and balance the need to assume good faith and avoid biting genuinely inexperienced editors, and the desire to allow responsible contributors maximum freedom to edit, with the need to reduce edit-warring and misuse of Misplaced Pages as a battleground, so as to create an acceptable collaborative editing environment even on our most contentious articles. Editors wishing to edit in these areas are advised to edit carefully, to adopt Misplaced Pages's communal approaches (including appropriate conduct, dispute resolution, neutral point of view, no original research and verifiability) in their editing, and to amend behaviors that are deemed to be of concern by administrators. An editor unable or unwilling to do so may wish to restrict their editing to other topics, in order to avoid sanctions.

So you willingly admit to violating the restriction set forth at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/September 11 conspiracy theories, no? –MuZemike 01:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

It appears that he neither violated any restrictions nor "admitted" to doing so. He did make one error in judgment in a discussion of a 9/11 topic, however. It is not true that cell phone calls cannot be made at high speeds and/or from high altitudes. That was changed some time after 9/11, and the new technology was announced. That, however, is not disruptive editing, and the factual error should have been pointed out. We note that he has been targeted by a faction that does not promote a neutral point of view on this topic in their tireless promotion of the official conspiracy theory (OCT). Reference to a fireman who stated, very articulately, that he heard a series of explosions coming from the towers is deleted with the "explanation" that the fireman was "confused." Statements from an English structural engineer, sourced in a prestigious journal, that he had seen photographs of melted metal at the WTC simply disappear. Quotations from Pentagon policemen which disprove the narrative in the Zelikow report cannot be referenced because the policemen didn't say that the report was wrong. The fact that 60 percent of the members of the 9/11 Commission now dispute the report isn't mentioned anywhere. People who raise honest questions are first told that the questions were previously definitively answered, and when they point out that that claim isn't true, they get topic banned. Reasons for topic banning are given which are patently dishonest. And, there they go again. Wowest (talk) 02:47, 23 December 2009 (UTC)