Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:12, 9 January 2010

Material up to May 21 2005 on User talk:Isaac Rabinovitch/Archive 01.

RE: I ♥ Little Rock

Don't worry, I understood what you meant ;) --Wolf530 00:07, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

VfD and gulls

(Taking this one off-line, as it were.) Actually, in the specialised world of seabird biology, people do quote that film at parties. (If you'd ever met a Western Gull you'd know what I mean)Bird-nerds or Monty Python Nerds, we're all the same. I stand by my vote, mind. Sabine's Sunbird 03:47, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

• Make that Python fans and seabird fans... Sabine's Sunbird 04:03, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you regarding bad article

Sorry about the mess that is Childlike mentality. I'm probably going to stick to random stub articles until I can better help document access to policies & such (I've been coming across them at random), as well as talking more with the community on things. Cwolfsheep 21:42, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

• I don't want to "campaign" for this article, especially since I think I was actually the first one to throw a stink about it, but I think that through working with User:Cwolfsheep, the article has been sufficiently altered (by which I mean pared away of its POV), to warrant a reconsideration of your criticisms (and possibly the speedy removal of the VfD tag). Please review the article, as well as the discussion on the VfD page and on Cwolfsheep's user and talk pages in the process. Tomer 23:22, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your support for Images of Feces. Can I also encourage you to register your vote on the Talk:Feces page? The vote is very close. The censors might ban all photos of poop. Eyeon 13:45, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Popcorn

Greetings! You're right, there is no hard and fast rule. I've never seen the 85% figure tossed around (who's said that?); I like to compare it to the "roughly 80%" figure that holds on RfA, which seems to be accepted. I'm not a hard-and-fast vote-counter (actually, I hate voting: m:polls are evil), but I do take the numbers into consideration, and 78% is well within the realm of admin discretion. It is subjective and inconsistent because there's just no way to make it otherwise without opening ourselves up to a labyrinthine system of rules on whose votes to count and whether to give more weight to stronger arguments; better to rely on the judgment of people whom the community has expressed trust in and call them on it if a decision was made in error. I thought the numbers justified it and the case wasn't terribly strong for keeping; therefore, delete. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:44, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I hate the name "votes for deletion" because it does imply that it's a vote, a strict head-count; I agree that it should be renamed, which has been suggested at several points in the past but never acted upon. That's one of the big problems with the process. I don't know what else to do to increase participation; we must expect that anyone who's been around for more than a few weeks knows about VfD (as it happens, many discover it on their first day!) and just does not care to make the decisions. Very few discussions, anywhere on the wiki, attract even 50 people: a small fraction of regular editors; the only thing I can say is that people gravitate to issues that interest them and must let the others slide. (I never peek my head in at Templates for Deletion unless one I watch/otherwise care about gets nominated, for example; I only have so much time and I just don't have that much interest in them.) It's not that any decision that generates vocal opposition must be blocked. It's just that there must be rather good reason for going against it. Simple numerical majority is not sufficient. Consensus does make effecting more than trivial changes a slow process. But it also means that no one can ram something through simply by outshouting the opposition and attracting a slight majority. (In theory, anyway.) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 23:04, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Marina Sirtis

• Hm. I would tend to want to keep 'British actress' in - she is, after all, of British nationality and extraction, and her best known character Deanna Troi is noted for her Kentish accent. It's also fairly consistent with the way others in similar situations are described: Patrick Stewart and Alan Bennett spend most of their time in the USA, but it would seem ludicrous to say they are anything but British. Just a few thoughts. Matthew Platts 01:07, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

VMI peer review

You made some excellent edits. I have posted the article Virginia Military Institute at Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Virginia Military Institute/archive1 and would appreciate your comments. Rillian 14:10, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

A belated thank you

Isaac - I want to thank you for the input that you provided on the Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ohio Womens Methodist Seminary last May. Your encouragement for calm discussion on the matter was deeply appreciated by me in retrospect. Just now starting to again test the Wiki-waters, but I did want to thank you for your voice of reason in the midst of that storm. Stude62 03:06, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

In responce to No Drivers???!!!

All DLR trains have one onboard staff member in case trains break down. As for halting problems, the trains have ATP (automatic train protection). So if the electricity cuts out or other types of failure, the trains automatically grind to a halt. The computer is controlled by people as well you know. Lenny 08:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Vasa (ship) at FAC

Since you've shown interest or made some contributions to Vasa (ship), I'd like to notify you that it has been nominated as an FAC. Your insights and comments would be much appreciated there.

Peter 14:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Big Love

See my new inquiry re: your edits at Talk:Big Love#Mormon fundamentalism. Good Ol’factory 00:21, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you stop deleting this cited information. So far, there have been 3 users who have stated that are surprised at your actions. You are the only user who is insisting on removing the material, and you've provided no reason that is based on WP policy to remove the cited information. If you continue to do so without finding a consensus to do so, your edits could be considered disruptive, and I will suggest intervention by a third-party administrator. Good Ol’factory 21:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't kidding, you know. Please stop—the issue is being addressed on the talk page, and you are the only editor in favour of deleting the cited material. Any further changes will be reported as disruptive edits. Good Ol’factory 21:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't say I didn't warn you. You might want to brush up on the meaning of WP:CONSENSUS. Good Ol’factory 22:05, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

From my talk page: You're not just making a "change", you're deleting well-cited information with no WP policy justification. You are the only editor objecting to its inclusion. 3 other editors have said you are wrong. What more do you want? I'll initiate a 3rd party comment on the information if you like. Arbitration is not appropriate in a situation where there is a consensus. Good Ol’factory 22:12, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll initiate some 3rd party comments, though I'm not sure what it will take to convince you. I am surprised you are being very doctrinaire in an area that you admitted you had little knowledge of. I think a good starting point would be your looking up the citations that have been provided, since they are relatively unambiguous. I reproduce them here: Vince Horiuchi, "Dern turns to Utah's 21st governor for HBO role", Salt Lake Tribune, 2006-04-14; Gayle Fee and Laura Raposa, "Mitt takes hit on 'Big Love'", Boston Herald, 2007-08-29; Rebecca Dana, "Raise the Red-State Lantern", New York Observer, 2006-03-12. All are available on the internet or through LEXIS/Factiva-type databases at libraries. Good Ol’factory 22:19, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, your explanation as to why the citations were lacking didn't comply with WP policies, including WP:NAME. Good Ol’factory 22:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Market Post Tower

I have nominated Market Post Tower, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Market Post Tower. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Ikluft (talk) 05:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Url.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Url.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 07:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Isaac Rabinovitch! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 1 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Begin (band) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)