Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:50, 20 February 2010

Archives

Archive 1

This user iswas taking a short wikibreak starting 1 October 2009 and will be back on Misplaced Pages in a few days. I think it may be good to take short breaks from Misplaced Pages on a regular basis, such as on the first of every month for approximately 1 to 5 days and come back refreshed with new ideas.

I will edit tomorrow, the 30th of September, though. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I am back Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 21:04, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Oops, I edited on November 1st. So there will be a wikibreak starting tomorrow for at least 24 hours. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 18:56, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Saab Spyker Automobiles

According to and it will change its name to Saab Spyker Automobiles.--Godzillerdood (talk) 21:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Al. New Mexico

This looks good now. I suggest you put the bit on when the museum is open into the footnote, rather than the text. Also, I'll have to check the rules for GA: I'm not sure if you need a bibliography and a set of footnotes. If that is the case, take a look at Inner German Border for examples of how to create a decent bibliography with all those newspaper articles. Maybe you could write something on Charles Bishop Eddy next. We need something on him, and there's quite a bit out there written about him already. Just not on wikipedia. Let me know when it's nominated. Auntieruth55 (talk) 02:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

 Finland

September 2009

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Leslie E. Robertson, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. mjwilson (/_Contrib) 19:02, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It was very constructive. However, I've reworded it to sound better and even included a citation. This is guesswork since your message above is just a form letter and not very descriptive. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Please do not remove redlinks

Please do not remove relinks from the articles, as you did with Alamogordo, New Mexico. Please see WP:REDDEAL, which says in part, "In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article, but for which there exists no candidate article, or article section, under any name." Thank you. --Uncia (talk) 20:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Bulleted lists of notable residents

The use of bulleted lists in the Notable natives and residents sections of city articles is deprecated; see WP:USCITY. I have reverted your reformatting of the list in Alamogordo, New Mexico to its previous prose form. --Uncia (talk) 21:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Your edits of Healthcare in Alamogordo, New Mexico

Your recent edits of the Healthcare section of Alamogordo, New Mexico removed important information, and changed the sense of the remaining information. I have reverted the section to its previous version. Please discuss your proposed changes on the article's talk page before making them again. Thank you. --Uncia (talk) 21:41, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Inn of the Mountain Gods Resort & Casino

A tag has been placed on Inn of the Mountain Gods Resort & Casino, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Misplaced Pages:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Template:Do not delete Mr. Vernon (talk) 18:42, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I think Mr. Vernon was right, and I deleted the article. We're not saying that no article on that business is possible ... if you can find reliable sources establishing notability, then it will be fine. We're saying that that article would make a bad impression on someone coming to Misplaced Pages for encyclopedic information, because it sounds like an advertisement. - Dank (push to talk) 19:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Alamogordo

Alamogordo, New Mexico is current being considered for promotion to Good Article status; see WP:GAN#PLACE. Please don't make any large changes until the review is over, because one of the criteria to be promoted is that the article is stable; see WP:WIAGA. --Uncia (talk) 21:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

You wrote: "The references are of different format ... I looked at the FA. This is unacceptable." What part of FA are you looking at? If you mean WP:WIAFA criterion 2c, this just means that the citations need to be either all footnote-style or all Harvard-style, it doesn't apply to the internals of the footnote, and in particular does not apply to the date format. Please do not make needless changes. Thanks. --Uncia (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Please do not remove repeated wikilinks

Please do not remove repeated wikilinks from the articles. Repeated links are permitted if they are far away from each other in the text, see Misplaced Pages:Linking#Repeated_links. I realize that you are trying to help, but you are new here and Misplaced Pages has many, many rules that have been developed over the years and should be followed. Take a little time and learn the most important rules before you start editing. There are links to them in the Welcome message at the top of this page. The book Misplaced Pages: The Missing Manual is also very valuable; you can read it online at Help:Misplaced Pages: The Missing Manual. Thank you. --Uncia (talk) 21:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages offers a mentoring program - are you interested in having a mentor?

Misplaced Pages offers a mentoring program for new editors, to help them become familiar with Misplaced Pages procedures and get up to speed quickly. Would you like to have a mentor? The program is called Adopt-a-User and you can read about it at WP:ADOPT and Misplaced Pages:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area. If you would like some occasional help but don't feel like having a mentor would be helpful, you can also ask for assistance with particular questions at the Editor's Assistance page, WP:EA. Welcome to Misplaced Pages, and I hope you will make use of one of these avenues of assistance. --Uncia (talk) 01:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Abecedare (talk) 20:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I have replied to your last message on my talk page. Please let me know if you already have that page watchlisted, since then I don't need to leave these talkback messages. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your support at my RFA. Irrespective of the outcome, I am happy to get it, since it affirms that wikiprocesses of calm discussion can work even when the parties get off on the wrong foot. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Goa

The problem with your Goa suggestion is that India is a Federation and many states have special situations vis-a-vis the central government. Jammu and Kashmir is the most obvious example, of course, but there are land ownership issues in hill states, religious protection in Arunachal Pradesh, etc. and many special situations arise. It is impossible to put one ahead of the other and, since India is a summary article, it is best to avoid all special situations, except where the situation is of political importance and effects other nations (China and Pakistan mostly). --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 19:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I think you're looking at this from the wrong end. If you start with "Goa is a special case" (or "Sikkim is a special case") then you'll end up feeling that Goa (or "Sikkim") is being excluded by "opponents". However, if you look at the India article, see it as a summary article, then you'll be more parsimonious in what you think should be included. --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 22:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, the only reason Goa is a "special case" is that the Portuguese were stubborn enough that they needed to be kicked out whereas the British and the French realised that their time was up and decided to leave in a dignified manner. Did you know that there were 552 princley states in India which, in a matter of speaking were independent of Brithish India but subservient to the British crown. Each of them had to sign an instrument of acession to transfer sovereignity to India or Pakistan. So thats 552 "special cases".

I hope you will not give any more ideas to Gaunkar. He is a nut and is seriously out of touch with reality. He pounced upon your edits and is hoping to gain some more support for his crazy little independence movement on Misplaced Pages. Dont feed the trolls. --Deepak D'Souza 12:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Please don't call others a "nut". I have not investigated Mr. of Goa, just read what he wrote to me. Mr. R. Park's comments are appreciated and I will consider them. Goa was the site of an battle, just as the battles with Pakistan. In contrast, the French controlled sections were generally peacefully transferred to India as with most foreign controlled areas. I am for article improvement, not just topic insertion so I will consider everything. I will be on a self imposed wikibreak starting tomorrow for a few days. This will be done as a matter of routine, once a month for at least 1 day, maybe a few days, starting on the first. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 14:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

This user is taking a short wikibreak starting 1 October 2009 and will be back on Misplaced Pages in a few days. I think it may be good to take short breaks from Misplaced Pages on a regular basis, such as on the first of every month for approximately 1 to 5 days and come back refreshed with new ideas.

It is 1 October. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Editing about own company

The answer to your question is essentially yes. You are allowed to edit wherever you like, but editing in an area where you have a conflict of interest means that there is a very high probability of such edits being reverted. --Anthony.bradbury 19:12, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, how are you involved with user:Annmarieburnett? --Anthony.bradbury 19:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I ask this question because of your apparent interest in her block and her unblock request; it is unusual for uninvolved editors to become involved as you did, although you are clearly entirely entitled to do so. And my answer is accurate. Edits violating WP:COI are usually reverted, but a decision is made individually on each one. It is possible to create a scenario in which such an edit would not be reverted, but it is unlikely in practice to happen. I remain unclear as to why, if you and user:Annmarieburnett are not connected, the question is relevant to you. --Anthony.bradbury 20:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Odd unblock

Yes, it is. Sometimes block logs get oversighted or suppressed, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. Daniel Case (talk) 15:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Policy

I have no wish to in any way discourage you, but you really should not try to run before you can walk.

You have, to date, made some 349 edits to wikipedia. I, counting admin edits, have about 30,000. I would, with this level of experience, not venture to attempt to change wiki policy except in the most peripheral areas. Misplaced Pages policy is already very clearly laid down, and is subject to change only by community majority consensus. There is really no need for any further policy documents, and I would quite seriously suggest that you should get a firm and extensive groundwork and experience in ordinary everyday editing before you try and go any further. Please, trust me. This is advice you should take serious notice of. --Anthony.bradbury 19:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I have now looked at your involvement with user:Gaunkars of Goa. Unless you have achieved significant expertise in wikipedia under another account, please back off NOW. And leave this area to those who have experience in it. --Anthony.bradbury 20:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

You know, you could be a really good editor and ultimately a really good admin. Please, just go and edit/write articles. --Anthony.bradbury 20:03, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

aiding the translation

Suomi, I have recently become entranced with this song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE9sQEw0W4s. However, I do not speak Finnish ... some say I barely am speaking English! LOL! Anyway, could you translate the lyrics for me? Or even just a gist of what it's about? THX - Secretoffatima (talk) 02:34, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply to you posting

Hi there; various comments.

Perhaps in some ways most important, the fact that I am a practising catholic does not blind me to the reality behind other faiths; I am well aware of the significance of Deepavali (or divali as some languages have it), as I am of other important days in Hindu, Islam, Jewish and other faiths. And Guy Fawkes day is a wholly historical commemoration without religious significance.

It appears to me, perhaps incorrectly, that you remain unable to grasp the importance of experience and depth of knowledge within wikipedia. It is wholly inappropriate for you to be considering the creation of a wiki instruction manual, even as co-author. I have no wish to give offence, but you simply do not as yet have even a small part of the skill and experience necessary to do this. Please drop the idea now.

I have said before, and say again, please concentrate on simple editing and article creation. I have looked at the Alamagordo article you mention. Your first edits to it were at a point when it already consisted of some 80+kb, and were to delete a number of redlinks for which you were soundly rebuked. And the point which I am making is that you did not know any better. So please go and gain basic experience until you DO know better.

I know that you want to be a good editor. And I know that you want to be an admin, and hopefully a good one. But you ABSOLUTELY MUST go away and learn how first. Careless or disruptive editing remains on your edit history, and can count against you in the future. I really am trying to give you good advice here. --Anthony.bradbury 15:47, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello, Suomi Finland 2009. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have an interest in adding your comments. The thread is User:Ludvikus revisited. Thank you. --Ludvikus (talk) 16:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

photo in alamagordo

there is nothing wrong with the photo. but go to the photo page, and remove the vandalism in it. Auntieruth Auntieruth55 (talk) 20:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks!

thanks for the barnstar suomi!

do you know of any place to discuss the deletion policy other than "black kite"s page?

Richmondian (talk) 20:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

South Georgia

Eh, no I'm not really living in South Georgia. Please, don't take my userboxes too seriously, as almost all of them are just a half-hearted attempt to look stupid (and I really don't like to give away information about myself online). I simply chose South Georgia, because it seems like a very obscure location to be at home, and I'm not even sure if anyone is living there, besides ruthless hordes of man-eating penguins and a few scientists every now and then.
Btw, I don't think it is good to be friends with someone, just because he lives in an isolated, lonely place. He could be an asshole just as much as someone from an overcrowded megacity. And honestly, if I truly were from South Georgia I wouldn't want to be treated differently than if I were from Madrid, Windhoek or Cherrapunji. In real life it might be difficult at times, but at least online the way you are treated shouldn't depend on where you are from. So, if you want to be friends with me, then because of who I am, anything else is futile and does no good. (Lord Gøn (talk) 07:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC))

So a bit of fun with details is ok?! ;p Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Why shouldn't it be ok? I mean, it's nobody's concern here on Misplaced Pages who I really am and I think the userboxes are absurd enough not to take them seriously. And as long as my contributions are fine, why should anyone be bothered by a little bit of nonsense? (Lord Gøn (talk) 09:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC))

Talkback

GedUK  18:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Is Goa feeling the heat?

Check this out, Don't call this POV ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.17.155 (talk) 18:35, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

See here and here for discussions on this subject. The user appeared to be spamming entirely random people (though I now know that is not the case). They also provided no context for the messages, lending support to my decision at the time. Furthermore, they also also appear to be an indefinitely blocked user and shouldn't be posting anything. --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 16:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Goa is a big city. The annexation of Goa is controversial. Therefore, you will have some people in Goa who feel very strongly and may edit in one of the largest websites, Misplaced Pages. It's like Northern Ireland. All users with similar opinions (pro or against something) are not necessarily the same. You should not be using excuses to muzzle people as long as the other people behave. Is that IP disruptive to my user talk page? No. Are you disruptive to my user page? No, but you are creating a bit of unneccessary drama. So on the disruptive scale, neither one of you is disruptive but you are closer (still far away) of the two to being so. Just let it go. That IP isn't doing anything disruptive as of 10 minutes ago. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, sorry. I was trying to clean up what I thought was a spammer and then found out was simply indefinitely blocked, a minor issue that no-one really cares about, and then I was explaining why I did that to you. Forgive me for trying to help Misplaced Pages. --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 16:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I don't expect everyone to know the history behind discussions. You also assume that the IP is the same person as that other user. That's like saying that anyone in Pakistan who does not like India is the same person or any anti-Hamas edits from Israel is the same person. This is not always the case. With those conflicts, editors should try to be civil as much as possible.

In case the IP is reading this, occasional posts are welcomed but extremely frequent posts may be considered spam. Everyone in WP is always welcomed to leave friendly messages here, at least until I change my mind. Be happy! Be nice! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK

Im not sure that there needs to be a change in DYK per se... I understand that the focus there is the creation of articles. But you are right in that there is no comparable "prize" for improving articles that are longer than stubs, but are pretty much crap. Redefining DYK too much will make it for other than "new" articles, something the community will not go for IMHO.Thelmadatter (talk) 01:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Dont I know it! I went through the process once with the Mexico City Cathedral and decided it wasn't worth the headache. So much nitpicking! I admit I'm really bad about all the little stuff (typos, measurement conversions, hard spaces etc etc etc). Id rather focus on providing information. Fortunately, getting gold stars from WP is not the only reason I work on improving articles on Mexico. It helps my Spanish reading ability and vocabulary and a learn a lot about my adopted country. If in the end, my work ends up as a 5x expansion ... I toss it onto the DYK suggestion list.Thelmadatter (talk) 17:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Fewer rules conflicts

Thank you for the invitation to comment. I'm always willing to talk about making guidelines more clear, and if there are examples of two rules that actually appear to contradict each other, then the solution is to make something consistent with the values that the two opposing sides represent. Some things definitely need to be more clear. I think that half of the people who use the phrase "indiscriminate list" have no clue what "indiscriminate" means (the irony being that they use the word indiscriminately). I think that most people who cite the "notable for one event" rule have never read the rule. On the other side of the spectrum are people who aren't aware of the concept of "historically notable", simply because it's a phrase buried deep into the definition of notability. That's why I spend a lot of time in the AfD forum, because it sometimes happens that a person needs to speak up when the rules are being described incorrectly.

Though none of the administrators will ever admit to it, most of these come down to a majority vote, which takes two forms-- either the majority followed a stated policy, in which case the outcome was "keep" or "delete"; or the majority went against stated policy, in which case the outcome is "no consensus" (i.e., maybe this won't happen next time it comes up for a vote). I'm interested in hearing what you (or any other editor) believes to be the most commonly encountered example of conflicting rules. Mandsford (talk) 16:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Talk:2009 White House gatecrash incident

Hi, I think you mistakenly posted the same thread twice. --PinkBull 20:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Then simply delete one thread, like I did. --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 20:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Re:Salahis

I still strongly feel that the event article is more appropriate than the individual Salahi entries. As colorful as their backgrounds may be, I still think they are only notable for one event, and WP:ONEEVENT states "the general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person". If they obtain greater notability down the road, I'd certainly condone separate articles for them; for example, if the Salahis are chosen as contestants for The Real Housewives of Washington, D.C., that alone would probably do it. However, if the Salahi articles are kept, I think it would be much more appropriate to have one Tareq and Michaele Salahi article, rather than one for each. — Hunter Kahn _(c) 23:01, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

• I tend to agree that there should only be the gatecrashing article, and not the gatecrashing event and the individual biographies. However, those biographies have gone through an AFD, and the result was keep. At this point, the scope of our discussion is only whether the two biographies should be merged into one, not deleted in favor of the gatecrashing article. — Hunter Kahn _(c) 01:44, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  • I actually think the event article is more appropriate to keep than the bios. But that article is also going through an AFD, so we should really respect that process. Honestly, my recommendation is simply to focus on whether to combine the two Salahi biographies at this point. Maybe in a month or so, when the media circus has died down and we have a better prospective on the lasting impact of the whole situation, we can revisit whether we want to merge the bios and the event article. Not now though... — Hunter Kahn _(c) 01:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Nokian Tyres

On November 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nokian Tyres, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 02:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 20:24, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Amanda Knox

I'm guessing the article was previously deleted as per WP:BLP1E while the trial was ongoing, because of possible BLP considerations dependent on the outcome. Now that's she's convicted, I dunno. I think the best thing to do is leave a message at WP:BLPN, so I'm doing that now. John Carter (talk) 01:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

The article has been redirected to Murder of Meredith Kercher and fully protected to avoid unnecessary re-establishment. There is no real argument for AK to have her own article. The talk is still open for interested parties. Thanks, raseaC 01:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC).

Reply

Hi, I have no interest in discussing this matter with you because I find your post on my talk page (which has been removed) offensive and your arguments completely flawed (I have posted on the 'deleted' Amanda Knox talk page on five separate occasions today). Thanks, raseaC 21:41, 5 December 2009 (UTC).

Hi, I've made some 'edits' (simply cutting, nothing else) to your post and re-added it. If you would like me to address that post then let me know, if not go ahead and delete it. Thanks, raseaC 21:50, 5 December 2009 (UTC).

I removed the aspects of your post that contravened WP:CIVILITY and were not useful to the discussion, as I stated above. It appears that you are unable to understand how WP works so once again have no interest in discussing the matter with you. Thanks, raseaC 22:08, 5 December 2009 (UTC).

Very strange. It seems that when I added the following, RaseaC think it is violating civility....

A word of advice, consider not writing "There is no real argument for AK to have her own article" when it is possible that some may have some points for having the article. That's why there's an AFD process not a deletion process where one user can simply declare "I've thought it over and there is no real argument to keep, therefore delete"

Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:17, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

block review

I ask for reviews of all my blocks, I believe it is the honourable thing to do. I take your points on board, but given my position I don't see them as applying. Not sure what the Wall Street Journal Europe has to do with it unless I have made the news. Hiding T 18:36, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you. Hiding T 19:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Valley2city 01:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Trains and things

Thanks for the barnstar and all, but I have to confess to being extremely confused by your obsession with this Asa Seeley business. When you marked the WP:AN thread resolved I assumed that meant that you were done with this, but then you went and contacted the one editor who !voted to merge the content in the AfD from February, which could be viewed as a form of canvassing for support from someone who agrees with you after your complaint was shot down at the noticeboard. That editor re-added the content over at West Baltimore (MARC station) without any discussion, and I have in turn reverted them since the current talk page consensus is for non-inclusion.

Perhaps one problem is that you simply have not noticed the basic facts of the case. Here you note "that unsuccessful, not carried out, assassination plots of presidential candidates has been the subject of AFD keeps." Okay, but that's simply not what happened with this supposed "assassination attempt". Later reporting, based on legal documents, said it turned out that Seeley "intended revenge, not harm to any public officials in Washington." So, from what we know, this was not an assassination attempt, rather it was a guy acting crazy and in a bizarre fashion who was mistakenly reported as threatening the president. Misplaced Pages articles (even the ones about train stations!) are not for discussing false accusations against living people. Surely you know enough about BLP to understand that. Creating an "Asa Seeley incident" article as you suggested is even more wrongheaded, and such an article would be SNOW closed as delete at an AfD.

As I said I have no idea why you are so interested in something so trivial, but I don't think you're handling this very well at all, and to my mind at least you're becoming borderline disruptive by canvassing for support and trying to change DRV policy based on a complete misreading of a brief exchange we had. That was just bizarre, and I highly recommend you step away from the whole situation, because you seem to have lost perspective somewhat. Of course you can ignore that advice, but to my mind you're not doing yourself much credit here. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 08:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Re:ANI

Regarding your question on ANI, that removal of the merged text would not be appropriate to bring up at WP:DRV. DRV is only for issues which require admin intervention to delete/undelete an article from the database. A merge doesn't fall under those categories, and should simply be discussed at the article's Talk page. — The Hand That Feeds You: 14:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

It was AN, not ANI. Also see your talk page for my question. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Deletion process

Creating a system where we have to have a separate debate, following an AFD, to decide whether or not to merge content and where to merge it to... it seems a bit clunky to me. I mean, we already have a process for discussing merging; flag it up on the talk pages of the affected articles. In cases like this, the best approach seems to be to merge (or to merge to talk), and then let that process occur organically. If the "target" feels it can be incorporated, great; if not, it'll be removed, no harm done, and there's a note on the talkpage explaining what happened.

Thinking of it as a way to "defy" or "mock" AFD decisions is a bit off; routine discussion and AFD are two separate processes, working together, and equally able to make decisions on what to do with content. If people are deliberately being misbehaved over this, going around and un-merging content just because they didn't like an AFD decision, then that's something we can deal with in regard to that person, but this doesn't seem to be such a case. Shimgray | talk | 18:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Problem: If an AFD is to merge, the editors in the receiving article may not want the merged text (might want 0% of it, not just some of it)

After thinking it over, I think the best way is for the adminstrator to "ask" the object/target of the proposed merged if they are willing to take it. If they take some of it, then merge is ok. If they don't want any of it, then the administrator can take that into account about whether to keep or delete. The administrator can "ask" the receiving talk page maybe 2 days before closing. This doesn't have to be policy but just common courtesy. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:59, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that seems sensible - if an AFD is debating a merge option, notify the relevant pages and let them feed into it. Shimgray | talk | 18:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Nokian Tyres GA review

I have nominated the article for community reassessment as I believe that the article does not meet the GA criteria. My concerns are at Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Nokian Tyres/1. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Please address your comments to the reassessment page. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:06, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I have responded at the reassessment page, which is where you should respond. Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

talk back

Cherry pick statistics

Hello. I presume that Cube lurker's clarification clears up your incorrect assumption ? To avoid looking this silly in the future, you may wish to check your facts (or at least the supplied links) prior to making accusations that others have engaged in bad-faith practices such as cherry picking statistics. — Kralizec! (talk) 20:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out, which I've corrected. That's the trouble with a huge mess which is why I proposed a clarity period. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:38, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Your edits

Please don't make unfounded edits to the WP:Editing restrictions. As you aren't an admin, you can not impose or remove community sanctions. --Coffee // have a cup // flagged revs now! // 20:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC) Sorry but your addition conflicts with others. I'll let it go though. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:50, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

That's exactly what my restriction says. I don't know where you're coming up with everywhere, I only said Misplaced Pages/talk space. --Coffee // have a cup // flagged revs now! // 20:53, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Dutch agency

If I can find some time, I will try to work on it. Thanks for letting me know!  fetchcomms☛ 19:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Talk page

Erm... thanks?  fetchcomms☛ 00:24, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Test on your own talk page next time. I tried reverting you, but you'd already done it. --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 00:29, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I tried to undo it as quickly as humanly possible. I couldn't test it because I know that my counter is a manual counter, not an automated one. Even with Falcon eyes, how did you see it so quickly? Is there a Misplaced Pages version of the NCTb or KGB? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:31, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Um, all of those counters are manual, and it was probably Huggle.  fetchcomms☛ 00:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Nope, just checked. He's on the Huggle Whitelist. It was luck that I refreshed in time to see it. There is no Secret Misplaced Pages Secret Police that is kept a secret. We never had this conversation. (puts on sunglasses and neuralyses) --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 00:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

reflist

Reflist|2 makes the refs into 2 columns, I did it because they were getting a bit long in 1 column. Reflist|3 is three columns.  fetchcomms☛ 00:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

The 2010 WikiCup begins tomorrow!

Welcome to the biggest WikiCup Misplaced Pages has yet seen! Round one will take place over two months, and finish on February 26. There is only one pool, and the top 64 will progress. The competition will be tough, as more than half of the current competitors will not make it to round 2. Details about scoring have been finalized and are explained at Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Scoring. Please make sure you're familiar with the scoring rules, because any submissions made that violate these rules will be removed. Like always, the judges can be reached through the WikiCup talk pages, on their talk page, or over IRC with any issues concerning anything tied to the Cup. We will keep in contact with you via weekly newsletters; if you do not want to receive them, please remove yourself from the list here. Conversely, if a non-WikiCup participant wishes to receive the newsletters, they may add themselves to that list. Well, enough talk- get writing! Your submission's page is located here. Details on how to submit your content is located here, so be sure to check that out! Once content has been recognized, it can be added to your submissions page, from which our bot will update the main score table. Remember that only articles worked on and nominated during the competition are eligible for points. Have fun, and good luck! Garden, iMatthew, J Milburn, and The ed17 19:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

2010

To all of those who didn't like an edit that I made or crossed wires with me, sorry and let's start a new decade fresh! Happy New Year! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Re:please explain

Concerning your question on Garden's talk page, the section is discussing good and featured topics. Basically, if you promote an article that is already in a topic, you get points for the promotion as normal, but you don't get extra points for the topic. However, if you manage to add an article to a topic that is already good or featured, you can claim the extra topic points. I appreciate this is a rather fiddly distinction- do you understand this now? If not, you're welcome to contact me on my talk page. I was the one who wrote that line, so I apologise if it is a little difficult. J Milburn (talk) 14:31, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:WikiCup questions

Hey. I don't mind answering your questions, so don't feel bad about posting them :) Regarding your first question, yes, you simply add the articles you have worked on to Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions/Suomi Finland 2009, in the format explained here. You may find further notes of interest on the rules page. As for what can actually get you points, you are correct that mere article creation or improvement will not. Instead, an article must be recognised as good or featured, or appear on the main page as part of the did you know or in the news sections. Did you know is the easiest of these, and I see you've already had one in your time on Misplaced Pages, so you know what you're doing there. As for how much you have to have done to claim the points- it has to be a "significant" amount this year. There's no line in the sand, but just be reasonable and don't abuse the system and you should be fine :) Does that clear things up a little? J Milburn (talk) 22:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Last year's competition included points for any edits in the article space or portal space, but the competition has changed tone a little this year. Discussion for how things will work next year won't be starting until we are well into this competition, but it could very easily change tone again. J Milburn (talk) 22:28, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:Roadmap?

• I'm fine with your vote. In fact, I think both should be kept, and I've gone on record saying that about both articles. I voted for Speedy close based on the history that's been ongoing with this user, and no reason other than that. However, I encourage you to reach out to him all you like. Also, my signature actually links to four different sections of my userspace (User page, talk, contributions, autograph book), but I probably should change it, as it is a bit confusing... :) — Hunter Kahn 17:33, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Suomi Finland 2009! 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 insure 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 5 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

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

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Foreign trips

My position is simple: if the trips receive substantial press coverage, they should have articles. Everyking (talk) 05:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Nokian Tyres

You're obviously committed to this article, so I'm going to do what I can to see that it doesn't lose its GA listing. The point of GA reassessments isn't to delist articles; nobody really wants to do that if they can instead be improved, and this one can. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

• gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

• ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

DRAMAOUT/2

Hey. Thanks for the barnstar, but it doesn't matter if we signed up a few hours late or not...

		The 2nd Anti-Drama Barnstar
		Awarded for participating in the 2nd Great Misplaced Pages Dramaout. Thanks for avoiding drama for 5 days!

Hope you like it. Nifky 10:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Inauguration of Barack Obama

Could you please place your comments on either the FAC (prefered) or the article talk page. No one concerned is watching my talk page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:33, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Criticisms will be resolved. I have two co-authors who will help me address any issues you bring up on either the FAC or the talk page. They are not watching my talk page, however.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:05, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:unimportant comment

I can't agree more. I myself took part last year, and was eliminated in the second or third round, I believe. However, I was still more than happy with what I achieved. So, congratulations! J Milburn (talk) 22:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

FAC formality

Pursuant to the regulations, I hereby notify you that I have submitted the Nokian Tyres article for FA consideration.Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for notification. Note that talking to yourself may be a sign of a psychiatric illness. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Kansas State Wildcats men's basketball

Please do not make self-referential edits as you do here. It is not important for the coverage of the basketball team that the rival school vandalized the Misplaced Pages page.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 January newsletter

We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. We've had some shakeups regarding late entries, flag changes and early dropouts, but the competition is now established- there will be no more flag changes or new competitors. Congratulations to Sasata (submissions), our current leader, who, at the time of writing, has more listed points than Hunter Kahn (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions) (second and third place respectively) combined. A special well done also goes to Fetchcomms (submissions)- his artcle Jewel Box (St. Louis, Missouri) was the first content to score points in the competition.

Around half of competitors are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. 64 of the 149 current competitors will advance to round 2- if you currently have no points, do not worry, as over half of the current top 64 have under 50 points. Everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places in round 2! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! J Milburn, Garden, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Suomi Finland 2009 is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.

This is the standard first of the month Wikibreak of a few days.Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with your main user page

I definitely think that we should do whatever it takes to cause as little offence as possible to other editors. :-) Anyway, I really came here to tell you that we have some more concrete proposals on the civility blocking policy - see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incivility blocks#Actual text. It would be great to get your feedback! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 13:59, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. But then I am supposed to be on wikibreak so I will start that tomorrow even though I am supposed to start on the first of every month. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

You know, I totally misread what you wrote in that thread. Please ignore whatever it was I wrote in response, as I made that reply on about 3:30AM in the morning. I'm a new father :-) I'll reply tomorrow. Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 16:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

comment

You're welcome to return your comment to the miscellaneous page, just as I was welcome to remove it. That's how wikipedia works! If you return it, I'll leave it alone as see what others think. I really don't care about what it said, except that it doesn't belong there. (By the way, don't be quick to cry "censorship" when somebody disagrees with you: that's a very old and boring tactic, and it means people won't take you seriously.) - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Incidentally, http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/02/palin-wants-rahm-emanuel/?fbid=K9xUidFNQLj#more-88484 is not always a reliable source. It's an editorial page for CNN staffers, so it's reliable in terms of the opinions that whomever is posting holds, but it's not a reliable news source in and of itself. I think that this is where you're confusion is coming from, in this particular instance. Regardless, you and everyone else should always question evn the most reliable sources regularly, by demanding backup to the info presented. If anything is presented as fact, it should be backed up by essentially the same information in alternate sources.
— V = I * R (Talk • Contribs) 19:55, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Breaker boy GAN

I made the tweak asked. If there's anything else you'd like me to do let me know, since I'm not sure where the original nom went. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Your page

I've moved that page you created into your user space, because you've essentially just copied the policy. You can't call it an essay, because it's a policy, one of our most important. See User:Suomi Finland 2009/Verifiability first. SlimVirgin 22:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Please do not move that page into anyone else's userspace, and please stop the games. V is an important policy. It isn't going to be changed on a whim and we can't have different versions of it existing in project space, because it might confuse people. If you want me to delete that page, let me know. If you have constructive input into the policy, it's very welcome on the talk page. SlimVirgin 17:35, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. I'll delete the page shortly. SlimVirgin 18:12, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

John Murtha

I think stating "X said this" about Murtha should stand, even if it may not ultimately be the truth as decided by a court of law. Go to the talk page to discuss it further if you disagree, although I'd like to keep the sourcing as high a level as possible. Bearian (talk) 22:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Breaker boy

I fixed most of your concerns. I don't have access to the offline sources so I couldn't help with expansion. Since it's not actually 'my' article I won't submit it into the Wikicup, just saw that the original author disappeared and it was close to GA. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:20, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Alright, hopefully it can be passed next time you're on. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 15:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

One sided admin

I would like to know how to complain about a one sided admin. Do you know where I can complain? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 19:37, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Travel

I wish I had the money to travel more! I stay in hostels when I can. Thanks for the invite to Belgium. Bearian (talk) 00:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Your note

Better to strike though rather than delete once someone has commented. SlimVirgin 00:39, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sharona Alperin

A tag has been placed on Sharona Alperin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:57, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Nancy 16:04, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Governance and WP:5P

To answer your question, I don't know. Part of the problem is that in the English-speaking world, we have the common law tradition, instead of the more logical civil law system. In the title are the two main pages for you to reference. See also Misplaced Pages:Governance review, Misplaced Pages:Governance reform, WP:LAW, and User:Walton One/Constitution of Misplaced Pages, all of which can be confusing to a newebie. I am happy that you have the sisu to deal with this. Bearian (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Doc Quintana (talk) 02:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Nokian

Hei, Regarding this sentence in Nokian Tyres:

"The project was put on hold in early 2009 by mutual agreement and will not be reinstated until late 2010 at the earliest."

It's sourced to an annual report from 2008 but the reference itself is just a sentence saying that without any details about the actual annual report. Is it available online or do you have a print version someplace so I can create a true reference? <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 18:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Let me see if I can track it down tonight. If not, I'll pull it out, ok? Nokian makes good tires. I wanted to get a set for my car seven or so years ago but they were hard to find around here at the time. You have to go to independent tire shops or else special order because most tire shops here are controlled by Firestone or Goodyear and Sears doesn't carry them either. <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 19:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe when Nokian is cleaned up we could work on Salora Oy. <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 19:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

El Paso-Juarez

Difficult article because some may consider it a content fork of the two separate city articles. Good luck on resolving this issue. The way to resolve this and still keep the article is to write about cooperative efforts between the two cities and issues about the cities, not an article about the two individual cities. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I had to deal with a similar issue some months ago. I certainly don't mind people venturing opinions but I am strongly offended when editors use their concerns as a justification for vandalism as is currently happening with the article (i.e. making major changes based on personal opinions rather than reliable sources). The point is that I have established notability and provided sources for the major points so there is no justification for the edit war (and certainly not the unsourced and non-consensus rename). --Mcorazao (talk) 17:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Global warming

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Global warming, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Misplaced Pages:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- TS 22:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)