Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:15, 2 February 2006

• /Archive1 July 25 - November 18, 2005
• /Archive2 November 29 - December 28, 2005
• /Archive3 December 30, 2005 - January 25, 2005

From Thr3D0

I recently posted an article on an independent presidential candidate because I noticed that one wasn't there. The candidates name was Daniel Imperato. The article was deleted as speedy deletion.

Recreation of deleted material. A substantially identical copy, by any title, of a page that was deleted according to the deletion policy, except if it is in user space, or undeleted per the undeletion policy. Before deleting again, the admin should ensure that the material is substantially identical, and not merely a new article on the same subject. In case of a speedily deleted page, they must also determine that it did meet a criterion for speedy deletion in the first place.

After reading this I wanted to see if what I wrote was an identical copy to what was already written. Turns out it wasn't. I went through google's and yahoo's cache and found out that there was an article on him that was substantially bigger than the two sentences that I wrote. So since its a new article on the same subject, shouldn't it not have been speedily deleted? And also from what I read in Cache from talk pages, I didn't think that my two sentences sounded like a commericial.

Please Advise

Thr3D0 14:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

From James D lamb

Thanks for the help, I'm still learning the ropes.

I have a personal interest and expertise in Livermore Valley Wines. Some of the information I have stems from 20 years of experience in the industry.

I'm also a resident of the new town of Mountain House, and am interested in maintaining a robust article on our new town.

It looks form your posts that references are publisher right on the article? To avoid copyright issues, is it enough to cite the material in my own words, and then cite the original? I'm new to all this, but would very much like to contribute.

I'm aware of a lot of the history regarding the Wente family that goes back five generations. The source comes from the Wente family. Is that usable?

Thanks for your time,

Jim

Protection

Hi Howcheng. Can you protect Sharia. There's some trouble there with an editor who doesn't want to compromise, and is using IPs to revert. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m 23:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Hoping he will compromise now. ;) --a.n.o.n.y.m 00:09, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Howcheng; I am the person Mr. Anonymous is having "some trouble with". -- Now could you unprotect the darn thing so Mr. Anonymous' on-going campaign of vandalism, blocker-running and commitment to "protect" the perception of Sharia from anything infidel Westerners might construe as hopelessly barbaric (e.g., Muhammad's own words, quoted from the Quran and Hadiths, and sourced, regards appropriate punishment for adultry and extramarital sex) can be relegated back to only half the day? Please also observe that Anonymous (and Yuber) have had no interest in using the Discussion page while they enjoyed free rein to edit (you can verify this easily enough by examining date-time stamps).--Mike18xx 03:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Sharia

(Quoting Howcheng's mail to me)

It also looks like you are engaged in discussion with other editors on the talk page as well, which is the whole point of protection in the first place.

There was no exchange in the Discussion section with any of the primary reverting opponants (Yubar, Anonymous) for over a full day prior to the Protected flag. They are the ones who are not interested in prior debate.

If you'll permit me to make an observation as a neutral third party in this, from what I've read of the discussion,...

You're not going to get an accurate perception from the discussion (see above); you need to examine the various iterations of the Sharia Wiki entry to see which are POV'd and which are not. The desire of Yubor, Anonymous, et al, to focus upon "honor killing" (not permitted under Shariah, they say, that point to be hammered repeatedly) as a red-herring in lieu of attention paid to the harsh punishments for extramarital sex including death-sentences (which are in various places), are, IMO, part and parcel of a running campaign of al-Takeyya weaseling and neutering spread out across all Islam-related Wiki topics.

...you need to read carefully what User:Tickle me wrote: Your using the Qu'ran as a source is by Misplaced Pages definition original research. An encyclopedia is a tertiary source, meaning that you should be citing secondary sources.

...Sources were cited. Anyone who's saying none were is either lying or not paying attention.

If any of the other editors are inserting content contrary to this policy, then call them on it -- make them provide their sources. If they can't, then you have every right to excise it.

That's not possible to do while the protection lock is up.--Mike18xx 08:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

> Reasonable adults should be able to work out a compromise.

It is not the purpose of al-Takeyya to be reasonable or indulge consensus in any capacity beyond lip-service and superficial appearance, because accuracy is not its objective.

The inability of great, heaping gobs of adult humanity to be reasonable results in disputes scaling up to full-blown wars, Howcheng; imagining it'd hold sway in a medium as tempting to propagandization as this requires, dare I say, a pronounced detachment from reality. I had hoped that Penny Arcade's lampooning had it all wrong when I gave this place a shot under the assumption that some fantacized-to-exist-by-me "upper tier" of fact-checkers exerted some means of control over the romper rooms -- but I see now that I erred there.

> Anonymous is an administrator himself....

Then the inmates are definitely running the asylum here, and the whole project is as much a factored-in lost-cause as the United Nations.--Mike18xx 20:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

John Lott

Article should have been full protected. Definitely an edit war, not vandalism. --Woohookitty 05:33, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Re semi-protection request for Cannabis, Cannabis (drug)

Could you reply to my latest, please -SM 15:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Re semi-protection request for Cannabis

Could you reply to my latest, please. I consider the request for SP on Cannabis still open, but it was inadvertently deleted. I took the liberty of reconstructing the dialog on Cannabis, while redacting out that from Cannabis (drug) -SM 21:28, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

question

Hello, Howcheng. I came here from Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Terence John Arbuthnot. I was wondering if you knew of any other cases of Croix de guerre recipients nominated for deletion, to see if there was any precedent. Maybe there isn't, I'm not sure. I'm sort of new to Misplaced Pages. Also, I noticed on your user page that the link to Bret Harte middle school leads to a page with links to two bret harte middle schools. you might want to change that. Thanks a lot. B.U. Football For Life|Talk 19:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC) thank you.--B.U. Football For Life|Talk 19:54, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Jahbulon

Thanks for the quick response on this entry. Are you sure it has no AfD history? If so, I am very confused. I thought it was deleted sometime around the end of December last year. I know we discussed it, and I had it on my watch list around that time, and the link changed to red... when I checked it, the article had disappeared. I assumed this was due to a deletion. Perhaps not, but then why would it go away? In any case, I am suppose we could go through a (another?) AfD review if needed. The article is a sure AfD candidate. Blueboar 20:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Please block Roitr

...he has been vandalising articles under the IP address 84.109.80.143. He responds neither to English nor Russian - so perhaps a block will set him straight. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 01:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

A sockpuppet of this user, Tt1, appears to be at it again at Comparative military ranks of World War II, now reinserting over and over again the title of Komandor, stating its an equivalent of Kommodore (which it is not). Hes one revert away from 3RR violation. Again this bears watching, but not yet protecting. -Husnock 20:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I unblocked User:Aaron

Please see my rationale at WP:AN. Just wanted to let you know. — Ilyanep (Talk) 02:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry about not using the sandbox

--Hoot 18:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)Hoot

Please punt this vandal

(Apologies for not going through whatever "official" channels which may or may not exist, because I have like about two seconds before I need to rush out the door.)

Please jack the following turd, whom you see in action here through the uprights. Or at least ban his IP address. Basically, User:66.166.118.99 swings by once or twice a day to re-direct links to (his?) blogs, and has been doing so for over a week.

Thankyverymuchgottagobye.--Mike18xx 19:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Sean Sinjin

My friend Howcheng,

I am completely aware that your personal information is available online should anyone wish to pursue it, and that is your 'choice' to make that personal information available; and I stress 'choice'. But, because of Misplaced Pages and its policies, 'I' no longer have that 'choice'. You, and Misplaced Pages, have not given me the 'choice' to remove my personal information that accidentally ended up on the net before I had a chance to rein it in (which I am currently in the process of). You may hide behind the fact that Misplaced Pages's policies do not cover 'privacy' issues when related to factual data, but I see that as a failing in your company's design, and a moral infraction in terms of respect. Do you honestly believe I shouldn't have the 'choice' of revealing my personal details?

Effectively, your website has now become a very powerful tool for recklessly endangering people's lives; yes, lives. I'm sure there are many politically-sensitive people listed in Misplaced Pages whose lives can also be similarly endangered by the frivolous exposure of 'facts' that may slip out, and can never be rescinded from the black hole of Misplaced Pages simply because they are true. Well my friend, I volunteer that Misplaced Pages needs to augment its policies to include the removal of 'factual' information that may result in very real harm. It is neither pious, nor noble, to exercise 'freedom of the press' for no other reason than to be able to 'boast' the most information.

This entire diatribe is probably moot, since even if the article itself is ultimately deleted, I'm not certain that your prior chat entry that 'also' disseminates my personal information, can be deleted.

I leave you with a desire for peace, so please exercise your beliefs as you see fit, I will no longer confront the issue.

-- Galgitron 19:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

My good friend, Howcheng, I see the history articles in question have been erased. Thank you very much for your assistance.

-- 70.192.20.64 17:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

accidental deletion of my workshop page

Sorry, I forgot to put the nowiki tag around the 'deleted by user' clip. How do I get my page back? Thanks, Chris 22:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

thank you sir, will fix it now :) Chris 22:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

An Esperanzial note

As I remember, the last spam that was handed out was on the 20th of December last year, so I think it's time for another update. First and foremost, the new Advisory Council and Administrator General have been elected. They consist of myself as Admin General and FireFox, Titoxd, Flcelloguy and Karmafist as the Advisory Council. We as a group met formally for the first time on the 31st of Decembe. The minutes of this meeting can be found at WP:ESP/ACM. The next one is planned for tonight (Sunday 29 January) at 20:30 UTC and the agenda can be found at WP:ESP/ACM2.

In other news, Karmafist has set up a discussion about a new personal attack policy, which it can be found here. Other new pages include an introductory page on what to do when you sign up, So you've joined Esperanza... and a welcome template: {{EA-welcome}} (courtesy of Bratsche). Some of our old hands may like to make sure they do everything on the list as well ;) Additionally, the userpage award program proposal has become official is operational: see Misplaced Pages:Esperanza/User Page Award to nominate a userpage or volunteer as a judge. Also see the proposed programs page for many new proposals and old ones that need more discussion ;)

Other than that, I hope you all had a lovely Christmas and wish you an Esperanzially good new WikiYear :D Thank you! --Celestianpower 16:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Message delivered by Rune.welsh using AWB. If you wish to recieve no further messages of this ilk, please sign your name here.

Turkish People Protection

Discussions showed that the factual accuracy and neutrality of this article is disputed. As long as he article is kept protected there is no way to put these tags in the article. please unprotect the article or put these tags yourself. Thanks. AverageTurkishJoe 20:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

DC streets

An AfD that you recently particpated in has been recycled. Please see Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of state-named Avenues in Washington, D.C. (second nomination). - brenneman 05:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Willy Borrell

I provided discussion on Willy Borrell's article, but it didn't get responded to. If I re-write the article making sure to cite quotes and just try more to keep to the rules would I be able to not get done for redoing the same article? What I’m really saying is...is their a chance I could get my article back up if I improved it? I’ve had many Razorlight fans ask me to make this article, and I’m sure many more would like this article to be made, and many more would benefit from the article being made.

Heathcoteheat 19:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

List of sovereign states

Thanks for protecting List of sovereign states (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), but why didn't you protect it at the status quo ante (the version of the article before the content dispute started, which includes the disputed regions). The current protected version doesn't include them. Did you protect the article simply at the version you encountered? Aecis 20:18, 30 January 2006 (UTC) I wanna emphasize that this is not meant as an accusation, even though it may sound like one.

To Aecis

Actually de facto independent states are includeed in the current version, in the separate list below the sovereign states. It wasn't me who separated the lists, though I believe, that would be an acceptable compromise.

I stand corrected. Aecis 20:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I know that you do not favor one version over the other, and that you didn't take any side in the issue. Perhaps it's all just a matter of personal preferences. I personally think it's best, when protecting an article, to "freeze" it at the version the article had prior to the eruption of the conflict. When I saw the article in its protected state, I noticed that Abkhazia had been removed from the A's. This led me to conclude that you had frozen it at 212.72.135.1xx's version, which was the version during the content dispute. I didn't look any further, and I therefore didn't see that Abkhazia and other unrecognized states had been moved to the bottom of the page. Aecis 22:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you give a glance to the talking page, you will see, that arguments for separation of the de facto independent states from sovereign states are more solid. And they are still undisproved right now.

Separation of these two lists (i.e. the current version) whould be a reasonable compromise.

Guys, I really don't care. Take this discussion to Talk:List of sovereign states and let us know at WP:RFP when you've reached some sort of agreement. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 16:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Mihintale

the article under mihintale still appears to have problems with copyrights, but i have made it clear and have informed that permission was granted to use any information of the site in consideration.

Please look into it .. thanks.

Request on Turkish people

Hi Howcheng,

I was wondering if you would be able to replace the current image on Turkish people with Image:Turks2.jpg. There has been agreement on the talk page for that image. Thanks. --Khoikhoi 02:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Done. howcheng {chat} 16:31, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Would you also be able to protect Image:Turks2.jpg from new images being uploaded over it? --Khoikhoi 00:21, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

AfD closings

Thank you. I appreciate your helpfulness. I won't close any more non-unambiguous AfDs. If you think any of the closings should be reversed, please put a note on the AfD subpage and I'd be glad to undo any of the actions I've taken (such as unmerging the Tacchinardis). Sorry about creating this mess. Thanks again. -- Jonel | Speak 22:05, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Nico Assumpção

Hi, i'm sorry for the violation, i'm aware it's not the correct manner to do an article. While i was writing the article, someone sent it for speedy deletion, so i pasted the text from his website just to have something in the meantime and dont have the article deleted Sorry! -- Joaobonzao 00:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

RE: My Username

I saw the policy regarding use of scatological usernames after creating it (I've used that username for years in various venues...its basically habit to use it now). If some backstory would help, "bugturd" is what popped in my head when I saw my Mom's dog for the first time (a chihuahua).

While it is technically scatological, I considered it only mildly so, but I have no issue with changing my username if there are problems. I will also copy this into the RfC. --Bugturd Talk 00:42, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Howcheng

We didnt made an agreement about khoikhoi's propagandist picture.All of we are supporting the other picture(you can see in discussion page).I hope you could change it by the decision of most users.If you decide to do it,please protect it as well.I believe a great wikiadmin as you dont permit any unfairness...Sincerely

-Inanna-

No one ever made an agreement of Inanna's picture. In fact, her picture has been reverted by different people ever since she added it. --Khoikhoi 01:04, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Talk it out on Talk:Turkish people, not here. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 01:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi howcheng.Please dont believe the lies of khoikhoi.How can i have more than one IP adress.I think he should be blocked due to his unfair lies.You can ask all the Turks if they are famous or not.One of them is the biggest singer of Turkey.Other one is the biggest actress of Turkey(most awards belongs to her).Orhan Pamuk has no importance.He only wrote two books.He was sent to prison as well.How can we show a guilty here? That's why khoikhoi and his band try to show this picture.I request the changing of the picture, please.

-Inanna-

You can have multiple IP addresses if you're connected to the Internet with DHCP. Every time you connect to your ISP, you get a different IP address. See for yourself at http://whatsmyip.net. howcheng {chat} 21:50, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I couldnt see and understand anything.By the way, what are we going to do picture?

-Inanna-

We are not going to do anything. I put up a poll about the image on Talk:Turkish people. howcheng {chat} 22:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, can I get your action

Hi howcheng. You posted on something I was watching, and I've seen your name a couple times, so I thought I'd ask for your admin assistance. Oh now I remember, it was the protection of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq entry.

Well, there's something else going on with that. The anonymous user who prompted the protections has two pending 3RR violations, a Request for Mediation, and a Request for Comment. I'd appreciate it if you could look at the second 3RR violation, in light of the first one where he was blocked (and noting that he uses multiple IP addresses to get around any block.) All relevent information can be found in the RfC . Swatjester 18:26, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Original research - State of the Union

That's ridiculous, how am I suppose to discuss the speech? All of what I've pointed out is factual, but it's not legitimate unless it's posted on another site? This policy needs to be changed. KI 22:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

hey, i was just wondering why my stub on westwood drive was removed. frenchfry22

userfying

What is it? Never heard of it till I found Misplaced Pages...its not a subject on Misplaced Pages either. What is userfying?

Please advise about Talk-pages deletion

Hi, Howcheng. When you decided the AfD for the Aetherometry entry and deleted the entry, you left the Talk pages in place. I believe they are no longer needed, and since they are the Talk pages for a deleted article, I listed them on . However, this has not yet produced any results, and I am therefore not sure that just listing them on that page is procedurally sufficient. Can you please advise? Do I need to put a template somewhere as well? Mnay thanks in advance. Helicoid 15:15, 2 February 2006 (UTC)