Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:51, 12 December 2010

.

• I will reply here unless you ask me to reply somewhere else.
• If I posted something (other than a warning) to your talk page, I probably added it to my watch list. I would prefer replies in the same page as the original post. However, feel free to reply here if you want.
• If I missed an update on your talk page, please poke me with {{Talkback|your username}} on this page.

I am: OUT

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16

24 December 2024
News and notes: Responsibilities and liabilities as a "Very Large Online Platform" Op-ed: Beeblebrox on Wikipediocracy, the Committee, and everything Opinion: Graham87 on being the first-ever administrator recall subject In the media: Delhi High Court considers Caravan and Ken for evaluating the ANI vs. WMF case From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting? Recent research: "Misplaced Pages editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality Humour: Backlash over Santa Claus' Misplaced Pages article intensifies Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols Traffic report: Was a long and dark December
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Medisweans

Thanks for deleting this. This was the second time its been deleted to day, and it keeps coming back every two or three months. Did you think to salt it? It looks like the pattern of work of a professional spammer. --Kudpung (talk) 15:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I didn't salt it because the two times today were the only occasions that this particular article has been crated by the user. I did watchlist it though. I seriously considered blocking him indefinitely, but ended up with just a 24 hour block. If he comes back and spams again, an indef block will be in order. --GraemeL 15:11, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Report

where can I make a note urget?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Searchingcriminals (talk • contribs) 18:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

You probably mean 'urgent', but then again, your English is much better than my Italian. English Misplaced Pages is not really the place to air problems that you have with another language project. The admins here have no authority on other projects. Following the dispute resolution process on your own project would be the best procedure. --GraemeL 18:08, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but unfortunately on wikipedia.it, this does not happen, there is a very heavy electronic dictatorship. Some admin does not allow the debate and do not follow the guidelines of wikipedia, just to get a short pause. To whom it may report these cases of abuse? --Searchingcriminals (talk) 18:19, 11 December 2010 (UTC)FindingMladic

The only place I can think of that might be of help would be searching at Meta-Wiki. That's the over-arching project. --GraemeL 18:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, one last question, how did you know that I'm Italian?:-) --Searchingcriminals (talk) 22:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)Searchingcriminal

Just presumed you spoke it since you were having problems with admins on the Italian languge wiki ;) --GraemeL 22:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

ok;-)--Searchingcriminals (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2010 (UTC)Searchingcriminals

Sorry for intruding, but unfortunately the English Misplaced Pages is unable to intervene with disputes on other projects. The best way to resolve your issue, since it involves an administrator, is to either contact a Checkuser on it.wiki, or a Steward on Meta. Nakon 06:41, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Censorship

The censorship on this site is ironic, to say the least. You seem to want everyone to contribute, with the caveat that it must be things that you personally approve of. This site is as hypocritical as Wikileaks, who believes that nothing should be secret except for their operation. What a farce, and one of the reasons that Misplaced Pages is considered as a joke of an information source. YOU decide what is "neutral", which from many points of view is quite biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.129.18 (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Because Hopefully, upon near-certain conviction, he will be executed for treason. belongs in an encyclopaedia article? I think not. --GraemeL 23:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Internet Suraksha

Sir, I have not used any copyrighted information, and the article whose content I have used in the page has been written by me itself for the Times Of india supplement Ahmedabad Mirror. So I dont think there is any harm in posting my own article again. And that I have created this page for advertisement purposes is not true. This is a non-profit organisation and I have written about my research which aims to create awareness amongst people. I hope that my article will be a part of Misplaced Pages again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harshkashiparekh (talk • contribs) 05:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but the article is a word-for-word copy of a newspaper article which claims "Copyright © Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. All rights reserved.". Unless you can prove that you own the copyright and not the paper, we cannot expose the project to potential legal claims. Please have somebody from the paper go through the procedure outlined at Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials if they wish to donate the material for use under the license used by the project. --GraemeL 10:56, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Sir, I have now edited some portions of my article. Please review it. If you still believe that I rewrite it totally its fine with me. As I had written the article for the newspaper myself, as the mention it on the article itself " The writer is a class XII student of Swastik School and has been trained in cybersecurity at Techdefence Consulting Pvt Ltd." But as you have said sir, I have edited some portions and I suggest you may edit some parts if you wish to. But I really hope that people realise how dreadful SMS forging is as there isnt any article on Misplaced Pages regarding this as a part of hacking and that it was a research of Internet Suraksha I hope it is included in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harshkashiparekh (talk • contribs) 15:48, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Replied on user's talk page. --GraemeL 16:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Street Art

Hi, I am new to wikipedia, so I just noticed it wasn't such a good idea to include all these websites in my edit. I still think your page was lacking reference on Invader who is really one of the most important figures of street art all over the world, and given the size of its influence in Paris, it was important to mention the city then. I will try to find more reliable sources today. Valeriar (talk) 15:52, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the Invader part is probably worth including as he has an article here which establishes his notability. I don't have a problem if you add the mention of Invader back (you don't need to reference that, just add a wikilink to his article). You can add the others in, if you can find news sources to use as references, but please don't add the links to their sites back in. --GraemeL 15:58, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Moors

Hello GraemeL,

I am writing you about the moors page, these "two" closely related people user talk:ITSENJOYABLE and user talk:SISPCM have been vandalising the page (and others for months now) making race based edit removing information about Black Africans from the page information that is sourced in the article. You protected the page shortly after this vandalism occured. They is no reason why that information should be taken out of the article. Please restore it. Thank you Botsystem (talk) 18:37, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

It is actually a contractual requirement that the admin protect m:The Wrong Version.

Get a consensus on the talk page and post {{editprotected}}. I'm not taking sides in an edit war. If you get me involved, I'm liable to start by blocking all of the edit warring parties. --GraemeL 18:53, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I see how me asking you to restore it to the orignal is sort of like asking you to take a side. That was not my intention and I'm definately not asking you to get involved in an edit war, I think edit wars are down right foolish. I'm just frustrated with this because its not just about the moors page. There are several pages they do this on. Again this issue have been going on for months, If you check the history of the discuss page you can see that "this topic" was dealt with. I have asked the user several times why he makes his edit and have never gotten a response. I wrote to you because as administrators you intercede and help with situations like this. I honestly don't know how to deal with someone who doesn't try to comunicate the purpose of their edits and doesn't seem to be care about warnings or the blocks they get and just continue to vandalize pages. Anyway if you do not want to get involve, I respect it Botsystem (talk) 20:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Posting an RFC might help, if you haven't tried that already. That could get a wider consensus forming group together to hopefully break the deadlock that exists at the moment. After that, there would be a clearer picture of which version was considered best. --GraemeL 20:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the wikilinks on my user page. They do look better. Grafen (talk) 20:30, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Cool. I hate the arrow thingies. --GraemeL 20:35, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Advice re Delicious carbuncle

Regarding your comment here, the user is attempting to deflect an earlier ANI report about the user's BLP violations, to change the issue to be an attack on me. Delicious carbuncle (talk · contribs) has engaged in abuse of process, and forum-shopping, disrupting multiple pages to push his attack on me across many different pages: ANI, NPOVN, WT:SCN, BLPN, etc. This disruption by Delicious carbuncle (talk · contribs) is ongoing on a topic under sanctions of probation (WP:COFS) and other remedies (WP:ARBSCI) What can be done about this disruptive behavior pattern? Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 21:51, 12 December 2010 (UTC)