| Revision as of 08:47, 12 March 2006 editMissmarple (talk | contribs)8,421 edits thanks← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:48, 12 March 2006 edit undoDan100 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users29,065 edits house keeping :-)Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div style="border-style:solid; border-width:3; border-color:#b2a4c5; background-color:#FFFFCC; color:#000000; padding: 2em;">'''Want to be an admin?''' If you think I know you, just ask me to nominate you. I remember that ] "adminship is no big deal", so I won't ask you to jump through any hoops - all I ask for is experience and trustworthiness. | <!-- <div style="border-style:solid; border-width:3; border-color:#b2a4c5; background-color:#FFFFCC; color:#000000; padding: 2em;">'''Want to be an admin?''' If you think I know you, just ask me to nominate you. I remember that ] "adminship is no big deal", so I won't ask you to jump through any hoops - all I ask for is experience and trustworthiness. | ||
| </div> | </div> --> | ||
| <center>]</center> | <center>]</center> | ||
| == Why, thank you for the Barnstar! == | |||
| I really appreciate the barnstar you gave me, for my changes to the {{tl|copyvio}} template. When I came up with them, I also felt they were remarkably ''elegant'', and it's really nice to get apprecation for them. Thanks! ] 07:21, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Reverts== | |||
| Okay Dan, I'll explain my reverts immediately, but could you also please explain your additions/deletions, then we'll both save a lot of time? Joe Mabel may yet want to make changes, because he feels the current wording is a bit harsh (the bit about any unsourced edit being removable), and although I don't agree with him, I see his point and won't revert him, though if you do, I also won't revert you. Despite our disagreements, I hope you accept that I'm editing in good faith, and being fussy only because I've been up against a thousand POV pushers and their various attempts to squeeze through loopholes. It's ], not ]. ;-) I sent you two emails by the way. I hope you got them. | |||
| All the best to you, Dan, for Christmas/Hanukkah. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 10:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Of course I know you're acting in good faith! I still have high regard for you, in particular for standing up to PoV pushers (I just can't do that), and that won't change. I honestly thought I had explained my text move, but on checking all I'd said was a short edit summary at ]. That was a mistake, which I readily admit to making. Have a lovely Christmas, ] (]) 17:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Bot running again == | |||
| Hi, I've got the bot up and running again, I've put it in a loop so if it shuts down it will wait 10 minutes and then start again. I've also reduced its line rate to waiting 0.4 seconds between each line (was 0.3 seconds) so hopefully it won't get booted for flooding so easily. After Christmas I'll find out more about getting the flood protection turned off by freenode (needs Misplaced Pages to tell them it's a legit bot apparently). When it does restart it will be quiet, so you'll need to tell it to speak again. Currently this can only be done from #wikipedia-en-vandalism... Have a happy Christmas --]<sup>(<font color="mediumseagreen">]</font>)</sup> 14:33, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == The evidence on RachelBrown et al. == | |||
| There is, in my opinion, solid evidence to support the allegations of sockpuppetry, based on CheckUser evidence. However, that evidence is private and cannot be published without breaching the policy we have on CheckUser data. The fact remains that for you to state that there is no evidence fails to assume good faith on your part. I think you are treading on treacherous ground here. ] (]) 15:44, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :From what I can tell, one of the accounts is a sock (Newport) but the rest are genuine editors who happen to know each other in real life. From I've learned of the Checkuser results, several of these accounts once edited from the same computer. For people who live near each other and are friends, I don't think it's unexpected for them share a computer at some stage. | |||
| :Further, all the accounts (apart from Newport) have very different edit histories and areas of expertise, and have been making good edits. Quite apart from anything else, Misplaced Pages the encyclopedia will suffer without those editors. | |||
| :Finally, the blocking policy only allows for the blocking of socks when they are being used to violate policy. As far as I can see, that's not happened. None of the other accounts have been used for anything else that could justify a ban. | |||
| :Have a happy and peaceful Christmas, ] (]) 16:53, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::It's not "once edited from the same computer"; there is an ongoing pattern of edits by multiple accounts from the same group of computers (both work and home). I think it is unreasonable to say that there is "no evidence" as there clearly is evidence. Your argument should not be that there is no evidence, but that you think that there is countervailing evidence based on edit content (which I did not review, since I was merely asked to review the CheckUser evidence). ] (]) 17:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :::I agree that there is some evidence of sock puppetry, that IPs have been shared, and that one of the accounts can certainly be viewed as a sock puppet (Newport). ] (]) 17:31, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == sighs == | |||
| It sounds like someone's been accusing me of something. I just wish that people would stop being hostile and work to try to get along. It is frustrating sometimes that no matter how much I work to try to prove to someone that I am not against them and am not trying to fight with them, some people still insist that I am against them, and therefore think that harassing me or stalking me or going to great lengths to attack me is reasonable. Apparently I am being threatened with being banned because I tried to help a newbie in trouble and tried to right a wrong. And also being threatened with being banned because I have 2 people stalking me. So if the powers that be deem that I am required to allow people to harass me and stalk me and that I am forbidden from helping anyone out, then fine, they can ban me. I don't come here to deal with nonsense. Nobody should ever have to put up with treatment like that. ] ] <small>] ] ]</small> 17:38, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :I know what you mean. Months ago (long before I was an admin) a then-member of the arbcom made some very uncalled-for comments about me, and I proceeded to tell everyone I could find and demand "punishment". I was soon told that that's not how things really work. Admins ''aren't'' police officers, and it's amazing what kind of nastiness people can get away with. But know this - when they do that, they lose the respect of everyone else, and people are much less likely to listen to them or ever support them. Further, severe misbehaviour and harrasment can lead to an RfC against a user, and then an arbcom case if necessary. | |||
| :The key though is to take the moral high ground. Never threaten (vieled or otherwise), always be extremely civil, overlook personal attacks, never use aggresive or confrontational language etc. Do that and you'll gain respect, and if RfCs or more are ever needed, people will be on your "side". ] (]) 17:51, 24 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Merry Christmas!!== | |||
| ] 22:33, 24 December 2005 (UTC)]] | |||
| ==Steward votes== | |||
| Your votes were done anonymously according to . Could you fix them by logging in to meta, then confirming your votes ? Thanks in advance ] 09:15, 25 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks Ant! ] (]) 16:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Adminship nomination== | |||
| OK, then... :-) ] 15:50, 25 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == I fixed your Nixdorf RFA == | |||
| Somehow, you managed to list it within InShaneee's RFA page. I'm not sure how you managed that, but I fixed it. —] (]:]) 10:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks, I'm not sure either :-) ] (]) 11:36, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Adminship == | |||
| Hi, thanks for supporting my request for adminship. If there's ever something I can help you out with please drop me a note. Happy holidays! ] 16:31, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Semi Protection ? == | |||
| I'm a newish admin and I wanted to ask you about the <nowiki>{{sprotect}}</nowiki> tag I've been seeing on a number of articles in recent days (Such as the article ]). I always thought protecting a page was supposed to be done only occasionally but this type of protecting now seems to be almost trendy. Has the threshhold for doing this limited protection been lowered? Is the consensus that we can semiprotect a page if it merely is a target for frequent vandalism? Thanks for passing on any info on this. Best,--] 00:55, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Opinion is very split over this, just see ] and ]! Some articles - GWB is a well known one, Nigger less so - just get constant IP vandalism all the time, so I'd prefer to see Semi-protection being near permanent for those pages. ''Personally'', I put it on articles when I think they need it, and then leave it. There are admins who regularly check protected pages so I leave it to them to judge when to unprotect. ] (]) 09:42, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks for the info. I'm considering doing a semi protect to the William Shakespeare article, which gets hit by a regular stream of vandalism.--] 14:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == thanks to you, my phone number is a stalker's username revising the ] page== | |||
| Dear Dan100, | |||
| I'm sure you unprotected the Biff Rose page in good faith, but I wish you had communicated with the admin who protected it, first. (I'm only assuming you didn't.) We have had a spate of extremely antisocial behavior from unregistered users on that page. A user on that page has been calling my home phone number as well, in the middle of the night. | |||
| After you unprotected it, on 00:48, 27 December 2005, someone posted a revision on the ] page...using a new username consisting of MY home phone number. This is serious. This is blatant stalker behavior and an invasion of my privacy. It is probably illegal as well. | |||
| Please reconsider your unprotection. Thank you. --] 07:55, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Sorry about that. I've deleted the number. ] (]) 09:35, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::I wish I'd picked a friendlier title for this section. I was a bit panicked. Anyway, thank you for your swift deletion of the number and reversal of action. I appreciate it. --] 01:03, 28 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Why, thanks... == | |||
| ''Ahhh, so you're the IP who mediated on the anal sex drawing case! Nice work ] (]) 15:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)'' | |||
| :Ta. ] <sup>'']''</sup> 16:23, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Thank you for the barnstar, and I'm now back from leave == | |||
| Dear Dan100: Thank you so much for the barnstar; it is greatly appreciated, and I am honoured that my actions on the medcab page did indeed assist you. :) By the way, I went AWOL since I was away at my grandparents 23-26 Dec for Christmas (''real life, 'ya know, isn't it such an inconvenience... :-D '') and I have returned once more to do battle down at the Medcab. I do hope you don't consider it impudent of me to re-add myself under Coordinators. Thank you for all of your hard work down at the Medcab; undoubtedly, had you not joined our merry throng, we would still have a one-man Cabal (i.e. myself!) rather than the emerging star we have today. All the best, --] | ] 16:50, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Mediation on ] external links == | |||
| Dan, please continue to mediate. I have reason to believe that the anon user has since registered as ]. I and others have reverted the page numerous times only to have the link re-added amid accusations of censorship. Thanks for your help. - ] 18:48, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Hello Dan, I would like to know how we are progressing here. I read where Dominic will continue to remove all links to www.truthroom.com on all articles irregardless of what happens here. Since this is his position I wonder if I should go directly to arbitration so as to settle this dispute once and for all. Thank you for your time. Whatif | |||
| == Biff Rose == | |||
| Thanks for your help with the ] situation. There are so many socks in play that it's confusing. -] 18:57, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Mediation for ]== | |||
| Hi ]. Thanks for coming around. :) I think that, through the power of positive collaboration, the community here has reached a consensus on the controversy at hand. Thanks for checking in with us! --] <sup></sup> 20:38, 27 December 2005 (UTC) ''(CC'ed to ])'' | |||
| Hello Dan and Animaed Cascade, I, too, am very happy that our negotiations and collaboration produced such a posiitive result. However, we now have a new editor to the page who is making changes with no regard to comments and discussion on the talk page. The new edits are not neutral. The editor admits to not even having read the author. This is of concern to me. I do not want this to devolve into a tit-for-tat revert fest and am unsure of how to address it. I also fear that this will be the case in the future--there is a past precedence for malicious edits on this page. If folks do not respect neutrality in the article, what is the recommended procedure? ] 13:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Aloha Dan! I wanted to thank you belatedly for intervening in and offering to keep an eye on the dispute re the JT LeRoy article -- The Cabal is on the job :-) . After noting back in October that I know Mr LeRoy personally, I became subject to various attacks, the most harmless accusation being that I was a sock puppet of Ms Albert. (In another arena, despite my best joint efforts to achieve compromise with ] whose views on Hawaiian sovereignty and history are mostly the opposite of mine, I was attacked by ] as trying to push an agenda re ''that'' topic.) Accordingly I thought it best simply to recuse myself from Misplaced Pages entirely for awhile. Despite all WP's good-conduct policies, some editors approach their chosen subjects with unusual personal venom -- your mediation helps restore my faith that such things can be contained, and I hope to be returning soon. ] 01:58, 26 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==WP:AN/I== | |||
| Whoops! Sorry about that, when you're doing as many things at once as I am, it's easy to lose track there. Speaking of which, i'm heading over to AN/I right now. ] 08:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Poetlister== | |||
| G'day Dan! | |||
| Another case (was thomas jefferson....) was solved on Cabal Mediation. All the best! --] ] 12:35, 28 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :By the way, is Poetlister unblocked or not? I would like that she would be unblocked. --] ] 13:26, 28 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::Poetlister isn't unblocked, and probably won't be - it was indeed a "]", and was used to vote several times on the same AfD, which is bannable offence under the ] :-(. ] (]) 19:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :::Hello Dan, thanks for everything. You know I do like very much to mediate. By the way I wish you succes here ] :). --] ] 19:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Reading fans == | |||
| Unfortunately, the ones that spend lots of their time on ] message boards (for no good reason, may I add), are. Then again, I'd say the same can probably be reciprocated about Brighton fans who hang around the Crystal Palace BBS. --] 21:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Mediation for Stuyvesant High School == | |||
| I have updated the mediation ] with the new information. Thanks. --] <sup>]</sup> 01:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| : Hi Dan, if you could take a look at the Stuyvesant mediation case it would be rather helpful. The anonymous user is not being reasonable. --] <sup>]</sup> 20:03, 30 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :: Assistance with the ] editorial "dispute" would be greatly appreciated. --] <sup>]</sup> 16:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Just thought you might like to know I couldn't stand by and watch Ed be railroaded. I've nominated him for ].] 04:24, 30 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == My RfA == | |||
| Hi Dan100, now that I'm an administrator, I just wanted to thank you for your support on my ]. -- ] (]) 02:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Market Reforms of the Modern Communist== | |||
| Contrary to communist theory proposed by Marx and Engles and later adapted by Lenin, Stalin, Mao the ]; the largest country whose ruling party refers to itself as communist, runs ] dedicated to capitalist enterprise, free from central government control. After opening up trade to the world under ], the People's Republic of China runs some of the most economically free regions in the world, including ], which is regarded by the Hoover Institute and the Wall Street Journal as the world's freest economy . | |||
| These ] have few restrictions upon businesses, industries, imports and exports, including the elimination of duties, and a free price system. Since the opening of the Free Trade Zones China has maintained a growth rate of over 8%, and originally saw growth rates around 12%. These Special Economic Zones are different than the ], as practiced in the Soviet Union, because the SEZs allow for capitalists to build and expand their industries and private property, free from the control of the central government. SEZ's operate under ] rather than the state capitalist top down ] approach. | |||
| According to China.org "After opening Shenzhen and other three coastal cities in South China as special economic regions and then dozens of economic and technological development zones in the 1980s, the country introduced free trade zones in the early 1990s in 15 coast cities, including Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Tianjin." | |||
| Several other self proclaimed communist countries have also made pro market reforms in the last few decades including Vietnam. | |||
| -------------------- | |||
| what do you propose? | |||
| The only thing that needs to be done is add alittle more info on other market reforms and find the appropriate place within the communist article...which really means cleaning up the headings and reorgnizing them...which i will do as soon as the communist editors delete my section with no discussion for the 35th time. (Gibby 06:00, 31 December 2005 (UTC)) | |||
| : It doesn't fit the context. See ]. It might find a place in more specialised articles, specifically ]. But surprise, surprise, it already contains this info, and more, except without the observation of "contrary". -- ] 06:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Deletions == | |||
| When you delete a page, please make sure to delete the associated talk pages (] & ]). -- ] ] 17:01, 31 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Templates== | |||
| ] just undeleted all of the templates you removed as a violation of policy. Since he was the creator of these same templates, doesn't this violate Misplaced Pages procedure? ] 22:51, 31 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == thanks == | |||
| {| style="border-top:1px solid grey; border-right:1px solid grey; border-bottom:2px solid grey; border-left:1px solid grey; background-color: #A1E794; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12px;" | |||
| |] | |||
| |<font color = "blue">'''Greetings Dan100,'''</font><br> I wish to offer my gratitude for supporting me on my recent ], which passed with the final tally of 65/4/3. If you would ever desire my assistance in anything, or wish to give me feedback on any actions I take, ]. Cheers! ] (]!) 08:01, 1 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| == ] (]) == | |||
| hi, | |||
| allabout2006 and his ips are back to destroying the alkyl nitrites article, and i was wondering if you could help keep an eye on it as you were doing a few weeks ago. thanks --] <sup>]</sup> 15:52, 1 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == joke templates at ] == | |||
| What's going on at with the "joke" templates? Unless you want to use the somewhat-smarmy {{behave}}, as it now stands Level 1 (use sandbox), Level 2 (Could be seen as vandalism), and Level 3 (Warning) are all the message. Doesn't seem to make sense to give the same message two or three times. You mind if I have a go at it? ] 05:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Can I be in your place head mediator? ] ] 15:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == My ] == | |||
| {|width=100% style="border:solid 2px #338" | |||
| |width="90%" bgcolor=#e4f2ff style="padding:.5em"| Greetings, Dan100! I wanted to sincerely thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with a final result of 55/14/3. Your support means a lot to me! If you have any questions or input regarding my activities, be they adminly or just a "normal" user's, or if you just want to chat about anything at all, feel free to ]. Cheers! —] ] 07:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| |bgcolor=gainsboro| | |||
| |bgcolor=lightgrey| | |||
| |bgcolor=silver| | |||
| |bgcolor=darkgray| | |||
| |bgcolor=dimgray| | |||
| |bgcolor=darkslategray| | |||
| |} | |||
| == Thanks == | |||
| Thank you for your support of my RfA, and for your generous comment. I appreciate your confidence. Best wishes for a happy new year, ] <sup>]</sup> 13:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == My RFA == | |||
| Thank you for your support in my recent succesful RFA. I appreciate the trust you have shown in me. Kind regards, --] 17:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == RfC == | |||
| i have filed an RfC concerning the behavior of ] and his socks on ] which can be found ]. you reverted his edits a couple times. comments would be appreciated. thanks. --] <sup>]</sup> 04:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| I responded to your comments. Sorry for the month-long delay, got carried away with work etc. --<small>]<sup>]|]</sup></small> 08:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Hi, you've warned this user for vandalizing pages. He did it again: --] 21:23, 9 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Anon talk page comment removals == | |||
| Did you intentionally remove all of the warnings/etc on ] with ? If so, in the future could you simply archive it instead? I just reblocked and had to go back to the block log to see it was a repeat vandal and then through the page history to see what had happened in the past and then readjust the block. Thanks. ]<sub>(])</sub> | |||
| * ...and ? ]<sub>(])</sub> 02:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Polling the 31/36 hour block... == | |||
| ...]. ] ] 02:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| ''The burden of evidence lies with the editor who has made the edit. Editors should therefore provide references'' From ]. Sources are required. Please revert. ]</nowiki>]] 13:27, 19 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == vote here == | |||
| hi, Please Vote here "keep" : ]. Regards, ] 24 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Current events == | |||
| * {{On AFD|Chinese current events}} | |||
| * {{On AFD|Indian current events}} | |||
| Please contribute to the discussions. ] 12:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Misplaced Pages Project == | |||
| Hi, | |||
| my name is Federico (alias Pain) and I am creating a section for nominating the best user page, I was wondering if you were interested in joining the project. | |||
| The project has just started, and we need help to spread the word and ameliorate it. | |||
| ] | |||
| Best regards, | |||
| ] ] ] 14:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Thanks == | == Thanks == | ||
Revision as of 08:48, 12 March 2006
Thanks
Thank you for the barnstar :) It's nice to see that someone notices your work and appreciates it :) --Missmarple 08:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)