Misplaced Pages

User talk:Feezo: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:00, 21 July 2011 editMagog the Ogre (talk | contribs)Administrators100,716 edits →Senkaku Islands dispute protection: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 02:31, 21 July 2011 edit undoFeezo (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators13,813 edits →Senkaku Islands dispute protection: reNext edit →
Line 124: Line 124:


I've taken quite a bit of liberty in unprotecting this page, and actually returning it to its predispute version. At first, this may look like an administrator pushing his will on an article, but I assure you it's nothing of the sort. I have been watching this dispute for too long and I'm trying to keep things sane. I'm posting here because technically I probably shouldn't have undone your protection without your permission. Please read my post on the talk page however which explains all of my actions. If you still have an issue, feel free to resopnd and I will happily work it out to return it to whatever state you'd set up. ] (]) 00:00, 21 July 2011 (UTC) I've taken quite a bit of liberty in unprotecting this page, and actually returning it to its predispute version. At first, this may look like an administrator pushing his will on an article, but I assure you it's nothing of the sort. I have been watching this dispute for too long and I'm trying to keep things sane. I'm posting here because technically I probably shouldn't have undone your protection without your permission. Please read my post on the talk page however which explains all of my actions. If you still have an issue, feel free to resopnd and I will happily work it out to return it to whatever state you'd set up. ] (]) 00:00, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
:Hello, thanks for the message—I don't have an issue with your taking on this challenge, and even unprotecting the page (although you should probably address the parallel dispute at ]). Protecting the dispute page was meant as a gentle reminder that edit warring is Not Allowed—and that administrators are standing by if the situation escalates. I agree it does "look" bad to ] a particular version, which was why I froze the page in exactly the state I found it. I'm not sure it's wise to get dragged into whether or not the article "should" be tagged. It's an internal filing issue that should never have been allowed to become an object of this much contention (per ]).

:However, it's clear that the situation is not going to go away, and if you're willing to take this to Arbcom, I think it would be better to do quickly, rather than letting the situation continue to simmer. <span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype, Book Antiqua, Palatino, serif;" color="#BBAED0">] <font size="-2">] | ])</font></span> 02:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:31, 21 July 2011

Welcome to my talk page.
  • Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
  • Please sign and date your entry by adding "~~~~" at the end.
  • Please indent your posts with ":" if replying to an existing topic (or "::" if replying to a reply).
  • I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.
Start a new topic.

Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7

If you are here to ask me to perform an administrative task, please see User:Feezo/admin for guidelines.

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Senkaku Islands

I put the tag back because it's been a few days since you said the closure of mediation is pending; feel free to remove it when the mediation case closes. - Penwhale | 02:58, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for mediation/Senkaku Islands/Code#Update

It might be a little too late for my input here, so I'm wondering if I should take the time to answer your questions. Thanks. – AJL 07:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't expect to have any further involvement with the case, although you're welcome to send in your answers if you wish. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 08:17, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
In that case, would you rather I send them to the Committee? – AJL 08:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Sure, you could do that—I came up with the questions on my own, but as the committee as a whole is currently deciding what to do, any perspective provided by participants should be welcome. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 12:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:43, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


ind_knight 16 july 20011

hi freezo

The semi-protection on the article (Digvijay_Singh_(politician)) is not justifiable because lot of contradictory information on large number of web references is available related to this article.1 where person himself states that that he was better hindu means he has converted now which contradicts the present content in the article. but semi-protection has been applied this on unrefined article and friezing to that stage where it seems that it will be not good for wikipedia to be source of nuetral information. kindly remove it grant permission to edit the page.

--Ind knight (talk) 06:05, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

You can contact the admin who protected the article at User talk:RegentsPark. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 06:16, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

In your opinion would this page meet Misplaced Pages guidelines? I don't want to sound advertisE or SpammE

Akiban Technologies Preview

Remember that this is only a preview; your changes have not yet been saved!

Akiban (Ah-kee-buhn) Technologies was founded in 2009 with the mission of delivering a database solution to allow high performance and scalability. The product, which is not yet in the market, allows companies to maintain existing relational databases, but restructures the storage of the data for scale. The company touts this approach as breaking “through the SQL scalability barrier”. The initial unreleased product appears to support MySQL, and we infer plans to support other relational databases in the future. Akiban has a MIT cadre of DBMS developers like Jack Orenstein, who was an Object Design founder, Ori Herrnstadt from the Israeli Defense Forces, Mike McMahon who was a founder of Oberon and Blue Agarve Software and Peter Beaman who used to work for Intersystems. Akiban Server

Operational databases with normalized schemas suffer from performance and scalability problems as schemas become complex. Scalability is the ability of a system, network, or process, to handle growing amounts of work in a graceful manner or its ability to be enlarged to accommodate that growth. These problems are not inherent in the amount of data however, but rather in the SQL joins required to construct objects from that data. Typical workarounds for these challenges include de-normalization, materialized views, and alternative database solutions. Rather than compromising the integrity and benefits of a relational model through denormalization, the database technology will make SQL run better. References

^ Luca, Andrei. "Akiban « High Tech in the Hub." High Tech in the Hub. 25 Sept. 2010. Web. 05 July 2011. <http://www.hightechinthehub.com/tag/akiban/>. ^ "Akiban | DBMS 2 : Database Management System Services." DBMS 2 : Database Management and Analytic Technologies in a Changing World. Monash Research, 19 Apr. 2011. Web. 05 July 2011. <http://www.dbms2.com/category/products-and-vendors/akiban/>. ^ André B. Bondi, 'Characteristics of scalability and their impact on performance', Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on Software and performance, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 2000, ISBN 1-58113-195-X, pages 195 - 203 — Preceding unsigned comment added by NO.Denormalization (talk • contribs) 19:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

This editor is a self-declared sockpuppet of AkibanTech and has been indefinitely blocked. -- Atama頭 18:46, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:43, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Feezo. You have new messages at In fact's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

In fact ( contact ) 07:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

File mover

Hi, There is more discussion in here, and also in the main page. Regards, In fact ( contact ) 12:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Windows Phone 7

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Windows Phone 7. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 05:18, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

SI Mediation

Feezo, will you be providing any sort of closing statement--a summary, an indication of what the committee was discussing, a recommendation as to whether you (individually or collectively) believe further DR (i.e., arbitration) should be requested, etc.? Both of the closes indicate that we should check the talk page for more info, but there isn't any there, at least not that I'm seeing. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:07, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

AGK has indicated on the case talk page that he will post a full statement once consensus is reached. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 01:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Unless I'm not looking at the right place, the only recent message from AGK is this one from 16 July, which says that the committee has finished discussion, and you (Feezo) would be taking action; it doesn't say anything about the committee or AGK making a comment. The 24 June comment says that, but I assumed that was superseded by the 16 July statement. I can ask AGK on xyr talk if you like. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:51, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I've asked him on the list if he plans on making a statement. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 07:43, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Feezo. Would you mind removing the dispute tag from the SI page? You added it at the end of May "as part of formal mediation". Now that the mediation is over, I would appreciate it if you could take it off. Cheers, John Smith's (talk) 07:30, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the message; I've taken care of it. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 07:43, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Dear Feezo, the dispute has not been solved although the mediation is over, and the current title has failed to be proved a NPOV one during mediation. I have not seen more conclusion as well as justifications except the closure itself for this mediation. Some confusions, sorry. --Lvhis (talk) 16:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your concern. The Senkaku Islands case is now closed. As I am no longer your mediator, I have no special authority over the article in question. Please follow the standard procedure for controversial changes. Thanks. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 02:28, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:36, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Senkaku Islands dispute protection

I've taken quite a bit of liberty in unprotecting this page, and actually returning it to its predispute version. At first, this may look like an administrator pushing his will on an article, but I assure you it's nothing of the sort. I have been watching this dispute for too long and I'm trying to keep things sane. I'm posting here because technically I probably shouldn't have undone your protection without your permission. Please read my post on the talk page however which explains all of my actions. If you still have an issue, feel free to resopnd and I will happily work it out to return it to whatever state you'd set up. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:00, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for the message—I don't have an issue with your taking on this challenge, and even unprotecting the page (although you should probably address the parallel dispute at Senkaku Islands). Protecting the dispute page was meant as a gentle reminder that edit warring is Not Allowed—and that administrators are standing by if the situation escalates. I agree it does "look" bad to WP:PREFER a particular version, which was why I froze the page in exactly the state I found it. I'm not sure it's wise to get dragged into whether or not the article "should" be tagged. It's an internal filing issue that should never have been allowed to become an object of this much contention (per Misplaced Pages:No disclaimers in articles).
However, it's clear that the situation is not going to go away, and if you're willing to take this to Arbcom, I think it would be better to do quickly, rather than letting the situation continue to simmer. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 02:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)