Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:55, 20 September 2011

Template:Archive box collapsible

Hope you are fine

Cptnono, I hope you are fine, and I will still see you around. In any case good luck to you in everything you are up to. It was great to know you! Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:59, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Everything is well enough. I was really ticked off last night when I found out that I was not going to be able to fly out to Columbus for Newcastle's US tour but the main reason for the semi tag is explained below. I noticed that my time on Misplaced Pages is so much less that I wanted to give people a heads up that an extra message here or an email might be needed to get my attention. I will surely be checking my watchlist every day or three but I have been on so much less lately. Cptnono (talk) 06:28, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

		All Around Amazing Barnstar
		Thank you for your help getting Steve Zakuani through WP:GA review. You stepped in when I had no time and saw it through. For that I recognize you as an all-around amazing Wikipedian and award you this barnstar. Thank you. SkotyWAC 05:11, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I hope you won't be completely out of commission in your semi-retirement. The SSFC task force wouldn't be the same without you. I admit I've been a lot less active lately due to more work, moving homes, and some other family stuff. I'm hoping to ramp back up in the next few months, especially if I have another cup final article to work on (Go Sounders!). Take care and I hope all is well for you in real life. --SkotyWA_C 05:11, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, dude! The semi-retirement tag is because I noticed that I missed a couple commitments because my time in Misplaced Pages has been halved (I was planning on doing an A class review for a guy like 2 months ago and totally ignored it). I'm not going anywhere but felt like I wanted to throw it up there since I am not around as much as I was 6 months ago. Cptnono (talk) 06:00, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

And nice work taking the reigns on that GA. I love Zak and it is cool to see the article at GA now. Cptnono (talk) 06:01, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Steve Zakuani a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell

Thank you kindly

	Thank you for your support
	Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. I shall endeavor to meet your and the community's expectations as an admin. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter

We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are Adabow (submissions) (Pool A, 189 points) and PresN (submissions) (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from Casliber (submissions)) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from Another Believer (submissions)). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. As ever, questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 11:26, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Your message

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 17:05, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

My thoughts are always fantastic. At least I am honest with you in letting you know that people think you are a poor admin who is too involved to do anything but edit in the topic area. But please use your tools and be a jerkoff more since you are under a microscope. Better to be in the know, right? And when you stop calling other's shitty names I will stop doing it as well. Cptnono (talk) 05:52, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Opinion on RS for Celtic F.C. supporters

Hi Cptnono. I was wondering if you could lend your opinion here on reliable sources for Celtic F.C. supporters if you have time as you've lent a hand on a similar subject before. ThanksMattun0211 (talk) 02:43, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh no. I just spent 10 min at a match tonight yelling at a Celtic supporter about his silly dialect and support for a garbage team. I'll try to be neutral. "**** THEM ALL LET THEM COME... LET THEM COME... LET THEM COME" (wasn't even an SPL match but they just piss me off so much)Cptnono (talk) 05:49, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Cheers - despite everything you managed a neutral input ;) Mattun0211 (talk) 09:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

And despite everything: Celtic is world class. The fans that made it out to Seattle (2003 I think?) congregated at the Owl & Thistle (local bar) with fans from here and rocked the joint. Seattle fanbase for sure. No doubt that it is worldwide.Cptnono (talk) 10:13, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Thought of you while reading this a couple weeks ago

The idea of parallel states ("in which Jews and Arabs would owe their allegiance to separate parliaments but share a single territory and army") is interesting, but I think it would be an administrative nightmare. If I read this correctly, the suggested breakdown is based on religion and ethnicity, not geographic location. So an Arab living in Tel Aviv would be governed by an Arab parliament (and Arab laws), while the Jewish next-door-neighbor would be governed by a Jewish parliament (and Jewish laws)? What would happen if their laws differed, or contradicted each other? Who determines land ownership rules and building rights? Which parliament would command the military? I suspect that the parallel states solution would have similar "separate is not equal" problems as segregation had in the United States. Imagine if the result of the civil rights movement in the United States hadn't been integration, but instead further segregation resulting in two governments - one for blacks, and one for whites - with a shared military and territory for both. I think it would have been highly unlikely that both governments would be equal, and you would have similar administrative headaches.

I'm still somewhat torn over whether the best solution is a one-state solution or a two-state solution, but I also doubt that either side has the willpower or the motivation to come to an agreement anytime soon. Israel has very little short term incentive to come to any sort of deal on the issue, and lacks long term vision. The Palestinians have very little short term bargaining power, and can only bootstrap themselves so far. My feelings at the moment are that it would actually be best for the United States to not veto the Palestinian UN bid of statehood in September, as a way to just sort of throw the kids into the pool so that they learn to swim together, but I don't think the United States has the political willpower to make a move that bold. ← George 19:11, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it is a bad idea as well. It sounds like nuts on both sides would make it even worse.

Not sure about the vote. I have read contradictory information on how important it actually is. I think it would be interesting to see the US not veto but it won't happen. Cptnono (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter

The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:

• Casliber (submissions), Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
• PresN (submissions), Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
• Hurricanehink (submissions), Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
• Wizardman (submissions), Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
• Miyagawa (submissions), the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
• Resolute (submissions), the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
• Yellow Evan (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.

We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists, Another Believer (submissions), Piotrus (submissions), Grandiose (submissions), Stone (submissions), Eisfbnore (submissions), Canada Hky (submissions) and MuZemike (submissions). Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Misplaced Pages. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.

In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate Ucucha (talk · contribs). The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.

A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, 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, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Note of reply

Personal Attack

I don't care what your issue is with User:Cerejota but please refrain from making personal attacks as you did at User talk:Cerejota#Richard Dawkins. Comment on the content, not the contributor. --Mrmatiko (talk) 10:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The guy should not have been condescending. Cptnono (talk) 21:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey

Hey, just saw your edit of 2011 USOC final. Haven't crossed paths with you much. If you'll be online over the next couple of days, I was wondering if you'd mind reviewing this and make any changes/tweaks you think should be made. I plan to nominate it at WP:TFAR the next time the TFA directors schedule a swath of articles (probably early next week). I'm waiting because it's kind of a longshot with only one point (and a weak one at that), but I figure it's worth a try. --SkotyWA_C 02:51, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

We're gonna win the f****** Open Cup... Again! Your picture at Starfire against LA made me livid since I actually missed that match.

In regards to the review: I am still not sure how to handle the name of the stadium (it was Qwest at the time but I think everything gets switched over prose wise to CenturyLink). Would be great for the day since people have some footy fever with the intl break over here and the Euro qualifying over there.

Nice work on the most recent final article. Consider ditching the quote box since it would work fine in prose and the image in that section takes up so much space. Throw that script in your java page since it makes dashes easier. Coding dashes is looked down upon for some reason and the dash script makes it super easy.

If I recall, you don't enjoy a tasty refreshing beverage after a game. But I will enjoy a sparkling water with you at the Hawk's Nest on Oct 4th after we 3peat.

Always a pleasure to run into you on Misplaced Pages and I hope life is treating you well. Cptnono (talk) 03:53, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Woops, I missed that you'd replied to this. I put together a group of 41 people(!) from work to go to the open cup final, so I probably won't be able to meet you after for a drink.

As for the review, I think it's appropriate to use Qwest instead of CenturyLink because the article is about a specific event and that's what the stadium was called when the event took place. Maybe I should put in parenthesis "now CenturyLink Field" or something like that.

I like the quote boxes when there aren't many images in the article. If I had more images, I definitely think the quotes should move into the prose. Without pictures, I think the quoteboxes make the article look a little less drab for the reader. Obviously that's a personal opinion though and not part of the MOS. --SkotyWA_C 15:39, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I nominated the 2010 USOC final for TFA here. If you get time in the next few days, please add your support. It'll need it I think. Very low points. --SkotyWA_C 15:48, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your support at my latest AE. Too bad it didn't work out as I hoped. Wikifan 10:40, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Care to tell me what you are talking about

'The page was locked due to edit warring. If you revert again you will be edit warring and someone like me will be seeking your block. Instead, follow the dispute resolution process. I recommend that an admin gives you a heads up on the additional scrutiny editors are under in this topic area based on a history of disruptive editing. I feel that I cannot give you the proper advice since you choose to not listen and I do not have the patience do deal with you'. I believe this is from you. I don't see any reference, so have no way to know what page you are referring to, but if it is Itamar attack, than simply reading what I have written would already tell you what I intend to do. I recommend that you check before you give advice, and make it clear what you are writing about. I do not have the patience to deal with you otherwise.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 18:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Again it seems you cannot bother to tell me what you are writing about. My name does not appear on the page you gave a link to, and so you are wasting my time with issues that do not apply to me. Why are you doing this?Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 18:45, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct

Thanks for chiming in in the brief time they left my complaint up at AN/I. Yes, you are correct...Admins should never use admin tools against anyone they have had a content dispute with. Best wishes.--MONGO 04:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Civility on falafel

Cptono, whether you agree with him or not, and whether he is right or not, User:Veritycheck has been polite and cooperative on the Talk:Falafel page. You, on the other hand, have been consistently hostile and uncooperative. Comments like this are uncivil and unhelpful:

Now that some of us have got it to GA I don;t care what others say since improvement is taking a backseat. Improve the article with refs or go away. Discount RS already in with actual RS or shut up. Your opinion means nothing so knock it off. Look at this GA and feel bad that you did not assist.

Veritycheck has in fact proposed some sources which we may or may not decide are solid. He has reasonably questioned whether the Ynet posting is solid with rational argumentation. You, on the other hand, simply assert that the Ynet posting is RS without even discussing why, though Veritycheck and I have questioned it with backup detail. Instead, you insult and question the good faith of those with contrary opinions in comments like this one:

A source (Ynet is RS even if it is from a country that people don;t like) says so and that is good enough for me since sources have allowed for falsehoods before and this one at least appears more plausible than others. Sorry, WP:V is met. Go change other articles against RS when it favors you and be reverted.

...which obviously implies that Veritycheck and I doubt that Shooky Galili's posting on Ynet is reliable not because of the issues we've brought up (that Galili is not an expert on food, that the article contains no sources, etc.) but because Ynet is published in Israel. It also implies that Veritycheck and I edit irresponsibly and should be reverted. This is all very uncollegial of you. --Macrakis (talk) 18:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

My point is that editors have not been improving the article while disregarding WP:V. If that hurts your feelings I do not know what to tell you. Cptnono (talk) 18:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I was not talking about my feelings. (And that in itself is a strikingly offensive reply.) I was talking about your extraordinarily aggressive, uncivil, and uncooperative tone in this discussion. If you think this is just me being thin-skinned, I suppose we'll have to ask for uninvolved editors to comment. --Macrakis (talk) 18:24, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I think in this instance you are overreacting. You can call it "thin skinned" if you want but I would not have used that phrase.Cptnono (talk) 18:28, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

But I will strike the portion of it I feel is not cool. The majority of the quote you provided is something I am fine with though.Cptnono (talk) 18:30, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

And I have made a mention on the other user's talk page since "shut up" was lame after thinking about it more. But feel free to bring this up at AE since it is topic bannable behavior.Cptnono (talk) 20:12, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Fuck him. Obvious troll is obvious and he can suck on my balls. Cptnono (talk) 06:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC)