Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:16, 24 March 2006

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, vfd comments

Removal of disambig pages

The article "Pepsi Chart" should be a disambig page, as it refers to both a UK show and a "foreign show", as linked to by an article of a TV channel. Although only the UK article exists on Wiki, perhaps the disambig page should be stubbed? User:Vinnielo

Uncategorised good articles

Great work! the database dump is scheduled to finish later today, so hopefully I will be able to update it again soon. Martin 13:53, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey

Look like you're taking some heat over protection (again). I guess this is because people blame the protector for everything that is wrong with both protection itself and the article as protected when really it's the fault of the people who couldn't control themselves in the first place. Tony Sidaway means well; we all know that it can be hard to work out why Random Article has been protected when all you really have to go on is a sentence on WP:PP and a sentence in the log. Maybe take a break and call by RfP when you feel like it. While you're away, WP:AFD/Old could use a hand or two... -Splash 17:55, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I am changing my monobook to autmatic the listing a bit more.Voice-of-All 18:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Learn To live with your misstakes

No no you are wrong, it clearly says you must do those things and I didnt post on the wrong page. Because there are other requests and they have posted on the same page and to avoid any chans what so ever of the item beeing denied I will post on the same pages as the other requests have. You are wrong It is plain andsimple one MUST do what the template says and if one dosent do that one gets denied. It is better to post on more pages then on less.

(Deng 21:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC))

Censorship within NLP

Hello Woohookitty. I am curious to why you are enforcing the censorship of discussion on the factual censorship of facts about NLP (Obscurantism, the sale of dubious products, and censorship by promoters of pseudoscientific therapies). This is very interesting, and is pertinent to the article. It is the view of scientists and independent researchers of NLP. It will inevitably be part of the article.

Any blocking in the workshop seems to me to be quite against the whole reason for discussion.

Perhaps this is a problem with NLP article in general. In which case it should be openly addressed.

Please explain in detail the motivations behind your threat to block discussions concerning the obvious censorship/whitewash of NLP and other pseudosciences as stated by independent researchers of NLP.

Regards HeadleyDown 12:08, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

Come on now. You not doing RfPP is like me not editing Doctor Who articles- Both a tragedy and an impossibility :). Do come back to it soon, you're missed :). Cheers, Sean Black 23:38, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

That's okay. But do keep up your good work elsewhere :).--Sean Black 21:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Now yet another admin has accused me of calling someone an idiot because you did it

Syrthiss has accused me of calling someone an idiot i posted on his page and ask him to prove it and show me where it happened but he hasent.

What I want from you is to write on my page that you were wrong in saying that and not what you last did with your reply "what ever"

Also it is clear that you are not neutral if you read on the eastern front talk page you will see that someone posted my view as idotic but you have not punished that person in anyway or even told them anything.

So you might think that you are neutral but you are not and reality and real events have proven that you are not. Because we have the same situation someone called someones views idotic but you did nothing. So you punish me when I say views are idotic but when others say that about my views you do nothing. And then you call yourself neutral. This is clear and absolut evidence that you are not. There are no 2 ways about it. 2 people do the same thing but you only punish one.

(Deng 07:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC))

Again you missunderstand NO ONE CALLED ME AN IDIOT NO ONE CALLED ME AN IDIOT

I can copy it more if you dont understand. He called my views idotic but didnt call me an idiot do you understand the diffrence?

And that is not the important thing the most important thing is that you either show the exact quote where I called someone an idiot or you write a statement saying that you were wrong and that I didnt call someone an idiot just that the statement that person made was idotic.

(Deng 18:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC))

Image Tagging Image:Chico-marx-sm.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Chico-marx-sm.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Misplaced Pages (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan 14:34, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Looking for articles to work on?

Hello there. I'm SuggestBot, a Misplaced Pages bot that helps new members contribute to Misplaced Pages. You might like to edit these articles I picked for you based on things you've edited in the past. Check it out -- I hope you find it useful. Also, if you could give some feedback about which suggestions are good and not, and whether you'd be okay having suggestions put directly on your talk page, that would be very helpful. SuggestBot feedback here. Thanks. -- SuggestBot 14:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

No worries, and no urging on my part

Hi Woohookitty. I have made alterations to my proposed change. I took my time about it deliberately because the NLP article was moving too fast for me. I believe the pace would be better if it were taken down a cog or two. More work on each suggested change, and less overall changes to work on. I think Katefan0 has done well to clarify that also. Anyway, I don't urge you to make comments on my change as I understand you have plenty on your schedule. Cheers DaveRight 07:05, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Why wouldnt I believe that you are from USA

Also there has been alot of bad blood between us mostly from me and therfore I have desided to mellow down in my attitude towards you.

Where we go from here is up to you.

(Deng 11:31, 9 March 2006 (UTC))

Well the crapola isnt done with you yet

Since you are the one who locked it and the one who has been watching it for the longest time then you should stick with it to the end and I dont think the end is far away maybe just another few months. But if you arent going to stay then who will take over your place

(Deng 08:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC))

Hello hello

You said "When things are settled, all you do is put a request up at requests for page protection. Any admin can unprotect the page."

To that I say maybe because I want to reach the meditation stage as you first suggested and to get there I just need to do the other thing in the template.

Doing the first thing that the template says has given some results but I dont know if it is enough to end the conflict but who knows maybe people like my test page now who knows. (Deng 18:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC))

Eastern Front (World War II)

Hi Michael - I made a proposal to move things forward a bit, and would appreciate your input on whether you think that is a feasible solution. Thanks a lot. Andreas 08:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Ixfd64

I have filed an RFC concerning an administrator's reversal of several blocks without discussion. This may be of particular interest to you as a one of the blocks was set by you. Regards. — Mar. 12, '06 <freakofnur_xture|talk>

Cleanup taskforce

King_Edward_VI_Grammar_School_(Chelmsford) has been addd to your desk. It needs cleanup and tightening. RJFJR 16:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on article Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact

See these changes and by this user .

This user is trying to cause as much trouble as possible by falsifying names and dates. --Constanz - Talk 18:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Alright, I'll make a note to in future, thanks for the early unblock. - 07:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

hrmmm

What was your major? Tomer 09:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I'm glad to see you joined WP:WPWI... there are so many articles attached to that project that janitorial work is practically a full-time job. :-\ Tomer 09:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Heh... you can start with Eau Claire Transit :-p Tomer 10:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I left a note for User:Micahmn about it here... Tomer 10:08, 15 March 2006 (UT

Pig is again vandalizing Bonnie and Clyde

User talk:Woohookitty Hello, hope you are okay, and our buddy Pig is back under yet another nom de plume vandalizing away, his latest alias is User:Wordlelwabash, and the same attack, on me, that he has posted under 4 other aliases is back at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Bonnie_and_Clyde&diff=43828150&oldid=43769350. What do you think drives someone to be so hate filled? I actually feel sorry for him, except that he wastes so many people's time in editing out his crude, viscious attacks. Sad. Anyway, wanted to give an editor his latest name, so it could be added to the blocked list. Thanks!old windy bear 12:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

(cat scratches) THANKS for your help! No, I had not figured out how he did it - just that he created yet another sock and went at it again. I am at a loss as to why he hates me so badly. I truly never did anything except argue with him, and I did point out that if you pretend to be 1,000 other people, folks find it hard to take you seriously. (and of course no one does take him seriously except as a huge waste of time!) Oh well, thanks for the help! No one likes to be mocked for their disabilities, for instance, and he is quite good at that. I find his comments puzzling, on the one hand, he claims I "stole" his article on Bonnie and Clyde, and then immediately after, blames me for rewriting it, and ruining it! Yet he cannot see that doing both is impossible, and actually, I did neither. I, and a group of other people, rewrote the article to reflect the best history available, as to the limited role Bonnie really had. (the fact no jurisdiction had a single warrant on her for a capital offense!) ANYWAY, have a nice day, and thanks! old windy bear 12:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

(cat scratches) Just wanted to say thanks again. You have to get tired of vandals. I am at a loss to understand people whose sole purpose in life appears to be either attacking someone else, or attacking this project, which, I honestly believe, has the potential to be the greatest repository of human knowledge in the history of man. Anyway, back to bed! Health woes recently, have to rest. Take care! old windy bear 02:08, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Pig's newest sock

(cat scratches) Greetings! Just wanted to let you know Pig's latest sock. (User:Shawlfurt)Another editor blocked, but I thought you might want it for the record. he certainly is both vindictive and determined - too bad he cannot channel it towards anything positive!old windy bear 18:48, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Leysau returning as possible sock while blocked

Hi, it seems Leysau is back under sock puppets, "86.143.127.4" and now 86.143.125.242 reverting both the articles that were involved in a dispute under a new IP to last version by you guessed it leysau, removing reliable sources, and disrupting another articles which has been rework by in one case by two other regular editors and myself.

Articles include Gothic Metal, Moi Dix Mois, from yesterday... and Heavy metal music (the article myself and two other users have tried to rework).

It was previously reported by another user here but nothing seems to be getting done about it.

thanks. - Deathrocker 19:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Gibraltarian is back - Please help !!

It seems our old friend Gibraltarian is back. This time avoiding setting up any sockpuppet, under the IP address 212.120.226.60. He just reverted this article and tried to erase any mention of his permanent block from his former user page. Any friendly administrator willing to take care of him before this escalates once again? Thanks, Asterion 22:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Deathrocker commiting serial offences within 12 hours of being unblocked

I logged all of Deathrock's offences on a page from my user page, so only myself and Admins can edit it. The link is here, . I urge yew to look into this matter immediatly. 86.143.126.55 21:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Pig Again on Bonnie and Clyde

User:Woohookitty Greetings! Hey Buddy, another sock of Pig, User:KleepGlub put up more of his vandalism, and signed my name to it, so can you block this sock too? Thanks! I took the section off, since he signed it under my name, but the history shows this is yet another Pig sock. Take care! old windy bear 11:14, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Woohookitty Greetings! Thanks Buddy, have a good day!old windy bear 11:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Inquiry

Hi Woohookitty, I have a question, is this considered vandalism? Also, you might want to give a warning to this IP address user, since he may be a chronic policy violator. ThanksZmmz 06:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

One last question on vandalism; is this also considered vandalism, since the section comes with a reference, i.e., Columbia Encyclopedia, and since the user in question knows about the reference, but refuses to accept it? ThanksZmmz 06:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Woohookitty, I`m reporting this guy for vandalism, he was warned a couple of times about this revertion. Where should I report him? ThanksZmmz 21:13, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Woohookitty, despite my good intentioned warnings, the user did it again . ThanksZmmz 23:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

My Username

Hi. In June last year my username User:Jebus Christ was blocked. I discovered recently that the admin responsible User:Secretlondon was involved in protecting the article relating to the profet mahommed images under the banner of freedom of speach. I personally find this hypocritical.

I've started a petition to get my username back. If you support this can you please sign my petition on my talk page User talk:Jebus Christ.

Thanks Jimididit 12:04, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Leyasu

Since you are an administrator, and have not only intervened in incidents involving User:Leyasu, but also imposed temp blocks on him for violating 1-revert violations (after his first ArbCom case), I feel I should bring this to your attention.

User:Leyasu is currently on Misplaced Pages:Probation and also personal attack parole and eligible for temp blocks if he violates it (per the ArbCom ruling); he called (and has been calling) various edits "vandalism" which are not actually vandalism, even after he was told by administrators that saying such is a violation of Misplaced Pages policies and counts as a personal attack.

He called one of my edits "disguised vandalism" As you will see from the edit, it wasn't vandalism or a bad faith edit at all; he has been changing the genres of various bands to a term of his liking, a term which is misleading and not even a separate genre to begin with ("Gothic doom"). With him and I, this all started from the Gothic metal article around 11/05 (as you will see from the revision history, he has completely claimed ownership of this article, reverting out virtually any edit not his.)

What else could be done about him? Trying to work things out peacefully is ancient history, as he doesn't provide any sources for his edits and doesn't engage in civil discussion.

His Misplaced Pages:Probation ruling also mentioned that an admin has the right to ban him from any article for reasonable cause. I think the Gothic metal page would be a good start. I would appreciate your feedback and response. My message on the Administrator's noticeboard was overlooked. --Danteferno 23:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I surely hope something is done about him very soon. These blocks don't seem to be changing his behavior pattern and it seems he now has a new ArbCase with similar issues to the first one.

All the stuff he said below is untrue. In his first ArbCase he was given Misplaced Pages:Probation, revert parole and personal attack attack parole; the Arbs only gave my name revert parole. Also, they concluded that it was him who failed to provide any sources for his edits, not I; Talk:Gothic metal (and several other articles) shows myself and others asking him numerous times to provide sources for his edits and making critiques of a lot of questionable information he boldly added to the article;he has rejected feedback and claimed complete ownership of the page. His claim that I was banned from the page is a complete lie.

So where do we go from here? This is far past the point of just being out of hand. --Danteferno 18:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Danteferno

Id just like to point out that the incidents in which Danteferno was referring to also put him on the same Arbcom rulings, and he was also banned more times than I for attempting to POV push on articles. He was also warned by several admins and also deleted all warnings by Admins in the same manner as User:Deathrocker. The user also tried to violate WP:CITE and was banned for it, and has ignored sources and been warned by the arb com for claiming ownership of articles and pursuing vendetta's against users.

Basically, most everything he says cuts out things that happened which he doesnt want you to know about. Suggestion, read up on users Woohoo, as Dante is on stricter warnings than i am, and on the same Parole as me. Ley Shade 03:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh i forgot to mention this, Danteferno was barred from the Gothic Metal article by Arbcom. Its ironic how he also missed the 30+ sources, and the 6 different admins, the consensus that was reached 3 times, and the four RFC's that all told him he wasnt allowed to change the Gothic Metal article to suit only his POV, dnying a rewrite by Danteferno. Again, please understand that this user is trying to bar me from the Gothic Metal article because his war of attrition didnt work. I suggest reading the Gothic Metal talk archives for evidence of this. Ley Shade 03:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair cop, and i didnt mean to imply that. However, Danteferno tried to claim that Gothic-Doom and Gothic Metal where the same things, even though 30+ sources, 4 RFC's and 6 Admins in total reached consensus 3 times that they were different things. It seems a lot alike he is simply trying to attack again a long forgotten war. Im part of the WikiProject Metal which isnt any secret. Danteferno's been changing the genres of bands to Gothic Metal on bands he has openly claimed he likes, and wants to group together.

Basically, banning one of us from the article should require both to be banned. And if i was against anyone editing the article, the only reverts wouldnt be for those that blank the page, advertise bands/websites, inser vulgar or glorifying comments, or otherwise disrupt the article. As there is plenty of people who correct spelling and gramma in many articles ive worked on. Ley Shade 03:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Danteferno claims i never provided sources when User:Parasti and admins User:Idonthaveaname and User:Spearhead concluded that i did. Danteferno also was warned by admin Spearhead for Meglomanical Behaviour, which Dante deleted from his talk page.

Danteferno is, as known, a problem user as concluded by several admins, all of which have still got their messages on my talk page. He is also suspected to be a copy of User:Deathrocker, as when one dissapears the other appears, to attack and discredit me on 'exactly' the same articles. Ley Shade 21:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Leyasu continually violating ArbCom revert parole, personal attack parole

Thw ArbCom ruling stated User:Leyasu is limited to one revert per page per day, he reverted the Nu metal page twice today ,. In the second edit he once again engaged in personal attacks by calling my edit "vandalism" which obviously was not vandalism, and he has been warned about this several times. He also reverted out and called another user's good faith edit "...made up garbage" Both violations are subject to blocks per the Arbitrators. FYI (!!!!) Thank you. --Danteferno 22:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)