Revision as of 21:55, 3 January 2012 editBouket (talk | contribs)374 edits →editing talk page comments← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:01, 3 January 2012 edit undoToddst1 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors137,716 edits →editing talk page comments: rNext edit → | ||
Line 261: | Line 261: | ||
:Such changes are generally discouraged, for reasons given at the talk-page guidelines; . ] (]) 21:48, 3 January 2012 (UTC) | :Such changes are generally discouraged, for reasons given at the talk-page guidelines; . ] (]) 21:48, 3 January 2012 (UTC) | ||
::It depends. If you're talking about making a change that clarifies things, it's not an issue, for example, changing ] to ] shouldn't be a big deal. ] <small>(])</small> 22:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
:: thank you very much. does it matter if its an admin who did it? ] (]) 21:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC) | :: thank you very much. does it matter if its an admin who did it? ] (]) 21:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC) | ||
:::No. It doesn't matter. ] <small>(])</small> 22:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:01, 3 January 2012
Help:ContentsArchives
Previous requests & responses | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||
Other links | ||||||||
Adult film - removed incorrect info about stds martin amis misquote
Answered – Danger 16:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)Chloe Nicholle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
My name is chloe nicholle, and there are some slanderous and false statements made about me under the Chloe Nicholle search findings. I have tried to remove them, but they keep coming back up. One dangerous piece of info is the california license plate number and the make and model of the car i drive being available to all who see it. I have two previous stalker issues arising from this post. Also, the false information about std's, which is a misquote of an interview i did with martin amis in early 2000. I do not have herpes, did not contract that virus from co-workers in my industry, nor believe everyone has the herpes virus. The info reproduced here and posted is a grossly taken out of context misquote, and is slanderous and unjust, not to mention hurtful and misleading. I am hoping someone will respond to this email to tell me how i can take this information off the wikipedia page that bears my name. Please let me know how to fix this false info. Please. Chloe nicholle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.47.97.211 (talk) 01:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- Well, yeah, that license-plate thing is beyond wrong. Besides that, no-one seems to have put the herpes story back either, it's still gone. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 01:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- If you feel that you are the subject of a libellous or untrue statement in a Misplaced Pages biography about you, please go to Misplaced Pages:Libel and follow the instructions there. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- I have temporarily protected the page from editing by anonymous and new users. Changes to the article must be requested on the article talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:00, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- In general, any independent editor is allowed to remove any unsourced statement from a biography at the request of the subject of the biography without going through any formal process, which seems to be the case here. It's only if the alleged false statement is cited from an external source that a more complicated process via WP:Libel is needed. Deryck C. 18:28, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
The Save The Children Fund Film
Answered – Danger 16:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)I believe that "The Save The Children Film Fund" is important to the integrity of our world. In 1971, this organization attempted to remove the documentary from our hands. It was released in 2011 by BFI and is now being "removed" from Misplaced Pages every time I try to add it. This is obviously a marketing tactic by Save the Children and has no place on this website. Please consider my edits as they are important to the integrity of information abroad. In order to create transparency, a "controversies" section of Save the Children's page must be allowed.
Sincerely, TWillisJr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twillisjr (talk • contribs) 16:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC) — Twillisjr (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Material making controversial claims such as this must be supported by information from neutral, reliable sources. Instead, your only "source" has been an IMDb listing. The IMDb, while it has its uses, is not considered a reliable source. If this information is true, you must back it up with references to press articles, articles in books, and the like; not to claims made by the makers of the film.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangemike (talk • contribs)
I am doing my best to locate sources and create a better page/article. This is why I have so far: http://en.wikipedia.org/The_Save_the_Children_Fund_Film_%281971%29
The information I've accumulated is supported by Guardian.co.uk articles. Perhaps I can be assisted? I apologize in advance for my lack of know-how.
-TWillisJr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twillisjr (talk • contribs) 17:49, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- Suggest that you start by readiing the links that have been placed on your talk page. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:13, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Save the Children Controversies and Scandals
I will try to make this as concise as possible:
- I researched controversies and scandals pertaining to Save the Children
- Valid sources can be easily found to support the information provided in the article
- OrangeMike (administrator) assisted in the clarification of the information submitted
- Information was removed on the basis that 3 pieces of information pertained to their subsidiary (RBreen)
- Article sections were edited with "subsidiary title in beginning of section"
- Removed a 2nd time (RBreen) using the same argument
Question: Should this research be removed from Misplaced Pages on this basis? The quantity of subsidiaries is significant, USA, SWEDEN, ... , ..., and I thought it should remain where it is. Also, wouldn't a creation of a "Save the Children USA" page require this main page to be renamed to "Save the Children UK?"
-TWillisJr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twillisjr (talk • contribs) 04:20, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
- This is an ideal situation for a discussion on the article talk page which hasn't been touched for months. I see you have left a message on RBreen's talk page, but rather than start a conversation there, perhaps you should both discuss this openly on the article talk page where other contributors can add their comments. And please remember to sign your posts everywhere, and please post new messages at the bottom of all talk pages, otherwise they are all likely to be ignored. See WP:TPG for help on talk page use. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:16, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Glenn Beck#2011 Norway attacks
Answered – Danger 16:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)I am concerned that as an orginization that wants its readers to consider its content factual some of its content can be seen as bias and opinion based. Point in fact ; the segment titled: 2011 Norway Attacks in the article about Glenn Beck. Most of the article I believe was fact based but I detected a hint of bias against Mr. Beck and his views. Some editing should be done to remove said bias. Are the articles not read before they are posted ? I would not like to think that this is nothing more than a "Blog sight". T Hardesty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.243.121 (talk) 19:30, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
- This should probably be dealt with at Talk:Glenn Beck. You can discuss your proposed changes to the article there, and if other people have suggestions or comments they should be taken into consideration. The Glenn Beck article is currently semi-protected which means that it can be edited only by logged-in users, and they must have been registered for at least four days and made at least 10 edits before. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:46, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
- See Talk:Glenn_Beck/Archive_16#Comments_by_Glenn_Beck_about_the_Utoya_Island_massacre_in_Norway - this question was discussed, and sources noting the controversy over what Beck said were cited. The conclusion arrived at was that it was appropriate to refer to the matter. Beck said something offensive, which he and his supporters no doubt regret, but this regret is no justification for ignoring the issue. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:02, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Request to create a Misplaced Pages biography for Late Maulana Tahir Husain Jarwali, renowned Shia Scholar
Answered – Danger 16:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)Can you please create a Misplaced Pages Page for Late Maulana Tahir Husain Jarwali, renowned shia scholar, there is a page for his close friend Maulana Mirza Mohammad Athar but not for his late friend as he was and is one of the famous scholar of his time and till now he is remembered and missed by all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.97.21.246 (talk) 14:28, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- A better place to ask for this would be, Misplaced Pages:Requested articles. You can also create the article yourself at Misplaced Pages:Articles for creation. The second one is probably the quicker option. GB fan 14:54, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
identical names/different authors
Answered – Danger 16:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)i want to post a bio of recently deceased african=american author henry van dyke. you already have a henry van dyke, an entirely different white author. can i/how do i do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fieldinski (talk • contribs) 22:19, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- The existing Henry van Dyke and your subject are both American writers so the article name is tricky. Per WP:QUALIFIER I would call the new article Henry Van Dyke (writer born 1928), and place hatnotes on both articles linking to the other. If you create the article and want help with the hatnotes then post again. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:19, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
- Looking at Steve Smith (wide receiver, born 1979), it would be "writer, born 1928". Buggie111 (talk) 01:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
- None of the guideline examples at WP:QUALIFIER have a comma. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:19, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
- Looking at Steve Smith (wide receiver, born 1979), it would be "writer, born 1928". Buggie111 (talk) 01:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Cipriano Reyes (Spanish/English Results)
Answered – Danger 16:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)I've noticed the search results for Cipriano Reyes is not available.. yet when I search it on a search engine, a Misplaced Pages page comes up in a different language (Spanish). Is this a glitch of some kind?
-TWillisJr Twillisjr (talk) 17:30, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
- No it's not a glitch, it's intentional. On the English Misplaced Pages you can only search for articles written in the English language. In this case, the article does not have an English edition, so it doesn't come up in the search results. For articles written in Spanish, you need to search the Spanish Misplaced Pages. Of course, you're always welcome to create an article on the English Misplaced Pages by translating the Spanish article into English! Deryck C. 18:20, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
- Just to clarify the difference further, the English Misplaced Pages is at http://en.wikipedia.org while the Spanish Misplaced Pages is at http://es.wikipedia.org. There are more than 200 language editions and Misplaced Pages's own search function can only search the language you are currently at. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:23, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Band of Brothers
Answered – Danger 16:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)Hello
I am trying to find out the name of the music that is being played in the movie, BAND OF BROTHERS, can you please help me out,
Thank You
Roy C. Carruth
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.217.176.198 (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
- A google search threw up this page with a track listing of the Soundtrack CD. If that's not enough then I suggest you ask this question at the Entertainment reference desk, where it will be seen by some movie experts. (I have removed your email address to protect your privacy) -- John of Reading (talk) 22:07, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Page keeps being reverted
Hello and thank you for your assistance.
Clearly I am making a mistake on the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/South_Carolina_Department_of_Natural_Resources
All the images have been cleared for use.
Yes, there are a lot of phone numbers and links to outside pages (all public domain government websites), but as a government agency we want to get information to folks looking for it.
This page has been repeatedly reverted to the intial page someone created. The initial page is chock full of incorrect info.
Any help on this matter would greatly be appreciated.
Scdnr (talk) 18:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- I've removed it yet again. None of this content is appropriate for an encyclopedia, it belongs on your website. Misplaced Pages is not a directory, we do not have lists of telephone numbers and webpages. Since you are obviously connected to the SC DNR, I suggest you read our conflict of interest guidelines--Jac16888 19:06, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Need text that I used for article
Need my text description for the article titled Enchanted Fairytale Parties and Enchanted Fairytale Parties LLC. Both were created 12/27/11 and were deleted speedy deletion. How can I get access to the text? 04:54, 30 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.228.234.137 (talk)
- Short answer is: you can't. You are not the creator of the article, and if you were, (User:Enchantedfp) as a blocked user, you might find your IP address also being shortly blocked for block evasion. If Enchantedfp wishes to continue editing, they should please consider making an unblock request per the instructions at User talk:Enchantedfp. FYI, both articles were deleted as blatant advertising - I have reviewed the deleted material and the deletions and the subsequent user block were procedurally correct. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:08, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
List of books in a series versus separate articles for each one
I have a question that I've posted regarding Walt Disney's Fun-to-Read Library. I've posted the question in its talk page. Basically, I'm torn between providing separate articles for each book in the series, or whether a Template:Book list is sufficient. Any advice? -- φ OnePt618 φ 19:49, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
- THe individual books clearly lack any notability, they fail WP:NBOOK. It is likely that that appklies to the series as well. I see nothing in the list to assert any sort of notability. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:10, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
False accusation
User talk:76.204.148.47 Jump to: navigation, search January 2009 Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Raphael Lemkin, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. FaceVC3 (talk) 22:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC) The recent edit you made to Raphael Lemkin constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Catgut (talk) 22:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC) ________________________________________ I just started receiving a message above Misplaced Pages articles that I consult. This message is dated January 2009. It states that this writer (self or husband) posted an edit which constituted vandalism. I looked up the subject in question and found that part (or all) of the edit included the use of the word "f*cking". Neither of us use this type of language, nor have we posted any edits to any of your articles. It disturbs me to wonder where this information came from, and whether something worse may occur in the future. By the way, my husband recently made a donation to your fund drive. Could there be a connection? Also, no one else ever has access to our computers, and we don't use AOL. I have the impression that anyone could hit me with this sort of accusation, perhaps someone who doesn't like me in my personal life? Sorry I don't have hours right now to go through all the relevant material. Further, I can't engage in a dispute with some unknown person! I think we deserve an explanation for this case of mistaken identity. Our reputations are valuable, and we don't appreciate being accused of this kind of behavior! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.204.148.47 (talk) 22:41, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
- The edit in question was indeed made by your IP in 2009, but as you say, it probably wasn't done by you, so don't worry about it. If you have only just received the notification (I admit I don't really know how IP message notification works) then you may have just been the first people to use that IP since then. You should keep in mind that IP addresses don't usually belong to users but the ISPs they use or the institutions they access the internet from. It's likely you're on a dynamic IP internet connection so you are reassigned addresses. It's just in this case the IP had previously been used for vandalism - that message was meant for them rather than you. Яehevkor ✉ 22:58, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
- Additionally, the best way to avoid messages like this is the future is to create an account, even if you don't plan to edit. When you're signed on, you won't receive messages intended for other people who have used your IP address. Danger 23:20, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Is this what editors are supposed to say about new users?
List begins BELOW this line -->
- Donnabalancia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - Troll --—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:57, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
I began the conversation by sending a nice, random note to an intelligent person. As you can see via the history, I said "You have an interesting background and I am learning patience from you." My daughter is interested in science and I saw the impressive credentials of this editor.
The immediate retort was to speedily delete request all my pages. Weird!!
I am thoroughly depressed and will not use Misplaced Pages again. It was a terrible experience and I am very sad about this person.
Goodbye— Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnabalancia (talk • contribs) 07:59, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Donnabalancia has been a member of this site since mid 2008. She is most definitely not a "new user". She came unannounced to my talk page with this cryptic message and then for some odd reason gave me a New Years message. When I investigated her edits, I discovered that she created several articles that are not worthy for inclusion on this project, and I went out and took care of them as I see fit.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- {E/c}I could be mistaken, but I believe this is exactly the kind of case I was referring to on Jimbo's talk page earlier this evening. (See my three comments there.) It seems to be a very inexperienced user who three times in the past wrote what we consider spam but she considers worthy business articles. No one caught those other articles so she had no way of knowing they weren't acceptable. Check out her contribs. Now she does it again in good faith and--SNAP!--Bite the newbie! She is obviously who she says she is. Why not cut her some slack, explain the rules, and reread her posts as being from an ingenuous, well-intentioned newbie. Yopienso (talk) 08:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Please read my previous posting. sorry about no signature and I am not a "troll" as called by Rylong -- I am someone who is going to disconnect from Misplaced Pages permanently. Thanks
I was just trying to be a nice friendly person on the last day of the year. While I have been a Misplaced Pages person for a while, I have not been exposed to true editing and issues like these ever before. I am appalled by this. My "cryptic" message was an attempt to be friendly to another Florida person. I was just outreaching for friendship. Will go elsewhere, it was a dumb idea to make friends with anyone here!
Donnabalancia (talk) 08:09, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, Editor Yopienso, I appreciate that you understood I was coming from a good place. I did not know I was supposed to receive some kind of invite to a person's talk page to post a greeting or a friendly comment. That is probably what started all of this. Then when I did post something nice, the speedy deletion requests really confused me. I thought I was actually fine with the articles that had been up for so long without any action. It is not the reaction I expected as we enter a happy and healthy new year. I am very sad about this and particularly about being referenced as someone who lives under a bridge...(?) I see that on my welcome page there are notes that were added a little while ago on how to proceed on a how to post an article. I will not be contributing again. But thanks for this:
{E/c}I could be mistaken, but I believe this is exactly the kind of case I was referring to on Jimbo's talk page earlier this evening. (See my three comments there.) It seems to be a very inexperienced user who three times in the past wrote what we consider spam but she considers worthy business articles. No one caught those other articles so she had no way of knowing they weren't acceptable. Check out her contribs. Now she does it again in good faith and--SNAP!--Bite the newbie! She is obviously who she says she is. Why not cut her some slack, explain the rules, and reread her posts as being from an ingenuous, well-intentioned newbie. Yopienso (talk) 08:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnabalancia (talk • contribs)
- You're welcome, and please hang around! Friendly editors have helped me through many misunderstandings; they will help you, too. I've taken the liberty of backspacing your quote to get rid of that box, and of downsizing the font since the message is posted just above. Happy New Year! Yopienso (talk) 08:54, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- I ignored the questionable actions of a strange user who doesn't know anything about the site, and discovered two crappy articles and one she blanked herself that wasn't very good to begin with. I don't care what happens to her, because she is violating one of our core policies by writing about things she is directly involved with.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:15, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- And as far as I am aware this is not something that is relevant to this board. And I am sorry if I was suspicious of this person, because frankly I've pissed off some number of people offsite and god only knows who this one person might be who came out of nowhere to my talk page.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:17, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Bed tax requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Misplaced Pages:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. —Ryulong (竜龙) 09:33, 31 December 2011 (UTC) Listen to me. Stop making pages. You do not know our internal rules and the more you break them the more I lose my patience in dealing with you.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnabalancia (talk • contribs)
MEAN PERSON VERY MEAN
Please delete all my pages. I don't want to be involved at all — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnabalancia (talk • contribs) 09:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- Stop making new sections every time you want to complain about me. You are acting wrong, and I am trying to fix things.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. —Ryulong (竜龙) 07:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC) You have added this information only after I asked for an editor's intervention. I do not appreciate what you called me.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnabalancia (talk • contribs) I'm not here to hold your hand. These articles are not appropriate for Misplaced Pages.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnabalancia (talk • contribs)
- Stop that.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:59, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not even going to waste my time investigating this. Donna and Ryulong either sort out your differences on your talk pages with some seasonal goodwill, one of you read the policies, and the other don't bite noobs, OK? Or go to the WP:DR forum, but not here. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- It need not be investigated, and she is not a newb. She's just simply someone who's been here for 3 years and has no idea how anything is supposed to work, particularly this page when she made 4 different topics on this one incident that she has totally blown out of proportion.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- The length of tenure since first registration is of no consequence, a user with only 69 edits is still a newcomer, and does not have the same experience as someone with 161,754 edits and a long block log. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:13, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- What the hell does my block log have to do with this mess?—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:33, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- The length of tenure since first registration is of no consequence, a user with only 69 edits is still a newcomer, and does not have the same experience as someone with 161,754 edits and a long block log. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:13, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- It need not be investigated, and she is not a newb. She's just simply someone who's been here for 3 years and has no idea how anything is supposed to work, particularly this page when she made 4 different topics on this one incident that she has totally blown out of proportion.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not even going to waste my time investigating this. Donna and Ryulong either sort out your differences on your talk pages with some seasonal goodwill, one of you read the policies, and the other don't bite noobs, OK? Or go to the WP:DR forum, but not here. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Need help on how to list London Southend Airport as destination in airport articles
I am having trouble if any experienced editor with airports, airlines, and aviation on how to list London Southend Airport as a destination in airport articles. The dispute is whether or not Southend Airport is considered a London airport (i.e. Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, Heathrow, and City Airport) eventhough most of these airports are about 30 or 40 miles away from London itself and located in the suburbs....also a couple of IPs are listing it as Southend-on-the-Sea (which I believe is part of London). I have started a discussion Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airports#London_Southend_Airport but only 2 editors replied. Thanks! Snoozlepet (talk) 21:20, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- There's not much we can do here at EAR to resolve any such dispute. You have already started discussions in the two most logical places and I fear that you'll just have to wait for more participation. WP:Airports is a fairly active project, but you could consider also leaving a message at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Aviation and with one or two of its more active members . Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:36, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Biased Misplaced Pages User
Aziz Shavershian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am trying to edit the article Aziz Shavershian in a manner that is objective and more fitting for an encyclopedia article, rather than the current fan boy-ish, one-sided article that it is.
There is a lot of evidence that suggests that Aziz abused steroids, which I feel is necessary to note, given that the main reason people idolized him was because he looked so muscular. However, the page keeps getting reverted by user:MelbourneStar, back to a previous, highly subjective edit.
I am not saying whether he did or didn't do steroids. I'm only saying that there is evidence that suggested it, which user:MelbourneStar vehemently refuses to admit.
I request that a block be placed on MelbourneStar for this article.
- Can an editor please take a look at the complaintants edits on the article, see how they are worded. Esp. The death section, which has leade to my revert(s). Also, please take a look at the user's talk page, prior latest blanking. P.S., I'm off, will discuss tommorow morning. Thank you, -- MST☆R 15:54, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages has policies in place to protect living and recently deceased people from improperly sourced negative claims. MelbourneStar is acting to enforce those policies. The material you have added is partly improperly sourced. Zzyzzcentral.com is not a reliable source for Misplaced Pages's purposes because it does not have editorial oversight. The fact that it appears in the article already is not an argument for its reliability. Also, you should not add your own commentary and analysis to articles, like "there is a multitude of evidence that suggests..." and similar.
- Please remember to sign your posts using four tildes (~~~~). Danger 16:16, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
- Zoolon, making threats such as you did with If you continue arguing with the facts I will have you banned. My roomate is an administrator on Misplaced Pages is not the way we do things here. I strongly suggest that you read up on some our policies here before continuing to edit the encyclopedia, and if you don't understand them - ask your 'room mate'. Here's a start: WP:CIVIL, and WP:BOOMERANG. Happy new year to you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:11, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Periyar_(river) origin dispute.
Hi, Periyar_(river) origin dispute. The reference's are being removed continuously without valid reasons, Also people fail to discuss the edit's in most cases. Please assist me on how to resolve this. I have earlier applied for the article protection but have failed to achieve one. Thanks. Pearll's Sun 09:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
deletion of <unknown>-2012-01-02T09:57:00.000Z">
Hi,
Since I don't know where else to ask this, I'll just do it here. On my Watchlist, the following entry appeared: "(Deletion log); 01:53 . . (Username or IP removed) (log action removed) (edit summary removed)". Note that my timezone settings are CET. I was wondering... what can be *so* secret that we can't even know which admin performed this deletion or what log entry was given? Or which page it was all about? (which was on my watchlist, so it can't have been thát bad...) Any help in shedding light on this issue would be appreciated. effeietsanders 09:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)"> ">
- Very sorry, really can't help you there - not enough to go on. I'll do one qiuck check and let you now what I find that might help you locate it so you know what the article was, but it must have been pretty bad to have been revdel'd and oversighted. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- No, sorry, I can't even find anything in your deleted pages that correlates. You'll just have to forget about it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, that is exactly why I worry about it - and why it shouldn't happen this way :P Maybe in the deletion log, at 00:53 UTC ? You can find it on this page between "Yamamoto Ichiro (talk | contribs) (log action removed) (test)" and "Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Floydian/Archive 1" (U1: User request to delete page in own userspace: G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup)". effeietsanders 10:56, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- If you can't find it there, neither can I. If it's been oversighted even I can't see it. If it's not a page you created, I shouldn't worry about it. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, that is exactly why I worry about it - and why it shouldn't happen this way :P Maybe in the deletion log, at 00:53 UTC ? You can find it on this page between "Yamamoto Ichiro (talk | contribs) (log action removed) (test)" and "Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Floydian/Archive 1" (U1: User request to delete page in own userspace: G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup)". effeietsanders 10:56, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
New editor needs WP:COI and WP:RS explanations
I have been explaining these policies regarding my recent reverts (see second one re: WP:Coi and WP:RS problems here) of User talk:Marc R M Gauvin's material at his talk page. I tell him to read the policies but I don't think he has. He just keeps disagreeing with me. I think he needs to hear it from another editor so it doesn't seem like I'm just some ill informed person biting a newbie. CarolMooreDC 16:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- It looks as if an editor has already chimed in on the lines you suggested. I don't think there's any need to escalate right now, but if the issue persists, the best venue would be WP:DR. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Change to article title
The article Strath-Taieri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) should be changed to Strath Taieri, i.e. no hyphen. I have removed the hyphens in the actual article. There has never been a hyphen in this place name. Aemiddlemarch (talk) 23:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- This is a matter to be discussed among the contributors to the article (and anyone else who drops by) at Talk:Strath-Taieri. Please start your discussion on that page, and if there is little reposnse after a while, you may wish to consider making a neutrally worded invitation to the other contributors on their talk pages to take part in the discussion. You can find out who they are here --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:49, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Six Million Crucifixions references
Quite a few months back Misplaced Pages editor Mike Rosoft left a comment on the Six Million Crucifixions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) page regarding references to sources affiliated with the subject, rather than references from independent authors and third-party publications. I made a couple of attempts to contact him both on the article's Talk page and his own Talk page, to no avail.
The question is, what if some of the third party remarks in the article were written directly to the author by all those scholars in the field of the book, none of whom are affiliated with the author? They are very relevant, very significant and independent, but they were never published in an independent publication. It seems to me those are valid references. Thanks! Esautomatix (talk) 01:20, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- This is a matter to be discussed among the contributors to the article (and anyone else who drops by) at Talk:Six Million Crucifixions. As there has been no reponse as yet, you may wish to consider making a neutrally worded invitation to the other contributors on their talk pages to take part in the discussion. You can find out who they are here where there are also direct links to their talk pages. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
editing talk page comments
hi if someone posts onto a talk page and then someone else says something, on there or somewhere else, and then the first person goes back and changes what they originally said, is that against policy or is it neutral or is it encouraged? thanks. Bouket (talk) 21:39, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Such changes are generally discouraged, for reasons given at the talk-page guidelines; here's a link. Haploidavey (talk) 21:48, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- It depends. If you're talking about making a change that clarifies things, it's not an issue, for example, changing User_talk:Aditya_Kabir to User_talk:Aditya_Kabir#December_2011 shouldn't be a big deal. Toddst1 (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- thank you very much. does it matter if its an admin who did it? Bouket (talk) 21:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- No. It doesn't matter. Toddst1 (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)