Revision as of 05:24, 4 August 2012

Archives

/Archive 1

Welcome!

Your submission at Articles for creation

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Misplaced Pages. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Misplaced Pages!

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Focus on the Family". Thank you. --Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 03:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Tasitolu

Hello Belchfire! When was Tasitolu changed to a national park? Do you have a source? AFAIK there are still only plans to create a national park, although they build aluxury hotel there. Greetings, --J. Patrick Fischer (talk) 08:39, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

See the DYK nom, its a new article not a 5 times expansion article.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK Tacoma Speedway

Edit Waring

Please do not edit out what over dozens of referances show. You are trying to injet your POV in Viloation of Misplaced Pages standards. I also see you have been editing without even going to TALK, another basic standard of Misplaced Pages. 216.81.94.68 (talk) 11:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

You are ignoring consensus and... projecting your own nonsense onto others. Your edits aren't likely to survive the day, so I hope they make you feel good about yourself while they last. Cheers. Belchfire (talk) 11:40, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

And where is this consensus? If you had even looked in the Talk section you would have seen the only references are supportive of the anti-gay title. You have not posted even once in TALK and provided no references. I have asked a Admin to look into this as you are not editing in Good Faith and have not even posted in talk, let alone added any good references. 216.81.94.68 (talk) 11:46, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

While I have no strong personal opinion about the above user's changes to the article, you were very close to a 3RR violation by some's standards. Please try to keep this in mind and ask for another editor to review if you're unsure about a second or third reversion. Best, Blurpeace 14:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

To give you additional caution, I will add that a user who has had prior blocks for edit warring should have gotten the message already, and will no longer get three free swings at the bat. In other words, you don't need to exceed three reverts to be blocked for edit warring. So please take care. While WP:BRD is neither an official policy or guideline, the long-timers and admins on Misplaced Pages generally adhere to it as if it were policy, so please read it over and do your best. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks all the same, but I'll take the 48-hour block that was put on the IP user as a more concrete indication of how admins viewed this situation. I think I made it pretty clear to anybody watching that I was washing my hands of the situation. Belchfire (talk) 18:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For Defending wikipedia from bias on the Chick-fil-A page Algonquin7 (talk) 00:50, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Focus on specifics?

It looks like your recent work at the FOTF article has been good! FYI: your last edit at the Talk page here could be perceived as a bit snarky. You might want to replace it with some positively-worded, constructive thoughts on specific wordings etc. The other editors seem to be taking a better attitude, and we should all do what we can to help that momentum keep going. --Noleander (talk) 04:59, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Point taken. Belchfire (talk) 05:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Chickfila, Winshape". Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.81.94.73 (talk) 11:33, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Equality Matters

Sorry if I'm being a bit obtuse, but I'm rather at a loss at what you're requesting with this edit in Chick-fil-A. Equality Matters is already wikilinked for those who don't know about that organisation. So what needs 'elucidation'? Alfietucker (talk) 16:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm looking for an explanatory phrase that helps the reader understand more about EM - who they are and their motivations. The narrative should stand on its own and it shouldn't be necessary to follow the wikilink unless a reader wants more in-depth knowledge. I would have added something myself, but you're doing a fine job on the article so I thought it better to make the suggestion and let you proceed on your own. Belchfire (talk) 16:16, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Fine - though I suspect some elucidation might equally be needed for those organisations listed by EM, with appropriate citations as per WP:REF. Alfietucker (talk) 16:23, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

I concur. It doesn't have to be long or involved, just an aside will do. I'm just pointing out that the story should make sense to somebody with no prior knowledge, and since I'd never heard of EM before a couple of days ago, that part jumped out at me as something that needs attention. Belchfire (talk) 16:27, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Much as I dislike your politics...

I have to agree that you're generally working for the good of the encyclopedia. However, this diff is not even close to qualifying. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Sarek. I respect your opinion as a veteran Wikipedian, even if I do strongly disagree. That heading is robustly supported by the contents of the article section, and strongly supported by the sources used in that section, as well. If you are unable to see that for yourself, I'm can only conclude it is your own politics that is clouding your judgment. Belchfire (talk) 19:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Advice Requested

Hi Algonquin here sombody named Aethersniper started an SPI investigation into me saying I'm Mantion I have not been editing wikipedia that long and the charges are horsefeathers should I be worried and is there anything I should do since I have never had to deal with this before here is a link to the SPI

Algonquin7 (talk) 19:20, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know that much about SPIs here on Misplaced Pages, but if you aren't guilty I'd say you don't have too much to be concerned about. Belchfire (talk) 19:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Great news the two administrators who have commented have said a Checkuser is not even necessary, thanks for answering my question by the way. Already I can see being an editor who is willing to call out liberal bias on wikipedia is going to be a chore, keep up the good fight Belchfire I would say if William F. Buckeley was alive today he would probably let your write at the National Review as for me I would be lucky if he even let me sweep up the place, your fan Algonquin7 (talk) 20:20, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah sheez, don't lay it on thick or anything.  :-) Yeah, it is a chore, but the truth is important. Keep in mind what some famous dude once said: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Or something like that. Belchfire (talk) 20:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Meanwhile, in other news... all 3 IPs (so far) belonging to our angry friend at the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security have been blocked for 72 hours. Now maybe the rest of us can get something done. Dontcha feel better knowing that guys like that are keeping us safe from terrorists? Belchfire (talk) 20:28, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Another fan here. That officially makes it a club, <grin>. That famous dude who the quote is attributed to is Edmund Burke, most notable for being the patron of WP:WikiProject Conservatism. To a much lesser extent, he is also known as the father of conservatism. – Lionel 23:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Please see Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Talk:Focus on the Family#Recreational drugs. Thank you. 72Dino (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Please trim your opening statement at DRN to less than 2000 characters - it helps volunteers review the situation in a more timely manner - thanks :-) Steven Zhang 20:18, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll have that done for you directly. Belchfire-TALK 20:35, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, done. Sorry, I know it's long, but I believe context is important. It is now:

• Prose size (text only): 1968 B (312 words) "readable prose size"

Hopefully that works better for you. Belchfire-TALK 21:03, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Great, thanks - I've also moved your comment from the discussion section to the opening statement bit - the discussion section is used once the thread is opened. Regards, Steven Zhang 21:15, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey

Hi. I was wondering if you could sign your name on talk pages after starting discussions. Thanks. – ツ Teammm 23:15, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

My bad, sorry. Belchfire-TALK 23:16, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

It's not a big deal, I just can't tell who said what when it's blank. Have a good day. – ツ Teammm 23:20, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 09:14, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Your side of the story will be greatly appreciated, and you also have a comment on the talk page involved to respond to. As a DRN volunteer, ~~Ebe123~~ → report 15:47, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello. You have a new message at Rjanag's talk page.

Thanks

I appreciate the hatting and the kind words. Unfortunately you seem to have inadvertently hatted the RFC as well and I can't for the life of me figure out where the problem is. I'm guessing it's an unclosed tag somewhere but I'm not seeing it. Any ideas? Sædon 11:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I had a helluva time getting it to work at all. The nowiki tags wouldn't hide the canvas template, and the hab template forced the hide-bar down to the bottom of the section for some reason. If you have another idea, I'm all ears.

Listen, just one more thing. I was typing this into your Talk a minute ago, but since we're here...

I put my apology out there, and it's sincere, but I have just a small point of order to make so that we're clear on something. This shouldn't be taken as hostile, please, but I am going to be assertive about something because I don't appreciate being played for a fool.

There is absolutely nothing neutral about posting a solicitation on a specific, hand-picked Talk page looking for members of specific demographic or interest group to come and participate in consensus building. Not on a hot-button topic like FotF, especially when it's been all over the freakin' headlines for a week. Deny that if you want to, but I'm not going to be fooled. Putting a RfC out there and letting the chips fall where they may is neutral, and that approach is unassailable because there's no way to game it. You and I both know that's exactly the opposite of what was done here. And if the answer is anything other than "Yeah, OK Belch, you're right" then riddle me this: why didn't Still-24 go shopping for eyeballs at Southern Baptist Conference or Ku Klux Klan? Right, because he was consciously looking for people who would help him get an issue decided in particular way. He wasn't looking for a neutral consensus; he was crafting a specific outcome. You beclown yourself if you try to claim otherwise.

As I just now said on the Talk page, you're a bystander and nobody should hold it against you for coming to help. But don't take the rest of us for fools, please.

OK, rant over. I just needed to get that off my chest. If I can help with that hide-bar, let me know. Belchfire-TALK 11:36, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

The issue at hand is FotF's views regarding homosexuality, so I went to homosexuality. If you wish to report me for this reasonable choice that is fully within what WP:CANVAS describes as the right way to do things, you are free to, but I suspect you're going to come out looking really bad. Remember how you misunderstood my example of question-begging? Like that. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 16:31, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I figured it out, the closing template had to be on its own line - weird I've never run into that problem. Do me a favor and let me respond to you tomorrow. Like you, I need some rest. I took ambien about an hour ago and it's just starting to kick my ass. Again, thanks for the gracious apology, and I will get back to you asap tomorrow. Sædon 11:50, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Hope you got a good night's rest. A piece of advice if you're an insomniac like me: valerian root may relax you, but it may also make your head feel like it weighs 50 pounds the next day. Anyway, back to the topic at hand. Well, I can understand your point but I think that if that was Still's intention it would be a fruitless exercise. Homosexuality has 827 watchers and I'm betting it's a pretty large cross section of the wiki. Also, many times a main topic's talk page will serve as a central place of discussion. Take a look at talk:astrology, for instance, the last topic there right now is an editor asking a question about another page, Hindu astrology, likely because HA isn't as trafficed. Ultimately it comes down to WP:AGF I think; call me naive but I try to assume the best in people until I have clear evidence to the contrary. If Still ends up consistently appearing to WP:GAME then I'll join you in condemnation, but as of now I accept his explanation above. Sædon 20:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Good points, all well-taken, and I greatly appreciate your "Misplaced Pages First" attitude. I must say, I am surprised that no new editors have appeared as of yet, although we have not yet reached evening prime-time on the east coast. It may yet be possible to write this off to "no harm, no foul."

It would be improper to go into any details here, but let me just say that even a saintly commitment to AGF can die the death of a thousand cuts. Belchfire-TALK 21:08, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

War on Women: "redefining rape"

Hello! Thanks for the note. I'm really trying not to get involved in this at all, but I'll take a look at it and see if I have anything to contribute. Arc de Ciel (talk) 04:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Chicken

BDD has given you a Chick-fil-A sandwich! Chick-fil-A sandwiches promote WikiLove and hopefully this piece has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot sammie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

For nominating the abominable POV fork that is 2012 Chick-fil-A gay-marriage freedom of speech controversy for deletion, I hereby award you this relevant foodstuff. --BDD (talk) 21:58, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Spread the tastiness of fried chicken by adding {{subst:GiveChicken}} to their talk page with a friendly message, or gobble up this chicken on the giver's talk page with {{subst:MunchChicken}}!!

Please revert yourself at CfA

You reverted my reversion, instead of taking it to the talk page. Not a big deal, because it can be handled in the talk, page but your claim of me misusing sources and attributing a POV edit to me is unfounded. Please correct this. Fasttimes68 (talk) 05:40, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Do you honestly expect me to believe you magically found a misquote in the article at this stage, after it's been gone through with a fine-tooth comb by every English-speaking politically-active Wikipedian that breaths, for two solid weeks? Seriously?

You're right, it can be handled it Talk. Best of luck to you. Belchfire-TALK 05:56, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually yes. I read the fucking title of the articles. Fasttimes68 (talk) 12:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Hint: you have to read more than that. It's pretty important, actually. Thanks for the confirmation, though. Belchfire-TALK 15:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Resilient Barnstar
	For the work regarding Chickfila and associated 'brouhaha.' HappyHippo69 (talk) 18:18, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

FYI