| Revision as of 00:06, 6 December 2012 editIgnocrates (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,170 edits →Question: duplicitous as ever← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:28, 6 December 2012 edit undoIgnocrates (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,170 editsm →Question: sm fixNext edit → | ||
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
| ::::The best person to contact regarding this matter is actually neither Ignocrates/Ovadyah, but ]. He tried to mediate the discussion involving both of those editors, which proved impossible given the POV pushing of both of them. He is also something that I believe neither of those two parties is, which is someone who has the trust and respect of the wikipedia community regarding matters of policy and guidelines. He is also familiar with the conduct of both of those editors and myself regarding this subject. And, as Pass a Method knows, I think most people would agree, in general, my POV is toward that of the best independent reliable sources. Sadly, neither Michael not Ignocrates can really say the same thing. ] (]) 15:51, 5 December 2012 (UTC) | ::::The best person to contact regarding this matter is actually neither Ignocrates/Ovadyah, but ]. He tried to mediate the discussion involving both of those editors, which proved impossible given the POV pushing of both of them. He is also something that I believe neither of those two parties is, which is someone who has the trust and respect of the wikipedia community regarding matters of policy and guidelines. He is also familiar with the conduct of both of those editors and myself regarding this subject. And, as Pass a Method knows, I think most people would agree, in general, my POV is toward that of the best independent reliable sources. Sadly, neither Michael not Ignocrates can really say the same thing. ] (]) 15:51, 5 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :::::Inaccurate, as ever; same old John, eh? Yawn. -- cheers, ] <sup>]</sup> 23:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC) | :::::Inaccurate, as ever; same old John, eh? Yawn. -- cheers, ] <sup>]</sup> 23:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :::::Speaking of frankly |
:::::Speaking of frankly grossly dishonest, two attempts were made at mediation with Jayjg serving as the mediator. Both attempts ended, unsuccessfully, when John Carter unilaterally withdrew from the mediation process. ] (]) 00:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| == Wikilinking == | == Wikilinking == | ||
Revision as of 00:28, 6 December 2012
 Archives | |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
| This is Michael C Price's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Welcome!
Hello, Michael C Price, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
You did very nice edits on Many-worlds interpretation! Welcome to wikipedia! --DenisDiderot 10:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks DD -- glad you liked it. Thanks for the links. I'll probably confine myself straightforward textural edits for the near future whilst I get the hang of the metatools.--Michael C Price 12:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can
|
The article Bohm interpretation, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup. If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Misplaced Pages's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page. |
Talkback
Message added 20:59, 20 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
over/underlinking
Could you take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Linking#What_generally_should_not_be_linked_--_can_we_bring_this_to_closure.3F
The "one link" rule/enforcement has gotten out of hand, I'm trying to get something closer to rationality. You've opined in the past, and I wonder if you could chime in once more. If the proposed langauge is something you'd support, I'd appreciate that too. Thanks Boundlessly (talk) 21:40, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Question
Out of curiosity, has John Carter also been harassing you? If so, that makes four the number of editors John has been harassing. Pass a Method talk 11:51, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Not recently, since I've been semi-retired! IMO JC is a mostly civil POV pusher, which is the most insidous sort, of course, since it damages article quality in ways hard to repair. He did try to form a tag team, once, to get me permabanned, but it failed when the covert nature of it was blown. -- cheers, Michael C. Price 12:54, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- What type of POV does JC have? Pass a Method talk 13:27, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Roman Catholic. -- cheers, Michael C. Price 13:29, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the information. Pass a Method talk 21:51, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Roman Catholic. -- cheers, Michael C. Price 13:29, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Pass a Method was blocked (for the 3rd time) for edit warring recently by another Admin (John Carter wasn't involved in the article). And isn't just John Carter who has disagreed with him recently. Several editors have reverted him at various articles and I warned him for a misleading edit summary and reverted some of his edits related to Raelianism. This is relevant also. Don't get me wrong, John's not perfect, but as almost always, context is key. Dougweller (talk) 13:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Michael, you failed to mention in your groosly inaccurate, and frankly grossly dishonest, statements above your own history of outright POV pushing regarding your beloved Robert Eisenmanand his widely rejected opinions regarding the Ebionites. That is, basically, the only subject regarding which I have had previous dealing with you, and, frankly, as can be seen from the Arbitration records, the only person who has been sanctioned regarding that matter to date is you yourself.
- The best person to contact regarding this matter is actually neither Ignocrates/Ovadyah, but User:Jayjg. He tried to mediate the discussion involving both of those editors, which proved impossible given the POV pushing of both of them. He is also something that I believe neither of those two parties is, which is someone who has the trust and respect of the wikipedia community regarding matters of policy and guidelines. He is also familiar with the conduct of both of those editors and myself regarding this subject. And, as Pass a Method knows, I think most people would agree, in general, my POV is toward that of the best independent reliable sources. Sadly, neither Michael not Ignocrates can really say the same thing. John Carter (talk) 15:51, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
- Inaccurate, as ever; same old John, eh? Yawn. -- cheers, Michael C. Price 23:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
- Speaking of frankly grossly dishonest, two attempts were made at mediation with Jayjg serving as the mediator. Both attempts ended, unsuccessfully, when John Carter unilaterally withdrew from the mediation process. Ignocrates (talk) 00:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
- Pass a Method was blocked (for the 3rd time) for edit warring recently by another Admin (John Carter wasn't involved in the article). And isn't just John Carter who has disagreed with him recently. Several editors have reverted him at various articles and I warned him for a misleading edit summary and reverted some of his edits related to Raelianism. This is relevant also. Don't get me wrong, John's not perfect, but as almost always, context is key. Dougweller (talk) 13:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Wikilinking
Hello Michael,
Regarding your revert of me "underlinking" Neithhotep. I was trying to make the article reflect this MoS guideline: WP:REPEATLINK. Is that particular guideline point not valid anymore or can we just pay no attention to it? --WANAX (talk) 15:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)