Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:41, 1 February 2013

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

VPP comment hiding

Just saw your reversion of Kosh's inappropriate use of the collapse template on your comment. This has been a longstanding problem with him, explained over and over but he refuses to get it. See this thread and elsewhere in his talk page history. postdlf (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

"refuses to get it" summarizes his approach to any piece of information that contradicts with his rigid, ill informed view of WP. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't particularly care about the comment. The person who was intended to see it responded already. If he wants it boxed, he should get an uninvolved editor to do it. I wouldn't argue about such a thing.--v/r - TP 19:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

As an isoated incident I agree it si not worth making a big deal about. However, as part of a seemingly unbreakable pattern of WP:IDHT behavior it is concerning. Part of the problem is that it is o frustrating to try and reason with him that users seem to give up and walk away, and of course I was unable to get him to leave me alone and that led to the unpleasantness lest week that the discussion was about to begin with. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, Kosh has made me rethink my opinion of Malleus a bit in the sense that my short conversation with Kosh almost led to me joining you in the corner last week.--v/r - TP 19:43, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

ygm

X!'s Edit Counter: K7L does not exist.

I do exist... really I do... voy:special:contributions/K7L. Yet http://toolserver.org/~tparis/pcount/index.php?name=K7L&lang=en&wiki=wikivoyage fails with "K7L does not exist." K7L (talk) 00:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

The Wikivoyage database replication has issues, it's not an edit counter issue.--v/r - TP 00:52, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks... sorry to have bothered you about this. K7L (talk) 00:53, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Your .02 real quick

I was just stopping by to get your two cents on something real quick since I'm kind of noobish in some regards. So, I tagged 2nd Combat Weather Systems Squadron for what I think is a lack of notability according to WP:MILUNIT. I was wondering if I did things right by tagging it and explaining why I tagged it on the talk page. Also, I noticed a member of the unit created the article as well when I took a look at the article history. Should/could I have done anything else do you think? I appreciate the help/feedback. (I also asked Bwmoll3 for his input too just to grab another opinion)—  dain- talk   16:24, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I would say per WP:MILUNIT that this squadron isn't notable. First off, it reads as promotional. But besides that, when the guidelines speaks of squadrons, it is speaking of aviation squadrons; not weather squadrons. A general rule of thumb for Air Force units is Wing or higher. Groups and Squadrons are generally not notable unless they are covered in 3rd party sources. A notable squadron would be 101st Air Operations Squadron. On the other hand, with a little bit of cleanup to remove the promotional stuff, it's not really hurting anything and WP:MILUNIT isn't a guideline.--v/r - TP 16:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/IZAK

Did you see that? It appears that, after the RfC/U on Epeefleche wasn't going his way, Danjel is attempting to discredit the people who disagree with him. He's basically mentioned every single participant in the RfC/U except you and me. Dude needs to drop the stick and back away, and we need to get that interaction ban in place ASAP pbp 17:36, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree that Danjel has been beating the caucus a little hard, but User:Rachack does seem a bit suspicious.--v/r - TP 18:28, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I disagree

Hi TP. Hopefully you'll remember that I am often in full agreement with you on a great many things; and that I greatly appreciate what you do on a daily basis in real life. I found something that I took exception to however. I waited until the last day because it's not my intent to try to change your mind in the least, just something that made me do a double-take. At a recent RfA (Jason's) I noticed that you seemed to equate "bored" with "disillusioned". Now as you said, I didn't take it as "offensive", but I do think the two things are VERY far apart; or at least can be in many instances. I did read through once more a lot of Jason's posts, and I didn't get any sense of "disillusioned" in the least. I was wondering if there was anything in particular that made you feel that way, or was it just a general impression? Granted this is not an important (even in the wiki world) question, so if you're pressed for time, feel free to make this a very low priority question. Hope all is well with you and yours. — Ched :  ?  20:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I suppose it's based off my own experience. I was much more enthusiastic about the project pre-RFA and I became disillusioned once I really got into it's working and that has contributed to a lack of interest and boredom. I got the same vibe from him.--v/r - TP 20:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Interesting .. to be perfectly honest - I've very often become disillusioned with the project in many ways over time. It can be a tough feeling to overcome at times. (for me at least). Anyway .. I just wanted to drop the note. Take care. — Ched :  ?  21:26, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

JoshuSasori?

Hey TP, I'm concerned that 123.225.49.155 (talk · contribs · count) is a sock of the indef blocked JoshuSasori. The account advanced the same position as Joshu in this debate, in very similar language. I was involved in the previous discussion so I'll keep it an an arm's length, but could you take a look?--Cúchullain /c 15:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

It was definitely him.--v/r - TP 15:41, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick action, TP.Cúchullain /c 16:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Does Cullen's Hound count as a vote if he/she (I've interacted with Cuchullain far too many times to not be able to use a pronoun (>_<) ) participated extensively last time but refrains this time? As I said in my second nom, I'm concerned that the first one only failed because JS interfering (following me...) made it look like the consensus was under question, but if it's just me and IIO against Kauffner this time, the same thing will happen again...

Also, if the Anon is JS, it seems likely that a number of the others (Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/JoshuSasori) are, and that means he probably has one of those dynamic IP things, which means blocking one will not help in the long run.

elvenscout742 (talk) 17:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

If the IPs continue, we can consider a rangeblock. As far as Chchullain's !vote, he can make one if he chooses too. I wouldn't get into trying to claim those !votes now if I were you.--v/r - TP

Gotcha. As far as the IPs go, one of them (in the only edit it had made) gave a decent enough argument that it is not JS. Apparently both JS and I voted against him/her in a move request before JS was banned. However, I'm still not sure: this person (whether or not he/she is JS) seems to only be concerned with voting on page moves, but not having a consistent user-name makes it extremely frustrating. elvenscout742 (talk) 17:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Interesting, it's not unheard of to hear of folks delibertly trying to throw people off their track but who knows if that is the case w/o a checkuser. I doubt a c/u would get involved here, though, so we'll have to consider behavioral evidence like Cuchullain.--v/r - TP 17:41, 1 February 2013 (UTC)