Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:09, 21 September 2013

If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page - it will be on my watchlist for at least a few days, so I will see your response If you leave me a message: I will answer on this talk page - please watchlist it so you'll know that I've answered. This will ensure that conversations remain together! Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Thanks!

N5iln has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

oldcsd

Template:Z1

Re: GoodSearch opinion

Thank you for the information. Understand the comments and agree with the suggestion. Uptodateinfo

{{Hangon}} for Course Selection at Earl Haig Secondary School

I have once again put the {{Hangon}} Template on the article, but I'm quite unsure why this article would be moved to deletion. It doesn't seem to have vandalized the copyrighted content, and also doesn't seem to have plagiarized someone's work. I can see what you are talking about, but I think that this article shouldn't be deleted. Otherwise, I will improve this article to Misplaced Pages's standard. But thanks for your notice.

Please contact me if you have any concerns.

Besides I'm only a Wikipedian for less than 6 months so I'm quite inexperienced. However the quality and standard of my articles will improve. Challisrussia (talk)

Village with offensive name

Just looked at your referral for Kotak, a village with an allegedly offensive name. The offensive word would be kotok (which is offensive slang for penis in at least Kyrgyz. However, Kotak should be ok -- it also appears on google maps for roughly the same location shown in the article -- Google Map of Kotak. Thanks for checking up on it, though! ~~

Wikiquette Alerts Notice Response

talkback

Re:

talkback

Mail

¡Thanks For The Heads-Up!

Binkernet would no doubt have been more than happy for me to have been unaware of the changes in that page; Thank you for the heads up. A REDDSON

Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Legal_threat_by_User:Uboater_at_Talk:U-8047_Replica_Submarine.23Connection_with_trust

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

DRN

Hey mate, DRN looks a bit backlogged. Can you give me a hand clearing out some of the old requests?

I would like to thank you. Your advice succeeded to move him.

I would like to thank you. When you closed the DRN you proposed: try restoring the material and if the user reverts then file a report at ANI for disputatious editing. I followed your advice successfully. user:pluto2012 was alarmed once I have mentioned the ANI , and suddenly started to reply and discuss the issue. Ykantor (talk) 19:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:37, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Email

I sent you an email. Please respond. Ignocrates (talk) 16:54, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I saw your reply on my talk page. I wasn't asking for your help directly. I was asking if you knew the right person I might contact to get the help I requested. Thanks. Ignocrates (talk) 16:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I was not clear: Having not worked in that areas, I do not know anyone with that particular skill set. I'm afraid I cannot help. — TransporterMan (TALK) 16:29, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks anyway. Ignocrates (talk) 17:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Vote

I know you weren't deeply involved in the DRN regarding blitzkrieg dispute, but you know a thing or two about it and have given an opinion on the issue within the past two months. There is an ongoing poll, suggested and overseen by admin Nick-D, to settle the dispute on the Battle of Kursk article once and for all. All you need to do this time around is to place your vote for whichever version you think is preferable. The LINK EyeTruth (talk) 17:54, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

why did you declined my request?

in our case, discussion was pointless i do not think i can convince him and neither do i think he can convince me, so thats why discussion in poinless, i just need a third opinion is there any other way to get or what should i do?

i do not think we can agree anyway 83.180.179.15 (talk) 18:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

See here for the explanation of why Misplaced Pages requires extensive discussion before applying for dispute resolution. (Though I do not believe it to be a problem in your particular case, see here for my suggestions on what to do if the other editor will not discuss.) You have, however, probably had enough discussion to satisfy the requirements for a request for comments; if you wish to do that follow the instructions there to make the request and then and wait 30 days to see what comments are made by the community. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:46, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

re: Sheldrake dispute

You read my mind concerning the Sheldrake dispute. I had read the dispute summary, and the linked talkpages (as well as other evidence the parties offered as part of the initial filing), and I concluded that this might have been a conduct dispute. I wasn't 100% sure, so that's why I asked the parties for evidence as to why this should be considered under DRN rules. It does seem a bit stupid if the parties then state in their discussions that this is a conduct dispute. Had you not closed it first, I would have pointed them in the direction of ANI etc anyway, so thanks for catching it before me.

By the way, I'm thinking of mediating the "anti-Serb sentiment" dispute, but it looks too complex for me to hand alone (it gets a bit fiddly to keep track of more than three different users, especially when argument is so nuanced as this). Do you mind assisting in the workload on that dispute? --The Historian (talk) 19:50, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to be tied up with RW issues over the next few days and don't know how much time I'll have to contribute, so I'd best decline (and I'm not too keen on ethnic disputes to begin with). You might ask Steven Zhang or Hasteur, however, as they've both been around DRN recently. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 20:08, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Relax (song)#Adding back unofficial titles of the song in lede?

Thanks for the Third Opinion. While I reluctantly agreed to never re-insert the passage again, what about adding sources as External Links? --George Ho (talk) 14:41, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

I replied at the article page. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 15:23, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:3O

I don't think simply removing his user name is "neutralizing" it, considering it's still full of ad hominem attacks.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:05, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Third opinion

TransporterMan, thanks for your third opinion on Polyethoxylated tallow amine. I have not used this service before but I fondly imagined that you would stick around to discuss the dispute with us. Is this not generally the case? Martin Hogbin (talk) 12:21, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

One particularly wise Third Opinion Wikipedian, RegentsPark, once succinctly put the purpose of Third Opinions like this, "It's sort of like if you're having an argument on the street in front of City Hall and turn to a passer-by to ask 'hey, is it true that the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale?'." And just like that encounter, most opinion-givers will just say yes or no and keep on walking, but some will stop and join in the argument. My feeling is that once you join in the argument, any weight your opinion had which derives from your position as a neutral observer is gone, so I don't stick around. If the opinion doesn't resolve the issue, then you can move on to additional dispute resolution through the dispute resolution noticeboard or through a request for comments or even through formal mediation. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Brandish

But it did come to a standstill; he refuses to actually discuss anything. How is "I'm stealing your edits and selling them on black market." conducive to anything positive? If 3O isn't the place to take this guy, then where? Despatche (talk) 17:49, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

It's not the "standstill" part that's missing, it's the "thoroughly discussed" part. If either editor will not engage in discussion, try these suggestions. If your dispute is more about the other editor's conduct than the content in question (3O doesn't handle disputes which are mainly conduct disputes), use RFC/U or ANI. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:09, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Man, I knew I was supposed to take him to RFC/U or ANI, but some of the mods told me it was better to go to 3O; bureaucracy, red tape, etc. Thanks a lot! Despatche (talk) 16:43, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Understand that all I'm saying is that RFC/U or ANI are the correct places for conduct disputes, but I'm not making any judgment about whether or not this should go there or not. That determination is for you to make. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:30, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charlene Richard

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Charlene Richard you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 1ST7 -- 1ST7 (talk) 05:22, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charlene Richard

The article Charlene Richard you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Charlene Richard for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 1ST7 -- 1ST7 (talk) 06:42, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charlene Richard

The article Charlene Richard you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Charlene Richard for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 1ST7 -- 1ST7 (talk) 03:12, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Email

Hey mate, I've sent you an email. Hope all is well with you. Steven Zhang 13:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:DRN and Volunteerism

Hey there, just wanted to apologize again if I spoke out of turn at DRN previously...in fact, I just added another comment to the discussion, trying to explain my understanding of why, at least in film articles, we don't include lists of differences unless there are sources that took note of them. I hope this will turn out to be productive rather than disruptive, much as my noting to the one editor that wikilinks are not reliable sources was intended to be.

Regarding the idea of being an official volunteer at DRN, I have to admit that I prefer to (usually) keep my WP editing at a "casual" level. I don't mind participating in discussions when I feel I have something worthwhile to say, but I'm also not the most tactful editor around, and the idea of being a primary moderator during a DRN filing is rather intimidating to me. And by "casual" editing I mean I usually don't even log in during weekends because I don't want to spend too much time here. :) That said, if you feel I can be an asset to DRN, I'm willing to at least list myself with the proviso that I may not be an exceptionally active one, and am more likely to chime in on the rare occasion than take an active hand.

Lastly, as someone with a BA in English Writing, I wanted to say that I was quite impressed by your comments at the filing. I imagine providing opinions on these things, especially in a manner both diplomatic and (hopefully) clear, can be quite an effort, and I appreciate that you're willing to put your energies into doing so! Regards. DonIago (talk) 19:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Please, please, please join us and try your hand at DR. Folks with your level of experience (and clean block log) are desperately needed and your clear analysis would be immensely valuable. And thank you for helping at White Queen. Don't feel that you have to take on every, or even most, filings if you join up. Doing one every now and then on a topic which interests you is absolutely fine, as is just dropping in a comment every now and then. While the practice is that one volunteer leads a case, that's not written anywhere and it's fine for any volunteer to chime in in any case. We try not to disagree with one another or step on one another's toes, but even that occasionally happens. I hope you join us, and thanks again. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:49, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Clearly you've forgotten that the comment you just made will forever be enshrined in the historical record. On your head be it! :p DonIago (talk) 19:54, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm gonna echo TransporterMan...please try your hand out at DR. It's so awesome. In fact, I'm so passionate about dispute resolution I got a tattoo of the mediator barnstar. I don't expect you to do that of course though ^_^ Steven Zhang 11:08, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Well now, this thread just became worthless without pictures! :p DonIago (talk) 12:42, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Dispute : Hridayeshwar Singh Bhati

Respected Sir i never with drew from the dispute resolution filed by me. I only mentioned i have no stamina left to bear insults and degrading of the subject. I demand justice Sir. Further instead of giving justice the people involved in the dispute had started Vendetta. All sections of talk page has gone to archives. Further they have started raising new issues against the subject after that dispute, which they them self accepted initially. I invite you to visit the article Hridayeshwar Singh Bhati for same The dispute filed by me was "Talk page of the article "Hridayeshwar Singh Bhati", Talk page of the editors themselves in discussion about the subject of the article, NeilN, Yunshui, Ihardlythinkso, Myself, Subject." I beg you and feel sorry if any language of mine was considered as with drawing of dispute RegardsSarower Sigh Bhati (talk) 07:09, 21 September 2013 (UTC)