Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:02, 12 March 2014

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.

Belfort book dates

You can call it spam but you've also now removed the only publication-date-reference for the books; which was the reason for my edits in the first place. Don't you think my solution was better than nothing on second thought? I thought it looked better to have a date here, couldn't without a reference. Do you really think Amazon's wrong? Swliv (talk) 12:57, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

You put a link to Amazon solely for the purpose of establishing the publication date of the book? That's overkill. They get the date from the publisher same as everyone else. Why not just use worldcat? The Wolf of Wall Street and Catching the Wolf of Wall Street.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

You could have saved me a good deal of angst by coming back to this page or otherwise notifying me after you posted this next to the Belfort article:

15:09, 1 March 2014 Undid revision by Alf.laylah.wa.laylah: I was wrong, we should list his books.

You're doing a lot. Take care. Less prolific editors are also, probably, acting in good faith in our constructive, collegial enterprise. Cheers. Swliv (talk) 21:17, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Oh dear, I'm sorry. I'll remember next time.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sarcasm is really helpful. (Was just wondering back re: 15:08, 1 March 2014.) Swliv (talk) 17:32, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Did you take that sarcastically? I really didn't mean it to be. It was a sincere apology.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:34, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, yes I did . Sorry. Good faith. Onward. Swliv (talk) 17:40, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Yep, see you in the trenches!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:41, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Block Evasion

LimosaCorel, who was blocked today for sockpuppeting, is evading his block by editing from a new IP address, http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/2606:6000:80C1:6900:C27:5D5A:F5A1:705B He has so far, already reverted one editor, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ash_Wednesday&diff=598239846&oldid=598238687 after being unable to edit with his account on the same page, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ash_Wednesday&diff=598217112&oldid=598208511 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.123.177.3 (talk) 20:33, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Can you not bring it to AN/I maybe? If not, I'll look into it but I won't have time for about 8 hours, if then.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:44, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

What is AN/I? 8 hours is okay but I guarantee you that this guy is going to go ballistic between now and then, just like he did on the Lent article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.123.177.3 (talk) 20:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

WP:ANI. It's a noticeboard to get the attention of admins for emerging situations. If you haven't done something by later I'll try to look at it.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 21:37, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, you can take care of it later, unless it gets really bad, in which case I'll let you know. There's also a third IP address being used by LimosaCorel, on the same article: http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/2606:6000:80C1:6900:E54D:20C3:B245:C208 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.123.177.3 (talk) 21:51, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

It looks like Callanecc took care of it, thanks! Thanks for your work here too, 131.123.177.3.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Muneer Awad

On 6 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Muneer Awad, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Muneer Awad successfully sued the state of Oklahoma to prevent it from forbidding state judges to decide cases using Islamic law? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Muneer Awad. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

I'd like to thank you for supporting the DYK project. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 00:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Rodeo Drive

Excuse me, I am not plagiarizing any webpage. I am saying things in my own words and I have gone on to cite the websites the information came from. You may not be able to see the citations because you deleted all of them from the Rodeo Drive page. Jbrubins (talk) 20:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

The whole Walk of Style article was copy/pasted from one of the sources. See here for proof.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

It was not copied from the website, it was reworded. But yes, I got information from it because it was valid information. After I used it, I cited the website the information was from. Jbrubins (talk) 20:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, ask your teacher if it was plagiarized or not, ok? you reworded it using the same words that were on the website. Anyway, if you disagree, engage on the article talk page rather than here.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

The information was taken from the website, but the sentences were reworded in order to stay away from plagiarism. Obviously I cannot change the website's information, because it is valid, known information, which is why it was included on the Misplaced Pages page. Jbrubins (talk) 20:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

You'd better talk with your teacher about what plagiarism is, OK?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:49, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm well aware of what it is. Thanks for your concern. Jbrubins (talk) 20:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

So you're aware of what it is, and yet you do it anyway? Lovely. Enjoy your educational experience.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Devils Advocate

I'm just playing Devils advocate. Both sides should be fairly represented. Otherwise it would be the AP Stylebook vs relevent arguments.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 03:09, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. I never expect things to break down in a simple way to this side vs. that side. Thanks for starting the RfC.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 03:11, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Hebrew Benevolent Congregation Temple bombing

Hello! Your submission of Article at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Drmies (talk) 18:22, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For all-around good work, and specifically Hebrew Benevolent Congregation Temple bombing. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 18:41, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Apple-ologies

OK, thanks! And I apologized myself at the article talk page. Have a serene evening!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 04:23, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Close

Yes I closed it.I think the answers were obvious. More information should be added. There needs more balance. And the template should stay. After reading Atsme's comments I can see no reason to continue. I'm now going to ANI to report exactly what I've done and ask that I be blocked if it was wrong.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 04:34, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

You're kidding. Well, knock yourself out.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 04:38, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

You are probably right I'm going to go to request for closure. The RFC certainly isn't helping to settle the dispute. He feels he's being harrassed. He keeps threatening to take this to what ever dispute resolution and now he's going to wait until it's over and use it as evidence. I'm done. This has been to much.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 04:51, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Why not just let it run but bow out if it's too much for you? You've gotten it started, there's no requirement that you keep working on it. There's actually productive conversation taking place and no real harassment. Any complaints about harassment won't be taken seriously by anyone at this point, really.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 04:55, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree that there is a productive.. You know what ok...Serialjoepsycho (talk) 04:59, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Haalp! prease!

Alf, I wonder if you could squiggle the boffin in you to iron up the citational problem that just arose with my edits to Amalek. I use the ref name="" /, but have never got the hang of how to add to the source ref plate when citing an author on different pages of his book, how to add p.124 p.126 etc. Others do it, damn it. Just saying say Horowitz/ after the first ref to him clarifies one page, when in fact he is being used for another page in the book, strikes me as bad practice. ? Thanks Nishidani (talk) 15:32, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, I did it in one of the many possible ways; I'm not too enamoured of this method, but on the other hand I know how to do it. If it doesn't meet your needs we can figure out another solution. The problem was that the software is only smart enough to match exact reference names, so if you say <ref name=blahblahblah> some book by some guy</ref> and then try to invoke that by putting the page in the name like <ref name=blahblahblah34/> it just thinks that's a new reference and that you never defined it, so you get the big ugly error message at the bottom.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:36, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, pal. You're a champion. I'll add you to the growing list (User:NSH001 was the first, User:Johnuniq was moved by a head-shaking compassion at egregious technical blunders, etc.) of wikipedians volunteering to wipe my arse-ups as I drift into senescence but persist mindlessly in the habit of making edits! Cheers Nishidani (talk) 17:18, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Glad I could help. I'd frame it more like I'm grinding your pigments, cleaning your brushes, and blocking out your backgrounds, so that you can add the master touches that make the masterpiece, but I suppose it's all the same thing in the end.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:24, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

I was scratching my head over how to do the page number differences from the same source and still keep using <ref name="this source"/> So {{rp|page(s)}} Alatari (talk) 17:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

No problem. That's just one way to do it, and the easiest way for me to remember. There are others, though. The best way to find out about them is to look at a bunch of featured articles and see the various ways they've managed it. The big advantage of the {{rp|#}} method is that you don't have to redo the referencing system for the whole article if it's a mess when you start working on it.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Nice work on Hebrew Benevolent Congregation Temple bombing, as usual. Enjoy some pie as a small token of my appreciation. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 02:02, 12 March 2014 (UTC)