Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:05, 22 March 2014

Civility

Your statement of "too much ignorance from computer freaks" is immensely insulting, uncivil, and unfriendly. Attitudes like that, are why people leave communities.

Demeaning and insulting a group of people, dehumanizing them with an us vs them mentality, is the cause of so much pain and anger in the world. Please don't add to it.

And the method for removing the "This page has been added to your watch-list" is directly above your disrespectful message:

Add .mw-notification-tag-watch-self {display: none;} to your common.css.

You're welcome. –Quiddity (talk) 23:11, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the script but the problem is not my "incivility" perceived by you but the ignorance of those I called upon. Try looking at the big picture and try to determine what triggered what. Remember the chicken and egg? In this case there is no question about what came first. Cheers, TMCk (talk) 23:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Modifying the Misplaced Pages interface

Take a look at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)/Archive 111#Hiding the BLP editnotice for instructions on how to selectively disable nearly any part of the interface. It also links to a few user script pages with examples of how it works. – Philosopher  21:22, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks a lot for your tip. I just added it to my CSS page. Best to you, TMCk (talk) 22:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Vehicle leasing

Dear Clean-keeper, I added those links to What Car? because they seem reasonable sources for the article. SOme of that information could be added to the article, but I'm not qualified to do that. I just added the links, so someone else can expand it. Can you do that? Thanks! --NaBUru38 (talk) 16:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi NaBUru38. There are several problems with your link. One is that it is a commercial link, not on first sight but if you dig further you'll find that they promote dealers in leasing and sale of new and used cars. The other problem is that it is not a

I know that What Car? is a commercial website, but the pages I added describe characteristics, pros and cons of the different leasing types. It sounds reasonable to me. Bye! --NaBUru38 (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Alex Jones

I was actually doing a favor for someone and saw the edit. Didn't see a source and looking over the editor's talk page it seemed like a situation that called for a revert. . Malke 2010 (talk) 21:29, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

No big deal. It's just that that guy is most famous (in the US) as a conspiracy theorist, but you might not have known this and the Rolling Stones citation isn't absolutely clear about that. Of course it's always better to use caution in a BLP. In that case it just happened to be something like removing a known politician's party affiliation b/c of missing a clear source ;)
TMCk (talk) 22:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't know him at all. Never heard of him, so it wouldn't be like a known pol for me. Malke 2010 (talk) 22:53, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I didn't know him either (even so I watched "Loose Change" at some point) until I "discovered" him through entries in other WP articles ;)
TMCk (talk) 23:55, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

What's "Loose Change?" Malke 2010 (talk) 00:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Loose Change (film series). Jones was an executive producer. Not worth watching but you should make up your mind yourself and not take my word which is of course my opinion.TMCk (talk) 01:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Your word is good with me. I'll skip it. Thanks. Malke 2010 (talk) 01:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm delighted :)
BTW, who's editor's talk page were you referring to?TMCk (talk) 02:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

You know. You commented there on his talk page regarding the edit. I can't remember his wiki name and I'm not interested enough to go looking for it. Have a nice weekend! Malke 2010 (talk) 01:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I commented there after I fixed the BLP problem they introduced and maybe they'll do better in the future. Don't worry about the rest as it's old news by now. I too wish you a very nice weekend. See you around, TMCk (talk) 01:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

interface changes

I followed your link. I didn't have any system problems like a few users there. Locking up for months? Ugh! I like the new notice of messages rather than that dreadful banner across the talk page. It always struck fear in me like I'd just been called to the head's office. I was surprised that there hadn't been mention of the changes prior to. Or if there had been, I must have missed them. Malke 2010 (talk) 01:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, they fixed the notice bugs and re-implemented a small orange bar after much complains. See Misplaced Pages talk:Notifications and Misplaced Pages:Notifications for info about that specific issue. The petition I link at the top of my page is not just about how they introduced the new notification, it was just a starter for those kind of changes in general. Now that the notification change was changed and debugged I don't have much of a problem with it either but it was a problem for about a week and there are other constant changes that are screwed up while not every editor is aware of or affected. Believe me, if you were affected and would've problems editing b/c of such (usually unannounced) changes you'd be, quite frankly, pissed off like many affected users. But of course it's fine if you're not interested in that petition; It's everybody's freedom to have their own opinion and priorities. Whatever works.TMCk (talk) 01:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say I wasn't interested, only that I'd not been affected. Your explanation makes it all very clear now. I can see being upset by things like that. They've made changes before and always had a warning, testing period. They seem not to have bothered this time. I'll sign the petition if it's going to help change that. Malke 2010 (talk) 05:24, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I signed the petition and am going to post that link I just copied from you on my talk page. Malke 2010 (talk) 05:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I just saw it (and I'm delighted :) ) when I had to respond to a developer who kept quiet until another programming genius posted a critical comment about main developers here. He's BS-ing me by passing the blame instead of commenting constructive and maybe solving the actual problem. Cheers, TMCk (talk) 05:48, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

And yes, what you describe as a "'heads-up' notice" is a major point of basics they should provide in front.TMCk (talk) 05:55, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

TMCk, I'm not a developer, and I don't know if Wikid77 is a programming genius (nor do I care) because my commentary is nothing to do with his code or anyone else's. The tone and attitude you're taking in this conversation to a fellow volunteer is completely inappropriate. I am not "BS-ing" you, and such a statement of bad faith is unbecoming of any editor. Ironholds (talk) 12:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I've responded her at the village pump where this started.TMCk (talk) 22:33, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Miscellany for deletion/User:Groupuscule/GMO

Would love to see your response to my comments here if and when you have time. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 08:33, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I do have some time issues but besides that, I'm not sure what else to say besides what I've already said and to which I still stand to. Repetition would only clutter the MFD and there is not much more to say IMO. Maybe, even so unlikely, we get some more uninvolved input from other editors and if not, we'll see what the closing admin's rationale will be, no matter the way they'll decide. Thanks for pointing me out to the latest posts over there thou.TMCk (talk) 01:17, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

visual editor RfC

Thought you might want to weigh in on this: . Malke 2010 (talk) 02:34, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Malke. I'm aware of that page but still hesitating to vote or comment even so I've made up my mind about this. I'm considering placing some votes with comments at some point. We'll see.TMCk (talk) 03:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Revert Hyperloop

I gave actually a source for my edit, please check: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hyperloop&diff=568845000&oldid=568805169 --Schwobator (talk) 08:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Only your source, which by btw was an opinion piece, didn't really back up your edit. Although I reversed you edit, I clarified the fact presented as it was only true in part. Some might doubt the costs being feasible as presented but even if it seems (for some) or is, even as a fact, difficult to achieve as proposed, that doesn't make it a false statement.TMCk (talk) 21:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Revert Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories

Hi. Your reversion note says "blogs, especially those are not a reliable source and can't be used." I'm not sure what you mean. The most useful source I cited was http://barackryphal.blogspot.com/2011/06/secret-origin-part-2.html which is technically a blog, but really a place that Loren Collins collects his research. Collins is referenced by e.g. http://www.politifact.com/personalities/loren-collins/ for what that's worth. There isn't any published material that I know of that goes into as much detail as Collins' pages about this esoteric subject. I'm not much of a Misplaced Pages expert, so -- any suggestions on how I could present this information better? -- JamieMcCarthy (talk) 23:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jamie. The Blog might be useful for personal research but in WP we only can add content based on reliable sources which blogs, with few exceptions (I.e. news-blogs), aren't.TMCk (talk) 13:31, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your help, and thanks for the link to WP:RS -- I probably should have read that first! So... I guess when writing on the subject of when and where claims first appeared on the internet, it would be OK to link to the actual blog pages which made those claims at that time, right? I would think those pages would be essentially primary sources, though I'm not sure. The page says "specific facts may be taken from primary sources," which I'd hope means linking to the actual source would be acceptable in this case. I've noted the WP:PRIMARY cautions "Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source" and "be cautious about basing large passages on them." If you think it'd be appropriate, I'll try resubmitting just the narrow facts of these claims first appearing. -- JamieMcCarthy (talk) 16:08, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's a little bit more complicated than that. Since I don't have much time on hand, why don't you visit the wp:Teahouse where you'll sure get plenty of help. To ask a question you can go directly to Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions and you could add a link to our short conversation here when asking your question(s) over there. Hope that helps, TMCk (talk) 23:54, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Will do, and thanks for the time you've already spent on this! :) JamieMcCarthy (talk) 14:29, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

E-cig liquid

Hi there. That's a common thing to get confused about! The two measuring systems in use are % and mg per ml. 2.4% is equal to 24mg/ml, and I imagine that's what you have.--FergusM1970 15:33, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

• Note to self: Response moved to his talk

Thanks

For your comment on the edit war board. I'd meant to apologize for reverting your change within all the edits going back and forth. It's crazy over there unfortunately. Thanks for your help! IWannaPeterPumpkinEaterPeterParker (talk) 17:04, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Barbie's Amanda Knox book

That is an old edition of the book and discussion of it before the acquittal of Amanda Knox now worthless. The title and ISBN identifies a specific edition of the book which can't be in the 'Further reading section' of an article for BLP reasons. Take it back out please, ASAP.Overagainst (talk) 16:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Roman Polanski probation

I have reverted your deletion of the "Citation Needed" tag that I put in place concerning that "probation was expected." Simultaneously I have started a new section on that article's talk page concerning this. Rather than deleting the tag, I suggest that you may explain your deletion there. But I much prefer that perhaps you collaborate with finding citable sources to clarify who specifically was expecting that Roman Polanski was going to receive probation. Otherwise, as I said in my edit summary placing the tag in the first place, the part of the sentence that says "and it was expected that he would only receive probation at his sentencing" is completely unjustified. And why I placed the tag rather than deleting it outright. While your edit summary says that other sources in the article justify this, perhaps you could point out which one and use that as a referable source at the end of that sentence. Nodekeeper (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

O'Keefe

Thanks! How did you find that? I find it very difficult to iterate through all the different edits. --Sarahp48 (talk) 05:07, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Simply by looking up the edit history. You removed it right after my last edit here while "consolidating identical links" as I pointed out in my edit summary.TMCk (talk) 05:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

State of the Beach

Did you find the "State of the Beach" in PDF, that Mother Jones was quoting? Can you link it? Geogene (talk) 01:13, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

See page 24, 37, 58, 140 and 175. Try Ctrl + F ;) TMCk (talk) 01:23, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Ah. Okay. By the way, calling me out on plankton the other day I consider to be particularly good work. Geogene (talk) 01:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome and thanks.TMCk (talk) 01:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Corexit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page OSHA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a ridisambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

re:Copy right violations

Hi. Thank you for your advice about my edits. According to your comments, I edited again the articles about Jjigae and Tteokguk. I'm wondering that my recent edits are okay. Can you check them for me?? :) -- Kjeongeun (talk) 05:05, 22 March 2014 (UTC)