Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:34, 20 January 2015

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

• Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

• Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

• If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: ].

• If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Ragnar Lodbrok

A user keeps adding original research to the article of Ragnar Lodbrok, trying to tie the Viking to the Merovingian Ragnachar and even the Arthurian legend... Not a single proper source is ever given. I'm afraid this might get out of hand. I tried to put my reasons on the article's talkpage, but he just launches in a diatribe and keeps adding the contented subsection. As you reverted some of the edits as well, you might want to join the discussion. -- fdewaele, 27 November 2014, 18:31 CET

Thanks. Timestamp to allow archival.  Sandstein  11:53, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Dear Sandstein,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

Republic of Estonia (1918-1940)

You closed an Afd of the article-in-question, as no consensus. However, an editor went & changed that article to a redirect, today. I don't want to get any deeper into that dispute, but I'm concerned about that editor's action. Not sure what to do about it. GoodDay (talk) 18:22, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, in principle, redirecting an article is an editorial action. It has nothing to do with the AfD - particularly one that resulted in "no consensus", i.e., had no actionable outcome. So the redirect should be discussed on the talk page and is subject to editorial consensus like any other edit.  Sandstein  18:27, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I reverted the 'change' per WP:BRD. It's likely to simply be the same result again. I'm concerned though, that the bold editor will merely revert, rather then open a discussion & press his argument. I can't afford to be in an edit-war & won't be. GoodDay (talk) 18:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of unconfirmed exoplanets

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of unconfirmed exoplanets. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 09:40, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice.  Sandstein  19:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Keeping indevidual settlements articles clean

Hello Sandstein, I would like to know what is the right channel to raise the problem where articles about different settlements became a horror description of the neighboring Palestinians. While I don't try to discount the importance of that issue, it has very little to do with the info people will be looking for when they look at a settlement page. If the community decides it should stay in, I will accept it but right now it looks like people with bias just fill them with pro-Palestinian propaganda. How does a discussion like that being started? Thanks, Ashtul (talk) 23:31, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

In general, content disputes should be resolved as described in WP:DR. If you want to edit in this area, you must absolutely learn how to talk to and compromise with editors with a strongly different point of view without engaging in edit wars, or you may find yourself excluded from the topic one way or another.  Sandstein  11:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Violation?

A user was indefinitely topic banned from the military subjects of India and Pakistan. Question is that if he voted on the AfD of Indian Century, a small stub that mentions about "military" twice, it would be considered as a violation of topic ban? I am quite skeptical about the 4th line of WP:TBAN here. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I'd say yes, it's likely a violation, because the article does go on at some length about India's military power.  Sandstein  11:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

You may want to check. Now it is confirmed that it is a violation of TBAN. What I should do next? I would just remove his comment and let him know that he should not participate in these discussion and it falls under the current TBAN. Thanks. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Warned for now. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:13, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

• I have not discussed Indian military. I am talking about Indian century topic. I am not debating if it can be deleted due to military. I am saying it is even not notable on other data. My comment should not be deleted ! ---TheSawTooth (talk) 12:18, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Article is using word "military" two times I am not even talking on it. I am talking about topic "Indian century". ---TheSawTooth (talk) 12:23, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

@Callanecc: what you have to say if this is a violation of topic ban or not? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:39, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Why dn you gather all your favorite admins and report me? What kind of report is this asking turn by turn from everyone. I am not debating military. My post is on indian century future predictive crystal ball article that names a century! ---TheSawTooth (talk) 12:41, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Read this post by neutral user I have agreed to him. bye. ---TheSawTooth (talk) 12:46, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the comment by User:Nick. If The SawTooth will cease adding new comments to the AfD we can leave his existing comments in place. The admin who closes the AfD can decide what weight should be given to the comments. EdJohnston (talk) 15:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

OccultZone and TheSawTooth, please do not continue to discuss this here. The topic ban at issue is a community sanction, and any enforcement request should therefore be made in a community forum or to the administrator who found consensus to impose the ban.  Sandstein  16:36, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

YGM

Gaijin42 (talk) 16:54, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, I don't read messages intended to circumvent topic bans.  Sandstein  17:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Please do read this one, the content of my message was not about the topic area, but just informing your something about Mike, and his ability to respond in a timely manner to the case. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:39, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

WingMen

hi there,

I am a producer on WingMen. I do not have much time to deal with this as we're currently in edits of the show, post production, in talks with lawyers and the network to possibly premiere the show this weekend or the next.

Everything on our page is fact. We hired a young lady to create this for us and was told not to use our Facebook page as reference as we have an official site and articles written. I will endeavour to correct all these but need some help.

Is there any way you can remove the request for deletion? I have no idea how to resurrect the page.

Stevepassionplaymedia (talk) 19:20, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I assume you refer to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Wingmen (TV Series). Topics only get articles on Misplaced Pages if they have been covered in sufficient detail in reliable independent sources, as described in WP:GNG. In your case, that would be articles describing the series's creation or reviews in reputable entertainment media. Unless there are now such sources, there's not much you or I can do here.  Sandstein  19:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)