Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:37, 6 July 2015

Write a new message. I will reply on this page, under your post. This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 28 days are automatically archived to User talk:Arthur Rubin/Archive 2024 . Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archives 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Status

TUSC token 6e69fadcf6cc3d11b5bd5144165f2991

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Personal attack

I just received a very strident personal attack from the user Andy The Grump on my user page and on the RFC on the Zeitgeist fim series page. Is there anything you can do to help me deal with this? This user called me a little shit in the not so distant past on Ani. I think a bunch of people are going to gang up on me now concerning that article which is only a content dispute at heart. Thank you Earl King Jr. (talk) 11:19, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't think I deserve a topic ban for going to this forum and complaining about personal attacks . I try to edit with guidelines and try to edit fairly. I never have made a personal attack on this project and complaining about getting p.a.'s should not boomerang me. My opinion. Earl King Jr. (talk) 23:47, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

The Misplaced Pages Library needs you!

The Misplaced Pages Library

The Misplaced Pages Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:

• Account coordinators help distribute research accounts to editors.
• Partner coordinators seek donations from new partners.
• Outreach coordinators reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.
• Technical coordinators advise on building tools to support the library's work.

Delivered on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry

I thought I was fixing double spaces on Government waste. Sorry about that. Rubbish computer 09:44, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: Even so, you're not supposed to make changes which have no effect on display; due to the way HTML works, multiple spaces display as one. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 09:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh dear I didn't actually know that. Thank you for informing me. Rubbish computer 09:50, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

It is OK to make such invisible changes, if you do it in the same edit which makes a visible and constructive change. JRSpriggs (talk) 15:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Is that what you intended to do?

I don't understand your edit summary here, you removed a bunch of content and I don't know how your explanation applies to it. I'm just checking to make sure that's what you intended to do. — Jeraphine Gryphon  10:00, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Not exactly. Although the content probably should be removed if disputed, I intended only to remove the implausible claim that the film used real 9/11 footage. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:17, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Moved from my talk

(invited, indirecly) I agree with Kww; John's ignoring

Thanks Kww. Hi Arthur. Please provide some diffs for "ignoring

• I moved this here as it really concerns your behaviour, not mine. If you find you are unable or unwilling to provide evidence in the form of diffs, in future please stay well away from my talk page as I find this sort of contribution disruptive. Unevidenced assertions and allegations about people's behaviour is worthless, in fact it has negative worth, and you should remember this going forward. Thanks a lot. If on the other hand you do find you are able to collate diffs that show the behaviour you alleged on my part, please feel free to post again at my talk, in a separate section so as not to disrupt the discussion. --John (talk) 17:05, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

@John: Diffs are difficult to provide (especially on a smartphone, which is what I'm using most of the time), but User:LesVegas comments indicate he isn't willing (or able) to understand the discussion. See WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:00, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate that. It seems faintly ridiculous to accuse me of ignoring something I have only just been made aware of. Please either assume good faith or do not comment in the future. Meantime I will wait for LesVegas to comment before doing anything else. --John (talk) 18:12, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Just to update you, I will be looking at this now that both parties have left evidence. I am a volunteer like yourself with numerous other demands on my time but I will try to come up with some intervention that will solve the problem in the next few days. If a delay arises and you feel I am ignoring the matter, feel free to ping me and I will further update you. I am still a little stung that you accused me of ignoring bad behaviour that I have been asked to look at. It only shows that you do not know me very well. I assure you that I will give this my best shot. --John (talk) 21:54, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Your reversion of my block notice

Hello, Arthur. Was this an accident? I'm imagining so, since there's no edit summary, but I wanted to check.  :) --Moonriddengirl 19:26, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

@Moonriddengirl: Quite correct. I'll check later to see if I did something else wrong.

I figured. :) It's happened to me once or twice, especially when (in my case) reverting from my watchlist - I hit "revert" on the wrong line. :/ I believe somebody else already put it back, but I was going to check with you before reverting in case you had received a private request from the user or something. I don't want anybody to feel harassed. --Moonriddengirl 20:37, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

recurrence relation

Arthur, you deleted the Franel example from recurrence relation, but it would be good to have at least 1 example with non-constant coefficients. There are many thousands of examples in OEIS. At the moment, the article has very little about non-constant coefficients (the subsection on that topic covers only order one). MvH (talk) 12:50, 21 June 2015 (UTC)MvH

The phrase holonomic sequence should probably also be mentioned in this example (means: a sequence that satisfies a linear recurrence with polynomial coefficients, such sequences have many nice closure properties and also correspond to holonomic functions (functions satisfying a differential equation with polynomial coefficients)). It'd be good to mention the close relation between holonomic sequences and recurrence relations. MvH (talk) 12:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)MvH

5th Annual Wiknic

5th Annual Wiknic (Saturday, July 11, 2015, ~9:30am-4pm)

Dear fellow Wikipedian, You are cordinally invited to the fifth annual Los Angeles Wiknic! The Wiknic is a part of the nationwide Great American Wiknic. We'll be grilling, getting to know each other better, and building the L.A. Misplaced Pages community! The event is tentatively planned for Pan-Pacific Park (map) and will be held on Saturday, July 11, 2014 from 9:30am to 4pm or so. Please RSVP and volunteer to bring food or drinks if possible! I hope to see you there! Howcheng (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC) Join our Facebook group here! To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Monty Oum

Why does it have to be ten? As you said, he's on 5 different Non-English Wiki's, so clearly he's notable in other countries. Rusted AutoParts 16:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts: Propose something better, and get consensus for the change. There are parts of WP:OVERLINK that I think absurd, but I still follow and "enforce" them. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration enforcement

By motion, the Arbitration Committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:

1. The case is to be opened forthwith and entitled "Arbitration enforcement";
2. During the case, no user who has commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page, may take or initiate administrative action involving any of the named parties in this case.
3. Reports of alleged breaches of (2) are to be made only by email to the Arbitration Committee, via the main contact page.

You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page and are therefore restricted as specified in (2). For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Change from announced time table for the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case

You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case, because you have commented in the case request, or the AN or AE discussions leading to this arbitration case, or because you have specifically opted in to receiving these messages. Unless you are a party to this arbitration case, you may opt out of receiving further messages at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Notification list. The drafters of the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case have published a revised timetable for the case, which changes what you may have been told when the case was opened. The dates have been revised as follows: the Evidence phase will close 5 July 2015, one week earlier than originally scheduled; the Workshop phase will close 26 July 2015, one week later than originally scheduled; the Proposed decision is scheduled to be posted 9 August 2015, two weeks later than originally scheduled. Thank you. On behalf of the arbitration clerks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Our friend?

108.73.113.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Cheers Ping me with {{u|Jim1138}} and sign "~~~~" or message me on my talk page. 08:15, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jim1138: Looks like it. There is little point in blocking, as he's been off for over an hour. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 09:03, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Motion passed in AE arbitration case granting amnesty and rescinding previous temporary injunction

This message is sent at 12:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC) by Arbitration Clerk User:Penwhale via MassMessage on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. You are receiving this message because your name appears on this list and have not elected to opt-out of being notified of development in the arbitration case.

On 5 July, 2015, the following motion was passed and enacted:

1. Paragraphs (2) and (3) of the Arbitration Committee's motion of 29 June 2015 about the injunction and reporting breaches of it are hereby rescinded.
2. The Arbitration Committee hereby declares an amnesty covering:
   1. the original comment made by Eric Corbett on 25 June 2015 and any subsequent related comments made by him up until the enactment of this current motion; and
   2. the subsequent actions related to that comment taken by Black Kite, GorillaWarfare, Reaper Eternal, Kevin Gorman, GregJackP and RGloucester before this case was opened on 29 June 2015.

July 2015 Request self-revert of disruptive editing

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Americans for Prosperity, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Misplaced Pages, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. You removed the NPOV article hat from a Tea Party movement article, while multiple threads on the neutrality of the article involving multiple editors were ongoing at article talk. Please self-revert your removed the NPOV article hat. Thank you in advance for your commitment to avoiding disruptive editing. Hugh (talk) 01:29, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@HughD: The previous NPOV tag was resolved by consensus, coincidentally while you were blocked. Guidelines suggest that a new NPOV tag should not be added without consensus. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

• Wikipedians with red-linked categories on their user talk page