Revision as of 12:52, 11 November 2016 editHob Gadling (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users18,370 edits →Ebell← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:37, 20 November 2016 edit undoBishonen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators80,259 edits A couple of discretionary sanctions alertsTag: contentious topics alertNext edit → | ||
Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
I just read your comment in the Ebell Talk page and I thought I was reading another harassing message in my Talk page. I am sorry for the hasty reply, which I deleted immediately. My apologies. ] (]) 12:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC) | I just read your comment in the Ebell Talk page and I thought I was reading another harassing message in my Talk page. I am sorry for the hasty reply, which I deleted immediately. My apologies. ] (]) 12:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC) | ||
:No problem. --] (]) 12:51, 11 November 2016 (UTC) | :No problem. --] (]) 12:51, 11 November 2016 (UTC) | ||
==A couple of discretionary sanctions alerts== | |||
{{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.'' | |||
'''Please carefully read this information:''' | |||
The ] has authorised ] to be used for pages regarding ], a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is ]. | |||
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means ] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the ], our ], or relevant ]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as ], ], or ]. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. ] | ] 17:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC). | |||
}}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> | |||
{{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.'' | |||
'''Please carefully read this information:''' | |||
The ] has authorised ] to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is ]. | |||
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means ] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the ], our ], or relevant ]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as ], ], or ]. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. ] | ] 17:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC). | |||
}}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> |
Revision as of 17:37, 20 November 2016
Changes to Argument from poor design
Hob,
The second changes you made are better than the first; I won't be reverting them. However, in removing the word "appropriated", you left hanging subsequent references to "this appropriation" and the like. You might like to tidy them up. Philip J. Rayment 15:33, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Debunker
Thanks, I added a clause to Houdini's entry so someone would know why he's there. Salsb 18:16, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Doh! Martin Gardner is Apparently On Time
Sorry, your right, I was thinking of Philip Morrison when I added "the late" part.--Brentt 12:24, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Daniel Dunglas Home
Hi Hob, Thanks for your input. Do you know where I can find some details on Alexander von Boutlerow's tests? Are you familiar with them? User:Kazuba 10 Mar 2006
- No, sorry. --Hob Gadling 12:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Pseudoscience/Articles attracting pseudoscientific edits
Hi, we need to urgently cut down the size of this watchlist. Looks like many or most of the articles you added really concern paranormal, not pseudoscience. Can you make a copy of the watchlist (paste) in our own user space and help us delete non-psuedoscience items? TIA ---CH 05:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
comments
Hallo Hob
Was sollen Änderungskommentare, wie: "Stevy-POV entfernt. Wieviel Prozent der Fachwissenschaftler sind nicht etabliert? Bleibt trotzdem überwiegende Mehrheit"??? siehe ...wenn du mir was zu sagen hast, dann tu das bitte direkt auf meiner Seite!
Oder soll ich auch noch so anfangen!??? Die Diskussionen und Kommentare gehören auf die Diskussions- oder Nutzerseite und nirgens sonst hin! Stevy76 22:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- You're in the wrong wiki. And that comment was a justification for the change and appropriate. --Hob Gadling 10:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Mag ja sein, dass es die englische WP ist. Du verweist in der dt. WP aber auf diese Seite! Nun denn: Ich schreib es gerne auch auf deine dt. Diskussionsseite und wir sprechen dort weiter... Grüsse, Stevy76 11:34, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Serious attitude problems with two editors
There have been some serious edit warrings over at Orthomolecular medicine, Megavitamin therapy, and Pseudoscience.
Primarily two editors have been very aggressive:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Linas
- http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/MichaelCPrice
This user is also involved as their sympathizer and ally:
Myself and User:Cri du canard are the ones being attacked:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Fyslee
- http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Cri_du_canard
You are more than welcome to examine our contributions
Here is one of my messages about the problem:
- I have just left a warning on MichaelCPrice's talk page. He, Linas, and others are violating quite a few rules here, including conspiring against other editors, incivility, failing to assume good faith, accusing others of bad faith edits, personal attacks, etc.. Their personal edit histories are very telling. They are also coordinating their efforts to attempt to trap others in 3rr violations, and are simply taking total control over the orthomolecular medicine and megavitamin therapy articles, with MichaelCPrice apparently functioning as the ringleader of the gang. He has been warned by others. I suggest that several administrators make a serious investigation, possibly leading to long blocks. I have never seen such organized aggressiveness before here at Misplaced Pages. -- Fyslee 23:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
These good messages of warning from a fellow editor illustrate the problem. (The intervening belligerant responses by them say even more!):
Three Warnings to User:Linas:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Linas&diff=prev&oldid=69024762
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Linas&diff=prev&oldid=69218700
- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Linas&diff=next&oldid=69220451
Warning to User:MichaelCPrice:
Another related comment from editor Jefffire:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Jefffire&diff=prev&oldid=69208687
Now I'm making a request for investigation and help from editors and administrators because it is beyond our control. These editors are extremely aggressive. -- Fyslee 23:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Apologies for misspelling
Please accept my humble apologies for unintentionally screwing up your name in this edit summary. My brain is a little cloudy today thanks to antihistamines (ragweed is out in full force where I live). I've often wished edit summaries were editable. I'm catching up on the discussion page and appreciate your contributions there. Best regards, Jim Butler 07:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
CSICOP article
Hob, I'd like your opinion before we make any changes to the CSICOP article. Bubba, Karl, and I have agreed upon changes to the Josephson dispute section. Davkal is blocked and has quit the mediation (says he's going to file a request for arbitation). So Mike has closed the mediation. But we'd like to hear what you think before we make the edit. Askolnick 05:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Hope you're around for a long time to come
I just saw your name, and am thankful that we have such a, uh, seasoned editor around here. I know people with the depth of understanding you've gotten over the years are invaluable to us. John Carter 18:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Caution: Presume Good Faith when dealing with others
(This warning was originally put on the user's user page by accident. It belongs here.)
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:Zecharia Sitchin. Thank you. Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 00:07, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
GAR input sought
Hi, I followed here from the Jonathan Wells RFC and I don't believe we interacted before. I am reaching out to you for an opinion, as, having been dealing with ID, you appear to be experienced with the topics of sourcing, neutrality and extraordinary claims.
It has been suggested to me by editor Coretheapple in the Discussion area of a current GA reassessment that the review be brought to the attention of a wider audience. The issues above are included in the review, so I hope there's enough of a cross-functional applicability. The article in question is Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz; no specialist World War II knowledge is required to be able to contributed to the GAR. The article has been described as "WP:Fancruft" by the editor who suggested I seek more opinions.
I would welcome a review of the article to see if it still meets Misplaced Pages:Good article criteria and whether it should be retained or delisted as a Good article. I would also welcome any feedback you'd be willing to share. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:57, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, not my field. I let the historians deal with that. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:48, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Ebell
I just read your comment in the Ebell Talk page and I thought I was reading another harassing message in my Talk page. I am sorry for the hasty reply, which I deleted immediately. My apologies. BatteryIncluded (talk) 12:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- No problem. --Hob Gadling (talk) 12:51, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
A couple of discretionary sanctions alerts
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Climate change, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. Bishonen | talk 17:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC). This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. Bishonen | talk 17:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC).