Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:17, 18 September 2006

23skidoo

I actually saw 23skidoo in high school, though my username is more related to its use in The Illuminatus! Trilogy. 23skidoo 19:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Enterprise

Both Data and Worf were once listed under the Enterprise-D (Worf took command briefly in one episode), but I believe they were removed because it was decided to list only officially appointed captains as opposed to temporary captains. Otherwise we'd have to list Scotty for the original 1701 because he "took command" on several occasions when Spock and Kirk were off-ship; or Deanna Troi, who took command during one episode when Picard was trapped below decks, etc. Unless Data was at one point officially given command of the Enterprise, I don't think adding him would work. Riker, however, was given command in Best of Both Worlds so he counts. 23skidoo 13:28, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I guess the question was whether Data was actually appointed captain or was acting as CO temporarily through chain of command. In "Chain of Command" (speaking of) we saw Jellico officially appointed the captain, and in BOBW Riker got promoted as well. In the Enterprise episode "Twilight" it is stated that T'Pol and later Trip are promoted to Captain and given command. Maybe the best thing to do is post the question on the article's talk page and see what others think - if there's consensus to add Data, then there shouldn't be a problem. 23skidoo 19:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Endor Holocaust

Renominated for the 2nd time in hope that discussion will generate a clearer community consensus.

Delete Per WP:NOT:

1.3.1 Misplaced Pages is not a publisher of original thought. Misplaced Pages is not primary (original) research such as proposing theories.

1.8.3 Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball. Articles that present extrapolation, speculation, and "future history" are original research and therefore inappropriate. Speculation on fiction is still speculation. See WP:FICT

If this article is actually about the debate on whether the Endorian Holocaust actually happened then delete per WP:CITE or WP:VERIFY since no reputable sources can be provided to verify that the debate even exists. Also the current page for Forest moon of Endor has a section of the Endorian Holocaust, which states "The matter was finally settled with the release of the book Inside the Worlds of the Star Wars Original Trilogy, which stated that following the Battle of Endor, Rebel ships prevented most of the larger pieces of debris from the Death Star's explosion from hitting the moon's surface, thus nullifying the theory that the forest moon was significantly damaged" This topic is null and void now. Page should be deleted. The stub in the Forest moon of Endor is all that is needed.

Hiya - hope this AfD reaches a clear consensus, but given the large number of Star Wars fans on Misplaced Pages I think it's unlikely. Good luck! Ziggurat 08:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Describing something as cruft, however fannish it is, is somewhat inflamatory. While I want this article out of wikipedia as much as you do, it is unproductive to stoke the flames, as it were. Emphasise the narrowness of the debate, how little impact it has had on the world (compared to other important memes), not the fannnish nature of it. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:26, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, I didn't think you meant it in a bad way. I just wanted you to know that it rubs people the wrong way and can hinder the progression of concensus. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Help.

See WP:HD#Step_3_in_Afd. --{{subst:user|4836.03}} 11:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

You wanted to talk to an Annapolis Johnnie. E-mail me at landgoldfish@yahoo.com

welcome to the Marsden circus

Hi Geedubber. Welcome to the Marsden circus. Thanks for stepping in and reverting some of what (pseudo?)-Rachel had done. I had reverted back two more steps, since she had taken out a reference along with what apparently seemed the offending phrase. Some of what she/he weeded out could probably be dropped, but I think the reference should stay. Feel free to overrule me here. Best wishes, Bucketsofg ✐ 13:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it may be the same guy, or at least a connected group. He seems to have a fairly serious obsession- it's been going on for months. My advice would be to revert any blanking that you see, certainly to the article, and probably to the talk page also. I prefer not to remove ANYTHING from talks, although it's perfectly reasonable to rm personal attacks if you wish to do so, and many do. This person appears to have extended that to removing ANY content they don't like, which is obviously not on. I must confess, I don't know who Rachel Marsden is and I'm not too sure what the big deal is actually about! All the best, Badgerpatrol 22:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Let me add to the appreciation expressed above for your work on the Kinsella/Bourrie/Marsden pages. I'm delighted to hear a sane voice in the discussion. HistoryBA 23:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Can I ask your advice, Geedubber? Should I put in a request for comment regarding Arthur Ellis's behaviour (which will take a lot of time), or should I wait a little longer to see if he settles down? As it stands, he seems to be intent on escalating his conflict with me and others. HistoryBA

Please, and add your comments to the article. It will help the case. Pete Peters 03:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Ignatieff

I think his support for the war is worth mentioning in the blurb in Liberal Party of Canada leadership convention, 2006 (ABM not so much as it hasn't become a big issue). Perhaps you can add nuance to the sentence rather than removing it altogether?Homey 05:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Mark Bourrie

Geedubber, feel free to revert to whichever version is correct in your opinion. I semi-protected, but I don't think I reverted, which I probably should have done, so you were probably right to revert the first time. The sprotection only stops anon IPs and new accounts from editing. Everyone else is welcome to continue as before. :-) SlimVirgin 08:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Big Up

Uhh the WK ban has been lifted, time for another round? No? Pete Peters 02:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Can you Re-revert My Work

Hello I have been working on the Trinity Spadina riding profile. A magical person from the Natiobal Library in Ottawa keeps reverting my work. It is not controversial work, I added statistics and such. But, I have reverted twice already, and well, do not want to break the 3RR. Pete Peters 02:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

What do you want to know about SJC?

What do you want to know about St. John's College? SJCstudent 14:45, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Warren Kinsella RFAR

Please be advised that a request for arbitration is being filed over the continued edit war occurring over this page. Please feel free to make a statement on the request page. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 20:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, I saw that (and have it on my watchlist). I noticed that I wasn't named, just part of the alii. So I had wondered if I should say something. I edited more at the Bourrie article but that's obviously the other side of the same coin. I'll try and think if I can add anything. Thanks. --JGGardiner 05:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I was just looking through the talk history and I think that we were on the same page. It's hard to see exactly where things fell apart. HistoryBA seems to be on an informal Wikibreak right now. I see that she hasn't made an edit in two weeks. But you never know what that means; I've heard that sock puppets are all the rage these days... =) --JGGardiner 05:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

AE IP

Yup. Anyway, if there were any doubt, it would be settled by this . One might also add that his first edit was to complain about Bourrie's block, that he seems to know about Bourrie's medical ailments, and that he knows Bourrie's family history and its relation to his interest in ships . Bucketsofg✐ 19:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The funny thing is that Arthur is an asthmatic too. If only for a minute. --JGGardiner 19:29, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

My, my, my... Want to know about Bourrie'a family and his asthma? Read his blog. It's all in there, right in the first posts in his archives. And the shipwreck stuff? He mentions it in the first pages of his first book. It was as hard to get as a walk down the library stacks. And not the National Library, either. And my asthma? Yup, I have it. That proves everything. You guys look awfully worried. Arthur Ellis 12:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Warren Kinsella

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Warren Kinsella. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Warren Kinsella/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Warren Kinsella/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 19:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Warren Kinsella

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above. Arthur Ellis is banned indefinitely from Warren Kinsella and articles which relate to Canadian politics and its blogosphere. Any article which mentions Warren Kinsella is considered a related article for the purposes of this remedy. This includes all talk pages other than the talk page of Mark Bourrie. Arthur Ellis is required to use one registered account. For the Arbitration Committee. FloNight 03:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Rachel Marsden arbitration

A Request for arbitration has been filed regarding the editing of Rachel Marsden, alleging that it is not edited in accordance with Biographies of living people, and you have been named as one of the parties. Thatcher131 20:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC)