Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:07, 29 September 2006

Click here to start a new talk section.

• Archive - May 06
• Archive - June 06
• Archive - July 06
• Archive - August 06
• Archive - September 06

Why did you blank my user page?

Why did you blank my user page?

Where are the "personal attacks"?

Where is the "rant"?

I keep important information on my user page, and your actions are against policy. Please revert. Deuterium 02:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

You didn't answer any of my questions.

Anyway I've changed my page so it doesn't even mention any users my name. How could it possibly be a personal attack if no one is named?

Also, you didn't need to blank the entire page. That is pure vandalism. Deuterium 02:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

• Hi - no problem with your actions - I just give lots more warnings. I note your user page does not make it clear you are an admin though - I would have left you to it otherwise.--Arktos 02:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Many of us don't like others editing our user pages. I didn't of course edit yours - just made the suggestion :-) Arktosifying is obviously a great addition to the English language! Regards --Arktos 07:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

There's a history of this with Inshanee. See ] Sarastro777 05:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

ND RfC

Hey Shane, I finally put up an RfC for the Natasha Demkina dispute. Let me know if it looks ok, especially my somewhat long statement. The actual request is here: Biographies RfC Thanks! Dreadlocke ☥ 01:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Re Scientology

Hi I made some edits to the Silent Birth section because it was slanted against Scientology and Hubbard in an inappropiate manner. ex. Mentioning that corn syrup was not available to Romans without mentioning that honey was. ex. Using the loaded term concoction in relation to the Barley Formula. ex. Making the unsubstantiated claim that Hubbard had no qualifications to give advice on children. I have children and that gives me some qualification. Hubbard was self-educated in the field of nutrition. ex. Stating that most medical experts discount anything without substantiating that claim is just silly. I could go on. I am an ex-Scientologist and though I am not great supporter of the CoS, I recognize a slant when I see one. I offered balance in the article. I suspect that you are a Scientology critic but please do not let your personal feelings color your responsibilities as an administrator.

Congrats

We're neck-and-neck for most edits on Shadow the Hedgehog. :) 69.145.123.171 Friday, August 25, 2006, 03:37 (UTC)

your RV in Talk:Natasha Demkina

You recently reverted another editor's comments in Talk:Natasha Demkina. Was this a mistake? (You can reply here.) KarlBunker 19:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

No, that was intentional. The user's comment was a wide personal attack coupled with a vast copy/paste of text. If he has something to say, he can find a civil way to do it. --InShaneee 19:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

No InShaneee, it was NOT a personal attack. You are abusing your administrative authority by censoring comments on talk pages that do NOT violate Wiki rules. If you continue, I will file a complaint. Askolnick 20:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I saw no personal attack; is it your contention that characterizing Pravda RU as "sleazy" is a "personal attack"? I submit that a journal is not a "person" and the characterization is reasonably valid and supported by the evidence that the editor provided. My eyes are a little bleary right now, so perhaps I missed some actual personal attack in there. If not, and if you can't give a better argument for that RV, I'll be replacing the comment you removed. KarlBunker 20:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

It is NOT harrassing text. InShaneee, you're clearly abusing your power here. You were appointed an administrator - NOT a censor. You are not only ignoring my protest, you're also ignoring the protests of another editor and an administrator. Your escallating campaign of harrassment has left me no choice. I have filed a complaint.Askolnick 20:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Another two cents- I don't see personal attacks, I see harshly worded criticism of Pravda RU as a source. Friday (talk) 21:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

InShaneee, I did not threaten you. The only one who is threatening people is you. Virtually every communication I've received from you has been a threat. I have no power with which to threaten anyone. You need to be more concerned about what other Wiki administrators can do. They have the power to enforce Wiki rules and standards -- which you are clearly violating when you use your administrator authority to intimidate editors and stiffle debate. Askolnick 22:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

InShaneee, instead of responding to my complaint on WP:AN/I -- or to any of the editors and administrators who have agreed your actions were unjustified -- you continue to harrass and threaten me for any criticism of pro-paranormal editors. And here you turn a blind eye to Keith Tyler's personal attack, but threaten to block me for responding to HIS attack! Not only are Wiki administrators not allowed to use their blocking powers to censor content they don't like - as you blatantly did - they are not allowed to discriminate and use their power to protect editors on the side of an editing dispute they support. Repeatedly, you have stood by and watched Tyler and Dreadlocke post one personal attack after another, while using your administrative authority to threaten me. Such conduct is an abuse of the authority giving to you by the Wiki community. This latest threat doesn't leave me wuth any real options. Unless you can show where you ever threatened to block Keith Tyler, Dreadlocke, and Andrew Homer for their personal attacks, I will begin the mutually unpleasant process of filing a wiki:RfC over this and your previous abuse of administrative authority. Your choice. Askolnick 23:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

InShaneee, I apologize for my mistake. I didn't see the "Keith, the same goes to you" comment at the end of your warning. So I struck out my entire comment above and apologize. Askolnick 01:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Request for input at admins' notice board

Greetings. I suspect we could use a new voice on an ongoing issue with user conduct. Three editors have expressed themselves about User:Kmaguir1 at the admins' noticeboard, here. Thanks for any input you may wish to provide,--Anthony Krupp 15:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

From justanother

Hi, InShaneee.

I see that you are arbitrarily reverting my good-faith edit in Scientology. Please note that I was restoring a previous description, i.e. many vs some, that another user changed without adequate justification per the referenced sources.

Please take the trouble to read the talk page before arbitrarily changing something. I have been editing on this article for over one week and believe that I have earned a certain amount of respect. It ain't easy. It is much easier to revert than to contribute in this article, that is for sure.

I will change it back one more time - if you have something to contribute please discuss it under Scholars on the talk page.

Thank you --Justanother 22:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

"Pushing it"

Unclear what you think is pushing it, and which rules are being violated. I would say given our history, you are not very objective. In the future if you think I am "violating" some rule .. please just directly file a complaint on ANI or the appropriate area rather than bothering me with your undesired opinions. Thank you. Sarastro777 05:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Arpad vs. Juro

Since you decided to block User:Juro for his disruptive behavior, I would like to kindly ask you also to warn User:Árpád to refrain from his disruptive behavior. In his comment, he conspicuously abused statistical data in order to manipulate readers. The initial number of "Hungarian" schools in Slovakia was a result of the preceding Magyarization of predominantly Slovak regions. These schools did not primarily serve the Hungarian community, but they represented a means of oppression on Slovaks in the Kingdom of Hungary. In addition, Arpad denied any significant cultural history of the Slovaks and Slovakia. That is factually wrong and quite offensive (yet somewhat unsurprising in the light of his previous comments ). He seems to enjoy offending non-Hungarian nationalities living in Europe (see for example ). Maybe I am wrong, but I would call and disruptive behavior. What do you think? Arpad systematically pushes his extremist POV (Hungarian revisionism that is the attempts to change the post-Trianon borders of Hungary), which is by the way prohibited by the international law (the peace treaty between the Allies and Hungary after WWII). Perhaps it does not mean anything to you, but Arpad's refined attacks are disruptive for many Central European users. Since you are now involved in the ongoing dispute over very sensitive issues in the region, I wonder if you can deal with Arpad in the same way as you have dealt with Juro. Cheers. Tankred 01:38, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Askolnick

User Askolnick is harrassing me endlessly on the CSICOP talk page. When I cite sources he refuses to check them and will simply insist I made them up. If I disagree with him he threatens me with warnings about disruptive behaviour. I openly accept that I have not responded well to this, but now the constant posts on my talk page threatening me with action if I don't submit to his bully-boy tactics have crossed what I believe to be an acceptable boundary.Davkal 01:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Err... sorry to jump in, Inshaneee, but I've been trying to figger what's going on on the CSICOP talk page — it's hard to do that from zero — and I happened to notice this complaint. Davkal, what "constant posts" on your talk page are those? Askolnick has posted twice on your page today. I have to go back to... hmmm....no, going back doesn't seem to help. Askolnick has actually posted twice, ever, on your talkpage. (You have posted four times on his in the past 20 minutes.) Bishonen | talk 01:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC).

I posted my complaint on his page and made a few changes to it. He has posted twice only, but the point is that the abuse and threats have shifted from the CSICOP page to my talk page. These threats of administrator action have been placed twice in one day since I failed to simply submit to his bully-boy tactics. If you really want to help, Bishonen, then you would do well to read things prior to simply counting things up. Look at the number of times Askolnick has accused of making up my own defintion of ad hominem, and look at how many times he has said this since I pointed out that my definition was 100% accurate according to hundreds of websites dealing with logic (some links were provided). His most recents threats to report me for disruptive behaviour concerned my providing links to a number of articles written by someone he said hadn't written any articles. As I said, Bishonen, whichever side of the fence you sit on re this particluar debate, if you really want to help then you should examine carefully the tactics that Askolnick has employed and condemn them - I don't care if you condemn me as well (I am no angel) but Askolnick has crossed several boundaries that simply should not be crossed. Davkal 01:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Futuristic Sex Robotz on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Futuristic Sex Robotz. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. Mystere 05:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

You're really asking for an RfC

InShaneee, because of my own mistake in which I wrongly accused you of only threatening me with a block, I decided to cut you some slack and not procede with the RfC against your repeated harassment and abuse of your administrative authority. I hoped all the comments you received telling your your actions were way out of line would bring you back into the fold of judicious administrators. Unfortunately, your latest act of censorship shows that that hope was misspent. You continue to claim the right to censor information on talk pages that you do not like. You have NO such right. I don't care that you don't like sarcasm. You don't have to like it. That's your right. But you don't have the right to remove anyone's comments which you think are sarcastic and you don't have the right to remove anyone's comments that you decide are not "respectful" enough, as you did several days ago. No one appointed you the Wiki Proper Respect Inspector, nor its Official Sarcasm Catcher. You were appointed as an administrator and as such you should be working to reduce conflict and disruption, not increasing it. You appear hell-bent on creating more rather than fewer disputes. You're leaving me no option but to resume the process of filing an RfC. Askolnick 18:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

InShaneee, I had hoped you would get the message that other editors and administrators tried to tell you in their comments on my WP:AN/I complaint. You are not allowed to censor comments on talk pages that you consider "disrespectful" or "sarcastic" or otherwise not meeting your standards of being "nice." You simply have no right to do that. It is disruptive. It causes the very problem that you claim is your motivation for making those threats and deleting comments. And you are not allowed to threaten to block editors for making comments you don't like. Did you NOT read what other editors and administrators told you? It's clear you felt no need to reply either to them or to me, but did you even read what they and I said? I'm sorry the informal complaint didn't seem to help you understand why this conduct is unacceptable. Do you really not understand that this behavior, if not stopped, may lead to your being censured or even cause the loss of your administrator status? With power comes responsibility, but the use of your administrator authority to bully and intimidate other editors and to remove comments you don't like from talk pages is irresponsible use of that authority. Unless you agree to stop this disruptive conduct, I am going to file an RfC requesting that you be censured and stripped of your administrator position. I had hoped I could reason with you. If you're ready to reason, I'll put the RfC on hold. Askolnick 04:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Also InShaneee, it probably would be helpful for you to read this paragraph from WP:NPA. It shows that your recent interpretations of what is and is not allowable speech on Misplaced Pages is not supported by WP:NPA.

Personal attacks do not include civil language used to describe an editor's actions, and when made without involving their personal character, should not be construed as personal attacks. Stating "Your statement is a personal attack..." is not itself a personal attack — it is a statement regarding the actions of the user, not a statement about the user. There is a difference between "You are a troll" and "You are acting like a troll", but "You seem to be making statements just to provoke people" is even better, as it means the same without descending to name-calling. Similarly, a comment such as "responding to accusation of bad faith by user X" in an edit summary or on a talk page is not a personal attack against user X. Askolnick 04:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Zgcard.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Zgcard.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 16:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Civility

Well, what about JzG? He may be acting civil, but that doesn't mean he's not being a terrible Wikipedian. He has constantly been undermining the intelligence and worthiness of CVG gamers, and has been subtly "treating them like idiots". Telling them that a consensus between gamers doesn't count. The only reason I could apply to this is that he's claiming that gamer Wikipedians have a hive mindset. That they aren't capable of accepting that anything could be more notable than games, and I'm sick of him subtly saying "CVG wikipedians are stupid". There are so many people who feel this way, and I wish they would keep their stupid, ignorant opinions to themselves. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I was not explaining. I was asking "why was JzG never given any such warning?" and it turned into a rant. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Uninsulting? Just because he doesn't swear or call names does not mean he's not being insulting. What do you call this? No better than what I've been doing. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I hardly consider that a valid opinion. He informed me that a CVG editor has an opinion that is not in favor of CVG articles, as if that's supposed to surprise me, as if CVG editors act in the interests of CVG articles. Just because he masks it like he has doesn't change what he meant. What is the point of telling me that CVG editors can have different opinions? If he hadn't already belittled CVG editors before, I wouldn't have made the assumption. But because he did, I find it hard to believe that he suddenly stopped belittling them. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

You know, this comment does sound distinctly paranoid. It also seems somewhat hypocritical, since the root of the problem was your refusal to accept that a long-standing usage, which exists in dictionaries due to its widespread currency, might justifiably have at least an equal claim to notability as that of a character in a video game. Of course you could have swayed the argument by posting some credible evidence of the video game usage being more widespread, in response to the multilpe evidenc eposted for currency of the real-world term, but you chose not to do so. Instead you restricted yourself to proof by assertion. The end result is that bowser is a disambiguation page, which is a great result for the encyclopaedia as nobody is likely to miss out on the meaning they were looking for; it even links to the stagename from which the Nintendo character gets its name, which is a bonus. I really can't see a downside here. Guy 08:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Civility award

Hero Barnstar An award for your efforts to keep Misplaced Pages a civil place for all editors! Dreadlocke ☥ 23:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

Last bit

Full protection on User talk:Jorge Rodriguesss; thanks lots. ~ PseudoSudo 21:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Uwe Boll

Would it be possible to have a reason why you reverted the edits by 85.50.99.97 on Uwe Boll ? 129.10.110.42 21:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

My Question

An answer to my question would be nice. Why was I blocked but not the other offending party? Torturous Devastating Cudgel 16:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

My Talk Page

It's my own damned Talk Page page, and I'll disenvowel whomever I damned well please. If you don't understand what's going on, don't criticize it. --Calton | Talk 15:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Try reading the link above -- and since you responded so quickly, it's clear you didn't. Try remembering the point of not altering comments. Read the link again. Notice the difference? --Calton | Talk 15:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes. You're trying to cleverly insult him. Don't do it again. Your mind-reading skills are falling short. I do it because it leaves the bogus comments without my being forced to read them -- which is certainly more honest than deleting them outright, which is what he does. Any suggestion otherwise is projection on your part. --Calton | Talk 16:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The next time you display such incivility, regardless of what any other user may or may not being doing, you're going to get a time out. What part of I do it because it leaves the bogus comments without my being forced to read them did you miss? What part of that is reliant upon or rationalized by the clause that follows? I believe deleting comments from one's Talk Pages is dishonest and I don't do it, no matter how stupid or insulting they are, but I'll be damned if I'll be forced to read them every time I have to go to my own talk page. Calling it "incivility" is flatly wrong, no matter how you handwave about it. --Calton | Talk 16:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Your comment

Ok, I actually see what you're talking about. But it's hard to deal with somebody putting down every single idea he reads. Check that page up, every single project is put down by that nobody*. And by "nobody"* I mean anybody. I just realized he is just a regular editor like me, but he acts like he calls the shots contributing to nothig but criticism (and I don't mean the good healthy kind).

In another article I relyed in my memory because I felt sure and put wrong some missing data, I corrected it myself as soon as somebody commented it. And he tells me "please don't rely on your memeory". Firstly, it wasn't that big a deal, seconly I research a lot, thirdly I haven't seen him contributing with info yet, and finally I don't know about him but I'm not a machine. He is such a jerk. I don't like what I did or my tone right now, that's why I haven't been writting a lot latelly, but I understand howcome I had sch moment of weakness.

I dont get him, what's his goal? I don't think he'll be happy until wikipedia is a blanc page with absolutely no info at all. Who the hell is he to judge me? I promess to behave, you can keep an aye on me, but tell him to please be more consederate to people. For what's worth, I'm sorry.--The Judge 20:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I give up, I can't handle that guy. I'll just ignore him.--The Judge 21:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

This is the kind of attacks Chris does, "I'm really trying to understand your writing. No offnse intended, but is English your second language?--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 12:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC) "...like the memory thing, technically he is right, but he is mean. I wrote the English thing at the top of my page. Of course he intends the ofense.--The Judge 22:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Ruzgar

I do not see any racist slurs and etc at this diff. The page protection is unwarranted in my opinion (strictly based on that diff, didnt look too deep). He is also complaining about his block.

I'll translate the discussion on that diff for you (I will overly simplify it too). Basicaly Ruzgar's inclusion of the POV image was a reaction to the existance of similar images on Armenian Genocide. He was violating WP:POINT in that sense.

Regarding the incident: While I agree that Kurdistan Workers Party article should not have such pov images, I further feel same standard should be applied to Armenian Genocide and other similar articles.

--Cat out 23:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The fact is, not only did the user continuously and knowingly disrupted that article with that image, and even after being blocked, encouraged others to continue in his stead. That's what I consider trolling. --InShaneee 17:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Even so, his ISP has a semi-dynamic ip so the block is causing collateral damage. I am not compaining about the existance of the block, I am complaining about the length of the block. I also feel that the protection of the talk page is unnecesary. After all, he can simply IRC/email for that, this only prevents me from talking to him.

I feel the user is frustrated with his inability to work on Armenian Genocide article (a frustration I share) and that this WP:POINT violation is steming from that. I feel what he seeks is right (removal of pov images from Armenian Genocide article), just that his method is completely wrong (attempt to force pov images to Kurdistan Workers Party article).

--Cat out 22:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

My block just expired can you unlock my talk page. Ruzgar 17:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

User Lutherian

How long do we have to tolerate Lutherian and his disurbances?

,,

Ass wipe? Gay devil worshippers? Provocative racist? --Eupator 21:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Fine, that covers the "provocative racist", what about the other two?--Eupator 03:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

It's a blanket warning. He's been warned. --InShaneee 14:23, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Flying Spaghetti Monster

Please do not remove individual posts, the anon is a newbie, don't bite the newbies.Hypnosadist 21:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC) Cease editing my comments on the talk page.Hypnosadist 22:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Civility: stop editing other peoples post for MINOR reasons. There are real civility issues out there like

I am keeping this bit of filth for evidence and show.http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FHis_excellency%2FEvidence&diff=69701704&oldid=69699623

In my own defense: A man has a right to his opinion. I do feel Timothy Usher is a bigot. I do feel that Jews are screwing up the planet (though admittedly Muslims, by far, surpass the Jews in their capacity to destroy things). Look at history. Only recently has it become the norm to like Jews. That only came about after certain countries (eg America) adopted them as the collective dame-in-distress needing shelter and protection. Sort of the precursor to the chihuahua. Before then, Jews were hated in Europe and America alike..And everywhere else. We all know Jews were once banished from most culturally superior European countries. The only reason why Poland took them in was that they had loads of money. Probably the same reason why Washington panders to the now. Point is, alot of people dislike Jews. I'm entitled to, so long as I don't demonstrate that dislike on articles dealing with the topic of Jews. We don't penalize people for not liking things, do we? His Excellency... 00:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

So how about dealing with things like that. PS this user is not perminently banned!Hypnosadist 22:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't Edit peoples posts! Admin privilages do not give you cart-blanche. Deleting an anon editors posts on talk without giving a reason is not going to make them get a login is it. Don't bite the newbies!Hypnosadist 22:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Editing someones reply even off topic is something i have never seen especially as such talks are common (too common you're right) but as i say why not start with people who do it alot! I gave you info on an editor that does that and you say a make a personal attack? Lots of people have told him about it and its the nature of the content thats the problem. Rants and Conspiracy theories, do something about it or don't, don't matter to me. And in the part of the world i'm from the phrasing "If you cannot act civil, YOU will be dealt with accordingly, like it or not" indicates a threat, because of good faith i don't take it that way.Hypnosadist 22:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

You have not said how my edit is a personal attack, it is a comment on a users negative editing. It was just an idea for you if you are bothered about chatting on a talk page, if not thats ok. But why is the FSM page specially picked out for this kind of editing? Try Talk:2006 transatlantic aircraft plot insted! Lots of chat for you to edit!Hypnosadist 22:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Thanks! :) —Khoikhoi 02:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Would you please take a look at these ,. Thanks.Heja Helweda 05:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually the above user does not have access to the unabridged Merriam Webster's dictionary. So she deleted words that she did not find in the non-unabridged version. Despite the hardwork that has gone in finding these words. Also some of her edits are very unscholarly and she should not delete from enteries which she did not do enough research on and instead concentrate on enteries where she has put up unreliable material. --alidoostzadeh 05:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

For example she deleted this term: ;Zerda: Etymology: Arabic zerdaw, probably of Persian origin. Fennec. .. whereas I have given full reference which is available for any subscriber to merriam-websters unabridged dictionary. But she deleted it with no valid reason: . Deleting materials that are soundly references is unacceptable. Some other words where also deleted although they were soundly referenced. This is actually vandalism of content as proper sources that are reliable (Merriam-Websters dictionary) were given. Also my reference to Assyrian/Armenian genocide is that in the article she edits, she does not mention them for political reasons, although I am not interested in her articles. But I do consider removing primary sources like Merriam-Websters unabridged dictionary (which needs subscription) as vandalism. --alidoostzadeh 06:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

hey Shane

please check your e-mail. thank you! ITAQALLAH 14:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Warning

This is your final warning to stop Wikistalking me. Further action will brought to the arbitration comittee.

Sarastro777 05:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

DND Campaign

You can go ahead and boot my articles. I had already copied my articles before I even bothered to protest, foreseeing the inevitable.Broken Piece 17:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

User Lutherian

Naturally, I'm tolerant of others' opposing views and always assume good faith, but how much more do we have to put up with comments like these ,  ? --MarshallBagramyan 18:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Stargate SG-1

In your edit summary you said "This has been discussed elsewhere to this conclusion." Could you provide a link to this discussion? The only discussion I know of is on the talk page, and if any concensus was reached, it was that the main campaign is noteworthy. --Tango 19:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Please see the straw poll on Talk:Stargate SG-1 about the fan campaign and give your opinion there. Thanks! --Tango 10:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Wikiproject Paranormal

I'd be happy to help you, but you'll need to be a bit more specific about what you want me to do. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 18:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks pretty good for a regular template; you might want to shorten the initial text a bit, though, since people have been complaining about crowded talk pages.

As far as the other stuff, I can help you add that if you want. If you'd like to experiment on your own, though, here is some annotated code from {{WPMILHIST}} for the things you need:

{| class="messagebox standard-talk"
|-
| ]
| This {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|non-article page|article}} is within the scope of the ''']'''.  If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the ''']'''.

The base message. If you get heavily into assessments, writing up a FAQ for visitors might be helpful, but it's not required.

|-
{{#if:{{{class|}}}| {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|
{{!}} {{{{{class}}}-Class}}
{{!}} This page is not an article and does not require a ''']'''.
|
{{!}} {{{{{class}}}-Class}}
{{!}} This article has been ''']''' as '''{{{class}}}-Class''' on the ].
}}
|
{{!}} {{-Class}}
{{!}} This article has not yet ''']''' on the ].
}}

The first part of the assessment code, which displays the rating in the banner.

{{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|A|
{{#ifeq:{{{A-Class|}}}|pass||
<includeonly>]</includeonly>
}}
}}

Support for a more formal system for assigning A-Class ratings, if you want to go down that road. This may be too much process for a smaller project, though.

|-
{{#if:{{{portal|}}}
{{{attention|}}}
{{{needs-infobox|}}}
{{{A-Class|}}}
{{{peer-review|}}}
{{{old-peer-review|}}}
{{{collaboration-candidate|}}}
{{{past-collaboration|}}}
{{{ACW-task-force|}}}
{{{Ancient-Near-East-task-force|}}}
{{{Australian-task-force|}}}
{{{Aviation-task-force|}}}
{{{British-task-force|}}}
{{{Canadian-task-force|}}}
{{{Chinese-task-force|}}}
{{{Classical-task-force|}}}
{{{Dutch-task-force|}}}
{{{Early-Modern-task-force|}}}
{{{French-task-force|}}}
{{{German-task-force|}}}
{{{Indian-task-force|}}}
{{{Italian-task-force|}}}
{{{Japanese-task-force|}}}
{{{Maritime-task-force|}}}
{{{Memorials-task-force|}}}
{{{Middle-Ages-task-force|}}}
{{{Napoleonic-task-force|}}}
{{{Polish-task-force|}}}
{{{US-task-force|}}}
{{{Weaponry-task-force|}}}
{{{WWI-task-force|}}}
{{{WWII-task-force|}}}|
{{!}} colspan="2" style="padding: 0px;" {{!}}
<div class="NavFrame" style="border-style: none; padding: 0px; "><div class="NavFrame" style="border-style: none; padding: 0px; "><div class="NavFrame" style="border-style: none; padding: 0px; "><div class="NavFrame" style="border-style: none; padding: 0px; "><div class="NavHead" style="background: wheat; font-size: 120%; text-align: left;">More information about this {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|non-article page|article}}...</div><div class="NavContent" style="text-align: left; font-size: 120%;">
{{{!}}
{{!}}-
{{!}} style="width: 43px;" {{!}}
{{!}}

This produces the show/hide box for everything else in the banner. The big list of parameters matches everything else that can appear in the template; obviously, you should remove any that don't apply in your case.

{{!}}-
{{#ifeq:{{{peer-review|}}}|yes|
{{!}} style="background: gainsboro;" align="center" {{!}} ''']'''
{{!}} A ''']''' for this {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|non-article page|article}} to be ] by the project.<includeonly>]</includeonly>
}}
{{!}}-
{{#ifeq:{{{old-peer-review|}}}|yes|
{{!}} style="background: gainsboro;" align="center" {{!}} ''']'''
{{!}} This {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|non-article page|article}} has had a ] which has now been ''']'''.<includeonly>]</includeonly>
}} 

The peer review lines.

{{!}}-
{{#ifeq:{{{collaboration-candidate|}}}|yes|
{{!}} style="background: gainsboro;" {{!}} ]
{{!}} This {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|non-article page|article}} is a ''']''' to be the project's ].<includeonly>]</includeonly>
}}
{{!}}-
{{#if:{{{past-collaboration|}}}|
{{!}} style="background: gainsboro;" {{!}} ]
{{!}} This {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|non-article page|article}} was the project's ''']''' ({{{past-collaboration|}}}).<includeonly>]</includeonly>
}}

The collaboration lines.

...

Any other parameters you want to include can be done as the above peer review/collaboration ones.

{{!}}}
</div></div></div></div></div>
}}
|}

The end of the banner layout, closing off the tables and show/hide divs.

<includeonly>{{#switch:{{{class}}}
|FA=]
|A=]
|GA=]
|B=]
|Start
|start=]
|Stub
|stub=] {{#ifeq:{{{auto|}}}|yes|
{{{!}} class="messagebox standard-talk" 
{{!}}-
{{!}} ]
{{!}} This article has been ''automatically'' ] as '''Stub-Class''' by the ''']''' because it uses a ].
* If you '''agree''' with the assessment, please remove <code>{{!}}auto=yes</code> from the {{tl|WPMILHIST}} template above.
* If you '''disagree''' with the assessment, please change it by editing the <code>{{!}}class=</code> parameter in the {{tl|WPMILHIST}} template above and removing the stub template from the article.
{{!}}} ]
}}
|NA = ]
|#default=]
}}</includeonly>

The second part of the assessment code, which produces the actual categories for bot-parsing. Note that the "Stub" rating includes support for auto-tagging by bot (the whole #if block in that rating); if you're not planning to use bots for rating, you probably don't need this.

Hopefully this will be somehow useful; if you have any other questions or requests, please don't hesitate to ask! Kirill Lokshin 20:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll take a look at it. As far as the project-side implementation, you might want to take a look at WP:PROJGUIDE (which isn't complete yet, but should still be useful); but feel free to borrow chunks of WP:MILHIST infrastructure if you need. :-) Kirill Lokshin 21:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I fixed a few stray links and the show/hide code, but everything else seems to work. Is there some reason you didn't include the first part of the assessment code, which actually shows the assessment in the banner, as well as the old peer review/collaboration categories?

As a side note, you may want to move the project page to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Paranormal (which is the standard capitalization convention for WikiProjects) before you gather too many subpages. Kirill Lokshin 22:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, done. I've created an example here that shows what the template looks like with some parameters set. Kirill Lokshin 22:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Only the first table (the current counts) is bot-generated; the monthly statistics have to be computed by hand. It's just a bit of time with a calculator once a month, though, so I think it's doable. Kirill Lokshin 00:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Once the bot picks up the assessment categories, it should create the page automatically. Make sure that you put Category:Paranormal articles by quality in Category:Misplaced Pages 1.0 assessments, though, or the bot won't find it. Kirill Lokshin 22:02, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words! :-) Kirill Lokshin 23:26, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Exile and the Kingdom (Lyrics)

You speedily deleted this article (and rightfully so), but there's currently an AFD for it that needs to be closed. Thanks! -- Merope 19:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my userpage. The user B&W Anime Fan has been cited before for vandalism, and was twice blocked previously for vandalizing Misplaced Pages (specifically my userpage :P) I don't know why he continued his vandalism, especially because since he apologized to me for it after his block period expired. Perhaps he has lapsed into his old habits. Anyways, thanks once more for your sharp eyes! =) –- kungming·2 | · 00:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)