Misplaced Pages

• Archive
• More featured pictures

3RR board

I'm involved and can't make a block on the newest 3RR report. But the user has now reverted 14 times. It would be helpful if you would take a look. Thanks. JoshuaZ 04:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks anyways. I think by softblock means an anon only block. I added a note asking such. JoshuaZ 04:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Last thing before I go to bed

I'm not sure your decline comment is completely accurate. While he was adding the unnecessary and problematic "pro-choice" descriotion (and would have 3RR by that) he was in fact removing the phrase "sexually suggestive" so that was a removal rather than an addition. JoshuaZ 04:25, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Redialed IP

Is now editing from another IP trying to make the same changes to a different article- User:67.72.98.91. A block would be appreciated. JoshuaZ 04:45, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

And has now made the same edit to the Foley scandal article again. JoshuaZ 04:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

It looks like I semi-protted a few seconds before you did, and I blocked the IP. Hopefully no one will see this as RfCable action. JoshuaZ 04:54, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

• Please see Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Abuse by JoshuaZ. - brenneman 05:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, looks like you confused the two editors again. . I don't know about you, but I need some sleep. Have a goodnight. JoshuaZ 05:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Our friend is back within a few minutes of semi-protection going off now as User:68.59.80.163. I would strongly urge to re-semiprotect (since one reason the semi-protection was removed was that I was involved when I semi-protected, so if you do it you are more likely to get it to stick). JoshuaZ 02:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Justanother

You may or may not choose to let this go (frankly, I'd be disappointed if you did, since I think the violation is pretty flagrant) but Justanother has violated the conditions you set down for his unblocking. You instructed him not to edit the article for 24 hours and his next edit to it was less than three hours later. -- Antaeus Feldspar 12:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

He's also removed the "Warning:No Personal Attacks" template I left on his talk page after repeatedly questioning Antaeus Feldspar's mental abilities. wikipediatrix 13:32, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Nice to be back, SV.  :)

Thank you so much for the nice welcome. Seeing yuor signature at the end of a post always cheers me up. The malefactors are already eating me alive as it is.  :)) Anyway, you know where to find me if you need anything. Much wiki-love and smiles at ya.

Lucky 6.9 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

PS: I kinda like these new templates! Fun!

Hardcore punk

I have become involved as an admin in a dispute over this article and associated articles. While it seems clear that one party (NYPUNK) is almost certainly self promoting (and not confroming to WP:Verify), and the other two are legitmate editors, excluding pre-final warning activity it seems to be simply a content dispute (though 3RR is probably being broken by both sides). I have warned the person who is being called a vandal (and welcomed him at the same time), I have also sportected the key page, as IP edits have been involved. One of the users thinks I should block NYPUNK and his IP addressen, I'm dubious at this stage. I would appreciate your looking at the situation, block if you think apporpriate. See User:Rich Farmbrough/NYPUNK for some of the IPs involved. Many thanks, Rich Farmbrough, 16:43 4 October 2006 (GMT).

Arisch

Thank you. - Jmabel | Talk 05:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale and copyright holder

Hopefully this one won't erupt like that last one. The image has 2 issues: Copyright holder and fair use rationale. {{fairuse}} neccessitates a fair use rationale (as {{fairuse}} tags without fair use rationale are delayed speedy deletable), so this is mainly to remind you to at least provide a fair use rationale for Image:GershomScholem.jpg and that images such as these without a fair use rationale may be deleted within one week. (etc etc) As for the copyright holder, see the PUI page for ideas I had on it. --Kevin_b_er 05:58, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Global Positioning System & Hafele-Keating experiment

Just wondering what you think of Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Uknewthat? Cardamon 08:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Lubavitch vs. Barry Gurary

Hi SlimVirgin: Please take a look at the Barry Gurary article and the talk at Talk:Barry Gurary#Dispute of content in particular. Your views would be greatly appreciated in the discussion. IZAK 09:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Gossiping ...

I think I have a right to know, exactly what "dangerous and absurd gossip" are you accusing me of? And who are you accusing me of gossiping about (besides yourself)? Unsubstantiated accusations like these pretty much also amount to gossip, personal attacks, and aggression — the very same thing you're accusing me of. --Cyde Weys 18:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Would you have a look at this?

See User:Friday/Sandbox. Dunno if this is a good idea or not. To me, Cyde's behavior (namely, incivility and improper blocks) is a problem, but then again it'd be easy for me to think so, given some of the things he's said to me. I don't believe that Cyde sees his behavior as a problem at all, so perhaps it'd help him see it, if he saw that sufficient numbers of other editors agreed (assuming they did agree.) Anyway, feel free to have a look, edit, tell me I'm crazy, or whatnot. Friday (talk) 19:40, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Fred Newman page

Hi. The entry on Fred Newman is deteriorating into a mess, and could use an experienced admin to step in and offer some advice. A number of edits and talk postings from both sides seem to be way over the line.--Cberlet 21:41, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:List of protected pages

Currently at least, you do not need to manually add pages to this listing; there is a bot that does it automatically from the protection log. —Centrx→talk • 22:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Gerschom Scholem's photo

Regarding this edit, there is a pattern emerging, and it isn't pleasant. Every time you get to deal with unpleasant arguments you don't engage those, you intimidate the person instead.

As far as my tagging Image:GershomScholem.jpg as unsourced, of course it is unsourced; a proper source would at least give the copyright holder. Since this is an encyclopedia it would be useful to have the year, too.

On occasion I do my share of mucking out the Augias stable that is Category:Fair use images. It's not so pleasant a maintainance task and one wishes you would be more conciliaroty to those that do the job. Regards, Dr Zak 22:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

BOT - Regarding your recent protection of Steven Best:

You recently protected this page but did not give a protection summary. If this is an actual (not deleted) article, talk, or project page, make sure that it is listed on WP:PP. VoABot will automatically list such protected pages only if there is a summary. Do not remove this notice until a day or so, otherwise it may get reposted. Thanks. VoABot 02:00, 6 October 2006 (UTC)