Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:54, 22 February 2018

Archives

Nov 2015 * Dec 2015 January–February 2016 March 2016 * April 2016 May 2016 * June 2016 July 2016 * August 2016 Sept 2016 * Oct 2016 Nov 2016 * Dec 2016 January 2017 * February 2017 March 2017 * April 2017 May 2017 * June 2017 July 2017 * August 2017 Sept 2017 * October 2017 Nov 2017 * Dec 2017 January 2018 * Feb 2018

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 12 sections are present.

Otto von Knobelsdorff

Hi, just a courtesy message letting you know that I removed your refimprove tag on the Otto von Knobelsdorff article due to deleting the huge amount of guff that had been added by an IP back in December and which I figured prompted your addition of the tag in the first place. Googling a few phrases of guff, I found that all that material was entirely, or at least largely, a cut and paste from a webpage. I assume you are OK with the sources otherwise? Cheers, Zawed (talk) 07:35, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

@Zawed: Yes, thank you for removing the copyvio 'cruft. I don't have any concerns otherwise. --K.e.coffman (talk) 07:53, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Police Regiment Centre

The article Police Regiment Centre you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Police Regiment Centre for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chetsford -- Chetsford (talk) 02:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Police Regiment South

What do you mean by "driven anti-Semitism"? Do you want me to supplement the activities section with the info from Arico and whatever else I can dig up? I do think that we need to cover the transition to more anti-partisan ops in '42. Unlike Centre and North, South wasn't redeployed to the frontlines during the Soviet winter counter-offensive. Do you think that this should be mentioned explicitly?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:19, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@Sturmvogel 66: Yes, if you have additional information you can add to the article, that would be great. On the first point, it was a typo (missing "by"). On the last point, yes, it's worthwhile to mention. BTW, I procured Westermann's book (Hitler's Police Battalions) which is excellent, even if it's a grim read. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:41, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I just got it through ILL myself and should have Uniformed Police Forces of the Third Reich: 1933 - 1945 by Phil Nix arriving next week. So hopefully some more organizational history as the post-Barbarossa period is pretty thinly sourced. Also just got In Broad Daylight: The Secret Procedures Behind the Holocaust by Bullets by Father Patrick Desbois. Won the National Jewish Book Award. Amazing interviews of the people who assisted the Germans in their murderous tasks; really a worm's eye view of how some of these massacres were set up and conducted. I found mentions of some post-Barbarossa massacres conducted by Pol.-Rgt. 15 that I need to add to that article.

Fritz Lanman and other Lanmans

Not paid/hired, not related, just volunteer local historian and genealogist who has helped this family and other local notables John Warnock, Charles Geschke once they achieve notability with suitable citations. My primary wikipedia work is streams and their ecology. Schmiebel (talk) 04:23, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

@Schmiebel: thank you for letting me know. However, some of the edits come across as bordering on promotionalism, such as:

• ClassPass is now the world's largest company leading membership to the world’s largest fitness network with over 8,500 partners in 49 cities worldwide! cited to the CEO interview: "ClassPass CEO: Our new product allows users to live-stream their... ".

This is a WP:SPIP source, not suitable for statements in Misplaced Pages voice. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:09, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree and will editSchmiebel (talk) 08:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Deleting articles about certain companies

Hi, today I objected to several deletions you had requested for articles about companies that apparently had originally been created as part of a covert paid editing scheme. I think that these companies are sufficiently notable and that the current version of each article has been cleaned up enough to mitigate NPOV issues. I would like to encourage you to think about the value that a neutral, factual Misplaced Pages article can have for readers seeking impartial information about such a company.

However, I also wanted to let you know that I share the general concern about the effects of undisclosed paid editing; and I do agree that there are cases where deleting or stubbing articles about borderline notable subjects who aggressively try to promote themselves on Misplaced Pages can be preferable over the laborious effort to deal with such activities. Please do keep up your good work on enforcing Misplaced Pages's principles. Regards, HaeB (talk) 06:18, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@HaeB: thank you for your message. I obviously disagree about the notability of the subject, that's why I nominated the article for deletion:

• Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Bounce Exchange.

I think it's a bit naive to believe that an NPOV article can be created on private companies that do a lot of self-promotion; i.e. who has independently verified that the company has 800 customers? And not 80? Etc. But opinions vary. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:00, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Erich Hoepner

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Erich Hoepner you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Euryalus -- Euryalus (talk) 02:41, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

HIAG

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article HIAG has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Good luck with the aricle as it moves forward.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 22:55, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@Twofingered Typist: thank you. I appreciate it. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:01, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Republic of Florida (group)

this is not allowed. Thank you, sir. I am a user and not a bot so please dont confuse me with a bot (talk) 17:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

• Please see Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Republic of Florida (group). K.e.coffman (talk) 02:14, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Bayesian

An article that you have been involved in editing—Bayesian—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:18, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Semiautomatic assault weapons

No, I don't think I'll remove anything. Your adds at NRA strike me as POV. You're entitled to your opinion. I'm simply not going to endorse you imposing it on the page. TREKphiler 11:04, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Trekphiler: Thank you for letting me know. I don't believe that this was an appropriate comment on an article Talk page (), which should focus on content, not contributors. If you wish to discuss my alleged anti-NRA, anti-gun POV, please feel free to do so on my Talk page :-). --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:12, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Norden

Hi, I'm respectfully asking for a response on the Nordic countries talk page regarding Estonia. SørenKierkegaard (talk) 12:43, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@SørenKierkegaard: I commented, but I feel you might get more participation out of a WP:RFC. The page does not appear to be well trafficked. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:26, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

page move

A proper page move request has been posted to Talk:Modern sporting rifle. You may want to post your reasons, and any supporting guidelines, in support of the move there. Notice of the move request will be posted at WP:RM and the community will now have an opportunity to discuss the move the move. (consider this your notice). - WOLFchild 02:57, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Right, this is obviously a potentially controversial move and I'm a little surprised that it wasn't contested sooner. The discussion should be allowed to run for at least seven days. FYI, I'm the bot operator who supports this process. wbm1058 (talk) 03:10, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@Thewolfchild: As with Trekphiler, who I offered same, if you wish to discuss my allegedly having repeatedly voiced anti-gun sentiment, please feel free to do so on my Talk page :-). --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:24, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

You see... that's just it. I'm not interested in debating the politics of firearms here. I just don't like to see people who's political ideologies and anti-gun passions, that have been inflamed by the recent shooting, taking that rage and disrupting the project with it. They need to check that shit at the door. If you've been paying attention, the position I've taken on the issue, now at RfC, is to oppose filling up firearm articles with giant walls of prose about one mass-murder after another. The type of additions that will never end because there will always be some kind of firearms-related incident in the news, including mass-shootings among others. What does that do to these articles? Puts them waaay out of balance. Look through my posts and you'll see just that. I'm not trying to suppress any information. I've made no "pro-" or "anti-gun" comments. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox. It's not a place to right wrongs. We're not here to educate the populace on the 'evils' of "these semi-auto "assault rifles", that have no other purpose than to kill people", or specifically the AR-15 and how many people it's killed and much firearms manufacturers make off the deaths of innocents and all the NRA conspiracies. All that needs to stop.

That goes for renaming that article. I've made my position clear on that and so I won't repeat it here. There is now a proper page request posted. People will actually have an opportunity to have their say before it's moved (if it's moved). The process takes seven (7) days and the page has been move-protected for that time, It's how it should've been done in the first place. Also, you'll notice I didn't post any actual argument against the move. I didn't even post a !vote. I just want to see it done properly, and if the community comes up with a consensus to move. then I'm fine with that. It was done the right way, and can't be argued after.

Too many people have a personal agenda here, someone needs to look out for the project. - WOLFchild 05:28, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't think you checked all your shit at the door. Drmies (talk) 15:30, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Gun control discretionary sanctions

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Template:Z33