Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:14, 24 November 2006

Moldovan referendum

Indeed, Me, too, I like the fact that we don't clash over this subject. :) Still, you didn't answer my question about your mark. Dpotop 23:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

You have it on your talk page, just look a bit upwards. Dpotop 23:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

Hey, I just recently protected (earlier today) Tourette Syndrome and now, the user Sandy is requesting the page to be unprotected. I don't see why it matters if the page is protected, or not protected, but I don't want to get involved in it again. Can you please take a look at it, and decide whether it should be unprotected or kept protected? Thanks. =) Nishkid64 00:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Lol...thanks anyway. Nishkid64 00:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk pages

Don't we all?

Still, particularly in contentious situations, much easier for everyone to see what's going on, and the only way someone neutral can step in and potentially resolve the dispute. Again, you both have good points, but you're both unable to see the other's side of the argument, and I can add arguments to both of yours, and show you both, if you're willing to listen, that you could find a compromise that would improve the readibility and help people understand why this information is important to include. But again, if it's not on the talk page, no one else can attempt to get you both to see the other side. KP Botany 00:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not lecturing you, and I do tell it to other users, as often as possible. I would like people to discuss these issues, on the talk pages, but instead people simply revert changes they don't like and simply tell the other party they're wrong, or don't discuss it at all in a way that invites outside contributions. KP Botany 00:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry, meatpuppetry, or just one more crusading user sharing in his views?

The question that still begs is: why did the two edit each other's user pages? Solidarity? LOL. In any case, it isn't surprising that there physically were more than one user with those views on wikipedia, since before the arrival of Antarcticwik, problem IPs ocasionally surfaced from time to time. Furthermore, other otherwise well known and respected Chilean wikipedia users (even admins) have also made similar edits regarding Chile in that regards (ie. decreasing proportions of ethnic groups or outright deleting content regarding demographics). The "mestizo" question in Chile is a very sensitive issue. As someone who has been there once before, i say that from first hand experience.

Chilean users such as Jespinos and CieloEstrellado also seem to be hell bent on excluding "mestizo". But even so, all four of these users together do not represent all Chilean users on the wiki project in regards to the ethnic issue of Chile. Just for the record, I don't want to tarnish Jespinos or CieloEstrellado's contribution to wikipedia, and I will state that appart from the sores of the "mestizo" issue (which doesn't indicate any fault on their part because it is a common phenomenon among Chileans) as far as I know they are excellent contributors. Antarcticwik and Chileeuropride seem just to be the extremist element in views of the "mestizo" issue that seems to plague that country. Al-Andalus 00:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

What is my supposed fault? Why I am associated with people having POVs opposed to mine? Who is the person that really is obsessed with the word mestizo?, but the bad thing is that along with using that word, paragraphs against the mestizos are subtly included. On the other hand, characters like Chileuropride are invented with the aim of manipulate to the editors. Jespinos 19:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't blame anything on you. I just made an observation on your views in that one particular matter. I also placed a caveat pointing out that apart from that as far as I know, you're a really good contributor. Also, the obsession with the word mestizo lies with those who cannot substanciate their point of view, since it is they that keep removing it. If you (plural) could get past that word we all wouldn't be where we are. Perhaps you don't see it as much of an issue, but if you experienced the number of attacks I get from annonymous IP's (most of whom I assume are Antarctikwik from before he created his account, but which continued from annonymous IP's) you'd understand the seriousness of the matter.

Also, you weren't all that helpful in that while you didn't encourage Antarctiwik's methods, you did encourage his cause. Game? My cause? Unmask what? You inadvertently cheered him on. All I've ever asked for the four of you is to walk into :Talk once in a blue moon, to actually back up your changes and constant reverts. But none of you have had the capacity to do that.

I now see that you too are suggesting that I created Chileeuropride. Please! I don't know if the two (Antarctic and Chileeuro) are or aren't the same person (aparently not), but all I know is that the two made similar edits for the most part and on ocassions edited each others pages. Whether or not they are the same person, it is clear to me that they we're some sort of tag team that at least knew of each other prior to the emergence of the latter. It seems only that one was a bit more idiotic than the other in his unsourced and unsustainable POV pushing and got himself blocked.

Finally, I would like all of those attacks on my page investigated. One apparently knows me and made a veiled threat to come and get me. Then there is , and , and . Al-Andalus 22:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Tibet

I have started a discussion. Please read the Talk pages for Tibet. Also, I only undoed your edit ONCE, not "repeatedly" as you state. Mamin27 00:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Al'Ilah

I fully protected the page while you were semi-protecting it. Does semi-protection prevent blocked users from editing it? -- tariqabjotu 03:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

THE INVENTION OF ANDALUS

It responds please, ¿The Andalus IP is similar, to the of Chileuropide? Antarcticwik 04:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply

I see what you mean, but that part I was talking about was deleted by Clevelander right before the closure of the vote for no apparent reason. As such, I was not adding something, but simply reverting vandalism. Please take a look at the page history.. Is it right for someone to take one of my comments that went to the heart of the argument beneath the AfD to be taken out by someone just because they didn't like it? And please also note that Clevelander tried to blackmail me, please take a look at my talk page and PA notice board and judge for yourself. I am not making a big deal of this since he withdrew his report by himself from the PA board. Is such act to blackmail a Wiki user to stop him contributing not against policy? Baristarim 04:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

He took out his comments by himself, and I will not be re-adding them, so you will have to look back into my talk page history . I am just saying all this to let you know that I was not playing with the AfD, but was rather reverting the deletion of my comments on content that were removed without my consent by Clevelander before the closure of the vote. In that case, Clevelander also should get a vandalism warning, right? But I don't want it to be as such, and that's why I didnt report him to anywhere and just reverted myself. I could have simply reported to you beforehand about the vandalism and asked you (or an admin) that something be done about it, no? :)))) So, believe me, I was simply trying to make sure that Wiki was running more efficient, trying to revert vandalism myself instead of reporting it to admins. Please also take note that OttomanReference's extremely relevant comments about the AfD have also been deleted without his permission.. Is that also correct behaviour? Baristarim 05:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It is not just a "bad" idea to delete relevant comments, it is vandalism, and that compounded with the blackmail issue is a big enough one. Just a quick note about the vote-stacking issue. As you can see, I have spent so much time writing and putting up posts and replies to the concerns of individual users. I have no idea who this Erdem guy is, but he has a right to have his opinion heard as well I suppose. Just FYI, I haven't contacted this person in anyway, nor have I asked somebody else to do it for me. And I believe that vote-stacking can be going on both sides, I am afraid.. In any case, there are no votes "per se", since there are no sides, what is important are the arguments and general concensus.. As for Karcha.. Can you please put back his vote that you crossed out? It was crossed out since he was blamed for being a sockpuppet of E, and if he is not, his vote should stay. Don't forget that that vote was struck out after a pseudo-confirmation of sockpuppetry, which means it was retroactive. However a simple ban for disruptive behavior is not retroactive in the sense that it would allow the deletion of votes (that don't include PA or etc.) that were made "before" the ban. It would only affect the future, not the past. Even people who have compared the "Ottoman Muslims" to "Nazi Germans" have voted, so I don't understand why karcha's vote is still struck out. Can you please also report vote-stacking that might be going around with the "delete" side? Please don't do it in such a way that would somehow discredit the hours I put into my posts replying to the concerns of individual posts. Please read the TfD in its entireity, you will see that the influence of any kind of vote-stacking is negligable, the debate has taken ten times much more space than the votes themselves. I find it very interesting that this issue of vote-stacking is coming about after many Turkish users turned up to vote, as if that was a bad thing. Why do you assume that just because Turks are having their voice heard, they must be vote-stacking? You and I know that many groups coordinate by message boards, emails and etc, much more than Turks do. So please keep that in mind. Cheers! Baristarim 05:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I just read Erdem's vote and his reasons. It was a long paragraph and not just some one word vote (like most of the delete votes are btw). To try to discredit him by blaming his comments on vote-stacking is disrespectful to someone who put his time and energy to write a whole paragraph to explain his reasons for his vote. Doesn't matter if hadn't edited for a long time. Please, please, don't try to unjustly influence the outcome of this debate by writing a report that says "there might be vote-stacking going on". None of these users are sockpuppets. Baristarim 05:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

His paragraph was not filled with usual banter, but it was a detailed explanation of the reasons underlying why the template should be kept. So, I see nothing wrong with a user putting forward his opinions in such a neat and detailed manner. Baristarim 05:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for the quick action on the angry Bahraini! :) Zora 06:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

AFD relist?

Is it okay to relist AFDs that need votes? Example: I have AFDs from yesterday so can I relist them for today? Khorshid 10:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

legal threat issue

Hi Khoikhoi - I request you to please check out User talk:65.110.153.102 and his edits on Talk:Allama Mashriqi, where he issued a legal warning/threat. I've blocked him for 1 week as of now, but I request your input on the proper course of action in this regard. Cheers, Rama's arrow 16:39, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey - sorry I made a mistake in blocking him. The legal threat was a quote from a website being discussed. Rama's arrow 18:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Yup, thanks. A question - how would you handle a threat case? Rama's arrow 20:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much indeed

Hi, I'll try to do the best I can. Bye bye--Furyo Mori 19:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks!!!! Bye--Furyo Mori 19:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Request for help

Dear Khoikhoi, I have made a small mess and I wonder if you can help me setting it right Ksyrie (talk · contribs) made a completely unwarranted revert of a page move from Chinese city wall to Cheng Qiang, and I reverted his edit my cutting and pasting. Now, I have realized that my course of action has disrupted the history of the page. I wonder if you could help us setting this right. Also, if you have time, could you tell the abovementioned user not to insist on Chinsese terminology in English Misplaced Pages. He will try to make a move again.--Niohe 19:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Chileuropide case

It responds please, what it is the country of origin of the IP of chileeuropide. Antarcticwik 19:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot

Concerning to Cheng Qiang,it's I who first make this article,When I found non corresponding word to describe this kind of Wall,I prefered to use the chinese translation.I just wonder the justifiability for naming it as Chinese City wallKsyrie

What are you doing?

What must i do?

User:Ksyrie again...

Sorry to ask you for help again, but User:Ksyrie is going rampant on China proper and just violated WP:3RR. Check the edit history for evidence. I think it is time to give him a warning or block him/her for a while.--Niohe 22:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

This is getting out of hand

Please take a look at these: , , , , , ? "POV template"? This is not just an ordinary "what do you think?" call. If it is not ok for E104421 to tell one of his friends in his university about the pages he is interested in wiki, this is also not ok. Baristarim 23:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I did not know that this is not allowed. Khoikhoi explained it to me yesterday, and since then, I did not post this message to anyone. Tājik 23:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

All this reminds me of Mustafa Akalp's performance at Khoi's RFA. User Baristarim, you are missing an important point. If E104... was asking people at work/school to come to Misplaced Pages and support him that is soliciting meatpuppets and is prohibited by WP:POLICY (see WP:SOCK). Spamming talkpages for votes is not meatpuppetry (as those users are already legitimate Misplaced Pages users) and is frowned upon, but as far as I know, there is no specific policy against it just yet.--Euthymios 23:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

PLEASE tell Baristam to stop wikistalking my contribs. he and ahwaz have become close friends. very very close :) Khorshid 23:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Look at this: *slaps himself on the head* Khorshid 23:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Slap myself on the head? I only notified ONE user, I didn't paste it all over message boards or at the talk pages of scores of users. I know the limit between a vote-stacking campaign and simple notification to one user. If I had wanted I would have sent e-mails to at least hundred users. It is common knowledge and practice that certain AfDs and TfDs are told to other users by some other users, what is important is the limit, there is a fine line between letting one-two people know about a particular vote and a massive campaign to get out scores of votes. In any case none of them are "votes", strictly speaking. Dry votes don't cut it, people have to come in and explain their reasons. If they want, they can say "per X", but even that doesn't carry the same amount of weight as a thought-out parapgraph. That's all I am saying.. Baristarim 03:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

What are you saying? I put 3 of her articles for deletion. NONE of them are notable - see WP:BIO and WP:PROF. If you have a problem with me then block me! DO IT IF YOU BELIVE I AM FUCKING DISRUPTIVE - I SICK AND FUCKING TIRED OF THIS SHIT OF GETING ATTACKED AND CALLED BIAS WHEN THEY ARE JUST AS BIASED Khorshid 03:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

What kind of words are here? Is this personel attack also.-->Attention to any admins.Must 10:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

• I feel verybad myself since my name is used in this discussion. 1-What Tajik said, also I said in my case. I didnt know that to send messages for vote is not allowed thattime.After first warning I stopped my messages. Conclusion; I blocked, Tajik..?
• According to wiki rules, every body (including anon) can put his/her vote and oppinion in anywhere. Nobody cancel this rule.Every vote must be counted. If; Today, I would ask my wife to login,using my home IP. (I know exactly that, Her wote will be also "Keep".)Who will cancel this vote, with which right and according to which rule. Please explain to me.Must 10:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Istro-Romanians

Excellent. Right now, two things spring to mind: we need sources (as you recognise), and an ethnic group template would be very helpful, provided we can gather enough information to fill it up. I will see what I can do. Biruitorul 23:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Good work. I cannot, however, contribute much on such topics, unless I'm called to express an opinion in some obvious area: my knowledge of Romance Balkan cultures other than my own is, alas, minimal. Thanks for the notification. Dahn 15:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

BIAS

So I am biased? Look at this: What do you call this, is he not stalking me and harrassing me when that disucssion has NOTHING to do with him and I make NO comment about him there?!? And he calls me that I am ATTACKING this admin when I am only CRITICIZNG which I have a legitimate right to do! I an asking that he be wanred and sanctioned for this stalking. Khorshid 03:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

No, not at all, I have been checking into E104421's case since much before you joined into the debate there, if you look into that section, you will see that my comments there date back before your involvement. I just checked it again to see if there was something new about him. Believe me, there is no conspiracy theory here, I was not stalking u into an incident that was reported to admin noticeboard. :))) Baristarim 04:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Three revert incident

I'm afraid I don't quite understand what's going on with Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:Freedom_skies_reported_by_User:Nat_Krause_.28Result:_prot.29 The 3RR incident involving User:Freedom skies. You marked it "Page protected by Blnguyen. Khoikhoi 09:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)", but what kind of remedy is this against the user who committed the 3RR? Heck, it was already protected, before I had posted the 3RR report. Meanwhile, our friend Freedom skies continues his POV edits on other articles. Why hasn't he been blocked?—Nat Krause 04:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The page should be unprotected and Freedom skies should be blocked. Why should the entire rest of the world be denied its Jimbo-given right to edit that page because this guy decided to go on a one-man edit war crusade?—Nat Krause 04:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

No.—Nat Krause 04:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Look, I'm very frustrated by the way this situation is developing. It's not a major problem, but it feels like just about the last straw for me. However, this isn't your problem; you haven't been involved with it outside of the 3RR report and you haven't done anything to make the situation worse. So, I don't hold it against you at all, but, hell no, I'm not getting involved in more bureaucracy over this.—Nat Krause 04:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Silly question

Hey, I have a very silly problem. I created this article Turkey - United States relations (with that spelling) to make it a redirect to Turkey-United States relations. But instead of the article's title in the redirect thing I put what was supposed to be my edit summery - "redirect page". So now it redirects to redirect page :)) It is a really silly thing, but can u help me sort it since I cannot move the page.. Sorry for taking your time! cheers! Baristarim 04:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

thanks!! Baristarim 04:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Check your email when u have the time. i will reply tomorrow. Ciao;-) Hectorian 05:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Baristarim

This user is Wikistalking me and other Iranian Users. He is all of a sudden active in several articles that he would not know anything about unless he was following our edits. He recently interfered with an Arbcom also. What should I do or what can you do?Khosrow II 16:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I want his message against me on Admin noticeboard taken out for "wikistalking" reasons. If not then I have 110% right to wikistalk him all over the place and criticise every little discussion he makes and no one can bother me about it because he does it and he still does it even after you warned him! I suggest also you raise this on the admin discussion and have him sanctioned for harrassment of users. Khorshid 02:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Please check the Ataturk page

Hi again, as I suspected, User:A.Garnet is having a knee-jerk reaction to my section with your suggestions added. He seems to be trying to pick out little criticisms in order to invalidate the whole thing. I'd appreciate it if you'd look at it and give your opinions on that page. The Suggestion section and the one under it in particular. Thanks. --AW 17:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Freedom skies

Sorry for the trouble. I sent a message to Nat Krause which also explains my intentions and actions and asking the legitimacy of his actions. Best regards. Freedom skies 19:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Les nouvelles socqeries

1. GreekWarrior: Good catch. Definitely his style and his IP range. I've logged him on the Arbcom page as you suggested.
2. Any idea who the Istanbul anon is who you warned for harassing Tajik? (85.100.33.205 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)) Tajik complained to me to, but I didn't really know what to do of him, seeing only the few edits under that IP (it's dynamic, obviously). But I'd say he's ripe for a block if he strikes again.
3. You might want to keep in mind that the other anon you've been reverting over at Yashar Kemal is a flat-mate of User:Karcha. Well, edits from the same student dormitory, at least. If he does anything Karchaesque ...

Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

A propos, what do you think about Hellenicwarrior (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? Coincidence? Look at his first few edits... Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 20th.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)