Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by KellyAna (talk | contribs) at 03:46, 15 March 2008 (→Barnstar of Diligence: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Cheering from the sidelines

Hi - just want to say "thank you" for being able and willing to follow through on PHG. As far as I can tell, dealing with this type of editor is the absolutely most painful part of editing Misplaced Pages, and I'm sure many others would just have left the case, saying "others will have to solve it".

Here's to hoping sanity wins! --Alvestrand (talk) 13:26, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Hopefully what i just posted helps. Let me know if I botched something terribly? Ealdgyth | Talk 03:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm just plain exhausted. And tired of having that hanging over my head. I'll sleep on it and rework it some in the morning, I think. Definitely try to work in your suggestions. Given the great big case that just landed on ArbCom's lap today, Im thinking this F-M case is going to be slow-tracked. You might be done with the trade show before they start! Heck, I might be deep into foal pictures by then.. ugh! Ealdgyth | Talk 04:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Totally unrelated to Mongols

Question, since you seem to be around tonight. I recently added some information to a new article Bitless bridle started by a new editor. The article as he started it was very much "anti-bit" POV, and I merely added referenced and sourced information to expand the article, as well as removing a commercial external link. Soon after I finished up, the new editor came in and removed most of what I had added, bringing it back down to what he had written, with some source citations I'd added and one sentence left. I left a note on the talk page and the editors page, but quite honestly I don't usually deal with this sort of behavior. Chance you could take a look at the situation and tell me if I'd be out of line to just revert him or what? We're talking mainstream sources here in what I added, nothing controversial. Mainly an expansion of what the bridles are used for. But his edits leave the article with a distinct (to a horseperson at least) anti-bit feel. Not helped by some talk page comments he made to another editor either. Thanks! Ealdgyth | Talk 01:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I also wonder if this isn't somewhat tied into promoting something commercial, given the name of the editor's account and the name of the bridle given in the caption. Ealdgyth | Talk 01:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I'm actually going to be on the road for the next week or two, so my wiki-time will be severely curtailed. I'm on my way to the airport now, but will try to take a look when I'm more stationary.  :) --Elonka 16:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Events seem to be taking care of the issue, I think. A couple of other horse editors have stepped in. Perhaps some newbie biting is going on, but the newb's biting back so... all is fair or something. So don't let it stress you. I'm off Wed also for Vegas, so I sympathize. Ealdgyth | Talk 16:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Mediation

I gladly agree to your proposal to open up the content of our mediation on the Franco-Mongol alliance. PHG (talk) 15:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Brian D Foy/brian d foy

Hi Elonka, would you care to join us or at least have an eye on the current discussion at Talk:brian d foy? The whole thing is probably just another routine quarrel on formatting, but I do get a little tense once opposing editors feel the need to point out their admin status, so having another sysops wielder around for checks and balances might considerably improve the climate over there. – Cyrus XIII 07:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

PWNO

Elonka, I don't wish to distrub thee too much from the time-sucking thing that is the ], but I fear your moderating voice is needed for the WP:PWNB. Things had gotten good for a while, but there are signs that it may go back to its old ways. I refer you to comments such as this and this. As Piotrus has let such comments go, I'm requesting you to put in a word. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 22:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd love to help, but I'm currently traveling, and just snatching a few minutes here and there for Misplaced Pages, while perched in my hotel room. If you think things are bad enough, you could try taking it to ANI. Or if not, I'll try to take a look when I'm back home again. Good luck, Elonka 22:45, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Just don't want things to return to their old ways. Enjoy your trip! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 22:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Kaaba

Hi, You had previously voted to support a Kaaba picture at FPC. An edit has been made to that picture and is up for voting again. I would be pleased if you could please vote for it. Regards, Muhammad(talk) 14:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

KT

I wondered why your recent edit to this article has a misleading edit summary suggesting it was merely MoS:DP cleanup. The addition of Template:Tocright could be considered as such, but you also added alternative capitalisations to the lede as expressly forbidden in the start of MoS:DP, re-ordered many entries without explanation (not that I actually wish to dispute that), removed redlinks and their most relevant wikilinks for reasons I can't fathom, added entries and increased the length of some entries by re-writing them into WP:DICDEFs describing the words rather than the concepts (as is expected in an encyclopedia).

Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley _{talk contrib} 12:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Well first, WP:MOSDAB is a guideline, not a policy. I reviewed my changes but don't see exactly which problems that you're referring to. In any case, on Misplaced Pages, if you see something you would like to change, the best way to deal with things is usually to just change it, not to chase after the previous editor who was on the page. There are preferred methods of doing things, but that doesn't mean that they're required. Either way, your change seems fine, it could really be done either way. --Elonka 19:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Baghdad (1258)

I imagine you're already aware of the baloney going on around this article, but I thought I'd alert you just in case. I've already deleted some of the dreck on the talk page per WP:TALK but it's been reinstated. Several good quality editors now have an eye on this article so there's a limit to how far the nonsense will be allowed to go. Cheers. --Folantin (talk) 13:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, and I'm glad to hear that others are keeping an eye on it. I'm still going to be traveling off and on for the next week or two, and my wiki-time is severely curtailed. Looks like I'll have lots of !entertaining reading to do when I get back! :) --Elonka 18:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

Hi Elonka, I was sent here by Jehochmen because I had a dispute about an edit at the quantum cryptography page ( here is a link to the diff). He deleted a large amount of text that I feel didn't need to be deleted. I explain my stance in the talk page. I already undid his edit, then he redid it, and I dont' want to get into an "undo" war, so if you could help me it would be much appreciated! Thanks!--MaizeAndBlue86 (talk) 14:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

In theory...

My ISP has fixed my issues. Note I said in theory. Things seem to be working for now... we'll see what happens. Ealdgyth | Talk 21:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words

I appreciate the kind words. Honestly, I'm just a kid playing with a new toy, User:AWeenieMan/furme -- RoninBK _{T C} 05:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet hunt

(This relates to your question to DarkoNeko)

Howdy,

If you're looking for user:Geir Smith, yes he's the creator of the French version of the Boubouleix article. IP 86.207.56.195 also intervened, as well as the 4 IP and users below. No other contributor of significance.

FYI: fr:user:Lord Hearntown, fr:user:D A A Boubouleix and fr:user:D Boubouleix are all sockpuppets of one another (+IP 86.207.121.187), but seem to be distinct from G.S. (we ran a Check User on them names, see here).

Hope this helps! Cheers, Popo le Dog 10:14, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

what he said :) DarkoNeko x 11:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! :) --Elonka 16:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

G. Smith incident

It was a very strange incident. Both the main perpetrators, Geir Smith and Dominique Boubouleix (plus his various socks), have been banned from Misplaced Pages. They posted some bizarre conspiracy theory rants about you here and on the French Misplaced Pages. You can see the unfolding saga at WP:FTN. We concluded that Smith was a crank who was trolling for hits for his website(s). He was desperate to get PHG on his side but we haven't found evidence that PHG was involved in any way. As Dbachmann said: "it transpires that is embraced as a brother in arms by the Warriors of Shambhala because he is in dispute with Elonka. I am sure he will be nonplussed to learn of his popularity among the Immortals". Cheers. --Folantin (talk) 10:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

"My CIA handlers will be pleased". Boubouleix's sock puppet "Lord Hearntown" also alleged you were really Jewish and a Mossad agent on French Misplaced Pages (since blanked). I haven't kept track of PHG's editing history in detail but we found no on-wiki evidence of collaboration between him and Smith, so I have no idea whether he's been inducted into the Warrior Cult of Shambhala, knowingly or unknowingly. This whole episode has been the strangest I have encountered on Misplaced Pages and has left me wondering about the quality of mental health care in France. --Folantin (talk) 16:43, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Dirty Dancing

Let me know if you want me to look at the article. I'm certainly not the greatest FAC reveiwer, but I can usually see where something is unclear. Normally I don't do "modern" stuff much, things past the Reformation bore me usually. Ealdgyth | Talk 04:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

ah, and I keep forgetting about this resource, you can dig around at WP:PRV. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to get to it tomorrow. I do most of my reviewing in the morning while my eyes are still fresh and I can face the task of being utterly picky. (grins). Ealdgyth | Talk 04:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

There, later than I hoped (stupid Daylight savings time change always annoys me) but got it done. I put a few questions/concerns/suggestions up on the talk page. Hopefully it helps. Ealdgyth | Talk 01:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: Request for review

Thanks for the message Elonka. Arabo-Norman civilization did not exist... and a quick Google search for the term shows the Misplaced Pages article as the only result. It should be speedy redirected to Norman conquest of southern Italy... because that is the time period in which Sicily went from been a Muslim country, to once against a Christian country (under the Normans). I'll redirect it myself due to it been a completely invented term. - Gennarous (talk) 09:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Priory of Sion

Hello Elonka! Congratulations on becoming a Misplaced Pages administrator! Would you have the time and interest in collaborating with me to improve the Priory of Sion article enough to meet Featured article criteria? --Loremaster (talk) 10:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I recently did some tweaking of the Charges of heresy section of the History of the Knights Templar article. Did you have any comments? --Loremaster (talk) 10:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I saw that you'd been working on it, yes. Though I didn't review the edits in detail, because I know that you know what you're talking about, so I trust you to put in good material.  :) When I get a chance, I'll go in and look in more detail. The Priory of Sion project sounds like a good one too, I'll definitely help as I can, though right now my time is a bit crunched. I've been sick with the flu for a couple weeks, and when I do have time (and health) for Misplaced Pages, my attention has mainly been on an ArbCom case. It's in voting phase now, but even after it's done, there are a a lot of articles (some of them Templar-related) that are going to need complex cleanup. I am also trying to get Dirty Dancing to FA, and will be submitting it for another Peer Review soon, and probably FA again next week. But if you still need help on Priory of Sion after I get those projects off my plate, yes, I'll definitely help out! :) --Elonka 19:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you read many French books on the Priory of Sion? Wfgh66 (talk) 22:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

"Atbash cipher"? Does that exist in any medieval manuscripts ? Wfgh66 (talk) 22:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Dated sub-cats

Essentially the templates need to be tweaked, and the sub cats created. There's a few bits of admin too, but that's the crux. I'll have a look at it. Rich Farmbrough, 21:29 11 March 2008 (GMT).

Basically done. Rich Farmbrough, 22:41 12 March 2008 (GMT).

Sorkhagtni bekh

Dear Elonka and Friends,

I read the secret history of mongols 3 times. Because I am mongol. Although I am a financer, i love medieval history especially mongolian.

I think the right spell for her name is Sorkhagtni but not Sorgaghtni. I think mongols did not use K instead of Kh or H in early times. K is foreign letter for us. For example, people call some names such as Kublai, Kaidu (or Qaidu)and more. Mongols call them Khubilai and Khaidu in mongolian.

Thank you!

Enerelt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enerelt (talk • contribs) 01:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

longissimam agnoscere veritatis viam

Elonka: your recommendation at Talk:Viam agnoscere veritatis seems sound. Would you mind, however, proposing the redirects cognoscere and agnoscere for speedy deletion by way of {{db-author}}? These are ordinary Latin infinitives with many other uses. Aramgar (talk) 14:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The solution for cognoscere and agnoscere is good. Aramgar (talk) 18:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Franco-Mongol alliance

This Arbitration case is closed and the final decision has been published at the link above. PHG (talk · contribs) is prohibited from editing articles relating to medieval or ancient history for a period of one year. He is permitted to make suggestions on talk pages, provided that he interacts with other editors in a civil fashion. PHG is reminded that in contributing to Misplaced Pages (including his talkpage contributions, contributions in other subject-matter areas, and contributions after the one-year editing restriction has expired), it is important that all sourced edits must fairly and accurately reflect the content of the cited work taken as a whole. PHG is also reminded that Misplaced Pages is a collaborative project and it is essential that all editors work towards compromise and a neutral point of view in a good-faith fashion. When one editor finds themselves at odds with most other editors on a topic, it can be disruptive to continue repeating the same argument. After suggestions have been properly considered and debated, and possible options considered, if a consensus is clear, the collegial and cooperative thing to do is to acknowledge the consensus, and move on to other debates.

PHG is encouraged to continue contributing to Misplaced Pages and Wikimedia projects in other ways, including by suggesting topics for articles, making well-sourced suggestions on talkpages, and continuing to contribute free-content images to Wikimedia Commons.

For the Arbitration committee, Thatcher 01:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

User:KellyAna

Hi, don't want to bother you, but you're an Admin now — with that and your vast experience (and participation in WP:SOAPS), I'd like your advice on how to deal with KellyAna. I have just hit my limit with her behavior and misguided edits. As you may know, she does not accept criticism or advice, but I am hoping there is an official way to get through to her. Her edit summaries and history and behavior on her own talk page (she ignores or deletes critical comments because they're placed "in the wrong place" on her page) should prove my case alone, but there are also several editors I feel she has terrorized and steamrolled lately and their interaction would also be illuminating. Please advise. — TAnthony 03:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Elonka. I have previously warned this user several times for her edit-warring, falsely labelling good-faith edits as vandalism, a technical problem with her user talk page, etc. Because of the idiosyncratic way she 'archives' her user talk, you may want to read the history, from about here on to get a picture. Best wishes, and I hope adminship is suiting you. --John (talk) 04:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

This may also be of interest. --John (talk) 04:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Elonka, as always ... I have never felt the need to intervene with an editor like this before, so I appreciate your advice. I of course don't wish to get KellyAna "in trouble" or even blocked, but hope to somehow get her to listen to reason. I do plan to post a detailed comment on her talk page, and amass links to the various recent situations I feel have been a problem (like John's, above). I may even ask you to look it over before I post it, so expect me to get back in touch ;). Thanks again. — TAnthony 05:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar of Diligence

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your work in ensuring historical accuracy across a wide range of articles, I award you this Barnstar of Diligence. Horologium (talk) 17:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Nonsensical

A comment that makes no sense is nonsensical and I have a right to remove anything from my page that I don't understand the wording of. It is not "uncivil" it is fact. Have people speak in normal English and I'll not remove their comments. Comments that makes no sense will be removed as "nonsensical." KellyAna (talk) 03:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)