Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zen-master (talk | contribs) at 07:24, 2 May 2005 (→It seems your POV remains). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

Old talk archived at Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4, Archive 5, Archive 6

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Hello, J. I'm new to all of this. But I couldn't help but see on the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review entry an aside that most likely was written as a joke that your re-inserted onto the main page.

More recently the Greensburg Tribune-Review has created a free evening city paper, entitled Trib P.M., which helps boost the publisher's readership and increase ad rates. Many believe the "Right-Wing Rag of the Three Rivers" does this to remain in the same category as the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

I am sure you would agree that this isn't cricket with Wiki's POV neutrality requirements. It's a snide joke, and not a real fact about the newspaper in Pittsburgh.

The other comments were cut out because they weren't really on point or were redundant.

Please respond to my disussion page if need be. I'll go back and take out the sections I mentioned.

Lionel of Pittsburgh

J,

That IP address is for the research library computers at a pooled newsroom. Hundreds of people use them every week. I have started on this and am not one of the original people making corrections.

The person who drew the ire of Gamaliel is an unpaid student intern. While she probably wasn't very polite, she was right about his intransigence. Apparently, he began the entry with an outright lie, and refused to change it.

She continued to try to edit the entry. She is using the experience on the copy editing of that and another as a thesis topic.

Please review what I mentioned above. I'm sure you will see that it is not neutral. No one would seriously write this and consider it "neutral."

More recently the Greensburg Tribune-Review has created a free evening city paper, entitled Trib P.M., which helps boost the publisher's readership and increase ad rates. Many believe the "Right-Wing Rag of the Three Rivers" does this to remain in the same category as the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Lionel of Pittsburgh 21:14, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)Lionel of Pittsburgh

1. The newspaper is not headquartered in Greensburg, but Pittsburgh, hence the name. See also other references in the main article. 2. There is no "Right-Wing Rag of the Three Rivers." This is a snide joke. 3. "does this to remain in the same category as the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette." Ibid. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette is the slightly larger competitor. 4. The evening paper isn't an evening paper. It's an afternoon paper (distributed beginning at 2 p.m.), and it costs 25 cents. There is a link from the newspaper's official website that says as much. 5. The author of the comment has admitted in another forum that it's a joke, that the editors of Misplaced Pages have fallen for & .

If this is a question of the IP address, I can simply post from my own desk instead of the library, which will have a different IP user tag.

Harm reduction

Hi there, it looks like my question got lost in your archive - why did you remove the section on harm reduction from drug use in your revert? Did you mean to or was it accidental? Thanks, Guttlekraw 15:23, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda

Could you please vote on the proposed move Links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda → Alleged links between pre-invasion Iraq and Al-Qaeda? The vote is here . Thanks. ObsidianOrder 17:16, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

User:LevelCheck

Hey. To let you know, this user is also subject of a RfC (I had nothing to do with that one). I also think this might be a stretch, but could this user be a sockpuppet of User:Islamist? Zscout370 21:31, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Islamofascism

Howdy,

Jayjg, even though we disagree on some things, I respect you alot. I was wondering if you could take a look at Islamofascism for general wikiness. Hopefully we can get it to FAC soon. At the moment, various leftists/Islamists/Arabists are objecting left and right. The article seems pretty NPOV to me, but it always helps to get more people involved. Since your extensive experience with Israel leads me to beleive, that would bring good experience and edits to it.

Klonimus 04:16, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppet editors

Jay, thanks for your note. I've seen what you and other editors have been subjected to, and I sympathise. I can well understand that that would get to you. Our viewpoints might vary but I am right behind you on one score: there is absolutely no way you should have to put up with that vile shit from anyone. We are supposed to be colleagues working in a great endeavour, not combatants in whatever war those guys (guy?) think they are fighting. Grace Note 04:54, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New_anti-Semitism

Jay, could you have a look at Talk:New_anti-Semitism#Highly_POV_paragraph_cut? I know that your views are much closer than mine (though probably not identical) to those of the person who inserted the material that I cut. Perhaps you could help frame some of this in an encyclopedic manner. Or perhaps you can suggest someone else who might work on this. Right now, I'm much to busy to do the heavy lifting on behalf of appropriately presenting a view with which I disagree completely. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:10, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

Right to exist vote for deletion

I think you will be interested in the outcome of this very convoluted stub. Guy Montag 14:28, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace, copy edits please

Dear Jay: Good Mo'ed to you and yours! I have asked for some expansion of the article about the Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace and User:MathKnight was kind enough to do so, but his style needs copy-editing please. Hope you can oblige. Thanks a lot. IZAK

El C vote

In cas you missed it, you didn't sign your vote. Guettarda 17:26, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Nazarene Qara'im?

Hey J, Can you check out the text at Karaite_Judaism#Nazarene_Karaites or do you know of someone who knows more about this stuff? It sounds strangely familiar (i.e., similar to some of the stuff that was being promoted a couple of months ago on Nazarene#Modern movements. Jag saméaj. Tomer 09:10, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

New template

Hey again again. I've started a little project at Misplaced Pages:Sandbox/Template:Judaism as you can see...please help out in any way you can, or tell me why I should just stop it. :-p Tomer 09:57, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

Pandeism vfd

Please consider changing the basis for your vote on Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Pandeism from "original research" to "non-notable." I believe I have adduced sufficient referential evidence to show that this article was not "original research," but simply an exposition on a philosophy which, although real, lacks enough adherents/proponents to be notable enough for inclusion. I apologize for having overestimated the importance of this topic. It was, after all, one of my first posts, when I was new to Misplaced Pages and not yet familiar with the criteria for notability. -- 8^D BDAbramson 04:40, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)

• Thank you. -- 8^D BDAbramson 05:31, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)
• I just found conclusive evidence of the use of the term "Pandeism" dating back to 1833 , being used by Godfrey Higgins, a follower of John Toland, the creator of pantheism.. The term is used in a book written by Higgins called the Anacalypsis. -- 8^D BDAbramson 10:49, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)

Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism

...Dunno. Is it someone's puppet? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 05:00, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what we can do other than protect the page. The last two days have been pretty busy for me, so I haven't had as much time for Misplaced Pages as I would like. --Viriditas | Talk 05:27, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New_anti-Semitism, again

Could I prevail on you to have a look at Talk:New_anti-Semitism#Lead_POV? It seems to me that Viriditas (and maybe a couple of others) have been taking this article in a polemical direction. When I've tried to discuss this with him, he and I seem to be talking at cross purposes. I feel like I'm engaging with someone who feels that he "has the Truth" about this controversial topic and that NPOV consists of the article expressing that Truth without qualification. Your opinion would likely be helpful, I know you were involved in this article earlier. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:47, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

• You have certainly targetted the part that seems most disingenuous to me. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:11, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

Nehruvian-Stalinism

It seems the vote at Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Nehruvian-Stalinism resulted in quite some new editors for Misplaced Pages, typically with edits only at this vote. I've left some notes highlighting this fact. Is anything else to be done in such cases? --Pjacobi 06:46, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)

Strong POV and good faith editing not mutually exclusive

Jayjg, I would like to commend you for so beautifully demonstrating that having a strong POV and making sure it's accurately represented in articles in a NPOV way is not mutually exclusive from good faith editing. The best articles are the collaboration of reasonable, articulate editors like you who represent various and opposing POVs while adhering to policy. I would challenge any editor with a strong POV to be able to produce a list like your User:Jayjg/Edits, evidence of your good faith efforts and adherence to policy even on behalf of opposing POVs. --MPerel 18:09, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

Well my thoughts on this were originally articulated here where I probably diverged too much from the actual issue at hand, which was dealing with an anon vandal. Maybe I only ended up humoring the vandal by even defending against such slurs and personal attacks. I have this ideal notion that we all ought to work alongside each other toward common goals and treat each other like fellow human beings. --MPerel 22:35, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

What!? You're rving yourself so I have to do the dirty work!?!? :-p

Why'd you rv your correction of User:Al-Andalus' edit to Mizrahi Jew? It's almost shabat here, so I don't have time to put in the Arab Jews mention in the article itself. Is there some way to set a reminder to do something, so I can remember to look at it sunday night or monday? Tomer 19:39, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

Request 3rd party mediation in International law and the Arab-Israeli conflict

Zero is being totally unreasonable. He is erasing relevent information in relation to the refugee status in the article. He doesnt give any valid reasons in talk, and is obstinate in every manner. I am interested in your opinion to the situation. If this is not resolved, I will have to use mediation or arbitration to resolve this.

Thanks,

Guy Montag 01:56, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Jay!

For your vote and very kind words in my RfA. And for all your encouragment, in general. Yours always, El_C 01:17, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

It seems your POV remains

"conspiracy theory" in an article's title is very POV. zen master T 05:55, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

The point is to have a neutral title for an article (I am not pushing a POV other than neutrality; you intentionally mischaracterize the issue). "conspiracy theory" in an article's title connotes that the subject is unworthy of being taken seriously which is the anti-thesis of an encyclopedia. zen master T 06:15, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

How is 9/11 domestic complicity theory not a more neutral and a better title all around? That is an exact summary of what the article is about (allegations of domestic complicity in the attacks). Encarta is hardly a reputable source (M$FT ). Every subject in an encyclopedia should be taken seriously so the reader can form conclusions based on the actual facts and merits of the issue, not tricked into believing the "majority" view through the use of psychologically subtle word games. zen master T 06:40, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

What was the point of this edit other than to cover your tracks? zen master T 07:15, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

I mean what other reason is there for that edit other than covering your tracks? You seem to be sweeping the naming controversy under the rug? (I am assuming good faith by asking) On the 9/11 article's you've done a pretty good job of misframing the issue in terms of me supposedly pushing my POV, your boss should be proud. zen master T 07:24, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree w/Zen, that "complicity" more accurately describes the nature of the theory in question. To apply he term "conspiracy" instead is not only inaccurate, its letting right-wing ad hominem abusive attack campaigns (which have been pretty successfull, obviously) invade wikipedia. watch cspan or cspan2 on contentious issues, such as the 2004 ohio electoral vote objection, and see who uses these phrases, in what context, and think about why.

not on wikipedia. wikipedia is held to a higher standard. we don't follow, we lead. we do things not because that's what other people do, we use words not because they've been heard a lot, we do things the way we do because they are the most accurate and informative ways to do them. So don't come here saying "I say this presented this way on FOX news, so we should present it the same way here." We can do much better than FOX news. Kevin Baas 07:15, 2005 May 2 (UTC)

I was using FOX news as an example of mainstream media that is very biased. Kevin Baas 07:22, 2005 May 2 (UTC)