Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.39.174.238 (talk) at 12:44, 10 February 2007 (Pepper Hamilton). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Timeline of inventions

Hi,

On Timeline of inventions, the two deleted were factually inaccurate -

• Artificial teeth was explicitly at odds with the article on the subject, which cited an earlier case. However, that article doesn't give a source for the invention - the patent mentions "...in a more easy and effectual manner than any hitherto discovered...", wording which clearly indicates that artificial teeth were in use, and the patent was for a better form.
• Scramjet I left out simply because of the ambiguity of when it was invented - you could probably argue for half-a-dozen dates over forty years - but I was fairly confident that one wasn't it. (In all honesty, I also meant to go back and research it, but the rest of that week grew rather busy and I forgot).

In both cases, I felt it better to have no mention than verifiably incorrect information; Scramjet as is now looks fine, but Artificial teeth still looks wrong. Shimgray 11:33, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Diuretics

Hi Selket, I agree. Perhaps an initial basic writeup would be good just to get things going, and perhaps people can fill it in with more detail afterwards. I'm a bit too busy to do it myself at the moment unfortunately. -Techelf 12:03, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Images

I wanted to thank you for the images you are providing for anatomy. However, might I persuade you to upload the images to commons.wikimedia.org instead of to en.wiki, to make the images easier to share with editors using the other languages? --Arcadian 19:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Selkat has an obvious vendetta against Larry Darby. He against posted non-neutral, poorly written, non-factual information in violation with a settlement reached between Darby and general counsel for Misplaced Pages. The only reason Selkat would have to rebuild the article would be to continue to post information that is designed to disparage the subject. I have restored the page to reflect that which was agreed. Selkat: you are advised to stop your unethical practices.

I did not rebuild the page. I was very unhappy when I saw the state that it had been returned to. I have no idea who User:71.207.240.17 is. To be honest, I do think the page needs some rework, but if I make any changes they will say they are made by User:Selket

Larry Darby

Per an OTRS ticket I have reduced the article to a stub. I know you have put quite a bit of work into this article, so I felt I should inform you. I would like to rebuild the article, and since you probably know more than me about the subject your help would be greatly appreciated.--§hanel 06:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

When you say OTRS do you mean an Office Action? I would be happy to rebuild the page. It was in pretty bad shape when I found it, but I did try to start rewriting for NPOV and would be happy to continue after things calm down a bit. --Selket 06:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

n

Sorry for not being more clear. OTRS refers to the foundation's Email response team, who use OTRS to assist in responding to queries, complaints, etc. Office Actions can sometimes arrive from complaints on OTRS, but I wouldn't have the power to do such a thing anyway. :) Thanks for your help and understanding; I really appreciate it. --§hanel 06:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

maps

Hello, usually for those it is a mix of photoshop and paint, with this map overlaid with this. Cheers, --Astrokey44 23:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Can more links be removed at Bayesian inference?

Hello Selket. Thanks for the recent link removal. The 'external links' section is rather long; are there any other links we could perhaps do without? I see that www.abelard.org is a bit garish-looking and has a lot of advertising. Somewhere I saw a rule that external links should be mentioned in the text. If such a rule were followed, most of the remaining links would go away (unless new text were written to integrate them). EdJohnston 15:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Larry Darby

I am very sorry, but you may not use internal links or internal diffs as your references per WP:RS and WP:V. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 23:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

There is currrently a discussion on ANI about banning Darby. You may wish to comment. JoshuaZ 03:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Despite our differences over the Misplaced Pages citations, I feel you are to be commended for your efforts to make a controversial article well-referenced and accurate. Editing these types of articles opens one up to fire from both sides and your NPOV concerns in the face of that is admirable. Frise 06:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Controller Area Network (CAN)

I saw that you removed multiple external links from the Controller Area Network (CAN) article. I also noted that there is an external link to kvaser.com with information on CAN

Question: Could you please evaluate the following link that leads to a very comprehensive CAN tutorial? http://www.softing.com/home/en/industrial-automation/products/can/more-can-bus/communication/broadcast.php?navanchor=3010076

Since I am affiliated with the company Softing I should not add this link. Instead, I would like to ask you as a neutral editor to evaluate this link and to add this link to the external link section of the Controller Area Network article if you think the link provides valuable information.

Thanks68.236.126.218 18:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Your bot proposal

You didn't need to withdraw that. It could have been useful. Gimmetrow 04:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Astroturf

Cheers, it was getting a bit above my level now anyway - WP policy/guidelines don't give 100% clear guidance. COI would indicate one thing while this would indicate something different. As far as I am concerned COI should hold, otherwise what is the point in any of us doing anything on this project if money is just going to talk, but I will let others with more experience in this area comment. SFC9394 17:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but you notice that if there is a non-trivial problem with an article, the factual error page says that the enterprise representatives should contact OTRS, not start editing the article. Also, this user has changed a lot more than a few factual errors and is a SPA, which should raise suspicions. --Selket 17:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

In which case the text "and change whatever you like." should probably be removed from that page - it tends to suggest that editing scope is far wider than factual changes. Additionally I arrived at multiple readings when things such as User:Schwartz PR are factored in. I appreciate this was sanctioned and declared, but it didn't sit too well (moot point anyway since they never seem to have used the account beyond the initial buzz). SFC9394 18:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

The problem I'm running into is the learning curve. There are so many cross referencing policies that I'm unclear where to look for specific information, or which keywords to use when trying to search for it. I've learned more on the policies from you guys telling me and the links you provide than I was able to locate on my own.

I didn't even know about the "factual error" page until I found this conversation. Ben 16:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

User "Coz" has changed your edits to the FieldTurf article back to the original. Perhaps you and SFC can persude him to halt his edits and discuss them openly on the talk page. Thanks. Ben 21:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Bot requests

Sorry to ask you directly, but you seem to be the goto person on this and I didn't know where else to turn. What is the policy on resubmitting bot requests for approval? Should a new userid be created or is it ok to reuse one that was withdrawn? --Selket 00:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem :-) If you want to request a new task for your bot, you can use the same bot account, just create a new request subpage. For example, if you want to request another task for your bot, you can call the subpage Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests_for_approval/SelketBot 2. —Mets501 (talk) 01:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

STV

Move is done. Fire when ready. :) Chris cheese whine 02:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Vestibule (Architecture) GA failed

I failed the article as a GAC, please see the talk page for information. Please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page if you have any questions. --Nehrams2020 22:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Pepper Hamilton

When you can turn up the source that something was irrefutably copied from and it's under copyright, have no hesitation about removing it, even if it substantially reduces the articel. 68.39.174.238 12:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)