This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) at 20:19, 27 November 2007 (New section User talk:Pigman#Margareta Svensson). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 20:19, 27 November 2007 by Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) (New section User talk:Pigman#Margareta Svensson)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)User:Pigman/Talktop User:Pigman/HeaderTabs Template:Archive box collapsible
Leave a new message.Please sign your message by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~
 |
|---|
| 24 December 2024 |
|
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Due to some questions about conflict of interest issues with a document I helped author and publish, it seems appropriate that I disclose my connection and role vis-à-vis The CR FAQ. This information includes both the web document as well as the printed/dead tree version. I am one of the co-owners of the domain paganachd.com. The domain hosts The CR FAQ and related articles. This is not a commercial or even non-profit enterprise. The sole purpose of the domain is to provide access to the collaboratively created document known as The CR FAQ and directly related articles. I believe The CR FAQ is a salient secondary source document. I am also co-editor and co-publisher of the the print version of the document, titled The CR FAQ - An Introduction to Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism. I mistakenly used the web site as a source in the Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism article before being clear on the COI problems of my actions. If you have any questions regarding my relationship to the domain and document, please ask me here. (Note: I'm deliberately not using external links to the site or book to avoid using Misplaced Pages to drive traffic to them.) --Pig
User talk:Mark Ironie/InfoCenter
Hard Job for New Admin :-)
Got to you from editors assistance. I put up an RfC on relevant page couple days ago, but no response. The article is about the probably most hotly contested WIKI issue - Israel - so put on your battle gear :-) But seriously, I like you saying you want to protect wiki pedia, and I know that means both from people who may want to stick in well-sourced but possibly a bit less than NPOV info and, on the opposite end, people who will delete anything negative about Israel, no matter how NPOV, well-sourced, etc.
Which is the problem right now at Samson Option. There are at least 4 editors (at that page and also at nuclear weapons and Israel) who think Samson Option needs its own article. Among ourselves we might wrangle over what goes in and what doesn't, point by point, in a civil manner.
The problem is User:Tewfik who has declared the article should be merged into nuclear weapons and Israel - in part because of lack of content - yet he repeatedly has MASS deleted content put up, mostly by me. He even deletes info and then puts up NEED CITATION! I think the other people are afraid to add anything now. Even I've gotten afraid to add the most sourced and UN-controversial material because he's always got a new excuse for deleting it - even when he himself has requested it. (There is one editor who keeps reading the article AFTER he's deleted content and then on Talk agrees it should be deleted because of lack of content!)
User:Tewfik has inferred he SOON will preemptorily merge Samson Option into nuclear weapons and Israel. This also would delete all records of his bad behavior on this page.
I'm trying to keep my temper. I've complained on his talk page a couple times and put up the RfC. I'm not sure if this qualifies as a 2 editor conflict per Mediation_Cabal - plus I confess I've been a bit sarcastic and dubious of his good faith intentions. If he merges the articles the debate will start all over again and he'll probably pull the same numbers.
Anyway, at this point there is now an article about the The Samson Option (book) that some of the relevant info can get put in and lots of other non-WIKI venues I'm working on. But it just riles me that an editor can be so capricious and intimidate everyone like this.
So feel free to do whatever you do best in these circumstances :-) Any input you want to have on Talk:Samson Option appreciated. Carol Moore 15:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC)User:Carolmooredc User talk:Carolmooredc
Comparison of database tools
Hi, just wanted to give a heads up that Anas2048 immediately recreated Comparison of database tools after it was just deleted per the AfD. Collectonian (talk) 00:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
article delete
hi, you deleted my article "Comparison of database tools" it's not finiched i write it now , give me one hour to finiched it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anas2048 (talk • contribs) 00:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Responded sort of on the user's talk page. Pigman☿ 01:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- And by e-mail when contacted. Pigman☿ 18:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Deletion review: Mary G Peterson Elementary School
see: Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 24 — I am bringing my own closure of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mary G Peterson Elementary School (2nd nomination) to DRV because the inconsistency between my no-consensus closure and you delete closure of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Myrtle E. Huff Elementary School is not pretty nor confidence building. I think it would be useful for you as the admin closing the AFD that I'm comparison-referencing in this DRF to provide input to the discussion. Thanks. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 12:37, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
User:Dbiel
YEANOLD you should be told user Dbiel is using mis information about article STUDENT to get his own way he is claims the debate was resolved and decided the image was not allowed use in the article this IS 100% UN TRUE!!
I looked at all point made by each side and has made me very angry a good argument is ignored so someone gets their way - this is wrong on all levels!
you should need to resolve this incident at once —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.138.19 (talk) 18:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Article Student and image Student japes.jpg
In reply to your posting of "Um, Dbiel, could you give me a clue about what this is about? I'd appreciate it" on User talk:Yeanold Viskersenn; this was posted by an unregistered user (talk) who appears to be very new to Misplaced Pages and failed to create a new heading or even sign the post. He also posted to my talk page User talk:Dbiel#STUDENT. If you would like to join into the old and extensive discussion of the use of Image:Student japes.jpg in article Student, your input would be most welcome. Dbiel 20:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Comparison of database tools
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Comparison of database tools. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.--Anas2048 (talk) 20:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Official thanks, slightly delayed due to post-RfA crash (who knew?)
...for helping me navigate the waters of my surprisingly peaceful RFA, which closed successfully with 85 supports, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral.
I would particularly like to thank Acalamari and Alison, my nominators, and everyone who watched the page and ran the tally (like you, Piggy!).
If there is anything I can do to be of service in the future, please feel free to contact me. But if you turn into a were-pig, I am going to go after you with the dart gun. No wheel-warring Pigmen will roam the earth! Nor will the were-boars root their filthy way through my 'pedia! Yes, that's right, I said MY 'pedia! WP:OWN is not as bad as a rampaging were-pig, godsdammit! AAAAAAARRRRRRRGH!!!!
And forgive me if I need a Wikibreak now and then (like now. I'm exhausted!). You wouldn’t want to see me climbing the Reichstag, now would you?
Off to flail around with my new mop! (what?!)
This RfA thanks inspired by Neranei's, which was inspired by VanTucky's which was in turn inspired by LaraLove's which was inspired by The Random Editor's, which was inspired by Phaedriel's original thanks.
You have been nominated for deletion
User:R/EFD/Nomination - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 02:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
- Why, this is such a surprise! I'm honored to accept this... hey, wait, I'm what? Deletion, you say? Is this some sort of Orwellian thing? You can't just erase people! People are needed to make Soylent Green! I'll fight I tell you. Pigman☿ 03:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk page
Hi - I'm sorry - it appears that you may have received numerous messages that were designated for my talk page. This is due to me having lazily copied code from your talk page to mine, specifically the "leave a new message section". I'll fix the issue now, and once again, can only apologise for any inconvenience or confusion caused. Thanks for your understanding. Yeanold Viskersenn (talk) 06:23, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you very match, for your help. "un grand merci pour vous".--Anas2048 (talk) 13:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
RE : Looking for a bit of help
Try CloseAFD. :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo (talk) 11:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Rude false remarks
I wrote an article about Margareta Svensson. It upsets me that it is deleted, but even more so that there are harassments from so called administers that apparently can say whatever they like, with no knowledge at all and no interest in finding out either. THOSE FALSE ALLEGATIONS will be what people will read about Margareta Svensson, not her extraordinary international career as a singer-pianist. There was NOTHING in that article that wasn't true, and if you administers were half-way professional you would find that out.
I had written I think three sentences when I had a message that she was not notable. And yes I did delete that message, and I only deleted that ONE, because it was not relevant. The article was not up. I couldn't imagine that someone who could write such a rude false remark after me having written almost nothing at all, could be favored. Is Misplaced Pages a game to see who can stand unfair beatings and just turn the other cheek?
I may have made the mistakes of creating an account with the name Margareta Svensson, because I thought that was how it was supposed to be done. And I also uploaded much before it was the final article, because I wanted to see that it worked. I didn't think anyone was that interested in my work that I got a comment long before I was done. Another lengthy rude comment, complained how I had worded a sentence, and I made changes to accommodate.
One comment that it couldn't be valid because references were in Swedish - I must say that arrogance does not even begin to describe such a comment. English is the language that is used by the world, but most people in the world does NOT have English as their first language.
It seems that administers are people with too much time on their hands who have nothing better to do than to quickly, within minutes of first activity, beat a new person down with rude, false remarks. Shouldn't you be interested instead? But being mean may be how you get your satisfaction? You are no better than bullying kids on the playground.
Ludwig Kaspersen
Margareta Svensson
FYI- I got the same message as you about this and I've replied to the user (see here). Obviously feel free to leave your comments, but I thought I'd let you know. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)