Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Proofreader77 (talk | contribs) at 20:06, 17 July 2009 (→P.S. WP:Civility/Poll: (some notes on the discussion) Many thanks for your indulgence ... a birthday license, now expired. :)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Are you here because I deleted your article? Please read through this first to find out why.

Talk archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Anna Anderson request

• Despite your vendetta-joining, I'm here solely to ask that you go to the talk page to intervene. Aggiebean, as per usual, is bullying a helpful new comer user john k I think--he's user John Kenney I believe. She is mercilessly insulting, baiting and goading him simply because he disagrees with her. And he is no sock puppet. Or do you only selectively enforce your rules as I suspect you do?75.21.103.13 (talk) 22:34, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

You attack me and then ask for help? Gwen Gale (talk) 22:43, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I see ol' IP75 is back and still tormenting me by attacking me behind my back! He's trolled my talk page and others and has been nothing but trouble on the AA page and other pages, and has been blocked several times.

Dear Gwen, just asking- Why did you undo my change of description of my website in external links? I don't know if you were aware "Anna Anderson Exposed" is my site and I wrote it. I do not consider my site a 'list of AA's fraud attempts' as it currently states but what I had originally put, a site explaining- in great detail- all the ways and reasons she wasn't Anastasia, and never was. Please return it to the description I chose, 'a site explaining why AA wasn't Anastasia.' Since it's my site I should have the final say over how to describe it, right?Aggiebean (talk) 00:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't do that. Diff please? There is no way I left an edit summary anywhere on this website saying list of AA's fraud attempts.

I don't know who first posted the wording, but when I changed it back, you reverted my changes. I saw it in the history.Aggiebean (talk) 02:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

No, DrKieman reverted it back, talk to DrKieman. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Both of you, please be aware that another admin is handling Anna Anderson. I tried to help, my help wasn't wanted, I left. Please don't ask me about this article again, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:59, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

You call that "handling"? And yes, I know the Way of the Misplaced Pages Double Standard, so, no, I didn't exactly ask you to do anything since I already know your type...and yes, it's fun insulting you. Were you unaware that I am the Revolution? ;)75.21.149.8 (talk) 06:46, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

If you're the revolution, please block me. ZooFari 06:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

OTRS

Hello. In these cases: File:Basij member with a knife.jpg, File:Basij Militia members.jpg, File:Mohammad Javad Basirat.jpg and File:A close shot of an armed basij militia.jpg OTRS is not applicable. As you may already know, if the one who took the pictures reveals his real identity he will seriously risk his life. The Iranian government definitely tortures and kills him. I will never ask him to reveal his identity! Please trust me and upload the pictures again. The pictures are very very important for this encyclopedia.--Breathing Dead (talk) 00:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

To be on Misplaced Pages, the pictures need independent verification from a reliable source as to their content descriptions, otherwise they're violations of WP:BLP. Also, even if the descriptions could be reliably sourced, for copyright reasons these would still have to go through OTRS. Anonymous licence grants aren't enough. If the owner of the images wishes to stay anonymous, there are ways to handle this, but this would have to do with steps taken outside Misplaced Pages first and I cannot give you legal advice. Besides, the descriptions would still need to be reliably verifiable through a published source. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Now in this case: File:A shot of the demonstration of 18-Tir.JPG , I have to say that are you blind or just love to annoy people? Didn't you see that file's tag? I PERSONALLY TOOK THAT PHOTO! You need to restore that file immediately or I will report you for your abusive behavior!--Breathing Dead (talk) 01:13, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

You'll need to file an OTRS ticket, for starters. You should do that through commons. However, if you describe the people in the photo as demonstrators, BLP worries may be raised. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

you know what? what you say is total nonsense.However, if you describe the people in the photo as demonstrators, BLP worries may be raised. What the hell do you think they are? I am sure those who are going to see that pictures are all human beings and can easily find out even without a comment that the people in that pictures are demonstrators. However I don't know about you. well some people have less mental capabilities and you sound like one!--Breathing Dead (talk) 01:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

You also might want to think about posting the images on Flickr. Either way, you should be doing this at commons, not here. If you carry on making personal attacks though, you'll get yourself blocked. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Who says I Should not upload the picture here? I took the picture by myself and I LIKE to post it here to use in article. And surely it is none of your business.--Breathing Dead (talk) 01:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Free images go on commons: Misplaced Pages:Uploading_images#Free_license_images. You only posted them on en.Misplaced Pages because they were deleted from commons, if the licences are ok and there are no BLP worries, they belong on commons. Free images uploaded to en.Misplaced Pages will wind up on commons anyway, so take it there. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I posted the image which I took personally to English Misplaced Pages because I LIKE it and I don't like to upload it in the commons. Since it is not against any policies of Misplaced Pages. I will upload it again in here whether you like it or not. You have to prove that I didn't personally take this picture or stop the act vandalism which you are doing right now!--Breathing Dead (talk) 01:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll block you from editing if you upload that image again to en.Misplaced Pages without an OTRS ticket. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I will talk with Mr. Ahmadinejad about your hard work to clean up his mess. He will definitely send you a medal of honor.--Breathing Dead (talk) 01:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

You've been given a lot of slack with these personal attacks. You should stop them now. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:55, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

• Followup: A shot of the demonstration of 18-Tir.JPG has been restored over at Commons, where free images belong. If there are BLP worries with the image, they should be dealt with on Commons. If there are BLP worries as to including the image in an en.Misplaced Pages article, those should be dealt with on the article talk page, as whether to include the image in the article (a deletion discussion would be held at Commons, not here). Gwen Gale (talk) 14:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Request for your assistence handling something unpleasant with grace and elegance

Hi milady (a one-time request, I promise) ...

Having seen from time to time (to my eyes) unfortunate spectacles of contention on this page (serious smile) ... and finding myself with an unpleasant dynamic with another administrator in which there is disagreement about whether a matter is concluded ... and I therefore do not (never would) wish to put unwelcome words on her talk page ... but principle demands I pursue the matter a bit further (serious smile) ... etc etc

Would you allow a topic on your talk page to act as neutral ground (under your eyes, but without requesting you say anything about it) to conclude informal steps of dispute resolution? (I can conduct my part in sonnet form for your amusement if that would help clench the deal. :)

Or ... suggest somewhere else other than puppy's house. :)

Feel free to decline with impunity. P.S. tomorrow's my birthday. :) Kindest regards, (off to bed now)Proofreader77 (talk) 08:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you give me a diff or two? Gwen Gale (talk) 11:38, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I think I'm the puppy referenced, but I cannot make heads or tails of the post. I don't have any idea what the concern might be. I know of no matter which is not "concluded", as Proof puts it. The only matter I was involved with was archiving on Talk:Sarah Palin, and I templated the two editors who did it (they were very nice about it) and added them to the probation list, told everyone else to move on, and if a matter needed more discussion to simply start a new section and then link to the archived discussion. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 14:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks KC. Seeing this tophatted thread I'm shocked... shocked to learn of a disagreement over talk page archiving at a political topic, moreover the article of someone as uncontroversial as Sarah Palin.

Pr, talk page threads get stale quick and might even be loaded with uncited assertions, original research and (shudder)... bickering. If disagreements are ongoing, it's more helpful to keep the discussion fresh by starting more or less anew, the policies don't change (much) and it's far easier for newly arrived editors to give their input. Either way, my talk page isn't the place to talk about this and I tend to stay away from political articles altogether, since most of the sources on them are flawed to begin with and shrill PoV runs deep, making them black holes (or I might say fuzzballs) for time. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Responding to requests for diffs in context of "cake"

(smile) I'll assume that the birthday greeting's have your cake and eat it too means to ignore the above request for diffs.

I understand why it looks like a good deal ... but it is not the specific undoing that matters now, but a clarification of larger issues illustrated by this sequence ... and specifically that administrators must not aide those who play the game with "tactics" which (yada yada yada bad result for NPOV not in a heavy sense, but by granting a license to dominate etc etc).

The context of the administrative action is one in which user:Simon Dodd is a form of bully, not particularly awful unless the context presents itself to illustrate that fact ... which it did (snipping elaboration) ... which he prematurely wiped into an archive ... which was ruled wrong ... yet the fruits of the wrong act were locked in as sacrosanct ... the wrongdoers wrists slapped with feathers ... and those wronged (in effect) threatened with sanctions if they undid any of the results of the bad act.

I would only pick a "paradigmatic" case to pursue which clarifies larger issues. The details are of no great consequence. The principles are. (And I do need administrators who do not understand my rhetorical methods for helping counter bias-by-wikibully ... to understand they do not understand ... and not get in the way of them. :)

LOL But anyway ... I think I promised sonnetization ... so let me conclude this resolved request to you (no), on your talk page with one I wrote before sleep:

Thank you for the time it took to consider this. As promised, I will not ask such a thing of you again. (Now to determine which venue to pursue this.) Proofreader77 (talk) 15:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I suggest dropping it, forum shopping is frowned upon here. You have now complained on the article talk page, ANI, my talk page, and Gwen's talk page. Be done. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 15:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Objection: Mischaracterization. (Noted for the record.)

COMMENT: While any talk page content issue is mute, the behavior issues (more than one) are not. Attempt at informal resolution of one aspect, concluded. I understand there are formal procedures for dispute resolution of different kinds—procedures I am not yet versed in, other than the general idea that one should attempt to resolve issues informally before "going there." (Complete elaboration of objection, with special attention to AN, will not be attempted here.)

NOTE: This subsection was in response to Gwen Gale's request for diffs on this page in the context of her reply on my talk page with the characterization have your cake and eat it too. At the time I composed this no one had responded beneath her request to me to provide "diffs" (which she had not struck through or removed).

Protocol: Having referred to user:Simon Dodd explicitly in this subsection (because it was clear Gwen Gale was aware of that), I will notify him that this (closed) topic exists.

No further comment or replies from me here. (Sincere apologies to Gwen Gale for this idea.) --Proofreader77 (talk) 20:34, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

FYI

I know you watch my page, but just in case you missed this, Ratel has posted a nice little note to you on my talk page. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 15:41, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I was reading it as you posted this, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Bastille Day (my birthday) reflections of (our) exchanges past on Gwen Gale's page

Not a topic for discussion, just taking a few moments for reflection of our exchanges here ... after I somehow noticed your userpage (must have noticed something you said somewhere), liked the painting, and decided to note you as someone I'd ask if I ever needed to ask anything ... I.E., Diffs of a different color :)

• 2 Sept 2008 "Vague aspersions of prenatal endangerment" // (current events wrangling)

re 08:34, 2 September 2008 Gwen Gale (→Vague aspersions of prenatal endangerment: cmt)

(in a subtopic I originally created then later corrected title) 02:19, 2 September 2008 Proofreader77 (→Excess details about Trig's birth) //Adding talk subtopic with sarcastic suggestion of article subtopic to clarify issue under heavy discussion

(to be continued ... I think you can count exchanges on one hand ... note: "little case studies") Proofreader77 (talk) 20:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

LOL Well, it was a few more than five. But it was a pleasant time-travel experience. Cheers. (no reply necessary) Proofreader77 (talk) 01:38, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

P.S. WP:Civility/Poll

Observation: The recent sonnetized episode here was really about issues in the discussion there. As for the negative aspects many allude to ... there is no transcendence possible until, e.g., Jesus comes back. :) _{(Now to go practice walking on water.)} Proofreader77 (talk) 06:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe a close friend or kin or trusted someone on the job can be snarky or short to one's face with few worries, but it's something else in writing and when written online, only stirs up harm. Notions as to what the project'll put up with may ebb and flow but I glark things will either tend to draw towards a steadfast take on being civil or, if not, it'll be a broad hint en.Misplaced Pages is in its death throes. As a big believer in open content and en.Misplaced Pages as a means towards the goal, I think there's nothing to show this website will (or won't) be carrying forth as the mostly widely noted and read open encyclopedia in say, 5 years. Gwen Gale (talk) 11:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

• I agree with the comments under "Too lenient" (re inequality of application), but consider "Too lenient" not the right subtopic title for that.
• I agree with the word "unenforceable" (in practice), but see that through the lens of untransendable "social" aspects of "the game." :)
• HEAVENLY ASIDE: If everyone was on salary, "perfect civility" might be achieved ... while continuing to build the project. See "paid editing." LOL AKA "in heaven" ... not while "the life on earth game" continues apace. :)
• (5 years) MATHEMATICAL PROPHECY: The number of people willing to do (e.g.) RCP ... in a land where the issues of inequality of application are treated as too complex to practically enforce (i.e., "justice" cannot be had) ... cannot remain numerically large enough to support the necessities of the project's growth. (Smarter bots may solve the problem, but that's a pretty darn smart bot. :)

(appreciate your indulgence, which I consider a birthday license, now expired :) -- Proofreader77 (talk) 20:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Remember User:NWill ?

Hi Gwen. user:NWill is mass moving pages again, apparently against consensus as an editor expressed on his/her talk page (and as usual w/o discussion). Would you mind to take a look at it? Tanks, --The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 16:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Undone, blocked. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:14, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I've just seen it on my watchlist.Tanks again, --The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 17:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Tanks? Yer taps! :D Gwen Gale (talk) 17:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops, here: h :) --The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 17:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)