Misplaced Pages

Archives

101 · 102 · 103 · 104 · 105 · 106 · 107 · 108 · 109 · 110

111 · 112 · 113 · 114 · 115

Misplaced Pages Signpost: 17 August 2009

• From the editor: Where should the Signpost go from here?
• Radio review: Review of Bigipedia radio series
• News and notes: Three million articles, Chen, Walsh and Klein win board election, and more
• Misplaced Pages in the news: Reports of Misplaced Pages's imminent death greatly exaggerated, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:39, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

+

As requested, Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Ernie Toshack with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948/archive1 YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 02:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. Daniel (talk) 22:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

here you go, ungrateful colonial

...that because the Foulées du Gois road running race is held on a tidal causeway, participants are sometimes forced to swim to the finish line? Ironholds (talk) 12:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Danke sir. Daniel (talk) 22:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Daniel is descendant from convicts. That's where he gets his dodgy skin tone. —Dark 08:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Australia at the Winter Olympics/archive1

Hi, this article is in the FARC stage now. Can you check back to see if your concerns were resolved? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 14:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Ta. Daniel (talk) 22:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Ponting's favorite cricketer! YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 05:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Neil Clark

Neil Clark took a "so be it" line on the potential murder of Iraqi interpreters, which amounts to what the anonymous user is claiming. The animus between Clark and Oliver Kamm is not derived from them writting for rival publications; Clark attempted to sue Kamm a few years ago, rather incompetently. An article by Clark has not appeared in The Guardian's 'Comment is Free' since last August, and pieces by Kamm appeared there also before he became a Times full-timer last Summer. Clark's main current outlet is The First Post, with occasional pieces for the Morning Star, Sunday Express and New Statesman, none of them are in direct competition with The Times. So the claim that they write for rival publications is inaccurate as much as it pushing a point of view. Incidentally, the absence of third-party sources on the libel case is the reason why it is unmentioned in the article. Philip Cross (talk) 10:58, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

"Neil Clark took a "so be it" line on the potential murder of Iraqi interpreters, which amounts to what the anonymous user is claiming" — no, it's not. You don't get to synthesise, analyse and deduce from sources; see WP:SYNTH. Per WP:BLP, all statements like that need to be impeccably sourced, and your argument for its inclusion (on a talk page, no less) does not meet that requirement.

You were advised last year by two separate administrators to back away from this article. I would suggest that would be a very good idea, given recent developments. You must consider whether you value your anonymity - something which is directly under threat should you continue down this course - more than you do the ability to continue to mash this article to bits with your point of view, an agenda propelled by your blog at http://anti-illiberal.blogspot.com/ (yes, I know it's yours). You are quite clearly an agenda-driven editor when it comes to this topic, and I strongly suggest you cease your involvement with it else face being blocked entirely or being banned from that article under WP:BLPSE.

Daniel (talk) 11:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

You've reverted an edit that is not an "edit war" but is directly related to comments that I put on the Talk page of this article. There are, as it stands, two clear factual errors in the relevant section - I should know, because I'm the author of the criticisms that are being recounted. If those criticisms are going to be included, then I'd like them to be accurately cited. If they're not going to be included, then it's immaterial, though you might wish to ask in that case whether a subject about which there is literally no other secondary material in a recognised source is sufficiently notable for an article.--OliverKamm (talk) 14:26, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd be glad if you would acknowledge and act on the point I've raised.--OliverKamm (talk) 10:21, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

My apologies for the delay, I haven't been very active lately. I cannot cede to your first request, but I feel you've made a good argument with the second point (independent third-party sources). I've raised the issue at Misplaced Pages:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Neil_Clark_.28writer.29 to seek wider input on the issue. Daniel (talk) 02:41, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Signpost: 24 August 2009

• News and notes: $500,000 grant, Wikimania, Misplaced Pages Loves Art winners
• Misplaced Pages in the news: Health care coverage, 3 million articles, inkblots, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Foulées du Gois

On August 26, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Foulées du Gois, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Help me to address mediation on a previous dispute PLEASE

Hello sir, I am trying to request mediation for an article on Kent Hovind, I tried to post a request, but there was a previous rejection in 2007, and I am unsure on how to proceed. In the mean time a few ( maybe one bouncing between computers ) is undoing all of my contributions. The artical is blatantly bias against this man, and I wanted to balance out some of the disputed claims to establish neutrality that Misplaced Pages is appreciated for. Truth is I have time and time again tried to edit in more acceptable ways, citations, and sources, but no matter how legit the contributions I feel like I am being pushed around. It is really stressful, PLEASE HELP ME.

Thanks, Thankful21$3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thankful21&3 (talk • contribs) 07:24, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

It would probably be best to contact the Chair of the Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite (talk · contribs). Daniel (talk) 02:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

American Junkie

You deleted this article but did not identify any reason why. Can you please? Thank you.

Regards Orangeee (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC).

The reason, as noted in the publically-viewable deletion summary, was that the currently-yet-to-go-to-print book failed to assert a sufficient level of notability to merit a Misplaced Pages article. Please also see Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources. Regards, Daniel (talk) 05:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Australia

It's on again YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Note to self: Sam Loxton with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948. Daniel (talk) 05:46, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Signpost: 31 August 2009

• Flagged protection and patrolled revisions: Misleading media storm over flagged revisions
• Flagged protection background: An extended look at how we got to flagged protection and patrolled revisions
• Wikimania: Report on Wikimania 2009
• News and notes: $2 million grant, new board members
• Misplaced Pages in the news: WikiTrust, Azerbaijan-Armenia edit wars
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 15:57, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Friedwardt Winterberg

I've proposed that we might test the waters with this article and its talk page which you semiprotected six months ago on OTRS ticket 2009030810017633. Do you think it might be worth unprotecting and watching it? --TS 22:01, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess it can be, but I disapprove in the strongest terms of the actions of the administrator (who doesn't have OTRS access) who unprotected it without the consent of myself or another member of the OTRS team. That kind of action is irresponsible in the extreme. Daniel (talk) 00:34, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:32, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

"Fueling the flames"

I understand your thinking, Daniel. But this guy passed RfA, and these Misplaced Pages users will go on to support more inappropriate candidates. If we're not going to ban all who supported P.T. at RfA, shouldn't we at least let them know how very wrong they were? We do them and the project a disservice by hiding the truth.24.22.141.252 (talk) 00:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Be that as it may, the way you presented it, plus where you presented it (on his talk page), was unnecessarily inflammatory. The Committee will make a statement in the next few days, which will let everyone know how wrong they were. Plus, to clarify, your contribution may be more allowable at, say, an WP:AN discussion about the issue generally, but doing it on PT's talk page emphasises that it was a remark of a personal nature rather than a constructive warning to the Wikimedian community. Daniel (talk) 00:53, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for hearing me out.24.22.141.252 (talk) 01:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I also notice that one sitting arbitrator supported the RfA, as follows: "Support, will make a great admin."24.22.141.252 (talk) 06:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Please add me as a party to an arbitration

The arbitration is here Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern_European_mailing_list. My reason for this is detailed here: Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern_European_mailing_list#Request_to_be_included_in_the_arbitration..

--Alexia Death the Grey (talk) 09:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Regarding notification

I'm confirming that I have received your notification regarding Arbitration case regarding the Eastern European mailing list. I should let you know that my work day plus commute are 12-13 hours, not counting visiting my 97 year old mother who recently went into nursing home care. As I do not have time during the week and all my PL must be attended to on the weekend, I will likely need to request an extension beyond the September 25th deadline. Given the gravity of the charges of misconduct being made, I trust this will not present an issue.

   I do not have a copy of the archive in question which forms the basis for the arbitration request. Please make arrangements for me to receive a copy. My Email is public (via LATVIANS.COM): petersjv aol.com and therefore may be shared freely and without stating with whom it has been shared. I commit to keeping private any personally identifiable Email address forwarding the content I have requested. I do not consider the "clock" as starting until I have received the material under discussion and had at least a day to review its contents. Thanks in advance. VЄСRUМВА  ♪  16:48, 19 September 2009 (UTC)