Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wikid77 (talk | contribs) at 16:38, 9 June 2010 (→New article..: new topic). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Silver medal awarded at the 2010 Olympics! But we WILL get the bronze in men's hockey and also women's hockey. Or I will quit Misplaced Pages in protest for 2 weeks! :p

A bronze for women's hockey. Now it's gold for the men's or I will quit for 2 weeks. We will win it! Finland will play Canada and win the gold. Canada will get the silver. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

F**K! No gold medal in men's hockey for Finland. I should not have pledged to quit for 2 weeks unless Finland won the gold. However, I do not lie so I must honor my promise. However, if Finland gets the bronze, I will come back a little bit sooner than 2 weeks. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 01:16, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Archives

Archive 1

This user iswas taking a short wikibreak starting 1 October 2009 and will be back on Misplaced Pages in a few days. I think it may be good to take short breaks from Misplaced Pages on a regular basis, such as on the first of every month for approximately 1 to 5 days and come back refreshed with new ideas.

I will edit tomorrow, the 30th of September, though. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I am back Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 21:04, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Oops, I edited on November 1st. So there will be a wikibreak starting tomorrow for at least 24 hours. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 18:56, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Saab Spyker Automobiles

According to and it will change its name to Saab Spyker Automobiles.--Godzillerdood (talk) 21:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Al. New Mexico

This looks good now. I suggest you put the bit on when the museum is open into the footnote, rather than the text. Also, I'll have to check the rules for GA: I'm not sure if you need a bibliography and a set of footnotes. If that is the case, take a look at Inner German Border for examples of how to create a decent bibliography with all those newspaper articles. Maybe you could write something on Charles Bishop Eddy next. We need something on him, and there's quite a bit out there written about him already. Just not on wikipedia. Let me know when it's nominated. Auntieruth55 (talk) 02:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

 Finland

September 2009

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Leslie E. Robertson, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. mjwilson (/_Contrib) 19:02, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It was very constructive. However, I've reworded it to sound better and even included a citation. This is guesswork since your message above is just a form letter and not very descriptive. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Please do not remove redlinks

Please do not remove relinks from the articles, as you did with Alamogordo, New Mexico. Please see WP:REDDEAL, which says in part, "In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article, but for which there exists no candidate article, or article section, under any name." Thank you. --Uncia (talk) 20:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Bulleted lists of notable residents

The use of bulleted lists in the Notable natives and residents sections of city articles is deprecated; see WP:USCITY. I have reverted your reformatting of the list in Alamogordo, New Mexico to its previous prose form. --Uncia (talk) 21:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Your edits of Healthcare in Alamogordo, New Mexico

Your recent edits of the Healthcare section of Alamogordo, New Mexico removed important information, and changed the sense of the remaining information. I have reverted the section to its previous version. Please discuss your proposed changes on the article's talk page before making them again. Thank you. --Uncia (talk) 21:41, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Inn of the Mountain Gods Resort & Casino

A tag has been placed on Inn of the Mountain Gods Resort & Casino, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Misplaced Pages:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Template:Do not delete Mr. Vernon (talk) 18:42, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I think Mr. Vernon was right, and I deleted the article. We're not saying that no article on that business is possible ... if you can find reliable sources establishing notability, then it will be fine. We're saying that that article would make a bad impression on someone coming to Misplaced Pages for encyclopedic information, because it sounds like an advertisement. - Dank (push to talk) 19:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Alamogordo

Alamogordo, New Mexico is current being considered for promotion to Good Article status; see WP:GAN#PLACE. Please don't make any large changes until the review is over, because one of the criteria to be promoted is that the article is stable; see WP:WIAGA. --Uncia (talk) 21:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

You wrote: "The references are of different format ... I looked at the FA. This is unacceptable." What part of FA are you looking at? If you mean WP:WIAFA criterion 2c, this just means that the citations need to be either all footnote-style or all Harvard-style, it doesn't apply to the internals of the footnote, and in particular does not apply to the date format. Please do not make needless changes. Thanks. --Uncia (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Please do not remove repeated wikilinks

Please do not remove repeated wikilinks from the articles. Repeated links are permitted if they are far away from each other in the text, see Misplaced Pages:Linking#Repeated_links. I realize that you are trying to help, but you are new here and Misplaced Pages has many, many rules that have been developed over the years and should be followed. Take a little time and learn the most important rules before you start editing. There are links to them in the Welcome message at the top of this page. The book Misplaced Pages: The Missing Manual is also very valuable; you can read it online at Help:Misplaced Pages: The Missing Manual. Thank you. --Uncia (talk) 21:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages offers a mentoring program - are you interested in having a mentor?

Misplaced Pages offers a mentoring program for new editors, to help them become familiar with Misplaced Pages procedures and get up to speed quickly. Would you like to have a mentor? The program is called Adopt-a-User and you can read about it at WP:ADOPT and Misplaced Pages:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area. If you would like some occasional help but don't feel like having a mentor would be helpful, you can also ask for assistance with particular questions at the Editor's Assistance page, WP:EA. Welcome to Misplaced Pages, and I hope you will make use of one of these avenues of assistance. --Uncia (talk) 01:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Abecedare (talk) 20:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I have replied to your last message on my talk page. Please let me know if you already have that page watchlisted, since then I don't need to leave these talkback messages. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your support at my RFA. Irrespective of the outcome, I am happy to get it, since it affirms that wikiprocesses of calm discussion can work even when the parties get off on the wrong foot. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Goa

The problem with your Goa suggestion is that India is a Federation and many states have special situations vis-a-vis the central government. Jammu and Kashmir is the most obvious example, of course, but there are land ownership issues in hill states, religious protection in Arunachal Pradesh, etc. and many special situations arise. It is impossible to put one ahead of the other and, since India is a summary article, it is best to avoid all special situations, except where the situation is of political importance and effects other nations (China and Pakistan mostly). --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 19:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I think you're looking at this from the wrong end. If you start with "Goa is a special case" (or "Sikkim is a special case") then you'll end up feeling that Goa (or "Sikkim") is being excluded by "opponents". However, if you look at the India article, see it as a summary article, then you'll be more parsimonious in what you think should be included. --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 22:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, the only reason Goa is a "special case" is that the Portuguese were stubborn enough that they needed to be kicked out whereas the British and the French realised that their time was up and decided to leave in a dignified manner. Did you know that there were 552 princley states in India which, in a matter of speaking were independent of Brithish India but subservient to the British crown. Each of them had to sign an instrument of acession to transfer sovereignity to India or Pakistan. So thats 552 "special cases".

I hope you will not give any more ideas to Gaunkar. He is a nut and is seriously out of touch with reality. He pounced upon your edits and is hoping to gain some more support for his crazy little independence movement on Misplaced Pages. Dont feed the trolls. --Deepak D'Souza 12:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Please don't call others a "nut". I have not investigated Mr. of Goa, just read what he wrote to me. Mr. R. Park's comments are appreciated and I will consider them. Goa was the site of an battle, just as the battles with Pakistan. In contrast, the French controlled sections were generally peacefully transferred to India as with most foreign controlled areas. I am for article improvement, not just topic insertion so I will consider everything. I will be on a self imposed wikibreak starting tomorrow for a few days. This will be done as a matter of routine, once a month for at least 1 day, maybe a few days, starting on the first. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 14:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

This user is taking a short wikibreak starting 1 October 2009 and will be back on Misplaced Pages in a few days. I think it may be good to take short breaks from Misplaced Pages on a regular basis, such as on the first of every month for approximately 1 to 5 days and come back refreshed with new ideas.

It is 1 October. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Editing about own company

The answer to your question is essentially yes. You are allowed to edit wherever you like, but editing in an area where you have a conflict of interest means that there is a very high probability of such edits being reverted. --Anthony.bradbury 19:12, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, how are you involved with user:Annmarieburnett? --Anthony.bradbury 19:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I ask this question because of your apparent interest in her block and her unblock request; it is unusual for uninvolved editors to become involved as you did, although you are clearly entirely entitled to do so. And my answer is accurate. Edits violating WP:COI are usually reverted, but a decision is made individually on each one. It is possible to create a scenario in which such an edit would not be reverted, but it is unlikely in practice to happen. I remain unclear as to why, if you and user:Annmarieburnett are not connected, the question is relevant to you. --Anthony.bradbury 20:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Odd unblock

Yes, it is. Sometimes block logs get oversighted or suppressed, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. Daniel Case (talk) 15:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Policy

I have no wish to in any way discourage you, but you really should not try to run before you can walk.

You have, to date, made some 349 edits to wikipedia. I, counting admin edits, have about 30,000. I would, with this level of experience, not venture to attempt to change wiki policy except in the most peripheral areas. Misplaced Pages policy is already very clearly laid down, and is subject to change only by community majority consensus. There is really no need for any further policy documents, and I would quite seriously suggest that you should get a firm and extensive groundwork and experience in ordinary everyday editing before you try and go any further. Please, trust me. This is advice you should take serious notice of. --Anthony.bradbury 19:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I have now looked at your involvement with user:Gaunkars of Goa. Unless you have achieved significant expertise in wikipedia under another account, please back off NOW. And leave this area to those who have experience in it. --Anthony.bradbury 20:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

You know, you could be a really good editor and ultimately a really good admin. Please, just go and edit/write articles. --Anthony.bradbury 20:03, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

aiding the translation

Suomi, I have recently become entranced with this song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE9sQEw0W4s. However, I do not speak Finnish ... some say I barely am speaking English! LOL! Anyway, could you translate the lyrics for me? Or even just a gist of what it's about? THX - Secretoffatima (talk) 02:34, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply to you posting

Hi there; various comments.

Perhaps in some ways most important, the fact that I am a practising catholic does not blind me to the reality behind other faiths; I am well aware of the significance of Deepavali (or divali as some languages have it), as I am of other important days in Hindu, Islam, Jewish and other faiths. And Guy Fawkes day is a wholly historical commemoration without religious significance.

It appears to me, perhaps incorrectly, that you remain unable to grasp the importance of experience and depth of knowledge within wikipedia. It is wholly inappropriate for you to be considering the creation of a wiki instruction manual, even as co-author. I have no wish to give offence, but you simply do not as yet have even a small part of the skill and experience necessary to do this. Please drop the idea now.

I have said before, and say again, please concentrate on simple editing and article creation. I have looked at the Alamagordo article you mention. Your first edits to it were at a point when it already consisted of some 80+kb, and were to delete a number of redlinks for which you were soundly rebuked. And the point which I am making is that you did not know any better. So please go and gain basic experience until you DO know better.

I know that you want to be a good editor. And I know that you want to be an admin, and hopefully a good one. But you ABSOLUTELY MUST go away and learn how first. Careless or disruptive editing remains on your edit history, and can count against you in the future. I really am trying to give you good advice here. --Anthony.bradbury 15:47, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello, Suomi Finland 2009. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have an interest in adding your comments. The thread is User:Ludvikus revisited. Thank you. --Ludvikus (talk) 16:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

photo in alamagordo

there is nothing wrong with the photo. but go to the photo page, and remove the vandalism in it. Auntieruth Auntieruth55 (talk) 20:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks!

thanks for the barnstar suomi!

do you know of any place to discuss the deletion policy other than "black kite"s page?

Richmondian (talk) 20:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

South Georgia

Eh, no I'm not really living in South Georgia. Please, don't take my userboxes too seriously, as almost all of them are just a half-hearted attempt to look stupid (and I really don't like to give away information about myself online). I simply chose South Georgia, because it seems like a very obscure location to be at home, and I'm not even sure if anyone is living there, besides ruthless hordes of man-eating penguins and a few scientists every now and then.
Btw, I don't think it is good to be friends with someone, just because he lives in an isolated, lonely place. He could be an asshole just as much as someone from an overcrowded megacity. And honestly, if I truly were from South Georgia I wouldn't want to be treated differently than if I were from Madrid, Windhoek or Cherrapunji. In real life it might be difficult at times, but at least online the way you are treated shouldn't depend on where you are from. So, if you want to be friends with me, then because of who I am, anything else is futile and does no good. (Lord Gøn (talk) 07:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC))

So a bit of fun with details is ok?! ;p Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Why shouldn't it be ok? I mean, it's nobody's concern here on Misplaced Pages who I really am and I think the userboxes are absurd enough not to take them seriously. And as long as my contributions are fine, why should anyone be bothered by a little bit of nonsense? (Lord Gøn (talk) 09:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC))

Talkback

GedUK  18:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Is Goa feeling the heat?

Check this out, Don't call this POV ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.17.155 (talk) 18:35, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

See here and here for discussions on this subject. The user appeared to be spamming entirely random people (though I now know that is not the case). They also provided no context for the messages, lending support to my decision at the time. Furthermore, they also also appear to be an indefinitely blocked user and shouldn't be posting anything. --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 16:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Goa is a big city. The annexation of Goa is controversial. Therefore, you will have some people in Goa who feel very strongly and may edit in one of the largest websites, Misplaced Pages. It's like Northern Ireland. All users with similar opinions (pro or against something) are not necessarily the same. You should not be using excuses to muzzle people as long as the other people behave. Is that IP disruptive to my user talk page? No. Are you disruptive to my user page? No, but you are creating a bit of unneccessary drama. So on the disruptive scale, neither one of you is disruptive but you are closer (still far away) of the two to being so. Just let it go. That IP isn't doing anything disruptive as of 10 minutes ago. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, sorry. I was trying to clean up what I thought was a spammer and then found out was simply indefinitely blocked, a minor issue that no-one really cares about, and then I was explaining why I did that to you. Forgive me for trying to help Misplaced Pages. --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 16:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I don't expect everyone to know the history behind discussions. You also assume that the IP is the same person as that other user. That's like saying that anyone in Pakistan who does not like India is the same person or any anti-Hamas edits from Israel is the same person. This is not always the case. With those conflicts, editors should try to be civil as much as possible.

In case the IP is reading this, occasional posts are welcomed but extremely frequent posts may be considered spam. Everyone in WP is always welcomed to leave friendly messages here, at least until I change my mind. Be happy! Be nice! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK

Im not sure that there needs to be a change in DYK per se... I understand that the focus there is the creation of articles. But you are right in that there is no comparable "prize" for improving articles that are longer than stubs, but are pretty much crap. Redefining DYK too much will make it for other than "new" articles, something the community will not go for IMHO.Thelmadatter (talk) 01:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Dont I know it! I went through the process once with the Mexico City Cathedral and decided it wasn't worth the headache. So much nitpicking! I admit I'm really bad about all the little stuff (typos, measurement conversions, hard spaces etc etc etc). Id rather focus on providing information. Fortunately, getting gold stars from WP is not the only reason I work on improving articles on Mexico. It helps my Spanish reading ability and vocabulary and a learn a lot about my adopted country. If in the end, my work ends up as a 5x expansion ... I toss it onto the DYK suggestion list.Thelmadatter (talk) 17:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Fewer rules conflicts

Thank you for the invitation to comment. I'm always willing to talk about making guidelines more clear, and if there are examples of two rules that actually appear to contradict each other, then the solution is to make something consistent with the values that the two opposing sides represent. Some things definitely need to be more clear. I think that half of the people who use the phrase "indiscriminate list" have no clue what "indiscriminate" means (the irony being that they use the word indiscriminately). I think that most people who cite the "notable for one event" rule have never read the rule. On the other side of the spectrum are people who aren't aware of the concept of "historically notable", simply because it's a phrase buried deep into the definition of notability. That's why I spend a lot of time in the AfD forum, because it sometimes happens that a person needs to speak up when the rules are being described incorrectly.

Though none of the administrators will ever admit to it, most of these come down to a majority vote, which takes two forms-- either the majority followed a stated policy, in which case the outcome was "keep" or "delete"; or the majority went against stated policy, in which case the outcome is "no consensus" (i.e., maybe this won't happen next time it comes up for a vote). I'm interested in hearing what you (or any other editor) believes to be the most commonly encountered example of conflicting rules. Mandsford (talk) 16:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Talk:2009 White House gatecrash incident

Hi, I think you mistakenly posted the same thread twice. --PinkBull 20:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Then simply delete one thread, like I did. --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 20:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Re:Salahis

I still strongly feel that the event article is more appropriate than the individual Salahi entries. As colorful as their backgrounds may be, I still think they are only notable for one event, and WP:ONEEVENT states "the general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person". If they obtain greater notability down the road, I'd certainly condone separate articles for them; for example, if the Salahis are chosen as contestants for The Real Housewives of Washington, D.C., that alone would probably do it. However, if the Salahi articles are kept, I think it would be much more appropriate to have one Tareq and Michaele Salahi article, rather than one for each. — Hunter Kahn _(c) 23:01, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

• I tend to agree that there should only be the gatecrashing article, and not the gatecrashing event and the individual biographies. However, those biographies have gone through an AFD, and the result was keep. At this point, the scope of our discussion is only whether the two biographies should be merged into one, not deleted in favor of the gatecrashing article. — Hunter Kahn _(c) 01:44, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  • I actually think the event article is more appropriate to keep than the bios. But that article is also going through an AFD, so we should really respect that process. Honestly, my recommendation is simply to focus on whether to combine the two Salahi biographies at this point. Maybe in a month or so, when the media circus has died down and we have a better prospective on the lasting impact of the whole situation, we can revisit whether we want to merge the bios and the event article. Not now though... — Hunter Kahn _(c) 01:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Nokian Tyres

On November 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nokian Tyres, 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.

Orlady (talk) 02:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 20:24, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Amanda Knox

I'm guessing the article was previously deleted as per WP:BLP1E while the trial was ongoing, because of possible BLP considerations dependent on the outcome. Now that's she's convicted, I dunno. I think the best thing to do is leave a message at WP:BLPN, so I'm doing that now. John Carter (talk) 01:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

The article has been redirected to Murder of Meredith Kercher and fully protected to avoid unnecessary re-establishment. There is no real argument for AK to have her own article. The talk is still open for interested parties. Thanks, raseaC 01:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC).

Reply

Hi, I have no interest in discussing this matter with you because I find your post on my talk page (which has been removed) offensive and your arguments completely flawed (I have posted on the 'deleted' Amanda Knox talk page on five separate occasions today). Thanks, raseaC 21:41, 5 December 2009 (UTC).

Hi, I've made some 'edits' (simply cutting, nothing else) to your post and re-added it. If you would like me to address that post then let me know, if not go ahead and delete it. Thanks, raseaC 21:50, 5 December 2009 (UTC).

I removed the aspects of your post that contravened WP:CIVILITY and were not useful to the discussion, as I stated above. It appears that you are unable to understand how WP works so once again have no interest in discussing the matter with you. Thanks, raseaC 22:08, 5 December 2009 (UTC).

Very strange. It seems that when I added the following, RaseaC think it is violating civility....

A word of advice, consider not writing "There is no real argument for AK to have her own article" when it is possible that some may have some points for having the article. That's why there's an AFD process not a deletion process where one user can simply declare "I've thought it over and there is no real argument to keep, therefore delete"

Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:17, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

block review

I ask for reviews of all my blocks, I believe it is the honourable thing to do. I take your points on board, but given my position I don't see them as applying. Not sure what the Wall Street Journal Europe has to do with it unless I have made the news. Hiding T 18:36, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you. Hiding T 19:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Valley2city 01:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Trains and things

Thanks for the barnstar and all, but I have to confess to being extremely confused by your obsession with this Asa Seeley business. When you marked the WP:AN thread resolved I assumed that meant that you were done with this, but then you went and contacted the one editor who !voted to merge the content in the AfD from February, which could be viewed as a form of canvassing for support from someone who agrees with you after your complaint was shot down at the noticeboard. That editor re-added the content over at West Baltimore (MARC station) without any discussion, and I have in turn reverted them since the current talk page consensus is for non-inclusion.

Perhaps one problem is that you simply have not noticed the basic facts of the case. Here you note "that unsuccessful, not carried out, assassination plots of presidential candidates has been the subject of AFD keeps." Okay, but that's simply not what happened with this supposed "assassination attempt". Later reporting, based on legal documents, said it turned out that Seeley "intended revenge, not harm to any public officials in Washington." So, from what we know, this was not an assassination attempt, rather it was a guy acting crazy and in a bizarre fashion who was mistakenly reported as threatening the president. Misplaced Pages articles (even the ones about train stations!) are not for discussing false accusations against living people. Surely you know enough about BLP to understand that. Creating an "Asa Seeley incident" article as you suggested is even more wrongheaded, and such an article would be SNOW closed as delete at an AfD.

As I said I have no idea why you are so interested in something so trivial, but I don't think you're handling this very well at all, and to my mind at least you're becoming borderline disruptive by canvassing for support and trying to change DRV policy based on a complete misreading of a brief exchange we had. That was just bizarre, and I highly recommend you step away from the whole situation, because you seem to have lost perspective somewhat. Of course you can ignore that advice, but to my mind you're not doing yourself much credit here. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 08:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Re:ANI

Regarding your question on ANI, that removal of the merged text would not be appropriate to bring up at WP:DRV. DRV is only for issues which require admin intervention to delete/undelete an article from the database. A merge doesn't fall under those categories, and should simply be discussed at the article's Talk page. — The Hand That Feeds You: 14:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

It was AN, not ANI. Also see your talk page for my question. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Deletion process

Creating a system where we have to have a separate debate, following an AFD, to decide whether or not to merge content and where to merge it to... it seems a bit clunky to me. I mean, we already have a process for discussing merging; flag it up on the talk pages of the affected articles. In cases like this, the best approach seems to be to merge (or to merge to talk), and then let that process occur organically. If the "target" feels it can be incorporated, great; if not, it'll be removed, no harm done, and there's a note on the talkpage explaining what happened.

Thinking of it as a way to "defy" or "mock" AFD decisions is a bit off; routine discussion and AFD are two separate processes, working together, and equally able to make decisions on what to do with content. If people are deliberately being misbehaved over this, going around and un-merging content just because they didn't like an AFD decision, then that's something we can deal with in regard to that person, but this doesn't seem to be such a case. Shimgray | talk | 18:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Problem: If an AFD is to merge, the editors in the receiving article may not want the merged text (might want 0% of it, not just some of it)

After thinking it over, I think the best way is for the adminstrator to "ask" the object/target of the proposed merged if they are willing to take it. If they take some of it, then merge is ok. If they don't want any of it, then the administrator can take that into account about whether to keep or delete. The administrator can "ask" the receiving talk page maybe 2 days before closing. This doesn't have to be policy but just common courtesy. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:59, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that seems sensible - if an AFD is debating a merge option, notify the relevant pages and let them feed into it. Shimgray | talk | 18:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Nokian Tyres GA review

I have nominated the article for community reassessment as I believe that the article does not meet the GA criteria. My concerns are at Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Nokian Tyres/1. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Please address your comments to the reassessment page. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:06, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I have responded at the reassessment page, which is where you should respond. Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

talk back

Cherry pick statistics

Hello. I presume that Cube lurker's clarification clears up your incorrect assumption ? To avoid looking this silly in the future, you may wish to check your facts (or at least the supplied links) prior to making accusations that others have engaged in bad-faith practices such as cherry picking statistics. — Kralizec! (talk) 20:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out, which I've corrected. That's the trouble with a huge mess which is why I proposed a clarity period. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:38, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Your edits

Please don't make unfounded edits to the WP:Editing restrictions. As you aren't an admin, you can not impose or remove community sanctions. --Coffee // have a cup // flagged revs now! // 20:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC) Sorry but your addition conflicts with others. I'll let it go though. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:50, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

That's exactly what my restriction says. I don't know where you're coming up with everywhere, I only said Misplaced Pages/talk space. --Coffee // have a cup // flagged revs now! // 20:53, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Dutch agency

If I can find some time, I will try to work on it. Thanks for letting me know!  fetchcomms☛ 19:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Talk page

Erm... thanks?  fetchcomms☛ 00:24, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Test on your own talk page next time. I tried reverting you, but you'd already done it. --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 00:29, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I tried to undo it as quickly as humanly possible. I couldn't test it because I know that my counter is a manual counter, not an automated one. Even with Falcon eyes, how did you see it so quickly? Is there a Misplaced Pages version of the NCTb or KGB? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:31, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Um, all of those counters are manual, and it was probably Huggle.  fetchcomms☛ 00:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Nope, just checked. He's on the Huggle Whitelist. It was luck that I refreshed in time to see it. There is no Secret Misplaced Pages Secret Police that is kept a secret. We never had this conversation. (puts on sunglasses and neuralyses) --Thejadefalcon_{The bird's seeds} 00:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

reflist

Reflist|2 makes the refs into 2 columns, I did it because they were getting a bit long in 1 column. Reflist|3 is three columns.  fetchcomms☛ 00:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

The 2010 WikiCup begins tomorrow!

Welcome to the biggest WikiCup Misplaced Pages has yet seen! Round one will take place over two months, and finish on February 26. There is only one pool, and the top 64 will progress. The competition will be tough, as more than half of the current competitors will not make it to round 2. Details about scoring have been finalized and are explained at Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Scoring. Please make sure you're familiar with the scoring rules, because any submissions made that violate these rules will be removed. Like always, the judges can be reached through the WikiCup talk pages, on their talk page, or over IRC with any issues concerning anything tied to the Cup. We will keep in contact with you via weekly newsletters; if you do not want to receive them, please remove yourself from the list here. Conversely, if a non-WikiCup participant wishes to receive the newsletters, they may add themselves to that list. Well, enough talk- get writing! Your submission's page is located here. Details on how to submit your content is located here, so be sure to check that out! Once content has been recognized, it can be added to your submissions page, from which our bot will update the main score table. Remember that only articles worked on and nominated during the competition are eligible for points. Have fun, and good luck! Garden, iMatthew, J Milburn, and The ed17 19:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

2010

To all of those who didn't like an edit that I made or crossed wires with me, sorry and let's start a new decade fresh! Happy New Year! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Re:please explain

Concerning your question on Garden's talk page, the section is discussing good and featured topics. Basically, if you promote an article that is already in a topic, you get points for the promotion as normal, but you don't get extra points for the topic. However, if you manage to add an article to a topic that is already good or featured, you can claim the extra topic points. I appreciate this is a rather fiddly distinction- do you understand this now? If not, you're welcome to contact me on my talk page. I was the one who wrote that line, so I apologise if it is a little difficult. J Milburn (talk) 14:31, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:WikiCup questions

Hey. I don't mind answering your questions, so don't feel bad about posting them :) Regarding your first question, yes, you simply add the articles you have worked on to Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions/Suomi Finland 2009, in the format explained here. You may find further notes of interest on the rules page. As for what can actually get you points, you are correct that mere article creation or improvement will not. Instead, an article must be recognised as good or featured, or appear on the main page as part of the did you know or in the news sections. Did you know is the easiest of these, and I see you've already had one in your time on Misplaced Pages, so you know what you're doing there. As for how much you have to have done to claim the points- it has to be a "significant" amount this year. There's no line in the sand, but just be reasonable and don't abuse the system and you should be fine :) Does that clear things up a little? J Milburn (talk) 22:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Last year's competition included points for any edits in the article space or portal space, but the competition has changed tone a little this year. Discussion for how things will work next year won't be starting until we are well into this competition, but it could very easily change tone again. J Milburn (talk) 22:28, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:Roadmap?

• I'm fine with your vote. In fact, I think both should be kept, and I've gone on record saying that about both articles. I voted for Speedy close based on the history that's been ongoing with this user, and no reason other than that. However, I encourage you to reach out to him all you like. Also, my signature actually links to four different sections of my userspace (User page, talk, contributions, autograph book), but I probably should change it, as it is a bit confusing... :) — Hunter Kahn 17:33, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Suomi Finland 2009! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 4 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Victoria Corderi - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Foreign trips

My position is simple: if the trips receive substantial press coverage, they should have articles. Everyking (talk) 05:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Nokian Tyres

You're obviously committed to this article, so I'm going to do what I can to see that it doesn't lose its GA listing. The point of GA reassessments isn't to delist articles; nobody really wants to do that if they can instead be improved, and this one can. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

• gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

• ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

DRAMAOUT/2

Hey. Thanks for the barnstar, but it doesn't matter if we signed up a few hours late or not...

		The 2nd Anti-Drama Barnstar
		Awarded for participating in the 2nd Great Misplaced Pages Dramaout. Thanks for avoiding drama for 5 days!

Hope you like it. Nifky 10:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Inauguration of Barack Obama

Could you please place your comments on either the FAC (prefered) or the article talk page. No one concerned is watching my talk page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:33, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Criticisms will be resolved. I have two co-authors who will help me address any issues you bring up on either the FAC or the talk page. They are not watching my talk page, however.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:05, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:unimportant comment

I can't agree more. I myself took part last year, and was eliminated in the second or third round, I believe. However, I was still more than happy with what I achieved. So, congratulations! J Milburn (talk) 22:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

FAC formality

Pursuant to the regulations, I hereby notify you that I have submitted the Nokian Tyres article for FA consideration.Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for notification. Note that talking to yourself may be a sign of a psychiatric illness. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Kansas State Wildcats men's basketball

Please do not make self-referential edits as you do here. It is not important for the coverage of the basketball team that the rival school vandalized the Misplaced Pages page.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 January newsletter

We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. We've had some shakeups regarding late entries, flag changes and early dropouts, but the competition is now established- there will be no more flag changes or new competitors. Congratulations to Sasata (submissions), our current leader, who, at the time of writing, has more listed points than Hunter Kahn (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions) (second and third place respectively) combined. A special well done also goes to Fetchcomms (submissions)- his artcle Jewel Box (St. Louis, Missouri) was the first content to score points in the competition.

Around half of competitors are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. 64 of the 149 current competitors will advance to round 2- if you currently have no points, do not worry, as over half of the current top 64 have under 50 points. Everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places in round 2! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! J Milburn, Garden, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Suomi Finland 2009 is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.

This is the standard first of the month Wikibreak of a few days.Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with your main user page

I definitely think that we should do whatever it takes to cause as little offence as possible to other editors. :-) Anyway, I really came here to tell you that we have some more concrete proposals on the civility blocking policy - see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incivility blocks#Actual text. It would be great to get your feedback! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 13:59, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. But then I am supposed to be on wikibreak so I will start that tomorrow even though I am supposed to start on the first of every month. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

You know, I totally misread what you wrote in that thread. Please ignore whatever it was I wrote in response, as I made that reply on about 3:30AM in the morning. I'm a new father :-) I'll reply tomorrow. Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 16:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

comment

You're welcome to return your comment to the miscellaneous page, just as I was welcome to remove it. That's how wikipedia works! If you return it, I'll leave it alone as see what others think. I really don't care about what it said, except that it doesn't belong there. (By the way, don't be quick to cry "censorship" when somebody disagrees with you: that's a very old and boring tactic, and it means people won't take you seriously.) - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Incidentally, http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/02/palin-wants-rahm-emanuel/?fbid=K9xUidFNQLj#more-88484 is not always a reliable source. It's an editorial page for CNN staffers, so it's reliable in terms of the opinions that whomever is posting holds, but it's not a reliable news source in and of itself. I think that this is where you're confusion is coming from, in this particular instance. Regardless, you and everyone else should always question evn the most reliable sources regularly, by demanding backup to the info presented. If anything is presented as fact, it should be backed up by essentially the same information in alternate sources.
— V = I * R (Talk • Contribs) 19:55, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Breaker boy GAN

I made the tweak asked. If there's anything else you'd like me to do let me know, since I'm not sure where the original nom went. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Your page

I've moved that page you created into your user space, because you've essentially just copied the policy. You can't call it an essay, because it's a policy, one of our most important. See User:Suomi Finland 2009/Verifiability first. SlimVirgin 22:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Please do not move that page into anyone else's userspace, and please stop the games. V is an important policy. It isn't going to be changed on a whim and we can't have different versions of it existing in project space, because it might confuse people. If you want me to delete that page, let me know. If you have constructive input into the policy, it's very welcome on the talk page. SlimVirgin 17:35, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. I'll delete the page shortly. SlimVirgin 18:12, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

John Murtha

I think stating "X said this" about Murtha should stand, even if it may not ultimately be the truth as decided by a court of law. Go to the talk page to discuss it further if you disagree, although I'd like to keep the sourcing as high a level as possible. Bearian (talk) 22:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Breaker boy

I fixed most of your concerns. I don't have access to the offline sources so I couldn't help with expansion. Since it's not actually 'my' article I won't submit it into the Wikicup, just saw that the original author disappeared and it was close to GA. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:20, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Alright, hopefully it can be passed next time you're on. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 15:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

One sided admin

I would like to know how to complain about a one sided admin. Do you know where I can complain? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 19:37, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Travel

I wish I had the money to travel more! I stay in hostels when I can. Thanks for the invite to Belgium. Bearian (talk) 00:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Your note

Better to strike though rather than delete once someone has commented. SlimVirgin 00:39, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sharona Alperin

A tag has been placed on Sharona Alperin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:57, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Nancy 16:04, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Governance and WP:5P

To answer your question, I don't know. Part of the problem is that in the English-speaking world, we have the common law tradition, instead of the more logical civil law system. In the title are the two main pages for you to reference. See also Misplaced Pages:Governance review, Misplaced Pages:Governance reform, WP:LAW, and User:Walton One/Constitution of Misplaced Pages, all of which can be confusing to a newebie. I am happy that you have the sisu to deal with this. Bearian (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Doc Quintana (talk) 02:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Nokian

Hei, Regarding this sentence in Nokian Tyres:

"The project was put on hold in early 2009 by mutual agreement and will not be reinstated until late 2010 at the earliest."

It's sourced to an annual report from 2008 but the reference itself is just a sentence saying that without any details about the actual annual report. Is it available online or do you have a print version someplace so I can create a true reference? <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 18:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Let me see if I can track it down tonight. If not, I'll pull it out, ok? Nokian makes good tires. I wanted to get a set for my car seven or so years ago but they were hard to find around here at the time. You have to go to independent tire shops or else special order because most tire shops here are controlled by Firestone or Goodyear and Sears doesn't carry them either. <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 19:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe when Nokian is cleaned up we could work on Salora Oy. <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 19:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

El Paso-Juarez

Difficult article because some may consider it a content fork of the two separate city articles. Good luck on resolving this issue. The way to resolve this and still keep the article is to write about cooperative efforts between the two cities and issues about the cities, not an article about the two individual cities. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I had to deal with a similar issue some months ago. I certainly don't mind people venturing opinions but I am strongly offended when editors use their concerns as a justification for vandalism as is currently happening with the article (i.e. making major changes based on personal opinions rather than reliable sources). The point is that I have established notability and provided sources for the major points so there is no justification for the edit war (and certainly not the unsourced and non-consensus rename). --Mcorazao (talk) 17:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Global warming

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Global warming, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Misplaced Pages:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- TS 22:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I see that you have run into members of the Green party

I've just reverted the revert that was done to your excellent addition to the Global Warming article, but the one Green Party activist and another user with the same view just keep removing it unhappily. Nsaa (talk) 00:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

You're unlikely to make the mistake of believing Nsaa, I hope, but for the record: no, I'm not a GP activist William M. Connolley (talk) 18:19, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Nää vihreet on välillä ihan sekasin. Tää yllä oleva on ehdottomasti yks niist. Yritä kestää.85.77.245.167 (talk) 18:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Yritä kestää.  :)

Speedy deletion nomination of Patrick Beckert

A tag has been placed on Patrick Beckert requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. iBen (talk) 21:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Too bad...

Kiprusoff threatened to not come at all unless he was the number-one goalie and he played terribly in this game. The coach should have called him in one goal sooner - but even then it didn't make a difference. I think maybe the team was a little bit too old also. I am very sad for the hockey fans of Finland, a country I have visited (and love the Finnish people!). In one hour I will start watching my Canadians play. I hope I will not be swearing soon... :) Best of luck four years from now, but you know we will beat you then too! ;) Franamax (talk) 01:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Friendly note

Hey there,

On Misplaced Pages, we try to keep clean, and avoid profanity on user/talk pages. Please take a look at the userpage policy, especially this section. Thank you! We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. I look forward to your further positive contributions. --iBen (talk) 03:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 February newsletter

Round one is over, and round two has begun! Congratulations to the 64 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our first round. A special well done goes to Sasata (submissions), our round one winner (1010 points), and to Hunter Kahn (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions), who were second and third respectively (640 points/605 points). Sasata was awarded the most points for both good articles (300 points) and featured articles (600 points), and TonyTheTiger was awarded the most for featured topics (225 points), while Hunter Kahn claimed the most for good topics (70). Staxringold (submissions) claimed the most featured lists (240 points) and featured pictures (35 points), Geschichte (submissions) claimed the most for Did you know? entries (490 points), Jujutacular (submissions) claimed the most for featured sounds (70 points) and Candlewicke (submissions) claimed the most for In the news entries (40 points). No one claimed a featured portal or valued picture.

Credits awarded after the end of round one but before round two may be claimed in round two, but remember the rule that content must have been worked on in some significant way during 2010 by you for you to claim points. The groups for round two will be placed up shortly, and the submissions' pages will be blanked. This round will continue until 28 April, when the top two users from each group, as well as 16 wildcards, will progress to round three. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup; thank you to all doing this last round, and particularly to those helping at Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:54, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Yipee! I am in the 2nd round. Oops, I wasn't supposed to edit quite yet because Finland didn't win the gold medal in men's hockey. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 23:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

SPI case

I am informing you that I have filed a WP:SPI case involving you here. DD2K (talk) 22:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of female performers in lesbian porn films

The article List of female performers in lesbian porn films has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Empty list.

While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stifle (talk) 22:20, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Prod

I see you prodded a lesbian film article. I am not interested in this and don't know who to add. In all fairness, you should notify the proper Wikiproject so that any interested editor can either agree with you or fix the article. I created it only for gender equality since the men have a similar article. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:04, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I nominate a lot of articles for deletion and notify the creator as a courtesy. I am not in a position to notify other people. Stifle (talk) 15:54, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I've made some comments at the article talkpage. -- Banjeboi 20:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure is!

Hey, thanks for your message, it was her birthday, Happy Birthday MC!!!<3--PeterGriffin • Talk 11:00, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 March newsletter

We're half way through round two, and everything is running smoothly. Hunter Kahn (submissions) leads overall with 650 points this round, and heads pool B. TonyTheTiger (submissions) currently leads pool C, dubbed the "Group of Death", which has a only a single contestant yet to score this round (the fewest of any group), as well five contestants over 100 points (the most). With a month still to go, as well as 16 wildcard places, everything is still to play for. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Although unrelated to the WikiCup, April sees a Good Article Nominations backlog elimination drive, formulated as a friendly competition with small awards, as the Cup is. Several WikiCup contestants and judges have already signed up, but regular reviewers and those who hope to do more reviewing are more than welcome to join at the drive page. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) 22:23, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Dispute

If you waited until 2011 to tell me that, I would've either wondered what was wrong with you or whether you actually got the joke or not. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Everytime you write something on my page, I am fearful that I am being trolled because you have such a way with words. The fact that I have to reread everything a few times also is a testament to your skill. Creating a page at User talk:Suomi Finland 2009/Editnotice should do the trick. You can even create one at your userpage to warn vandals like I did. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Re:Wikicup

Yeah, a new round means 0 points. A lot of people talk about strategy, but I think the majority of people entering are not thinking about it too much- I know I wasn't when I took part last year. J Milburn (talk) 17:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Immunize (talk) 18:36, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Reference style

Yes, sorry about that I was busy for a while and haven't been back yet. Reference style is pretty simple, I already began formatting them at Nokian a while ago but haven't completed. The best information can be found at the following

• For newspapers Template:Cite_news
• For books Template:Cite_book
• For scholarly journals Template:Cite journal
• For websites, primarily online news sources and whitepapers Template:Cite_web
• For press releases Template:Cite_press_release

All of these have sample templates that I just copy and paste. Then I fill in the parameters as needed and delete the extraneous ones. Each template needs to lead in with <ref name=*> with the name of your reference replacing the asterisk. The benefit of named referencing is that it is much easier to use the same citation throughout. You will only need to include the full information in the first reference. For example:

Nokian Tyres considered building a new factory in Espoo, but ultimately decided against it.<ref name=espoo>{{cite news | title = Nokian decides against building new factory | author = | first = Janne | last = Ahonen | authorlink = | author2 = | author3 = | author4 = | author5 = | author6 = | author7 = | url = http://www.hs.fi/ | format = | agency = | newspaper = Helsingin Sanomat | publisher = | location = | isbn = | issn = | oclc = | pmid = | pmd = | bibcode = | doi = | id = | date = 26/4/2010 | page = 12 | pages = | at = | accessdate = | language = | trans_title = | quote = | archiveurl = | archivedate = | ref = }}</ref>

These are all the possible parameters for this template, I've filled in the most important ones. Note the name "espoo". Now, if I want to use the same article to cite a different portion of the Wiki article, all I have to do is add the following:

<ref name=espoo/>

This will group all citations together into one listing in the reflist, including a letter for each allowing readers to click the letter in the reflist to find which specific sentence it is referencing. It's very helpful if you're using the same references more than once so you don't end up with a huge, messy reflist. Give it a try, I will come along as time allows and try to help too. <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 05:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure, you can copy and paste the template above. I also forgot something: you can install a gadget in your preferences that alllows you to click a button to insert the type of reference you need. It opens a window where you plug in the various information. You may want to give that a try. <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 16:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, it looks like you actually wrote most of the Nokian article, which is something I probably wouldn't bother attempting anymore. You're a good editor. I can clean up the refs myself but it will probably take some time, working little by little. That particular article has a ton of them and it will take some time to sort them out properly and format them. It's really kind of tedious work but if you want to pass FA you ought to have those done right. I may have some time this weekend if some plans don't pan out, if so I'll pop in and do some work. <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 04:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Policies

I generally don't keep hard, fast rules when it comes to policies vs. guidelines, but for the most part, I do feel that Misplaced Pages has become too policy driven as time has gone on. Things like the notability guidelines and essays are easy - they all derive from core content policy, so not only is it unnecessary to make the notability guidelines policy themselves, but doing so could create issues if a core policy were ever to change. Two policies acting against each other would lead to a mess.

I can't say for certain how I would view a policy that is based off a guideline, as I would need to know which policy is being referred to to make an informed judgement. It would also be relevant. Do you have a specific policy/guideline in mind, or is this more of a hypothetical discussion at this point?

Interesting. I think WP:BLP1E doesn't restrict articles on people known for only one thing but rather restricts low profile people known for one thing. Given how much effort is put into writing and rewriting WP:PEOPLE, it doesn't surprise me that the guideline is actually better written than the policy it is based off of. Cleaning it up should be relatively painless, I'd hope, and could be done via a discussion at WP:BLP. That said, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if any such effort was met with resistance. Resolute 22:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't think there is any harm in discussing it on the talk page of WP:BLP if you feel it is important to reword the section. More eyes from the start would be better, and if the proposed changes are improvements, they should gain support. Resolute 00:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

While that certainly is streamlined, I don't think you would get much traction on a change that reduces the verbosity of the section. IMO, the policy page should clearly spell out what is and is not accepted practice, using the guideline page for extra examples and unusual situations. As such, you will want the BLP page section to be larger than it currently is, imo. Resolute 22:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for 1958 Major League Baseball All-Star Game

On April 29, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1958 Major League Baseball All-Star Game, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) 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.

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

hey, hey, thank you! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Re:wikicup withdrawn

It'd just mean that they couldn't get through to the next round, meaning that, if they did have enough points to qualify, someone else would get the place. J Milburn (talk) 16:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 April newsletter

Round two is over, and we are down to our final 32. For anyone interested in the final standings (though not arranged by group) this page has been compiled. Congratulations to Hunter Kahn (submissions), our clear overall round winner, and to ThinkBlue (submissions) and Arsenikk (submissions), who were solidly second and third respectively. There were a good number of high scorers this round- competition was certainly tough! Round three begins tomorrow, but anything promoted after the end of round two is eligible for points. 16 contestants (eight pool leaders and eight wildcards) will progress to round four in two months- things are really starting to get competitive. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Judge iMatthew has retired from Misplaced Pages, and we wish him the best. The competition has been ticking over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. A special thank you goes to participants Stone (submissions) and White Shadows (submissions) for their help in preparing for round three. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 17:39, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

Hey Suomi, Iv'e opened up a new discussion here and would appreciate your opinion and input. Thanks!--PeterGriffin • Talk 04:03, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

RE:ANI

I am a bit confused by your message. If this is about Scarlet's article, you will see my ANI post was expressing my disapproval of the removal (or "fear") of such tags on Misplaced Pages for aesthetic or BLP reasons. I agree with you that tags serve a good purpose. SGGH 15:32, 3 May 2010 (UTC) ...right, and why did you post it on my page? I'm barely involved. SGGH 16:36, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

"fan club"

Erm? "Fan club" was sarcasm in this sense, because the person I was referring to had been insulting me. There is no such club. bahamut0013_deeds 00:27, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Your note

Hi SF, I normally don't edit that article, at least not in recent memory, so I am certainly uninvolved. And in this case, I saw what seems to be a vandalism edit, replacing a period in the final sentence of a paragraph with an exclamation mark. If you feel this is not vandalism, and there is some good explanation for it, you may be right, but it sure seemed that way to me when it popped up in my watchlist. Crum375 (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I only use rollback for obvious vandalism, and this edit appeared to me to be so, as I explained above. If you don't feel it is, please explain why not. Crum375 (talk) 17:47, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the cake, SF! (And sorry about the missed gold for Teemu and his gang.) Crum375 (talk) 18:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

This user forgot to take a standing wikibreak starting 1 May 2010. A break is scheduled every month on the first. Such break lasts a minimum of 1 day up to a few days. Because the schedule was not followed, the scheduled wikibreak will be effective immediately.

Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:12, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Galaxy 15

On 8 May, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Galaxy 15, which you recently nominated. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Los Angeles Express (newspaper)

I noticed the article you recently created, Los Angeles Express (newspaper). Just to let you know that you can't use a Misplaced Pages article as a reference for another article. Regards, --BelovedFreak 23:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Your note

Similar guideline

I would love to collaborate on it. --Legolas 03:16, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

CFM56 Edits

Hi Suomi Finland 2009 -- I wanted to let you know that I have reverted several of your edits to the CFM International CFM56 article. I removed your addition of a source in the middle of the lead. Usually items in the lead do not need to be referenced if the fact is established and cited later in the article, and the fact that the CFM56 is used on many A320s is established later in the article.

Additionally, I reverted your change of the "Variants" subheading to "Models". The "Variants" subheading is a standard category for the Aviation project / aero-engine task force, and can be use synonymously with the word "models". Furthermore, the additional sentence at the beginning of the article wasn't really necessary, and the citation was sloppy (just a link, nothing else).

Currently the article is undergoing a review as a featured article candidate. If you have suggestions or requests for the article, I would appreciate it if you brought them up at the FAC review page or on the article's talk page while this process is on going. Thanks for your interest and understanding! -SidewinderX (talk) 02:57, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

http://www.mfa.gov.sg/pedrabranca/multimediagallery/PhotoofPedraBrancatodaywithvariousfacilities(SingaporeMemorial).html User:Hammersoft

Note,

Re, your message, I would appreciate if you would not treat me like I am a bad writer, simply because you didn't take the time to familiarize yourself with the case. A quick scan of the banned user's user talk page would have told you all you needed to know.

I have been here far longer than you, and I have done far more than you. I know how to write a discussion. Instead of assuming I don't know how to write, why don't you assume that I do. I didn't feel it was necessary to go into a long diatribe about a user that nearly everyone on that board was very familiar with.

Further, before you go trying to give me any 'advice' as if I didn't know how to write in the first place, make sure you look through my contributions to ANI in the past. I have written much more detailed ban discussions but, as said, for Frei Hans, it was not needed.

Again, look before you leap. Don't bother coming back to my talk page unless you're going to apologize.— Dædαlus 21:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Re:WikiCup judge

Hey, I guess this probably isn't the most useful answer, but this is not the kind of thing in which I like to get involved. As far as I see it, your original concerns were not the most important- you say yourself you don't disagree with the ban, and so complaining that the person who made it come about is not following a certain procedure reeks of wikilawyering, which is not very becoming. I personally keep my nose out of that sort of thing where I can; there's a lot of aggression and upset to be had, and, if that's not what you're after, it's perhaps best to stick to article writing and those cases where you feel it is worth making a stand. We all came here, first and formost, to write an encyclopedia. Inevitably, there will be unpleasantries, but complaining about the writing style of someone in a case that does not really affect you, especially when said case is closed, is probably not a constructive way to spend your time. I admit I have not looked into this fully, and I admit I'm a little tired, but that's the impression I'm getting here. I hope you still feel happy to continue contributing to Misplaced Pages, and taking part in the WikiCup. J Milburn (talk) 00:06, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Not full URLs for wiki links

Hi. I've noticed you put full URLs for links within wikipedia. This causes problems like creating extra tabs, moving btwn those who use secure links (link me) and those who don't. It'd be better if you make your links like I changed here — Rlevse • Talk • 20:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I gather you know the answer now, but since I spent ages writing my answer, I'll post it anyway in case you find it useful!

I'd use ] for links to articles (or other "current" pages) and for diffs. It looks to me as if the padlock icon is automatically displayed by the MediaWiki software. The examples display as:

• Finland

You can also this this variant (it's called "piping"): ] for links to articles (or other "current" pages) and for diffs; these display as:

• An article about Finland
• A diff from an article about Finland

Does that help?

Cheers, TFOWR 20:42, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Reply to question

It seems to have a proper source. Not the greatest thing to have in the article but as it appears to have had an affect on his playing it would seem valid to include it. However, there is no source for him suing the board. I would question the inclusion of the next two sentences. There is no source there. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 21:52, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Neutral: reply

Thank you

Thank you for withdrawing your question here. The roles of oversighter and bureaucrat are very different, and it is entirely reasonable for standards and expectations to be different for each. I believe it would be unfair to imply that non-acceptance of an application for one role would in any way relate to acceptance in the other role. It should be noted that criteria for bureaucrats are entirely established by the English Misplaced Pages community, independent of any other groups. The same is not true of oversighters, who must meet criteria established by the Wikimedia Foundation, as well as the Arbitration Committee, before their candicacy is considered by the community. Risker (talk) 19:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 May newsletter

We are half way through round 3, with a little under a month to go. The current overall leader is Sasata (submissions), who has 570 points. He leads pool C. Pools A, B and D are led by Hunter Kahn (submissions), Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) and White Shadows (submissions) respectively. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Two of last year's final 8, Theleftorium (submissions) and Scorpion0422 (submissions), have dropped out of the competition, saying they would rather their place went to someone who will have more time on their hands than them next round. On a related note, a special thank you goes to White Shadows (submissions) for his help behind the scenes once again. There is currently a problem with the poster, perhaps caused by the new skin- take a look at this discussion and see if you can help. The competition has continued to tick over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. Good luck to all! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 20:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Monthly wikibreak

Note: I have a monthly wikibreak. I forgot to start on Tuesday, the first of the month. Therefore, I will start immediately. The minimum length is 24 hours but I could not find the right template. This is not an official block, just a self imposed wikibreak.

Template:Blocked user Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 14:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps this:

Suomi Finland 2009 is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages no less than a day from now

As to your suggestion of working on Nokian Tyres, alas, I will be busy in the next bit working on articles related to players at the 2010 NHL Entry Draft. Best of luck with that article, however! Cheers, Resolute 15:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

• Comment: having just returned from a lengthy (and unplanned) wikibreak, I have to say I think regular (scheduled!) breaks are an excellent idea. I came back refreshed - I hope you do too! TFOWR 17:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Re:Template

We will be sending out stuff like that at the end of the competition overall. Fox is good with images and not bad with templates, so he'll probably be the one dealing with that stuff mostly. No doubt we'll have a chat about it at some point. Thanks for your thoughts. J Milburn (talk) 20:51, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Checkuser and oversighter selection‎

Please don't disrupt the RfC by adding far too many options to be reasonable to the poll. It is an RFC and the poll is FT2's. Don't change the options, if you have a different view you can express your view in the section above. I've removed options 1a and options 5 through 20. Prodego 00:29, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

At least one option was put in by HJ Mitchell. It looks like a joke. Some of the others are very serious proposals. There is more than two views. Learning the nuances helps understand the problem. Forcing everyone to wear either black or wear white is not helpful to learn fashion. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:21, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Nokian

Intelligentsium 18:49, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

At mine as well, I think I found some tools for you. ++Lar: t/c 22:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

New article for Amanda Knox

As you have inquired, we have received permission to expand the redirect page into article "Amanda Knox" and other users now can edit that page. Please beware that many users have expressed an interest in limiting Misplaced Pages information about Amanda Knox, so the article has been re-nominated in a WP:AfD Article-for-Deletion debate. Although, per policy, Amanda Knox has individual notability (to allow a separate article), on previous occasions an AfD has been decided based on severe resistance to having an article exist, and an admin might delete an article which would, otherwise, have been allowed on a notable subject. You might view various decisions on Misplaced Pages to be based on avoiding enemies, even though WP:Policies and guidelines seem to allow more freedom than actually occurs, due to intense debates. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)