Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MiszaBot III (talk | contribs) at 16:19, 25 July 2010 (Archiving 2 thread(s) from User talk:Matthead.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Matthead. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Sennen goroshi

Hello, Matthead. Since I added your encounters with Sennen goroshi and his suspected sock IPs to automobile related articles and others as evidences for Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Sennen goroshi, so your input would be highly appreciated. Thanks.--Caspian blue 15:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Matthead! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 10 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 15 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Klaus Ludwig - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Jochen Neerpasch - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Max Welti - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
4. Herbert Linge - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
5. Davy Jones (racing driver) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
6. Ellen Lohr - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
7. Marc Duez - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
8. Justin Bell - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
9. Klaus Fischer - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
10. Giovanni Galli - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Wolfgang von Trips

Hello, I thought I should let you know that I've requested a page move from Wolfgang Graf Berghe von Trips to Wolfgang von Trips, as you made the original move a few years ago.--Midgrid(talk) 21:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Sandstein#Your attention needed

I'd appreciate your comment on this.  Sandstein  09:08, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010

Notice to administrators: In a 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

This is a block per WP:DIGWUREN#Discretionary sanctions for your nationalist WP:BATTLEground conduct and harrassment at as discussed at . Please stop this.  Sandstein  23:00, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

This is an unacceptable statement by Sandstein. Shame on you. -- Matthead  Discuß   00:05, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Matthead (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

What? Loosmark follows me around, provoking me repeatedly, and Sandstein blocks me? What a lop-sided act. No wonder admin Sandstein was recommended on the EEML mailing list, and Loosmark has chosen to complain on his talk, successfully. Somewhere, somebody is laughing his ass off.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline: A reviewing administrator is not allowed to unblock unilaterally someone who an administrator blocked to enforce an ArbCom decision. Please see WP:AEBLOCK for instructions on how to properly appeal this block. NW (Talk) 23:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Uh, what? Special rules? A blocking admin just has to claim he enforces an Arbcom decision, and the block must not be questioned by another admin? Beats me. -- Matthead  Discuß   23:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

There are indeed special rules, but that doesn't mean the block is unquestionable. Feel free to appeal using the {{sanction appeal}} template. NW (Talk) 23:27, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Medal table

Ich denke am vielversprechendsten wäre es vorerst nur die FRG/GER Fusion zu unterstützenden. Wenn ich mir die zurückliegenden Versuche anschaue hier einen Konsens zu erlangen, denke ich, dass hier die Logik am meisten überzeugt. Wäre schön wenn Du die Variante unterstützen könntest. Es sieht so aus als wenn hier langer Atem und konsequentes Argumentieren notwendig wäre. Cheers KarlMathiessen (talk) 22:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Langer Atem und konsequentes Argumentieren reicht nicht wenn einige Leute ihre Meinung durchdrücken wollen, oder gar nur provozieren, während die schweigende Mehrheit schweigt und schweigt und schweigt ... Es wird wohl vonnöten sein, das Thema "Westdeutschland gibt es seit 1990 nicht mehr, und Deutschland gab es zwischen 1945 und 1990 nicht" mal grundsätzlich klären zu lassen, in einem RfC oder so. Aber da werden nur wenige konstruktiv mitmachen, dafür aber viele der POV-Ritter auftauchen. -- Matthead  Discuß   16:32, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Appeal by Matthead

Moved to AN. NW (Talk) 03:25, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

So that you know what is going on, the template you filled out is the start of a community discussion, which will take place on the Administrator's noticeboard. This discussion will examine the situation that led to this block, and determine if it should be lifted or (if it takes too long, which in this case is quite possible) noted in your block log as improper. If you have further comments to make in regards to this discussion, post them here, and they will be transferred over to AN by another editor. This procedure is required for Arbitration Enforcement blocks, as these are made under the authority of the Arbitration Committee, and cannot be unilaterally undone by any single administrator, only with the written consent of the Committee or a community consensus. Hersfold 03:32, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

At Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#Appeal_by_Matthead, there is a trial in which I have no chance to defend myself, as I am still blocked, while Sandstein and Loosmark are allowed to participate. Very fair procedure. -- Matthead  Discuß   13:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Voluntary agreement

Do you accept the terms outlined with respect to you here? Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ncmvocalist, I appreciate your effort with this proposal, and your input at the now closed ANI discussion. Actually, me staying away from the article on West Germany (and related ones) might have benefits for me, as the three latest blocks of me were related to it - or rather to others having rather odd ideas about it, and me getting punished for not swallowing them with a smile. As for the question: Ncmvocalist, may I ask you if you would accept to avoid editing your home country article and talk page in exchange for an unrelated foreigner doing the same? -- Matthead  Discuß   22:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd give such an area a break even if the other side continues to edit the article; an agreement of this sort is more of a rare luxury than something that commonly happens on-wiki. Staying away from the area you are most passionate about can be really useful, and I also think it would be beneficial for each individual. You may of course disagree, and you're not being forced to sign the agreement, but it's there...for now anyway. Do have a think about it. Regards, Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:49, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not beneficial for Misplaced Pages if well-informed editors stay away from an article, and outsiders can establish their POV as they please. One of the biggest problems of Misplaced Pages is that the "civility" of the talk among editors is held in much higher esteem than the reliability of the actual content they add or remove. Editors who can not win a content dispute can still succeed by provoking opponents, and by finding a sympathetic admin who edit restricts or blocks opponents. Seen it many times, almost exclusively on the receiving end. Reasonable mainly non-passionate editors are driven away, and highly motivated POV warriors (like that one) remain (successful). So I simply could give up on Misplaced Pages, too. Or maybe I should only edit articles others are most passionate about, applying some needles and pins there with cold blood, until the blood of an editor who actually cares about the topic starts boiling? -- Matthead  Discuß   17:06, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

ANI thread you will have an interest in

WP:ANI#Nationalist SPA.--Kotniski (talk) 13:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive605#Nationalist_SPA was about one of the countless socks of Serafin. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Datenbanklinks

Hi Matthead, ich habe gesehen, dass du das Template:PGDA erstellt hast. Für die Open Library wurde das Template:OL von einem Benutzer angelegt, der leider nicht mehr aktiv ist. Hast du eine Idee, wie man die Vorlage verbessern kann? Deine gefällt mir wesentlich besser. Gruß --Kolja21 (talk) 03:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

PS: Da die OL-Vorlage (zu?) vielseitig ist, habe ich jetzt - analog zur dt. Misplaced Pages - eine getrennte Vorlage für Autoren (Template:OL author) erstellt. Hintergrund: In der neuen Version der Open Library wird es möglich sein, auch Werke (einschließlich aller Ausgaben) zu verlinken. Gruß --Kolja21 (talk) 00:59, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Mit dem Techno-kram kenne ich mich nicht so gut aus. Zudem scheint sich bei OL auch noch einiges tun müssen. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Universal Cyclopaedia and Atlas

Thank you for creating an article about this important encyclopedia.

Apparently you did not like my changes.

1. What did you mean by "You can not make a copy&paste move"? I did it, so you must mean that my procedure violated some guideline. What is the preferred way of accomplishing the switch between 2 pages? This is a question about procedure, not about whether or not a switch between 2 pages is the right thing to do.

2. The article Universal Cyclopædia & Atlas includes material about Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography. The two works are unrelated. Do you object to removing the irrelevant material about the latter work?

3. Why do you not want Universal Cyclopædia & Atlas redirected to Universal Cyclopaedia and Atlas? The latter is the title printed on the actual work, and I don't see why saving 2 characters by replacing "and" with "&" would be your preference.

4. Is there an online edition of the "1902 edition" that "is now in the public domain"? I would be grateful if you could provide a link.

I found some websites where "Universal Cyclopaedia and Atlas" was confused with Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography. I suspect the date 1902 comes from the work on American biography, since "Universal Cyclopædia and Atlas" editions are 1900, 1901, 1903, and 1905.

I found "JOHNSON'S UNIVERSAL CYCLOPEDIA" (1898) at: http://www.archive.org/stream/johnsonsunivers01pubgoog/johnsonsunivers01pubgoog_djvu.txt

I am not seeking a battle, I just want to understand your reasons for undoing my changes.

I'll watch this page for your response.

Well, please see Help:Moving a page for the guideline. It is explained there why copying/pasting is not the proper thing to do. As for the content, I can't remember details, so please fix it. -- Matthead  Discuß   01:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick reply. I shall read the guideline and fix the details. Xophist (talk) 04:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

You know what Matthead? I'm going to do nothing and leave the inaccuracies on your page. The guideline is the biggest load of bureaucratic bullshit I've seen in a long time. Guess I'm not cut out for this type of picayune nonsense. Thanks anyway. Xophist (talk) 04:27, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the bureaucratic guideline, but complaining at its talk could lead to its improvement, maybe. Also, leaving the inaccuracies on my page does not help anybody, while putting it on the related article talk might. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

You are correct Matthead. I shall take a look at it again, and at least remove the inaccuracies. Perhaps after I make some comments on the talk page, someone with more tolerance for such procedures will initiate the redirection. Thanks for your opinion. Xophist (talk) 03:01, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (4th nomination)

Hi, Matthead. Because you participated in Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2010 January 18#Richard Tylman, you may be interested in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (4th nomination). Cunard (talk) 02:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sticking to the proposal to let uninvolved editors decide, as they now have a chance to succeed. Unlike in prior cases, some supporters of the subject are currently banned from editing. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Richard Tylman was deleted. -- Matthead  Discuß   19:14, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement topic ban (WP:DIGWUREN)

• Matthead (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Considering that your contributions and your block log show that you are habitually engaging in battleground-like conduct related to nationalist issues involving Poland and Germany, that you have been repeatedly sanctioned for related disruption under WP:DIGWUREN, and that you now show up on my talk page making demands for action against others even while being yourself, again, involved in nationalist edit wars at Wilhelm Gnapheus, Rübezahl, Henricus Petrus and Mauritius Ferber, I consider your mode of editing in this topic area to be persistently disruptive. For this reason, per WP:DIGWUREN#Discretionary sanctions, you are hereby indefinitely banned from the topic of Poland and Poles, broadly construed. For the avoidance of doubt, the topic includes subjects which are or were only partially Polish, or whose Polishness is disputed (by you or others), and the ban includes all articles, other pages, parts of pages and discussions related to the topic, and does not contain exceptions for reverting vandalism or WP:BLP violations (but these may be reported to the appropriate noticeboard instead). Be advised that any violations of this ban may result in immediate long blocks. This sanction may be appealed as described at WP:DIGWUREN#Discretionary sanctions.  Sandstein  20:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm waiting some time to see whether you retract that. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

In vain, hardly surprising. Only four days ago, I had asked asked you, Sandstein, about a certain user who has been warned. Since, said user has returned, and has just been asked to redact a personal attack. Wonder what will happen next. -- Matthead  Discuß   18:50, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, Future Perfect at Sunrise blocked indefinite (Apparent ban-evading EEML sock.-- Matthead  Discuß   19:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Warsaw Lyceum

On May 5, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Warsaw Lyceum, 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) 00:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI

I'd report this 3RR violation myself but it's too late in the day for me to figure out the instructions!

He's also been warned again for WP:BATTLE behaviour ("Continued misuse of this forum as a battleground will result in sanctions.") despite already being under a DIGWUREN Discretionary sanctions warning for, among other things, violating WP:BATTLE . Is the guy not subject to normal WP policies? Varsovian (talk) 22:29, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Strangely enough, although his initial reaction to my 3RR warning on his talkpage was to deny that he had reverted me "even once" and to accuse me of making "bogus accusation." , he then backed off slightly, stating "I don't remember reverting any of your edits. Please show me the diff which of your edits have I reverted and I will gladly undo it." . But after I posted the above message to you, he self-reverted . Of course he couldn't just self-revert, he had to threaten to take action "returned the collapse thing to avoid the usual wiki-drama. i still don't agree with it and will raise the issue at an appropriate board later" . He then went on to prove his commitment to WP:CIVIL with a post which simply stated "Varsovian, you have just re-defined the word epic fail." Varsovian (talk) 13:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)