Misplaced Pages

User talk:Ardenn

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by LeftCoast (talk | contribs) at 16:56, 18 May 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 16:56, 18 May 2006 by LeftCoast (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Read BEFORE Posting:

  • Vandalism and other offensive commentary/trolling will be deleted expeditiously.
  • If you want me to respond/take your comments seriously, sign them with ~~~~.
  • Be sure to be signed in. Anonymous users will have their messages deleted without comment.
  • I will respond on your talk page, but I will not return to your talk page after that unless you've responded on my talk page. Sounds convoluted, but I'd rather be editing articles than reading your talk page.
  • Add your comments to the bottom of the page.
  • If you don't agree with a change that I've made to an article, please let me know nicely and I will address the issue.

Welcome!

Hello, Ardenn, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  karmafist 21:48, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Monicasdude closed

This arbitration case is closed.

Monicasdude is placed on standard civility parole for one year. If he makes any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, then he may be blocked for a short time of up to one week for repeat offenses. Monicasdude is banned from making edits related to the deletion process (excepting obvious vandalism and copyright problems) for one year. This is to be interpreted broadly, and includes, but is not limited to, commenting on articles for deletion nominations and removals of nominations for proposed deletion and speedy deletion. He may be blocked for a short time of up to one week for repeat offenses. After 5 such blocks, the maximum block time is increased to a year.

Should Monicasdude violate any ban imposed by this decision he may be briefly blocked, up to a week for repeat offenses. After 5 such blocks, the maximum block time is increased to a year. All blocks to be logged at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Monicasdude#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

For the Arbitration Committee, --Ryan Delaney 08:17, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Page blanked

Hello - you may have missed it, but you deleted many of the comments on the Queen's University talk page here when you added your "off topic" template. I've restored the comments, and then restored your template edit. Cheers. --Ckatz 08:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Favour: The Widget

Can I ask a favour, please? Some fans (and possibly some of the creators) of The Widget podcast are apparently convinced I'm out to destry 'their' article - presumably because I put a POV template on the article and pointed out some of the POV issues on the talk page. At this point, I expect any changes I may try make to result in an edit war and personal attacks on me, so having another editor review the article would be very useful, I figure. Thanks. —GrantNeufeld 19:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out! —GrantNeufeld 19:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Green Party of Canada

I'm sorry to have to disagree with you on the POV vs. NPOV status of calling the party "eco-capitalist". The use of the term is controversial and is not endorsed by the party, so should be in a "Controversies" section in the article. I, personally, come from a more anti-capitalist background, so have never been happy about the accusations of the party being right-wing. (I'm also not happy with the accusations of it being left-wing because I tend not to agree with narrow ideological frameworks like the uni-dimensional traditional poltical spectrum.) (BTW, anti-capitalist does not mean pro-socialist. I prefer to avoid ideologies altogether.) —GrantNeufeld 05:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

Hi Ardenn,

Thank you for any constructive criticism you may have given in my recent unsuccesful RFA. I will strive to overcome any shortcomings you may have mentioned & will try & prove myself worthy of your vote in the future.

Cheers

Srikeit 10:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Libby Davies

Please see Talk:Libby Davies. - Montréalais 16:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Recent oppose votes in RFAs

Hello! While I understand you are angry at administrators and that you don't agree with policies like Fair use, I also believe you may be failing at one of the basic points of Misplaced Pages: assume good faith. By constantly voting negatively because there is no way to remove administrators (which is not correct, by the way), it is my belief that you are not assuming good faith in their future behaviour. Administrators should be chosen because of what they have done, not what they may do in the future. As already stated in some RFAs, that is not the place for complaining. I am not asking you to stop voting negatively if you feel like that, but instead to also reach the formal channels, as probably nobody will do it unless it is you. Just an advice from a third party. -- ReyBrujo 22:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Kathryn Holloway(2nd nomination)

You have given me an NPA warning? Wow! Pretty feeble response. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 03:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


User talk:JaysCyYoung

What are you doing? Why are you revert warring on somone's talk page? Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 00:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

3RR on Queen's University

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. Difs: Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 00:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Crystal Ball Policy and Star Trek XI

Hi, Ardenn, this is BCSWowbagger, whose additions to Star Trek XI you have been reverting, per the Crystal Ball policy. Now, I am new here, so I confess that I may be doing something wrong. However, having read the Crystal Ball policy several times now, as well as made an un-responded-to entry in ST XI's Talk page, and a lengthy question/objection in my edit notes (which was answered rather glibly, you must admit), I still do not understand how the paragraph on movie-related rumors in any way violates the CB policy, or indeed any other Wikipedian policy.

The rumors I listed are all relevant to the movie; the movie itself is an "individual scheduled or expected future event" that is "notable and almost certain to take place". None of the rumors listed are "extrapolation, speculation, or... original research". They are all cited, noteworthy, and relevant to the article's main topic. To the Trekkie community, every word about the movie spoken by anyone of import is a topic instantly worthy of pages of discussion; only the most relevant of these rumors were added to the page, while, for instance, Robert Picardo's speculation of last week was left out. None of the rumors are written as "advertising". They conform closely to the NPOV rules. I simply do not understand your use of this rule to remove the rumor section.

Finally, you cited some sort of policy that "Misplaced Pages is not a rumor mill." Neither this policy nor anything similar are present on the page to which you linked. A Google search turned up nothing. Would you care to point me in the direction of this rule? Or was this citation an oversight on your part?

Assuming I don't find some rule to the contrary, I will revert the article in one week unless I hear from you. Thank you. BCSWowbagger 05:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

New Guy Question

Hi. You gave me an introduction post on my talk page, so I figured I'd ask you this. On my page, I have a few "User is..." blocks that I've found on other pages. Is there a place to find a list of all of them? Thanks. Rockhound 23:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Meat puppetry

Would appreciate if you would put the meatpuppet info on the user talk pages as opposed to the Queen's talk page. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 00:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

And also, I'm aware of WP:AGF. No need to remind me on my talk page. Thanks. -- Samir धर्म 00:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. I've got my eye on the article also. I think the traditions section should probably be toned down a bit and will state that on the talk page. Regards -- Samir धर्म 00:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

You are being overly agressive. Put a meatpuppet warning on someones talk page when they haven't actually done anthing is bullying. You need to stop using policy tags as weapons. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:37, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Response to your comment

I have reread WP:AGF per your advice. I do not wish to make this a major issue, but one line in particular from WP:AGF stands out as relevant: "Of course, there's a difference between assuming good faith and ignoring bad actions. If you expect people to assume good faith from you, make sure you demonstrate it. Don't put the burden on others. Yelling "Assume Good Faith" at people does not excuse you from explaining your actions, and making a habit of it will convince people that you're acting in bad faith." Thank you for your comment. —Cuiviénen, Wednesday, 17 May 2006 @ 01:21 UTC

Thanks muchly

Thanks very much for the barnstar. It is wonderful to get recognition once in a while! It doesn't happen as often on Misplaced Pages as it should. Regards, Ground Zero | t 02:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Making points on RfA pages

Please stop making a point about the RfA process in general on RfA pages, if you want to discuss the fact that we need no more admins please do it on the RfA talk page and not the RfA pages. Thank you -- Tawker 05:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Template:Canadian mobile phone companies

Apology Accepted

It takes a big person to apologize and admit that they were wrong, so I accept your apology. Hopefully we can work together in the future rather than bicker needlessly. Cheers!

JaysCyYoung 02:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Ditto

I too accept your apology. Thanks

LeftCoast 16:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)