This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 172.56.10.47 (talk) at 15:42, 21 May 2014 (→Please stop WP:REVTALK). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:42, 21 May 2014 by 172.56.10.47 (talk) (→Please stop WP:REVTALK)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User | Talk | Contributions | Articles | WikiProjects | Bookmarks | My Sandbox |
- "When trying to justify the addition of criticism, please don't emphasize that it's factual and sourced. That is not the issue. Being factual and sourced is NEVER enough to justify adding anything to an article. Just stick to trying to convince us that's it due. HiLo48 (talk)"
- "Here on Misplaced Pages, it's OK to be an idiot or do something stupid as long as you are willing to take responsibility and own up to it when you are called on it." - Source Unknown
- Just as "ignorance of the law" is no excuse for breaking it, personal ignorance of any subject here on Misplaced Pages is no excuse for deletion, significant change, or general mucking up of ANY article. WP policy not-with-standing, extolling whatever rule that suits an interest under the guise of being an ignorant dolt is never justification for any edit.
- Sadly, I am the author of this article... WikiBigotry
|
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
| Thank you for helping to peacefully resolve a great many of the challenges that we're seeing in some of our firearms articles. Justanonymous (talk) 19:12, 2 March 2013 (UTC) |
|
The Original Barnstar |
| For your recent (fantastic) articles on things as varied as architects, popular culture and the banjo, I award you this barnstar. Keep up the great work! :). Ironholds (talk) 02:01, 6 June 2013 (UTC) |
|
The Barnstar of Diplomacy |
| I just want to say you are doing a great job of taking the workload of working on the lede in the Second Amendment article. Im making quibbles to make improvements that I see, but I do not want you to interpret that as anything other than collaboration - you are doing the tough job of proposing text, and getting shot down by everyone else :). I think the various revisions are noticeably better from revision to revision, and we are narrowing in on something that everyone can agree to. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:59, 14 August 2013 (UTC) |
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 43 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
International Harvester Metro photo
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
IMFDB
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm MrX. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Death's Apprentice, and have un-reviewed it again. If you've got any questions, please ask me on my talk page. Thanks, MrX
ANI on Andy
There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. --
Remington
Unfortunately my "edit" of the remington NMA article didn't really come across as intended. The system has greatly complicated uploading pictures and somehow, the caption didnt' make it to the article. Basically, the picture shows a 45 colt R&D conversion cylinder group at 12 0'clock and a ball/fffg group to the right both fired one-handed from 25 yards. User:Michael E. Cumpston (talk | contribs) at 09:08, February 4, 2014
Disambiguation link notification for April 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Faye Reagan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Girls Gone Wild
- Joanna Angel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Scrapper
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Sandy Hook article
I think you're being a bit unreasonable here, particularly since the initial edit you reverted treated the President's comment as a statement of fact. My edit clearly attributed it to him and added the NRA because he directed his comment at Republicans and the NRA. I think you should compare my initial edit to the version before. --75.68.97.241 (talk) 18:28, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- It's quite clearly you that being unreasonable. I removed the commentary entirely, no president's remarks, no parties, no NRA. The article is about the shooting and the section is about things related to gun control since the incident. What's unreasonable about keeping the political debate and rhetoric out of this artile? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 18:37, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- The entire section is about commentary. It's the subsection under "Reactions" covering "Gun control". The push for more gun control (and resultant push against it) was perhaps the most prominent national reaction to Sandy Hook. The section opens with a direct quote from the President explaining his intentions, the body of the section contains quotes and reactions from various politicians and groups on both sides of the debate, and the closing covers the defeat of the only Bill that saw a vote at the national level, and quotes from both sides of the aisle, including the President. That's not just neutral, that's good writing, I think. The only part I took out was a single word that treated Obama's words as fact (and since he was criticizing Republicans and the NRA, that's clearly not neutral), and adding the NRA, since in the quote he specifically directs his criticism at both Republicans and the NRA.
- I'm note sure what you're classifying as rhetoric, but your suggestion to keep politics out of a section specifically covering a political issue confuses me. If anything this section should cover legislative reaction to Sandy Hook (ie, new gun control laws in Colorado, New York, Maryland and Connecticut) in far more detail. --75.68.97.241 (talk) 19:47, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- From my perspective you seem to be confusing rhetoric (and editorial) with facts. The President's remarks about the push for gun control are appropriate, his views on the parties regarding the legislation not going he wanted it to are not. Do you understand the difference? The comments invite other editorial opinion and that is not what the article is about, plain and simple. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 00:49, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- That's a reasonable take, but I still disagree, largely because the president was the focal-point for gun control efforts, so when they failed it's reasonable to include his reaction. The section also includes analysis from the NRA and a reaction from a Republican lawmaker. Misplaced Pages can't endorse a specific viewpoint (as some of the editors on the talk page certainly did), but it can report the viewpoints of others. It's reasonable to believe that readers will agree with one and disagree with another, and as evidence I'll use another comment from the talk section from an editor who apparently felt the article unfairly represented the pro-gun rights side. As it stands I feel the article fairly covers both while endorsing neither. --75.68.97.241 (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- From my perspective you seem to be confusing rhetoric (and editorial) with facts. The President's remarks about the push for gun control are appropriate, his views on the parties regarding the legislation not going he wanted it to are not. Do you understand the difference? The comments invite other editorial opinion and that is not what the article is about, plain and simple. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 00:49, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Just FYI - it seems there have been some pretty drastic changes to the article over the past 48 hours. I've made my opinions known and will now likely recuse myself of further edits, outside reverting vandalism and keeping an eye on the conspiracy theory article. Thanks for your time, and I'm sorry you and I could not come to a consensus. --75.68.97.241 (talk) 19:11, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the help, but...
- Although I truly appreciate your efforts in saving articles for notable pornographic actors and actresses, I'm afraid you might be a little confused about WP:PORNBIO. If pornography is all a certain actor/actress is known for, s/he isn't automatically notable if s/he won any porn award (group and scene-related awards don't qualify, although they did in the past). Of course, there are exceptions when the actor is also notable elsewhere; for example, Raven Rockette is still notable because she also did some mainstream work.
- Have a nice day. :) Erpert 01:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- Circa the end of January when the edit you're referring to was made, I'd have to say that many of us were "confused" regarding the PORNBIO guidelines. I'm not sure of when I became aware of the "scene awards don't qualify" exception, but I am now. I realize that we, for the most part, are trying to work together for the betterment of the site, but a lot has happened with the Porn guidelines in the last few months. Even I'll admit that there are more than a few articles that should have never been created to begin with. Regards, --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 17:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:40, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Relevant Talk Page
Talk:US_Airways Already started a discussion on it. Let's hope it won't get removed again. But I won't hold my breath. Tutelary (talk) 16:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
- When I saw that articles about what happened and the fact that their Twitter page was outranking their home page and the Misplaced Pages article, I knew that this was no ordinary incident. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Gina Lynn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Belladonna
- Melissa Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Paul Thomas
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I hear you
I've been staying away from that article for the most part as it is a complete mess, but I almost threw an "Essay" tag on it last night because that's how it reads. Thanks for taking the initiative to fix it. --Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 17:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- I also clarified the NFA/GCA verbiage as it was focused just on machine guns which we know was not the intention. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 17:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Michaëlle Jean
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Michaëlle Jean. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:31, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tanya Hyde, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages English and AFD (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Notice of RfC and request for participation
There is an RfC in which your participation would be greatly appreciated:
Thank you. --Lightbreather (talk) 14:55, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Notice of RfC 2 and request for participation
There is an RfC on the Gun politics in the U.S. talk page which may be of interest to editors who participated in "RfC: Remove Nazi gun control argument?" on the Gun control talk page.
Thank you. --Lightbreather (talk) 22:26, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Why?
The original percentages in numerals were MOS compliant. Why do you insist on spelling them out? Lightbreather (talk) 01:52, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Simple, words force the reader to actually read the text in its context and not just skim it. It actually helps to convey the information in a cohesive manner. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 01:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- According to whom? I follow the AP Styleguide and it say no such thing. Lightbreather (talk) 02:16, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- I follow my experience from twenty-five years of editing, then again I'm just as capable of writing crap as anyone. I'm also in favor on not dumbing down articles to a 5th grade reader level like most newspapers. If you choose to use a writing guide, that's your prerogative. Please don't be upset when others do not wish to have it inflicted on them. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 02:28, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- That reply was a bit harsh. Misplaced Pages follows std style rules unless there's an agreement on an exception. You have 3 Rs on Gun control after the Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting, I think. I hope you'll let it go. Lightbreather (talk) 02:34, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Any perception of harshness is entirely in your interpretation. Please own up to that and stop blaming others for how you feel. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 03:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- To be fair, wikipedia follows wikipedia's style guide. AP is a nice guide, but it has no relevance to the wiki. Both forms are allowed in MOS:NUMERAL and this is an item that will just have to be dealt with via consensus. But to both of you, aren't there real issues where our energy is better spent than bickering over what format we put numbers in? Gaijin42 (talk) 02:40, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- From WP:MOS:
- Style and formatting should be consistent within an article, though not necessarily throughout Misplaced Pages. Where more than one style is acceptable, editors should not change an article from one of those styles to another without a good reason. Edit warring over optional styles is unacceptable. If discussion cannot determine which style to use in an article, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.
- The 2nd and final sentences apply especially here, I think. Lightbreather (talk) 02:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- From WP:MOS:
- You're absolutely correct, you're the one that took offense by the change and reverted it. If you're going to cite a policy that allows for both styles and then state that "Edit warring over optional styles is unacceptable", then this perceived problem is entirely your creation. I'm not the one that others have accused of OWNERSHIP and this kind of behavior is an example of that. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 03:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- That reply was a bit harsh. Misplaced Pages follows std style rules unless there's an agreement on an exception. You have 3 Rs on Gun control after the Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting, I think. I hope you'll let it go. Lightbreather (talk) 02:34, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- I follow my experience from twenty-five years of editing, then again I'm just as capable of writing crap as anyone. I'm also in favor on not dumbing down articles to a 5th grade reader level like most newspapers. If you choose to use a writing guide, that's your prerogative. Please don't be upset when others do not wish to have it inflicted on them. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 02:28, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- According to whom? I follow the AP Styleguide and it say no such thing. Lightbreather (talk) 02:16, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
I fear on this issue, I think LB has the better of you. Between the bit quoted above, and WP:STATUSQUO the onus would be on you to develop a consensus to change. Gaijin42 (talk) 03:06, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- That's understandable stance, but the fault here still lies with LB for reverting the change. If its truly an optional style, then it should not have mattered, but it did and now she's defending it. That's a pretty straightforward indication of WP:OWNERSHIP. I made a change, LB made an "issue" out of it. We would not be having this discussion if it were not the case. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- "Where more than one style is acceptable, editors should not change an article from one of those styles to another without a good reason." More than one style is acceptable. You changed from the one that was already used to another, without giving a good reason. You gave your reason, after I asked you here, but it doesn't sync with what journalists and other writers are taught. But please, let's let it go - especially the character stuff. Lightbreather (talk) 03:30, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- What part of "Misplaced Pages is an Encyclopedia" do you not get? Since when are journalists or other writers taught to write for encyclopedias? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 03:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- My point is that trained writers, including those that write for encyclopedias, use style guides. Here is a link to an Encyclopedia Britannica article:
- Assault Weapons: Year in Review 2013. Do they spell out numbers over nine, or use numerals? Lightbreather (talk) 03:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Nice example, is the horse sufficiently dead or would you like to beat it more? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 04:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- What part of "Misplaced Pages is an Encyclopedia" do you not get? Since when are journalists or other writers taught to write for encyclopedias? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 03:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- "Where more than one style is acceptable, editors should not change an article from one of those styles to another without a good reason." More than one style is acceptable. You changed from the one that was already used to another, without giving a good reason. You gave your reason, after I asked you here, but it doesn't sync with what journalists and other writers are taught. But please, let's let it go - especially the character stuff. Lightbreather (talk) 03:30, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- That's understandable stance, but the fault here still lies with LB for reverting the change. If its truly an optional style, then it should not have mattered, but it did and now she's defending it. That's a pretty straightforward indication of WP:OWNERSHIP. I made a change, LB made an "issue" out of it. We would not be having this discussion if it were not the case. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
revert
I only meant to revert that last change, not the one before. Sorry. I have re-implemented your prior edit. Gaijin42 (talk) 02:14, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Note to Lightbreather and Scalhotrod on that, I am not taking a stand either way on the numeral change, I just didn't mean to revert that, so I undid my own change. I shouldn't be counted toward consensus either way on that point. Gaijin42 (talk) 02:17, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- No worries, thanks for letting me know. BTW, I reverted the restoration of the appointment. The source cited makes no connection to the Sandy Hook incident. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 02:19, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 28 April
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Gun control after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:07, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
3RR warning
Your recent editing history at Gun politics in the United States shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Cwobeel (talk) 16:04, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're not on the side of the train riders, so they will do everything they can to fuck with you and eventually block or ban you.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 16:51, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
- Trains...?! Cool, I love trains... :) I'm not worried in the slightest. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 14:10, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not either, apparently some button clicker who never heard the F word thinks I'm a dirty whore because I used it once and has to keep mentioning it everytime his action's are questioned, but if I was a cowardly limey nancy boy who said it in every other sentence that would be ok, because as long as you're on their side of the atlantic ocean or political aisle profanity is not uncivil.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 18:18, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- Trains...?! Cool, I love trains... :) I'm not worried in the slightest. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 14:10, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're not on the side of the train riders, so they will do everything they can to fuck with you and eventually block or ban you.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 16:51, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gun politics in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Spitzer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Heads up
You made a series of nine big edits on the GPUS article. Some of them I liked, some of them I have no strong opinion about one way or another, some I disagree with. Some of your edit summaries were complete and accurate; some were not. I am going to make a series of edits, too. Just a heads up, and let's take it easy with each other on any edit summaries or talk-page comments, OK? Lightbreather (talk) 16:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- Works for me... :) --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:27, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Explanation
Could you please explain your most resent revert at Gun politics in the United States at the talk page there. As mentioned at the policy you pointed too isn't about establishing notability for people who are sourced, it is about establishing notability for articles. Notice, your at your third revert. Thenub314 (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- Between you and Lightbreather, I'm not sure who made the edit, but the material was removed because the notability of the people making the editorial statements was not established. None of them have WP articles, so they are not WP:NOTABLE (or WP:PEOPLE if you prefer) in that regard. Listing a bunch of names and then saying effectively "these random people agree on this, so it must be true" does not work on Misplaced Pages. Are any of them worthy of articles on their own? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 21:13, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- You have your policy mixed up. See WP:Reliable Sources for a guideline as to which sources should be used for citation. WP:NOTABLE is just not at issue. These are Books and Journal Articles referencing the effects of various events on the gun politics in the US, how are they no appropriate? Do you mean to tell me if I check back at ever reference you've added, the author's will all have a WP page, and if they don't I am free to remove the insufficiently referenced material? Thenub314 (talk) 21:36, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Please stop
Please stop deleting this sourced material from the GPUS article. (This is the diff: , with edit summary, "Switching to non-controversial source and removing redundant content again per WP:MOS")
First, I disagree that OpenSecrets.org is controversial. Second, even if it were (for argument's sake), there is no policy that says controversial sources cannot be used. Third, the material you keep replacing this with is sourced with an OK source, but it pre-dates Super PACs. Fourth, your preferred source is included with the one you don't like in the material you keep deleting (in case you didn't notice). And fifth - I explained all of this in the GPUS discussion of just one month ago Presenting OpenSecrets.org figures - and the material stayed. Please add something if you think it will improve the article, but deleting this material does not improve the article, so please stop. Thanks. Lightbreather (talk) 20:15, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- 1) Disagree all you want, others have commented that its editorial material is suspect. 2) Yes there is and there is policy that gives preference to established and especially print sources. 3) I've deleting redundant material that is meant to be supplemented by Wikilinks and their related articles. Please stop "dumbing down" the article. 4) The source is fine for factual material, you should be happy I'm using it at all. 5) Your explanation does not override policy or consensus of which there was no consensus and the lack of it does not justify your edits. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 20:53, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- Again, I disagree that OpenSecrets is a "controversial" source (though some, like the NRA, might call it biased), but could you please provide the 1. The policy that says controversial (or biased) sources cannot be used, and 2. The policy that gives preference to print sources? Lightbreather (talk) 22:13, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Assault weapons ban article's name
Re renaming Assault weapons ban as "Assault weapons legislation": WP:V, WP:RS and the majority of the general populace call them assault weapons bans. Please start a discussion on that article's talk page, with sources supporting the change, if you want to consider changing its name. Thanks. Lightbreather (talk) 21:04, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- Do you worry or even consider how much evidence you're piling up against yourself for a case of WP:OWNERSHIP to be made for a myriad of articles? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 21:12, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- Those in glass houses... Thenub314 (talk) 21:24, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- Indeed, but I'm not the one who has authored most of these articles nor am I trying to accomplish anything other than an adherence to policy. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 21:28, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- Ownership? No. WP:STEWARDSHIP? Yes. Also, you might want to review Examples of ownership behavior. ... What I'm seeing in regards to this topic - and have seen for some months - is a push by a number of editors who don't seem to want to acknowledge to Misplaced Pages readers that there are in-force assault weapons bans, or that there ever was any assault weapons ban except for the federal ban that expired 10 years ago. Lightbreather (talk) 21:45, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- User Sue Rangell was the first that I am aware of to make the statement and I've seen others do so in regard to your recent editing. I happen to share that opinion. I'm not really interested in wasting time putting together the difs and evidence to report it.
- As for your observation, that's an entirely different situation. Its one thing to have an opinion or to edit with a purpose, but outright stating a bias or a POV is never a good thing unless you're trying to be sanctioned. It has happened previously, you wouldn't be the first. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 21:57, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's quite simple really: If you don't want to be bothered with providing diffs, keep your comments on content and not on character. You might want to read WP:WIAPA. Lightbreather (talk) 22:06, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- You mean like here and your above statement. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 17:33, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- Not sure what you mean by "like here." Another editor started that discussion, about me, on an article talk page. I did reply to that, there. When I wanted to talk about your behavior, I came here, to your talk page. It was between me and you. As for ownership, no-one owns that article, but you have unilaterally moved and renamed it without discussion against WP:MOVE, and despite having an open Requested move process underway, continue to edit as if the process is completed and decided in your preferred way. Lightbreather (talk) 18:12, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- You mean like here and your above statement. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 17:33, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
3RR warning
Your recent editing history at Assault weapons ban shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
--Lightbreather (talk) 21:22, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- To quote you from Mike's page, Hey Pot, how's its going? From, the Kettle. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 21:25, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- FWIW: I believe that you're quoting Mike from my page: Lightbreather (talk) 21:32, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- If the shoe fits... --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 21:33, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you.
A completely agnostic policy elucidation, unrelated to any article or topic
A completely agnostic policy elucidation, unrelated to any article or topic, may be of interest to you
Misplaced Pages:Guide_to_layout#See_also_section "As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes." Gaijin42 (talk) 01:35, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- That's what I thought... thanks! Admittedly, I do tend to forget about the suggestion of annotations. That could probably prevent quite a bit of angst. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 01:47, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- Gaijin42, considering that Scal is edit warring with me and at least one other editor (refer, for instance, to the previous six discussions here) on the Gun politics in the U.S. article and the Assault weapons ban article - which he has unilaterally moved/renamed to/as "Assault weapons legislation" - why are you advising him on policy that is directly to-do with some of the reverts and the move/rename he did today. This may be OK by the letter of your topic ban, but I can't see how it's OK within the spirit of the ban. Lightbreather (talk) 02:44, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Discretionary sanctions notification
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:56, 6 May 2014 (UTC)Template:Z33
- Hi Callanecc, thank you for the message, but I was already aware of it and had mentioned it in the ANI. The 3rd User involved in the activity, Lightbreather, is the one who most importantly needs to be reminded of this. Its in response predominantly to her edits and actions that I've made many of my edits. Also, what was resolved or discussed in any productive way in ANI? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 15:30, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Notice
I have asked for clarification re: Gaijin42's topic ban here: "https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Clarification_request:_Gun_control.23Gaijin42_.28topic_banned.29"
The request is to-do with a discussion he posted here on your talk page yesterday. --Lightbreather (talk) 15:35, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Ping
With all that has been going on I didn't know if you saw the questions I asked here. But since I was hoping to resolve our dispute over what sources were acceptable, I thought I would point it out explicitly. Thenub314 (talk) 16:38, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, sorry, I missed that. Thank you for the heads up. That's going to take some time to respond and I'll have to get to it when I have more time to respond. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:44, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- Understood, I will be patient. Thenub314 (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- That's always appreciated... :) --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- OK, where were we... --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:05, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- We were in a disagreement about what sort of sources were acceptable. You said that one criteria was if an author was Notable and had their own WP page. You suggested perhaps other criteria could be used and I was wondering what other criteria were acceptable to you, so I could find choose references on which we both agreed were appropriate instead of just arguing about it each time I added something. Thenub314 (talk) 16:10, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- :) I remember, that was just my way of announcing that I was working on a reply, but thank you for the synopsis... :) --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:12, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- OK, where were we... --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:05, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- That's always appreciated... :) --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- Understood, I will be patient. Thenub314 (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:01, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Suggestion about copyright
I am a bit rusty at these things, but I wanted to make a suggestion to you. It looked like you copy and pasted some text in this edit. Technically speaking, that is only acceptable with WP copyright if you provide attribution to the authors by giving at least a link where the author's names can be found. In the edit above there was a link to the main article so all is good. But at WB we recommend put something like "Copying from ]" in the edit summary. Just something to think about. Thenub314 (talk) 00:25, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, good idea, thanks. What does LB think of it? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 00:31, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- No idea. It may not even be standard operating WP procedure. One of the side affects of bouncing around lots of different WM projects is that I occasionally mix up local policies/procedures. I am sure you could ask him though.Thenub314 (talk) 02:22, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- You mean "she", Lightbreather is female. You're better off asking her than me, I consider even collegial communication with her a lucky occurrence and not the norm. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:30, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- No idea. It may not even be standard operating WP procedure. One of the side affects of bouncing around lots of different WM projects is that I occasionally mix up local policies/procedures. I am sure you could ask him though.Thenub314 (talk) 02:22, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Would you consider a self revert?
Look, I am trying hard to work with you and find sources we both agree are reliable. When you took this out, you may not have noticed that one of the people being sourced was Chip Berlet. He has achieved enough recognition to have his own wikipedia page. He was reviewing 4 books, from various political points of view, for a respected academic journal. He stated that all four books agreed on this point that was in the article. The books would be primary sources, he would be a secondary source because he is summarizing them, and he is an expert in the field and would point out if he felt this was a factually incorrect point. This has to tick all the WP:RS boxes. Thenub314 (talk) 19:04, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry if my edit comes across as over zealous, but that content has numerous problems. First, its mixing issues out of context via the commonality of the 1994 AWB. The paragraph starts with content about a criminal act and the illegal use of firearms by a mentally ill person. Then it leaps over to the militia movement citing two government debacles. How these incidents could be put in the same paragraph confounds me as anything other than what I have come to understand as the tactics of the extremist gun control (gun banning) movement. Its one of the sneakiest forms of WP:SYNTH I've seen.
- Does the content have a place in the article, probably, but not in that paragraph. What part of the content would you like to keep? I'm happy to work with you to figure out good placement for it. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 19:16, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- The only opinion I zealously hold is that 0.999...=1. If placement is the issue, then let's address placement. I do not intend to imply anything good or bad about the militia movement, but it really picked up steam at some point, and many people have wondered why. The new legislation about gun control followed by some royal government screw ups where people died (with gun issues being an important factor)... it is almost a no brainer. But it is important, and should be included and sourced. I meant no subtle implication of mental instability. Thenub314 (talk) 05:08, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
3RR
I doubt it's necessary, but consider this a friendly neighbourhood 3RR notice for Gun politics in the United States. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:17, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- Actually Nomoskedasticity, I consider it a taunt or a dare on your behalf. After an editor with a stated bias toward this subject matter reverted the removal of the text for policy based reasons, you then placed this notice on my page. Lightbreather has a history of activity of stacking Users in her favor and bringing in other Users to support her causes. I really hate digging into someones WP history, but you've put yourself into the fray. Have you checked Lightbreathers edit history? Its enlightening in many ways. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 20:58, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- Better yet, please join in the discussion that we are having in the section above, it concerns this specific text... --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 21:05, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- I came here to 3RR warn you and found this. "Lightbreather has a history of activity of stacking Users in her favor and bringing in other Users to support her causes." Per WP:WIAPA, "Serious accusations require serious evidence." I'd like you to retract that statement, and I'm asking you again for I've-lost-count-of-how-many times to STOP saying things about me without notifying me so that I may defend myself. Lightbreather (talk) 22:33, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- Also, prior to reviewing today's history on the GPUS article, I'd never heard of Nomoskedasticity before. Lightbreather (talk) 22:35, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
ANI Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Personal attacks. Thank you. —Lightbreather (talk) 23:44, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Jade Fairbrother (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to All Access
- Shae Marks (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Black Scorpion
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
I see your olive branch, and raise you a dove
Lightbreather (talk) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!
Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
Thank you, and yes, a Mother's Day greeting is appropriate. I was not aware of these templates, but your post prompted me to go look for more, so I thank you for that. I am happy to resume peaceful, WP:CIVIL relations. --Lightbreather (talk) 04:22, 12 May 2014 (UTC) Thank you, I look forward to the peace as well... :) --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 04:26, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
A favor, maybe
Since we seem to have forged something of an understanding, would you mind editing or striking some of these comments? It would be appreciated. Lightbreather (talk) 00:47, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- So I took a look at each one and the first question I have is why? What would it accomplish? Given that nothing is ever completely erased from Misplaced Pages, this could be perceived as an odd move on my part because 1) you've made this request and 2) there are more than a few Editors make accusations of collusion or "teaming up" to push a POV or other agenda based on something like this.
- In regard to the last item , this is part of the record of an ArbCom proceeding. Even if an edit or strike is permissible, I am not in favor of changes like this. If I expect others to be judged on their behavior as indicated by the WP records, then I must stand up to the same scrutiny. I've had what I consider far worse said about and to me by other (often very Senior) Editors and Admins. I've also had Editors and Admins come to my defense because of my comments and history of edits and actions. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 17:25, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- Because it would be a nice thing to do, Scal. You made personal comments on an article talk page and the others were accusations without diffs. Although we "made up" (so to speak), those things are still floating around for other editors to read - and possibly think the less of me for having read them. I'm not gonna twist your arm, but a little redaction would demonstrate good faith, that's all. Lightbreather (talk) 18:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- Hmm... Interesting approach. You start with an emotional appeal and then start citing WP policy followed by guidelines for your proposed redaction and a request to demonstrate good faith. But I've already demonstrated good faith. I was the one that reached out to you with the Olive branch, which you thanked me for, and I am making the effort to understand your viewpoints so that we can work together. Yet, you want more my part and as far as I am aware, I have not seen any reciprocity on your part.
- As for what others see, it never goes away. None of your appearances in ANI or any other formal process ever disappears from scrutiny except by primarily the new and/or un-experienced Users who do not know how to find it.
- But in the spirit of compromise, I am willing edit this entry. Since it is part of a closed RfC, I have asked Number 57, who closed it, if this is permissible. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 19:25, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- Scal, it was a simple request, but you asked "why," so I gave some policy reasons, which is (I think) what most editors are looking for when they ask "why." When I read old talk pages and I see someone's comments redacted, I know that he/she changed his/her mind about what he/she wrote. As I said, I'm not going to twist your arm. If you don't want to do it - don't. I just think it would have been a nice thing to do. But if you still want that stuff floating around out there unredacted, more power to ya. I'm not going to ask why. Lightbreather (talk) 19:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- Because it would be a nice thing to do, Scal. You made personal comments on an article talk page and the others were accusations without diffs. Although we "made up" (so to speak), those things are still floating around for other editors to read - and possibly think the less of me for having read them. I'm not gonna twist your arm, but a little redaction would demonstrate good faith, that's all. Lightbreather (talk) 18:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Didn't I just agree with your request? I intend to make a change, but I'm not willing to violate policy at your request so I asked for clarification from the Admin involved. And I agree that it's a nice thing to do, but as the policy that you linked to also says, changes should not be made when it might affect the subsequent context of the discussion. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 19:49, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- If I misunderstood you, I apologize. All I see there is "But in the spirit of compromise, I am willing edit this entry," with a link to one item. It seemed you were willing to redact those personal comments in that one item, which would be nice, but the others are the accusations without diffs, and those are more (potentially) damaging. Lightbreather (talk) 20:06, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you, accepted... :) Interesting though, from my perspective (granted I know what I was thinking when I made the comments) I view it completely opposite. The other comments (especially the ones without difs) are personal opinions and likely in my experience to be completely dismissed by other Editors. If someone wants to build a case against you, they look to your direct actions/edits, not the opinion of others. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 20:24, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- (imagine we're having a beer and I give you an elbow in your side) Then you won't mind if I start peppering my comments with, "Scal, you have ownership issues," and "That Scal canvasses and vote stacks," - right? ;-) Lightbreather (talk) 20:31, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, heck no. I'm way thicker skinned than that... :) The thing that I try to remember is that if one person says something less than positive, its fairly easy to write it off as a "rant" (unless its backed with numbers), or, possibly something as simple as someone "having a bad day" that coincided with my edit, or, I just completely misinterpreting their comment (what they "wrote" versus what they "meant"). I've learned that responding to it often just makes it worse, all some people need to pursue an issue, is acknowledgement. In fact, sometimes its best to wait a bit and see if someone else responds first to criticism, not just in my defense, but with another relevant point or fact, something I had not considered. Nub has done this on your behalf and as long as his points are well made and logical, its great support for your stance. Of course if a known WikiNut backs you, it can backfire as well. My point is, just because someone says something that you feel is directed at you, don't ever feel that you must respond.
- (imagine we're having a beer and I give you an elbow in your side) Then you won't mind if I start peppering my comments with, "Scal, you have ownership issues," and "That Scal canvasses and vote stacks," - right? ;-) Lightbreather (talk) 20:31, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you, accepted... :) Interesting though, from my perspective (granted I know what I was thinking when I made the comments) I view it completely opposite. The other comments (especially the ones without difs) are personal opinions and likely in my experience to be completely dismissed by other Editors. If someone wants to build a case against you, they look to your direct actions/edits, not the opinion of others. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 20:24, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- On the other hand, if multiple people say that same thing (or close) and its across several articles (especially if they are topic related), then I interpret that as a really good opportunity to do a self review and try to look at the situation from other perspectives. The WP User community chews up and spits out new editors on a regular basis regardless of "Don't bite the newbies" and such. Wait long enough and circumstances can totally change. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 20:59, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Re your edit summary at Talk:Gun control
If you have something to say, use the proper channels - though why anyone would take the post of a semi-literate self-declared 'American historian' seriously I have no idea. Someone's sock more than likely. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:46, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- I have no idea and its not something I intend to speculate about either. I just thoroughly enjoy your antics... :) I've likened you to a teacher I had in high school many years ago. His name was brother Alfred and he was part of the Brothers of the Holy Cross order here in Northern California. I have never personally encountered a clergy person who was more despised (even by the schools administrators) for his outspoken opinions regarding the school itself and the Catholic church in general. Yet he was also very well respected by a small group of people who took the time to understand the motives behind his antics. I learned over the years that sometimes he did go too far and was forced to apologize or "be retired" from teaching which he begrudgingly did, but it never stopped him. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 18:01, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Arbitration clarification request(Gun control :Gaijin42)
An arbitration amendment request(Gun control :Gaijin42), which either involved you, or in which you commented, has been archived, because the request was declined.
The original discussion can be found here. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 23:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Warning about Lightbreather
I have thouroughly investigated the complaint lightbreather made against you. I have noticed that she has done this regularly recently to other gun issue editors. My conclusion she is likely gaming the system to maintain ownership and to throw NPOV out the window. Be very cautious when she asks you to do something as it may be used against you by her or a set up. I have commented on the original complaint. I have no pull as your Wikibigotry article illuminates due to being an IP but have attempted to promote some fairness here. Hopefully some unbiased admin will look over Lightbreather very closely and set her straight. I also investigated you as well. I found out from above you like to collect old panel vans. We had one on the farm for storage that was I believe a 57' Metro and yellow. Unfortunately it is long gone. Why collect cab over vans? I have a 73' Super C20Cheyenne with a built 454 and 4.10 rear end. However it is quite heavy with a 1 ton rear. Also owned a 4X4 Burb with 383 stroker with roller rockers and roller cam. It was a bat out of hell for a lifted Mudder with 35's but I gave it to my brother in law who desparately needed wheels for his young family (he was the baby and my wife was 12 years older and well I was nearly 20 years older than him). I also had 2 older BMW's and a 67' 912 but got out of the expensive toy game. You may want to consider a different Wiki handle because everything is out there but you must know that and do not care but I thought it prudent to let you know. Well nice meeting you (sounds better than investigated). 208.54.35.173 (talk) 14:17, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Hey 208, if you don't mind me being so informal... :) Thank you for the notice. I haven't really looked into LB beyond the articles that she and I interact on to appreciate the full extent (intentional or otherwise) of her actions. She's made statements that suggest to me that she has purpose in her editing, but I'd be hard pressed to say that it has any nefarious intent. The worst accusation I can make at this point is that LB (and others) are victims of media hype rather than digging sufficiently to get to the heart of the matter. The discussions of "gun control" versus "arms control" not just as terminology, but in practical application are an example of this. They might be called different things in various parts of the world and by different politicians, agencies, and organizations, but it often deals with the identical firearm whose only distinction is geographically where its located at any given point in time.
- Yes, I'm a vintage truck guy... :) I have a '57 Metro van now and it will be first up to be turned into a driver and usable vehicle for my business. Sounds like you've owned some fun stuff too. As for the handle, like you say, it's all out there. Changing it might be perceived as an attempt to hide and I'm not exactly the shy type. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 18:00, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Heads up
I got tired of false accusations and bullying of editors by Lightbreather so after attacking me I opened an Arbcom which was related to the accusations Lightbreather made against you. I do understand if you want to lay low as she stated you have made up to which I responded was switching tactics when her attempt to silence you failed. I am posting so you are aware of the situation at Arbcom. 208.54.35.173 (talk) 15:39, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm happy to answer questions assuming that this is not some sort of "witch hunt". Otherwise, I'm not sure how to respond to this. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 17:37, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Scal, I see you fixed 208's spelling. Watch out! He warned me about "editing" his comment because I added a subsection header to another discussion. Lightbreather (talk) 17:45, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- His correction was constructive and yours was not. As far as watching out remind why you took Scalhotrod to Arbcom? You also appear to be canvasing a big no no. 208.54.35.173 (talk) 17:51, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, blame the auto-correct extension in my browser for that. In certain windows it just does its own thing. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 18:06, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Notice
I have asked to have your move/rename of "Assault weapons ban" to "Assault weapons legislation" reconsidered at ARE Lightbreather (talk) 01:36, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 15:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Nikkimaria (talk) 15:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Woohoo! Very cool, trying it out now...! :) --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 23:14, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Jenna Haze/Allie Haze
Hey, Scalhotrod. I removed the WP:Hatnotes you added to the articles on Jenna Haze and Allie Haze, linking them to each other. Hatnotes are used to link articles to one another when they have either the same name, like Michael Jackson's article for example, which has a hatnote linking it to the Michael Jackson (disambiguation) page, which is a list of other people with the same name, or to link a person's article to one with a similar name, such as:
- Missy Stone and Misty Stone
- Sunny Lane and Sunny Leone
- Jasmin St. Claire and Jasmine Sinclair
- Kendall Karson and Kendel Carson
- Stoya and Stoja
The first names Jenna and Allie aren't similar, so there is no reason to link them to one another just because they have the same last name. That would be like adding a hatnote to Kim Kardashian's article stating: "This article is about Kim Kardashian. For the other Kardashians, see Kourtney Kardashian, Khloé Kardashian, Rob Kardashian, and Robert Kardashian. These are obviously good faith edits, but keep all this in mind next time. Rebecca1990 (talk) 03:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Semiautomatic and FAL
- Assault weapons legislation in the United States (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Cleveland Elementary School shooting
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Just wanted to thank you for trying on the Second Amendment
A year ago, after more than six months of trying to get an accurate portrayal on wikipedia of the history of the Second Amendment, I gave up.
Those who support the ignoring of the prefatory words of the Second Amendment are dead set against the public knowing that prior to the Heller decision in 2008, the Supreme Court and lower courts interpreted the Second Amendment solely as a collective right.
That undeniable fact can never be presented because the "keepers" of the Second Amendment article are desperately trying to rewrite history.
And you can't fight them, because they'll outlast you.
George Orwell was right: War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is Strength
as long as a few editors of wikipedia have all the time in the world to say so...
But I do appreciate your sincere and dedicated effort to allow truth in Misplaced Pages. Even though it was always destined to failure. Because there is no way, under any policy, to actually put up objective truth in Misplaced Pages When a determined group of opinionated editors are determined to rewrite it.
(They even refused to allow me to cite Supreme Court decisions on the Second Amendment that they didn't agree with!) And that's when I gave up.
Still, I appreciate your integrity in attempting to revive my doomed attempt to put objectivity there.GreekParadise (talk)
- Hey Greek, I appreciate the thanks. I must be doing something right, because I seem to be upsetting everyone. The true gun nuts are ticked at me and call me (the guy with a section about Cowboy action shooting on his User page) anti gun, and, the gun controllers are mad because I change their edits. Most of the time its just to correct their grammar and vocabulary because its so atrocious versus the actual content. I do admit that they are good at finding sources, they are just really bad at paraphrasing them and using the information in the correct context.
- We did seem to come out alright on 2A. That article seems pretty stable and is mucked up less these days. I wish I could say the same for Gun Control and the like. But from what I understand, the U.S. politics articles are an even bigger mess. I just stick to 1st and 2nd Amendment issues, that's about all the "controversy" I can handle and still have WP be fun for me.
- Again, thank you my friend. Good to see that you're still around. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 17:52, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
User Box Sex ED in Pubic Schools
Hi, Guten tag, Hallo, etc.
Scal just noticed your user box about sex in public schools. Do you support forcing private schools to endorse this idea? Do you expect religious schools to teach things against their fundamental beliefs? Do you realize that children have been exposed to pornography as early as 3rd grade in the government school sex ed programs? Do you realize it is often a canard to promote a liberal agenda concerning lifestyle choices? Do believe public/government schools should teach the repercussions about non traditional lifestyle choices to include unwed pregancies, a rising Aids rate among homosexual men and also heterosexual women who have sex with bisexual men which are all of course well documented by the Centers for Disease Control studies. A google of Aids and CDC will show I am not blowing you smoke. Of course the questions are meant for things to consider and I certainly do not expect or desire you to explain all your positions. Just wanted you to look deeper into the matters around these "new" ideas. Thanks for your consideration of some of the points. 172.56.10.214 (talk) 20:36, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Um, you meant "Public Schools", right? Otherwise your rant is hilarious and I appreciate the chuckle. And thank you for taking an interest in my User page. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 05:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:42, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Please stop WP:REVTALK
The ArbCom gun-control discretionary sanctions reiterates WP principles about working with other editors. Please stop with the uncivil WP:REVTALK like these:
- "No reason given for blanking of content, vandalism?" (No content was "blanked" and the edit was not vandalism - it was a revert.)
- " WP:PARAPHRASE, regurgitation of the same word over and over is not encyclopedic or informative." (I don't think the paraphrase essay applied here, but if you did, you could've just cited it and left out the snarky commentary.)
- "Are you trying to justify plagiarism or poor writing?" (How about WP:AVOIDYOU? Especially in edit summaries.)
From WP:REVTALK:
- Avoid using edit summaries to carry on debates or negotiation over the content or to express opinions of the other users involved. This creates an atmosphere where the only way to carry on discussion is to revert other editors! If you notice this happening, start a section on the talk page and place your comments there. This keeps discussions and debates away from the article page itself. For example:
- reverted edits by User:Example, see talk for rationale
I'd surely like to see you use the talk pages more. I seem to usually be the one who has to start discussions about our disputes... you just keep reverting, often using edit summaries contrary to WP:ES.
Thanks. Lightbreather (talk) 02:51, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Warning Walking Talking MAN BOOB Exposed
Say it ain't so. There is such thing as a walking talking man boob. See here for defintion. http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3613&p=75171 Thought you might want to know more about some of the characters you are dealing with. Scal keep that man boob away from your family, its like cancer yet worse. LOL 172.56.10.47 (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2014 (UTC)