Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Oroboros 1 (talk | contribs) at 07:20, 24 October 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• ]

Template:RFCheader

• Talk:Midnight_Syndicate#Disputing_NPOV_.28New_Issue_OCT_2006.29 Dispute about NPOV vs. original research and self-promotion. Fact vs. fiction. Deceptive editing being used as a promotional campaign to change actual history vs. documentation of printed material, legal docs, letters, earlier interviews and audio that show a different history, albeit undesirable to current band members. 07:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Wizard (fantasy)#Request for comment This is a dispute about whether the terminology section should contain discussion of other terms, such as enchantress, sorcerer, or warlock, that are used in fantasy to refer to characters who practice magic. 00:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Betazoid#Eye color A dispute regarding the WP:V of Memory Alpha as a WP:RS is the source of multiple reversions. 16:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Fox News There is a debate about the wording of a sentence in the introduction (whether or not it uses/should use weasel words). 20:31, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past/Four Swords I didn't know where else to put this, so... there is a debate as to whether or not The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords should be merged into the above mentioned article, on the grounds that the latter game does not exist outside of the cartridge of the former game's and because not merging them means we'll have two small articles as opposed to one right-sized article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Flavor_Flav#Request_for_Comment:_List User TeslaDeathRay continues to edit advertisements for his counter-strike clan into the Flavor Flav article simply because they named it after him. Will others please comment on this practice and explain why it is against wikipedia policy.23:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Panic! at the Disco#Genre_debate Genre is being heavly disputed by AnonIP and registered users. Core of debate is clarity needed in who can determin a genre: 1.) Vote by wikipedian's or 2.) band/main stream media 09:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Very_special_episode#Request_for_Comment:_List. This is a request for comment on the extensive list of examples that is currently being disputed.05:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Paparazzo#Plural entry. As the moving editor and the objecting editor are the only ones discussing this (quite civil, but limited in scope), some additional eyes, thoughts and comments would be appreciated. 04:20, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Under the Umbrella Tree — Dispute over whether to incorporate American or British spellings into the article. Article initially contained American English, was changed, and conflict ensued. Comments appreciated.— OLP 1999 17:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Madame Medusa#Ping-pong Game Disagreement over the inclusion of unsourced comparisons with Ursula (The Little Mermaid). 22:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Encyclopaedia Metallum#A new start?User Deathrocker reverts pretty much anything other users do to change his edits. Many users tried to reach a consensus with him, but our efforts were fruitless. He keeps on reverting the edits, cause "he's fixing vandalism". The main issue here is the part of the article that deals with Led Zeppelin. I tried to keep it short, cause the article isn't about the band, but how Encyclopaedia Metallum works, but he thinks he's correct to have a big discussion about it. As he said many times, he cannot agree with us cause we are "extreme metal kids" (incorrect assumption), hence we know nothing about metal, so I'm wondering if more people could join the discussion. Thanks.Evenfiel 14:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Carnatic_music#Adding_an_external_link_to_a_website_containing_a_discussion_forum Can a website containing discussions on the art of Carnatic Music be externally linked to pages that directly relate to carnatic music, or not simply because wiki external links policy advises against adding forum discussions since they tend to usually contain non-original or unverifiable information? The website contains both forum and non forum content.09:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:AC/DC The dispute is over editors claiming the origin of this band is British without supporting references except the birth place of current band members. I'm asking for an unassociated reviewer to look at whats being said and suggest ways forward to reslove this issue. 11:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Ernest Borgnine Dispute concerning Mr. Borgnine's birth name, with one editor claiming to be a relative and to have been told Version X by Mr. Borgnine himself. Version Y is the one that is in all the books and newspapers. I don't want to be too uptight about this OR stuff, so I would appreciate another set of eyes to weigh in. Also the article has an excessively long trivia section.--Mantanmoreland 22:02, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Baseball card Some consensus is really needed. The article seems to be "owned" by Tecmobowl who seems to resist any attempts at adding any non-American information, dislikes making the article geared to those who know little or nothing about the topic and mistakingly calls non-commercial links commercial links to justify removal. Some consensus from others is needed. I am going to take a break from editing while this all gets sorted out. TBTA 21:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Shiny Shoe Music needs a new title (i.e., to be moved). Disucssion has ground to a halt.17:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Atia of the Julii#RFC At issue is whether or not statements in the main article are true and factual, as well as with a neutral point of view. The dispute is at a standstill. 15:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages dispute resolution