User talk:Ideogram - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Piotrus (talk | contribs) at 19:18, 6 December 2006 (→Your input is requested). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 19:18, 6 December 2006 by Piotrus (talk | contribs) (→Your input is requested)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

I try to keep conversations threaded.

I generally reply to posts here on this page.

Usually if I post on your talk page I watchlist you.

Welcome!

Hello, Ideogram, 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:Questions, 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! --Allan McInnes (talk) 22:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello and welcome

Hello Ideogram, Welcome to Misplaced Pages.
Thank you for the very kind message you left for me. It came as a very pleasant and welcome surprise. I think Misplaced Pages has a lot of potential, although it has its detractors, but I'm glad you've decided to make up your own mind about it and the best way to do that is to get involved. In the long run things usually work out well, and there are lot of very capable and dedicated editors here that ensure the integrity of the project is protected as much as possible. (The abilities of the various monkeys here are diverse but the mix seems to work.) Please let me know if there's anything you ever need help with and I look forward to hearing from you. Once again, welcome! Rossrs 00:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: AQu01rius

Well, he's being bold, I suppose. You should be more precise in stating your objections, though; I think he's open to discussion on specific points, but reqiring that all changes be discussed beforehand isn't usually done except in cases that have already degenerated into substantial edit-warring.

(And keep in mind that it's only edit-warring if changes are undone repeatedly. It's quite appropriate—and even expected—that you'll occasionally revert edits that you don't agree with.) Kirill Lokshin 18:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

If I start reverting I guarantee you he will revert me back. Why am I forced to start an edit war to get him to listen to me? --Ideogram 18:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, if he reverts back, then he is edit-warring; but I suspect that he won't. Kirill Lokshin 18:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

What did I tell you? --Ideogram 18:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

That, when choosing things to revert, you shouldn't go for the most politically sensitive one? ;-) Kirill Lokshin 18:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't tell which changes are most important to him. The color is actually the least important change to me. --Ideogram 18:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

In cases like this, Kim Bruning's bold-revert-discuss approach seems to work fairly well, for what it's worth. Kirill Lokshin 18:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

No, he was bold, I tried to discuss, now I'm being bold, and we are both reverting. This is leading to an edit war, exactly what I predicted. --Ideogram 18:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Some of your changes will stick; some won't. The ones that don't are the ones that need to be discussed further. Kirill Lokshin 19:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, apparently he is leaving some things alone. This might actually work. --Ideogram 19:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Issues

Hello :)

First of all, your comments in Portal talk:China#Civility gave an impression of "I did this, and this. I was here before you, so I am better than you.", which is very immature, and I suggest you to cool down and think about it. Also, take a quick peak at Misplaced Pages:Etiquette.

Now, I'll clarify some of your concerns regarding me. Note that Misplaced Pages is not a battleground, so I would like both of us to forget about all those issues, and work on Portal:China to get it featured (which is currently my primary focus).

"You're a little high school punk"

Is that relevant?

"new to Misplaced Pages, and . Read WP:CIVIL. I have had it up to here with your attitude"

New? Um.

User:AQu01rius: earliest edit: 20:35, 19 March 2006

User:Ideogram: earliest edit: 20:34, 26 May 2006

How long have we been here is completely irrelevant. For WP:CIVIL, I could not found any criteria I have violated, except for rudeness. I have been bold, yes, but rudeness? If your talking about "editing your work without your talking to you first", I explained, and apologized for that.

However, for your comments in Portal talk:China, you have violated the following criterias of WP:CIVIL:

Ill-considered accusations of impropriety of one kind or another, "goddammned newbie"
Judgmental tone in edit summaries, "You have a lot to learn"
Personal attacks, "Highschool punk, goddammned newbie"

But again, let's forget about all those and spend more time on improving articles. Thank you, and have a nice day =) AQu01rius (User  Talk) 20:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I prefer to work in an atmosphere of mutual respect. You seem to enjoy making disrespectful comments, perhaps you think that by making me angry enough to leave you will get your way. --Ideogram 20:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Deleted page "Portal:People's Republic of China (new)"

A page you created, or image you uploaded, Portal:People's Republic of China (new), has been deleted in accordance with our deletion policy. In particular, it meets the one or more criteria for speedy deletion; the relevant criterion is:

Test pages (e.g., "Can I really create a page here?").

Misplaced Pages has certain standards for inclusion that all articles must meet. Certain types of article must establish the notability of their subject by asserting its importance or significance. Additionally, since Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, content inappropriate for an encyclopedia, or content that would be more suited to somewhere else (such as a directory or social networking website) is not acceptable. See What Misplaced Pages is not for the relevant policy.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable notability guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content; it will be deleted again and may be protected from re-creation. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article. If you have any questions, please contact an administrator for assistance. Thank you – Gurch 04:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

This place gets weirder every day. --Ideogram 11:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

read my talk. --JakeLM 09:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

happy Turkey-Day!!!!

I wish you a very merry Thanksgiving! Hope you and your family have a magnificent day! So, what are you thankful for? Hooray and happy gormandizi! --Randfan _{please talk talk to me!}

Have a great day! Please respond on my talk page (the red "fan" link in my signature). Cheers! :) —Rand fan !!

Cheers! :) —Rand fan !! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

What does your name mean? Cheers! :) —Randfan!! 17:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

China

I do not think that putting the words de-facto and de-jure are pro-PRC at all! The United Nations, US, and most countries in the world agree with the 'One China' principle - even those who only recognize the ROC agree that there is only one China.

Therefore, those who recognize the PRC recognize that the whole of China is under the PRC. Those who recognize the ROC think that the whole of China is under the ROC. Therefore, by putting 'two modern states' who not be pro-PRC, in fact it would be rather factual and neutral. It cannot offend both pro-PRC people and pro-ROC people!

I think that only by using de-facto and de-jure terms can one truly understand the current government in China Ghfj007 18:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't put this here. Put it on Talk:China. --Ideogram 18:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Mediation

Hi,

I guess I missed the original posting on the mediation page, I just noticed it now. E-mail or talk pages are preferred between myself and Mystar as the issues extend over multiple pages, I'd rather not clutter up talk pages. WLU 00:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Photo of Chuck Moore

Hi. I just uploaded commons:Image:ChuckMoore.jpg, and I wonder if you still have the original authorization, and if you could send it to the commons people, so the image won't risk to be deleted. TIA. Greetings. --es:Usuario:Angus 19:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I temporarily unprotected your page so Angus could leave a message. Just forward that email to permissions-commons (a) wikimedia.org. Thanks. Bastiq▼e 19:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

New Mediator?

Hi, I noticed that you changed the status of the Muhammad Mediation page. It is unclear to me why you made the change. Could you explain please. Thanks. --BostonMA 14:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Explain to me, too, please, since I'm the mediator. --Ars Scriptor 14:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC) (formerly Aguerriero)

Sorry, I asked on the talk page if the mediation was still active, and I didn't realize from the responses that the mediator was still active. I also examined the history of Talk:Muhammad/Mediation and was confused by the fact that Aguerriero didn't show up. I suggest you change the mediator name listing on the Case page to your current username. --Ideogram 20:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: MedCab

Ya, sure thing, I'll go take a look at the caseload right now, I hadn't checked the list in a while, otherwise I would have picked something up had I known it was so bad. Cheers. Canadian-Bacon 18:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Mediation case

I think they banned him if i recall so go ahead and close it down. // Tecmobowl 19:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: MedCabal

I'm sorry, but I'm just not able to be on Misplaced Pages enough to mediate a case. I should've marked myself as inactive, but I simply forgot to. Apologies. --digital_me 23:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

There is no Cabal!

I haven't ever had a case, and when I signed up ages ago I didn't get any help, so you'll have to walk me through a mediation before I can go and mediate the world. If you're willing, so am I. :)

Please reply on my talk page. Thanks.

The Duke of Ideogram 23:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Sweet. Thanks. The Duke of Ideogram 01:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Chess FAR

Now that the two-week review period is ending, can you let us know if your concerns have been addressed at Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Chess? Thanks, Sandy (Talk) 14:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Mediator Needed

Hello, Ideogram, Addhoc mentioned you as someone who might be able to help out with a case. The case is stalled as the mediator never showed and has now been removed from the case. A new mediator has been requested, but no one has volunteered. The editors who work on the many articles affected by the case are frustrated and unusure how to proceed.

This is the case: Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-03 Starwood Festival

And this is the discussion some of us had about it on Addhoc's talk page: User_talk:Addhoc/Archive6#Difficult_Mediation_needs_new_Mediator

Thank you for your consideration. --Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 22:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I am sorry, but I am actually not a good mediator. It is very unfortunate how your case has been handled, but as an informal organization we have no control over our mediators. At this point I would recommend you look at WP:MEDCOM or WP:RFAR. If you have any questions about those I will be happy to help you with the process, unfortunately both options will take some time. Hope that helps. --Ideogram 01:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Mediation

Holy ::insert word here::, I forgot about that. I can continue, if you want. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 03:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, will do. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 03:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

3RR block

I've blocked you for 3RRV on Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Vote/Geogre. Since you an otherwise good contributor I have only blocked you for 3 hours but you should be happy I didn't make the block longer. It is unacceptable to blatantly violate 3RR while you are warning other people about it. JoshuaZ 04:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I had come here to warn of the same. SlimVirgin 04:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

SV, as someone close to Geogre who has already voted for him, you would do best to stay out of this affair. --Ideogram 04:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

In reference to your email inquiring "Please explain to me how adding new material three times qualifies for a 3RR block"- where I saw 3RR- the relevant difs are . And yes, I know that they aren't literaly reversions the clear intent was to add back substantially the same content after it was removed. Whether or not threaded content should be allowed and what sort of threaded content is a matter for general discussion not for you to edit war at. If you prefer you can think of it as a block for general edit warring and arguably gaming 3RR rather than 3RR itself. JoshuaZ 04:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I can understand that, but I would have appreciated a warning that I was misinterpreting the rules. I also think it would be nice if you blocked the other people for edit-warring with me. I am perfectly capable of having a reasonable discussion about what comments are allowed on that page, but the people opposing me clearly are biased in favor of allowing Geogre to do what he wants while accusing me of trolling. As long as they outnumber me they can simply revert all my comments off the page and I can do nothing. How do you propose I deal with this situation? --Ideogram 04:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest you go to one of the general pages for discussion arbitration elections and bring up the issue there of what sort of threading is acceptable. JoshuaZ 04:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I can do that, but I am more concerned with the general case of an unpopular opinion being denied the right to speak simply because it is outnumbered. This kind of tag-team reverting has happened to me before, and I see it as mob rule, pure and simple. Perhaps I was "gaming the system" but I saw no alternative to dealing with a situation where I feel the mob is wrong. Do you have an opinion on how to deal with this? --Ideogram 04:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know quite what to say. But I would like to point out that in article space when someone is blocked for 3RR many respond by making similar assertions- that letting the group revert more than 3 times somehow creates a mob rule or a similar problem. When one has such an issue more often than not it is because the group is correct or is behaving with some logic. I would therefore strongly suggest bringing the topic up for discussion where it will get a larger number of people looking at it and will hopefully result in some sort of clear decision. JoshuaZ 05:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I will do that. --Ideogram 12:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

An update is here. Carcharoth 15:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer Carcharoth, but I don't think it's possible for me to have a productive conversation with Ghirla. --Ideogram 01:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

CSICOP mediation

Ideaogram, just a quick note to say thank you for closing the CSICOP mediation case back in early November. I was the mediator on that but for various reasons my WP activity dropped to zero for a while after the case ended, and I never got around to closing it on the cabal page. Thanks, and sorry I dropped the ball on this. Mike Christie (talk) 16:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, no need to apologize. We always appreciate your help, and I hope you won't hesitate to help again in the future. --Ideogram 01:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Your input is requested

Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 15:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:RFAR

Thank you for the offer. It is something I have been considering for, well, years, now. There are three reasons why I am still hesitating: 1) it's a waste of time I could be putting into content creation (although stress generated by offensive remarks and disruptive edits by Ghirla is increasingly making me wonder what is the less of two evils) 2) Ghirla, despite being very opinionated and often extremly offensive, is a content creator even more active than myself - I don't want to see him blocked, just reformed (Misplaced Pages does benefit immensly from his articles on Russian architecture) 3) which brings me to 'what solution could ArbCom' offer other then blocking him? I am considering something along the lines 'users are allowed to revert Ghirla without concern for 3RR and remove his offending posts from talk, also his edits with offending summaries can be deleted by admins from page history' - but I don't know if it is something ArbCom would consider? Out of curiosity: what can 'come out' of RfC? Based on my experience, RfC don't do anything - some users air their greviances, other support some statements, and that's it - they are only good to use later to back up some statements if a majority has supported a given side, but even through for example at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Ghirlandajo most users agreed he was incivil, I didn't notice any effect it had on the situation - other then many hours of many editors were wasted in the discussions on that page.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)