Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Simbirskin (talk | contribs) at 10:27, 22 December 2006 (→Malber's block). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

is turned off on my talk page. Feel free not to sign your comments if you don't want to.

Archives

Main talk ∞ 1 ∞ 2 ∞ 3 ∞ 4 ∞ 5 ∞ 6 ∞ 7 ∞ 8 ∞ 9 ∞ 10 ∞ 11 ∞ 12 ∞ 14 ∞ 15 ∞ 16

Khatami

Mohammad Khatami uses glittering generalities. By "democracy" he means mullahcracy and by "rule of law" he means rule of law#rule of sharia.--Patchouli 14:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't mean you're allowed to say that in an article. -Amarkov _edits 15:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I mean stating this to you. In the article, I put, "... It is true that Khatami beat three other candidates to win the presidency in 1997. But he emerged to victory only after the mullahs disqualified 234 other challengers whom they felt too reformist or too liberal."http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-rubin031802.shtml and other things.--Patchouli 15:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Um... You didn't say "OMG KHATAMI/MULLAHS/ISLAM IS EVIL", at least, but that's pretty blatantly POV, no matter what sources you cite. -Amarkov _edits 15:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Where in the article page did I say this?--Patchouli 15:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I said you didn't say it. -Amarkov _edits 15:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for my mis-reading.--Patchouli 15:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks much for your help =) Maverick423 15:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. I don't really need thanks, but it's nice to get it! -Amarkov _edits 15:40, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

NPWatcher approval

You've been approved to use NPWatcher. Please give me any feature requests or bugs. I'm also happy to help if you have any problems running the program, or any questions :). Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if I've made a new release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Finally, enjoy! Martinp23 19:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Could you please take another look at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jules Joffrin (Paris Métro) ?

Could you please take another look at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jules Joffrin (Paris Métro) ? Subway stations are notable. Misplaced Pages has many good articles on individual subway stations in New York, Paris and elsewhere. As well, Jules Joffrin (the person), a French politician who lived many decades ago, is notable. --Eastmain 00:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

No, subway stations aren't automatically notable. I reject most of these "But Xs are inherently notable!" arguments. Furthermore, being named after a notable person does not make something notable. -Amarkov _edits 00:35, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Jeremy Hammond

Thanks for addressing the recent vandalism on this page. Edivorce 04:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Malber's block

Amarkov, I apologise to you, and to the community – which had put its faith in me. I made a problematic block, I accept it. You are a bold man, you act in good faith and voice your opinion. I respect your judgment. However, Malber has been consistently disrupting Misplaced Pages since a long time; and then gets away with a warning all the time. Have a look at his contributions, he has made it a point to test the process, toes the line of disruption. He is consistently uncivil and acts in bad faith. Check the history of his talk page – he has been warned for his behaviour umpteen times but never heeds them. I will try my best not to involve myself in further disputes with him; but frankly, I believe that someone needs to make WP:DIFFICULT blocks. What did he do after coming back from the block? Instead of waiting for consensus (I assumed there was consensus because all I saw was criticism for his behaviour), he continues to be disruptive and asks questions because he does not like teenagers. As far as I know he has been involved in disruption/trolling on the talk pages of Journalist, Rebecca (Rebecca blocked him for making libellous edits) and WAvegetarian. I do not understand why the community should accept such disruptive behaviour, when he has made it clear that he does not want to contribute to articles/maintenance and only disrupt and test the process to its limits. If there is something I can do to make it up with the community and you, I would do it. Apologies, again. — Nearly Headless Nick 05:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Amarkov, I am deliberately keeping my anonymity for reasons you won't fail to see soon. User:Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington is grossly abusing his admin privileges through his mindless and revengeful blocking. Some body wrote an abusive article on him in an attack site. He went into a fury over it and expressed his rage in very bad language on the IRC channel; I witnessed it myself. He suspects some users about that attack article and has been on a binge of blocking axing many users who don't have any connection with the affair. Please see this ]. Some of the accounts seem to be vandalism only accounts. But user:Dakshayani is an editor who has made some good edits. This abusive admin not only blocked her (without a warning or leaving a message) but also protected her talk page so that she wouldn't be able to ask for review. See his arrogant reply here. ] When she made an another account (admittedly) to complain on the Administrative Notice Board, this admin again blocked her and reverted her edits there. See here ] This admin who often uses foulmouthed language and who has been chided for that (for example by user:Malber) is running amok in his abusive course. I believe it is hightime he was stopped. Otherwise, he will disrupt WP more than any number of vandals or trolls could possibly can. I can assure you that this user also will be blocked and this comment reverted. But I am sure you will notice this message in the history. If you would kindly give this matter some consideration, I would request you to specifically enquire if user:Dakshayani and other alleged sockpuppets has an IP in common. Regards

Simbirskin 09:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. I have followed the Malber issue in the RfA talk page and am not going to comment on it. But the Dakshayani affair goes back a long way and there are still some sleeping socks that Nick himself doesn't know about. He was once a decent editor in another incarnation but for some reason got frustrated and became a troll. Simbirskin doesn't know anything about this business to make such comments on it, unless he is a sock himself. Tintin (talk) 09:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Can the above user point out a single instance of trolling or disruptive behaviour from user:Dakshayni before she was blocked without reason? Simbirskin 10:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Deja, pardon this one comment. Simbirskin 10:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)