Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:22, 20 September 2007

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Your Talk

No obsession, that's why I stopped reverting to previous versions, but please do not screw around with[REDACTED] templates, especially on your talk page. Also, don't forget to sign your posts from now on, thanks! Happy editing. Bmg916_Sign 02:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Generally, it is frowned upon to edit one's talk page the way they see fit, unless someone is blatantly vandalizing or trolling on it. Your regular user page is for you to (within reason, of course) design and edit as you see fit. On Misplaced Pages, we prefer if a user archive's legitimate talk page comments, rather than delete them, as they are meant only to be a record of discussion. This way, other users who come here to speak with you, can see if you've had a similiar or same discussion with another user, etc. It was a slight mistake on my part to press the issue of reverting your talk without explaining things as I am now, and for that I apologize. Bmg916_Sign 02:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Just noticed you signed my autograph book. Thanks! Bmg916_Sign 02:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

If you have any questions about anything, ever, please feel free to let me know! Bmg916_Sign 02:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

lonelygirl15

Hi Wwefan980, I've noticed you've been trying to make some edits to lonelygirl15. I just reverted those edits because they were causing a formatting problem. I also wanted to let you know about a Misplaced Pages policy called: No original research. This policy says that you can't use primary sources for controversial claims. For example, you claim that nearly all lonelygirl15 videos are rated very low. This is actually not very accurate. Some of her videos are rated between 2 and 3 -- which isn't necessarily that low. But many of her videos are rated between 3 and 4, and many lg15 videos are actually rated above 4. Also, the lonelygirl15 article already notes that "The New York Times attributed Lonelygirl's poor finish to the YouTube community's ill will towards the series." So we already have a sourced statement about low ratings and I think that's probably sufficient. --JayHenry 22:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:lonleygirl15

Hello JayHenry, I am going to post this on your page too but I am going to copy it there and leave a copy here(on my page). Anyhow, I never said that ALL of her videos were rated low, just that many of them were. And more are rated 2's and 3's than most videos.... What should I use to make a "controversal" claim then? And besides, being in the trivia section it may be more recognizable to the[REDACTED] readers. I noticed the format was messing up for some reason, so I guess I should let it lie for now but if I find a way to source my claim(which is true) then I will do it and hopefully it won't mess up the format of the page. Wwefan980 23:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Here is a New York Times story that talks about "community animus" toward lonelygirl15. Certainly if you can find other news reports that talk about low ratings, those can be used to source claims. Also, keep in mind that the article is about all lonelygirl15 videos and so it therefore includes videos posted by Danielbeast and Jonastko at http://www.youtube.com/danielbeast and http://www.youtube.com/jonastko respectively. Some of these videos are rated rather high. To be fair I think we'd have to say "Some videos receive ratings that are below 3 but other videos are rated above 4" or something like that. --JayHenry 23:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:PW

Have you considered joining the pro wrestling wikiproject? You may consider doing so. Also, the warnings on wrestler's pages you have been deleting are standard Wikiproject pro wrestling warnings and have community consensus and are there for a reason, and in some respects are extensions of core Misplaced Pages policies. Please refrain from further removal of them from wrestling articles. Thanks, and happy editing! Bmg916_Sign 04:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC) Well I hope you see this because you locked your talk page for some reason. Those warnings are put there by users, and they don't HAVE to be followed. As long as the user editing the article is contributing and actually informing something about a wrestler, then they aren't doing wrong. They are not subject to follow other users rules, and I remove those warnings because they shouldn't have to. They know not to vandalize, so those warnings are just further scaring them from editing, even though Misplaced Pages encourages editing. You are not my boss so leave me alone. Wwefan980 15:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

My talk page should not be protected, I am sorry if it is, I'm not sure why, I'll look into it. I am not your boss, no, but those warnings are approved by nearly, if not 100% of the editors of the pro-wrestling wikiproject and are a standard that is adhered too. If you do not like it, I suggest discussing it with the editors of the project at the WP:PW talk page instead of just removing warnings that are part of a community consensus. These warnings are in place to help the articles and keep them from getting extremely lengthy (and thereby eventually difficult and confusing to edit) as well as to keep them in line with core Misplaced Pages policies. These warnings do have to be followed, and removing them without consensus could possibly constitute vandalism. I am only trying to help you avoid conflict with other editors. It's not one person putting these warnings on wrestling pages, it's possibly up to several hundred. Happy editing, Bmg916_Sign 15:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

It doesnt' matter if I am in conflict with other editors(particularly you it seems), because the thing is this: Why do you think Misplaced Pages encourages people to edit articles? I think listening to what Misplaced Pages encourages users to do matters more then other editors opinions. By the way, I looked at your talk page and it seems you are the one who is doing the editing in a bad way. You are trying to boss other users around and delete their changes too. Wwefan980 15:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages encourages us to create consensus and work with other editors, as well as follow policy, not just edit freely. I edit according to my best interpretation of the policy, if I disagree with another editor's edits or editing patterns, I give my best attempt to work it out with them in a compromise. Misplaced Pages encourages its editors to talk to discuss disagreements with each other (which is why I encourage you to speak with the editors of the pro wrestling wikiproject) rather than just delete warnings that are community consensus approved (which Misplaced Pages encourages us to listen too). If you continue to delete the warnings, I may have to warn you for disruption and blanking of article content which is something I absolutely do not want to do. Happy editing. Bmg916_Sign 16:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I am going to try and reply on your page. Wwefan980 16:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The only article contents I remove are non-notable in an encyclopedia article pertaining to that person's overall career. The edits may not be incorrect, but they may also not be notable enough to include in an article. In my personal opinion we should not add week by week events as this is not a dedicated wrestling news and results site, it is an encyclopedia, and we can't include everything as it makes the articles incredibly lengthy and hard to edit. That's just my opinion. In order to reach a real community consensus about your proposed compromise however, I suggest asking at the WP:PW talk page about the warnings and how you feel about them, etc, and get reactions from other editors besides you and I. Happy editing, Bmg916_Sign 16:52, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Please also realize, that I am not trying to patronize you, I am just trying to help and familiarize you with Misplaced Pages guidelines and policy. Also, I suggest reading Misplaced Pages:Verifiability which is one of Misplaced Pages's core policies for content inclusion, granted it is mainly about making sure articles have reliable sources. Happy editing, Bmg916_Sign 17:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to try to explain this one last time, and please do not take it personally, that is not my intention. I am only trying to help you understand. Misplaced Pages is not anarchy, although anyone is allowed to edit articles, they cannot write just anything they want. Misplaced Pages is not a not a democracy but then again, neither is it a pure bureaucracy. "Disagreements should be resolved through consensus-based discussion" (from WP:BURO). The warnings you disagree with are consensus based within the wrestling wikiproject, and have been for years. The wrestling wikiproject oversees, and seeks to improve (just as you do) wrestler's and other related articles. Going against this established consensus, and saying you are blatantly going to do so and there is nothing we can do about it as you did here is considered disruptive and harmful to the project (by project I am referring to Misplaced Pages as a whole in this instance). If you disagree with something, you are to discuss it (as I encouraged you to do with the wrestling wikiproject) and even if the consensus does not come out in your favor, you are expected to abide by it according to Misplaced Pages policy. Refusal to discuss an issue and just going around changing it as you see fit is not what Misplaced Pages wants us or encourages us to do. Any editor is entitled to their opinion, just as you are, but when controversial changes want to be made and their is a disagreement, the disagreeing editors must discuss the issue (as we are) and as I stated above, abide by any community consensus based agreement whether that falls on the side you agree with or not. Not abiding by an established consensus could constitute vandalism, which is why I labeled your last edit as such (note that I never had before). I hope this helps explain things. I will ask that you either discuss this with the wrestling wikiproject in a civil manner, and abide by whatever the resulting community consensus is about the discussion, and refrain from changing and not adhering to the current consensus-based warnings as you see fit until a consensus is reached if you decide to discuss it. If you decide not to discuss the changes you would like to see (since they are potentially controversial), I will still ask that you refrain from changing and not adhering to the current consensus-based warnings as you see fit. I hope this helped explain things. If you continue editing in a disruptive manner, I will unfortunately be forced to report you to the administrative group, and as I have stated before that is something I do not want to do, as I know you here in good faith to try and help this project. Happy editing, Bmg916_Sign 13:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I read what you wrote on the Wikiproject Pro Wrestling talk page, and you weren't clear about what you wanted changed. You pretty much said "I'm going to do what I want, and you can't stop me, because there is no way for you to enforce it". Were the other editors correct in their responses? Perhaps not, but you also were not clear about what you didn't agree with, and what you wanted changed. This may have prompted the responses you got (again, I'm not saying the responses were right). If you were more clear and came off more civil, then perhaps a consensus could be reached. Happy editing, Bmg916_Sign 14:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Just because your edits are not vandalism (and they can be construed to be by those who don't fully understand What Vandalism is Not, as you just showed me), does not mean that they aren't disruptive, which is what other editors are seeing them as because you are not communicating the message of what exactly you have a problem with to them, as you are with me. Bmg916_Sign 17:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

User Page

Did you want a user page/talk page heading similar to mine? I noticed you tried to insert (and then removed) similar coding, so I figured if that is the case, then I would be more than happy to make one more for you. It's no problem. Let me know. Bmg916_Sign 18:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

 Done, let me know if you need anything else. Bmg916_Sign 21:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

RE:Phonetrace.org

First, I want to say I am sorry if other editors are rude to you, as they shouldn't be. I know it can be very frustrating, but make sure when you reply to anything you feel is rude you do so with a clear head, this way you can reply in a more civil manner than the other user did to you. As for phonetrace.org, I will try to look it up in the log for you so that you may contact the deleting admin. Remember to keep a cool head while doing so. Back in a flash after I check the logs. Bmg916_Sign 12:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Longhair was the deleting admin of the article. Bmg916_Sign 12:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't delete them, I moved them to the proper location. You asked him in an archive of prior discussions on his talk page, not on his main talk page where new discussions take place. I moved it this way he will see it and respond to your question faster than perhaps not at all if he does not look over his archives. Bmg916_Sign 16:52, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

The article Phonetrace.org was deleted as it failed to meet the basic critieria of WP:WEB and therefore qualified as a candidate for speedy deletion. -- Longhair\ 00:48, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

This is a wiki. Users can change almost any page on this entire website. That's how wiki's function. The criteria at WP:WEB is what the Misplaced Pages community has generally agreed upon when it comes to including websites within the encyclopedia. You'll see by taking a glance over the history of WP:WEB that major changes don't occur all that often, and when they do, it's usually by consensus. You asked why your article was deleted. The guidlelines on that page indicate why. You failed to meet them. -- Longhair\ 02:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't wish to recreate the Phonetrace.org article. If you do, be sure it meets the criteria for websites as outlined above, or an administrator will simply delete it again. An example of a shock site that's been included at Misplaced Pages is Goatse.cx. Why this one and not Phonetrace.org? Goatse.cx received mention by third party media related websites such as Wired. -- Longhair\ 05:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

wwefan980talk

You've already had this discussion with another editor so there is no need to go over this again. But if you keep changing the Project warnings, they will be reverted. The goals of the Project come before the opinions of an editor. - Deep Shadow 18:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)