Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:41, 14 August 2009

• WP:AN
• WP:ANB

• For urgent incidents and chronic, intractable behavioral problems, use Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
• To request review of an administrator's action or other use of advanced permissions, use Misplaced Pages:Administrative action review
• If you are new, try the Teahouse instead.
• Do not report breaches of personal information on this highly visible page – instead, follow the instructions on Misplaced Pages:Requests for oversight.
• For administrative backlogs add {{Admin backlog}} to the backlogged page; post here only if urgent.
• Do not post requests for page protection, deletion requests, or block requests here.
• Just want an admin? Contact a recently active admin directly.
• If you want to challenge the closure of a request for comment, use {{RfC closure review}}

When you start a discussion about an editor, you must leave a notice on their talk page. Pinging is not enough.

You may use {{subst:AN-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.

Sections inactive for over seven days are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.(archives, search)

Template:Active editnotice

Strategic Planning

The Wikimedia Foundation has begun a year long phase of strategic planning. During this time of planning, members of the community have the opportunity to propose ideas, ask questions, and help to chart the future of the Foundation. In order to create as centralized an area as possible for these discussions, the Strategy Wiki has been launched. This wiki will provide an overview of the strategic planning process and ways to get involved, including just a few questions that everyone can answer. All ideas are welcome, and everyone is invited to participate.

Please take a few moments to check out the strategy wiki. It is being translated into as many languages as possible now; feel free to leave your messages in your native language and we will have them translated (but, in case of any doubt, let us know what language it is, if not english!).

All proposals for the Wikimedia Foundation may be left in any language as well.

Please, take the time to join in this exciting process. The importance of your participation can not be overstated.

--Philippe

(please cross-post widely and forgive those who do)

Academic Research Study Survey: Final Call

Thank you to the Misplaced Pages community for your participation so far in this ongoing research study, and for your response to our previous post on the Administrators' Noticeboard. We plan on keeping this survey open for one more week and would like to encourage anyone who has not yet had the opportunity to participate to take the survey described below.

As part of an ongoing research project by students and faculty at the Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science and headed by Professor Robert Kraut, we are conducting a survey of anyone who has participated in the Request for Adminship (RfA) process, either voting or as a candidate.

The survey will only take a few minutes of your time, and will aid furthering our understanding of online communities, and may assist in the development of tools to assist voters in making RfA evaluations. We are NOT attempting to spam anyone with this survey and are doing our best to be considerate and not instrusive in the Misplaced Pages community. The results of this survey are for academic research and are not used for any profit nor sold to any companies. We will also post our results back to the Misplaced Pages community.

Take the survey

Thank you!

If you have any questions or concerns, feel free comment on my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CMUResearcher (talk • contribs)

Copyright work?

We really need more editors and particularly admins (since the delete tool comes in handy for this job) helping out with copyright investigations. Misplaced Pages:Suspected copyright violations, where CSBot's tags are listed, is backlogged. CSBot occasionally tags something that isn't an issue, but generally it's spot on, and it's really an important first line of defense against copyvio. We need more people who can evaluate the listings there and, equally importantly, figure out if copyvios it detects reflect a systematic problem contributor that needs to be addressed. There are also a number of long-term multiple-article infringement cleanups open and unresolved at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Copyright Cleanup/Contributor surveys. Thanks to User:CactusWriter, who has joined me at WP:CP, we've got that board under control. If there are any admins (or other readers here) who have an interest in keeping our content legal, we could seriously use a hand. I dream of a day when we have more contributors than work to be done. :)

I wish I could think of a way to more proactively treat the problem. The current method we use is pretty inefficient. There must be some way to keep stuff like this from happening. :/ --Moonriddengirl 11:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Many dealt with, many more to go! I'll try to stop by from time to time. This is important work. decltype (talk) 12:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

We could make a new edit filter that googles every edit before it is committed...might slow the site down a bit though... Thatcher 20:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Just a tad. ;) Protonk (talk) 20:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Now you're thinking, Thatcher, but I think a better way to handle all this craziness would be to stop all self-directed instant editing. Think about it - all the problems we have, from vandalism and copyvios to POV-pushers and illiterates are all rooted in this crazy "anybody can edit right now" mentality. If people want to make changes, they can submit an application in triplicate including a rationale for their suggested changes and their full resume, to a triple level editorial board for consideration, factual review and verification and finally, implementation. Trust me, this is the way of the future and it will fix all our problems. hawhaw Sarah 00:48, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Great idea! Too bad someone else already had it... :-) Vicenarian 00:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Is there an abuse filter to report removals of copyvio notices? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 04:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Not that I know of. --Moonriddengirl 17:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages talk:Edit filter#Removing copyright tags. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

MassDev

Apparently the Massachusetts Redevelopment Authority has found a way to add their propaganda to our site. They go by the username User:MassDev. I'm going to warn them as they have already screwed up some pages. Am I bringing this to the right place? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know that they've "screwed up some pages", but that's certainly a promotional account, possibly a prohibited role account, and definitely a username violation. They're also likely to fall afoul of the COI guidelines sooner or later. I'd suggest a calm warning rather than an aggressive one, though. — Gavia immer (talk) 01:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I gave them a level 2 warning for promotional criteria. I based the screw up on speculation, as I had only seen two pages. Thanks for the help. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that account is a pretty clear username violation; it could probably be soft-blocked. MuZemike 02:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I would do that, but I can't. I'm behind you in that idea. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, no edits in six weeks. I think they may be done doing what they were doing anyway. Wknight94 14:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

MassDev isn't "definitely a username violation". The big issues are with the conflict of interest, not with the string of characters "MassDev". (Another way of putting it: if the account had a different name, it would not fix the problem, so involving the username policy is unhelpful.) rspεεr (talk) 15:10, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Updating Misplaced Pages:Most wanted articles?

I know this should be on WP:VPT but it was ignored there and then archived without reply.

Since Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Database analysis seems to be dead, Misplaced Pages:Most wanted articles has been outdated for 2 years now. It's featured on many project pages and should allow newcomers to find articles they could create. As such, I think it needs to be updated. Question is, who will do it? Can this be done by a bot or does anyone know how to do it? Regards SoWhy 06:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages talk:Database reports seems to be active enough, or at least it was a few months ago. Protonk (talk) 06:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
• Also DB dumps just got restarted, so maybe there will be a resurgence in interest in that sort of thing? Protonk (talk) 06:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Possibly but I thought I'd ask here to see if there is anyone really willing to consider doing it. Regards SoWhy 10:09, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

i have a message

Attention: high holy wikipedian

from this guy: bigtimepeace. he says,

Single-payer

Please start discussing the changes you are making to Single-payer health care on the article talk page. You are drastically rewriting things without any discussion, even after you have been reverted by others. And please read this policy. Your contention in this edit summary that "concensus never defines wikipedia" is categorically incorrect. Consensus-based editing is at the heart of the project, and since at least one editor has disagreed with your changes, you need to start discussing them before editing further. Thanks. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 20:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

===my response is,

consensus-building, yes, but not consensus defining. plus, i explained my edits, while the reversions were *not* explained, and consensus is no excuse for irrelevancy. on this basis, i feel harassed, unduly chastised, and my time and efforts disrespected. just because the admin (as proudly self-identified) bigtimepeace has no basis for their reversion, it doesn't mean that i should be required to do extra legwork, or be threatened with sanction. i suggest that the person taking the action reverting, deleting or creating paragraphs should be able to back it up with at minimum a short and relevant explanation.[REDACTED] is supposed to be about the written word! relevancy changes with time, and consensus cannot be a catch-all for deletions of significant parts of politically charged current topics. 24.2.247.208 (talk) 22:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Why are you two posting this here? Take it to your own talk pages or the article talk pages. If you can't reach agreement use dispute resolution. Exxolon (talk) 00:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

For the record, as it were, I did not post the above comment here, nor was I informed of this thread. The initial comment with my signature was posted by me on the talk page of the IP editor and then cut and pasted here by that editor. This is a content issue, so there's nothing more to say about it at this board, but I just wanted it to be clear that I did not bring it here in the first place. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 09:55, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Need to redirect or link to correct preexisting article

The Category function seems to be in need of improvement. Every List that I specify under Category is colored red, and jumping to that page reveals an article that has not yet been created, despite the fact that an identically-named article already exists, and can be easily reached by typing the name in the Search box. I would vastly prefer that when a Category is specified, the link takes you to the preexisting article. The following links are currently problematic in the article for Fattburger, which I created:

(1) List of smooth jazz performers
(2) List of funk musicians
(3) List of jazz fusion artists
(4) Jazz-funk

All of these links should not only take you to the preexisting article, but should be colored blue, not red. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LAlawMedMBA (talk • contribs) 22:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Categories are not intended to link to articles; rather they are a means of grouping articles on related topics. I have moved your four 'categories' to a 'See also' section in the Fattburger article and linked them to the respective articles, which I hope will satisfactorily meet your need. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:05, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

• In an article:

  ] puts the article in the category Qwerty

  ] is a link to the category Qwerty

• Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Tintor2

can you pls do something against this user? hes reverting my useful edits all the time. give him an asskick by banning him for example. thanks. 88.243.134.122 (talk) 17:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Please keep in mind WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. Even if in a dispute with another editor, calling that editor "nigga" is unacceptable. Thank you. Sincerely, --A Nobody 17:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

(after ec) Wrong venue, and one shouldn't really call attention to oneself when one is evading a block by jumping IPs. Syrthiss (talk) 17:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Anybody want to take a shot at adding "Plaxico" to Misplaced Pages:Glossary#P? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:50, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

• On it. Should I mention the origin or no? -Jeremy 03:57, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
  • The living namesake is still a defendant who has pled not guilty, and is in a world of hurt, beyond the (allegedly self-inflicted) hole in his leg. Steveozone (talk) 06:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
    • As such, I, personally, prefer the existing, and long-standing, metaphor of shooting onesself in the foot. Uncle G (talk) 09:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Possibly Unfree Files backlog

Could an admin please help here? Thank you.--Rockfang (talk) 06:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

• That's a big one. I hate working PUF. I covered July 3-7. Anything that wasn't deleted is probably ok, though I didn't go through the archiving motions for the discussions. Protonk (talk) 08:57, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards