Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:06, 1 July 2010

User:Malik Shabazz/Header

Are you here because I deleted your article? Please read this before you leave me a message.

Coming soon to a Wiki near you...The Fourth Great Misplaced Pages Dramaout will be March 1–6. Please join us for serious content creation! Signup is here. To include this template on your talk page use {{User:Berean Hunter/NODRAMA}}

click here to leave a new message.

This is Malik Shabazz's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 5 days

Malcolm X

I noticed that in a couple of places, you added a non-breaking space to Malcolm X's name. As this seemed like a good idea to me, I'm doing an AWB sweep to that effect. Any reason you can think of that I shouldn't?--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:24, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

1968 Polish political crisis

I made some revisions to 1968 Polish political crisis. Since this was a contentious area/article before, I'd appreciate it if you took a look (honestly, the article's a bit of a mess in general).radek (talk) 05:47, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Haley as a co-author on the Malcolm X bio

Does the original 1964 copywrite to Alex Haley and Malcolm X gives credence to the arguement that Haley was originally credited as an author on the book? Look inside, on the first page you will find the original copywrite. --GabeMc (talk) 22:50, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

'48 massacres

Hi Malik,
There was a discussion around 1 year ago (that ended without consensus) about this problem of sources, from all sides. The article is based on 10+ books and articles. And if Morris is more often given in the footnotes it is just because he gives clear numbers. For the analyses, minds are given from all sides.
3 months ago, an editor came and added a flag. Without arguing anything. Since then, he didn't try to find any new sources. But he revered Ian Pitchford and Ceedjee, only stating that "he was there before", which is not an argument.
If somebody doesn't like what is written there, for any good, he can find other sources and add information. What is there is neutral and quite complete.
Adding tags meaning "I don't like this" is not the way[REDACTED] works.
81.244.167.24 (talk) 07:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Please stop the edit war

I listed 4 scholarly sources versus your one, which is again, just listing the title of the book. GabeMc (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I realize this isn't a counting sources as an answer edit war, but there are arguments which aren't completely based outside of reality on both sides. Your approach to this situation is not becoming of an admin in my opinion, for what little that's worth. This doesn't appear to be a situation where you'd have any type of exemption to 3rr. I realize everyone involved at this point thinks they are right without question, but discussion instead of reverting seems like a healthy way forward. --Onorem♠Dil 06:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Here is a pic of a first edition book with dust jacket, not just solid black with writing on the spine as you described, but white, with a picture and writting on the front dust cover, just like the one pictured on the Wiki page . --GabeMc (talk) 02:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Does the phrase "with the assistance of Alex Haley" appear on either? --GabeMc (talk) 02:46, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

What do you think of

GabeMc (talk) 03:06, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Chords of Fame (film)

On June 28, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chords of Fame (film), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: "Put up or shut up"

In response to your post on my talk page: 1.) Whilst not giving up my right to do so, generally speaking, I do not file ANI reports. I find it both childish, and a poor use of time that could be spent improving articles. 2.) Filing an ANI report against an administrator is a notorious waste of time. The fact is, that you are abusing your position, attempting to close open discussions, and trying to intimidate users with statements like "drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass". You have been provided with reliable source after reliable source, yet you continue reverting ad infinitum to the version you prefer, whilst making the decision for the entire community that all of those sources don't count. You are edit warring, and you need to stop. I also note, that here on your talk page, an uninvolved user has said that your conduct in this matter is unbecoming of an administrator. It also appears to me that you have used rollbacks in reverting to your preferred versions, even though no vandalism has taken place.Mk5384 (talk) 10:01, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Kansas City Bomber (song)

On June 28, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kansas City Bomber (song), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:04, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:Judaism

I moved the discussion "Should every BIO of a Jew be part of Wikiproject Judaism", which you recently participated in, to the talk page of WP Judaism's MOS. This is an important subject and needs to be incorporated into the MOS once we reach a consensus. -shirulashem 18:22, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Explanation at "Judaism"

Thanks for your help. Editor2020 (talk) 21:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Fragment_Earth Speedy deletion protest

   * 02:50, 28 June 2010 Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) deleted "Fragment Earth" ‎ (G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion (CSDH))

also in dougwellers inbox for : Delete No evidence of notability, self-published. Dougweller (talk) 13:03, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

This works lack of notability is well stated and though clearly an issue to you here is why it is not in my case: it is well stated within the opening body of my article itself and therefore of no surprise and not a legitimately shocking claim to have made. can you state a reason of greater concern than this? -- because lacking notability and being self published is not a crime of warrant. everyone starts somewhere, even wikipedia. i lack notability and i am self published because this is inline with my development scheme. i am if you must know almost trying not to be discovered. But most certainly not submitting myself to any consideration of publishing houses or reviewers. therefore your requirements to be included in[REDACTED] would be contrary to my very business model, and ethically over stepping your boundaries by more than a tolerable amount.

Article of question: http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Fearth

my article contains a boat load of new, accurate, encyclopedic information. from the source, me, on a fictional subject of no priorly established concern to anyone. this is likely your greatest problem, but given the lack of an established field such as i raise this is not a problem of concern to anyone, yet you judge me by the same measure you might a physics paper... who verifies me? i do, that is who -- this is fiction not physics, you should relax.

is there any dispute the book exists? is there any dispute i wrote it? is there any dispute the subject i claim its about is not what it is about?

until and when someone disputes me publicly, let it be handled on the page as it would be any other page. fill my page with flags and markers. but do not delete me simply because my business model of not wishing to be discovered before my story has had time to develop properly does not come adorned with the requirements some rubber stamper of yours previously established as a broad basis requirement for submissions, without considering all the fields it might effect.

cite changes that are within my capacity to make and i will make them. but dont cite fiction for lack of notability. its fiction!

p.s. thank you for this page it does explain alot http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Malik_Shabazz/Speedy_Deletion but my case does not apply

(Fearth (talk) 02:16, 29 June 2010 (UTC))

Fragment_Earth notability

Firstly thank you for your prompt reply.

Fragment Earth being entirely e-published with no physical book planned is subject to your Notability_(web) rules? I presume yes.

Therefore i need someone of non associated relative significance to pass idle gossip on my book of some appreciable amount from a non trivial website. like an editor from tailcast.com perhaps? writing a few words of his opinion in review of my works?

so my otherwise fine encyclopedic page is useless until idle gossip has been passed. apparently 60% of our brain hasnt gone unappreciated here.

and an idle gossip passing i a-go —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fearth (talk • contribs) 03:40, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

merge

Hello, could you please merge the info from the Kurdish Freedom Flotilla, to Reactions to the Gaza flotilla raid and then delete it? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:54, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy mention

I mentioned you here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 10:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)