Misplaced Pages

User talk:Acroterion: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:13, 5 June 2011 editBjornsonw (talk | contribs)31 edits →Me thinks thou protest too much...: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 23:20, 20 January 2025 edit undoBbb23 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators271,587 editsm Reverted edit by 12.15.128.152 (talk) to last version by DPL botTag: Rollback 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{userboxtop
{| style="background: transparent;"
|- valign="top" | toptext =
| align = right
| {{WP:TPS/watched}}
{{clear}} }}
{{WP:TPS/userbox|stalkee=yes|talk}}
<br>
{{3-tier diff}} {{userboxbottom}}
{{busy}}
{{Notice|<center>'''If you leave a message for me''': I will respond here. Either add this page to your ] or ask me to notify you of a response on your talk page. {{Notice|<center>'''If you leave a message for me''': I will respond here. Either add this page to your ] or ask me to notify you of a response on your talk page.
---- ----
Line 11: Line 12:
This helps keep discussion easily readable and in one place.</center>}} This helps keep discussion easily readable and in one place.</center>}}


{{message}} {{message}}


{{archivebox|] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]
]
] ] ] ] ] ]}}


{{archivebox|] ] ] ] [[/Archive_Q2_2008|Archive Q2 2008
]] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]}}


== Loctician == == Fixing your profile ==


Here is the newly edited version. Feel free to use it. " ] (]) 15:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Can I repost the same info without putting the salons website info on it. she is actually the first person to have to word trademarked and its on file with the commomwealth of Virginia state corporation commission. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:08, 3 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:The most important issue is whether the term has received coverage in third-party media, like a story in a major newspaper. Trademarking isn't significant on its own - Misplaced Pages determines notability by reference to multiple instances of coverage. See ]. If the term has widespread use, it could be included. If it's restricted to a single salon (and I would think it would be if it's trademarked - that's the point of trademarking), then it's unlikely to be notable. In no case would a link to the salon be appropriate. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 03:12, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


:Just been blocked for abusing editing privileges. ] ] 15:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:::This term is used nationwide, however this person was the first to trademark it. The word had been in circulation since the late 90's but locs were not as popular then. It is semi popular but just as the dreadlock community is growing so is the popularity of the word. just google it. So how can i post the definition without being deleted, Thanks. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


::Yeah, no surprise. I was busy baking for friends who are coming for lunch, a much more rewarding exercise than trolling the noticeboards or dealing with them. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 15:43, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
::::can i re post? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 04:13, 3 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::Sounds good, what are you baking? ] ] 16:20, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Just brownies, nothing complicated, but the kitchen smells great now. We're all going out for lunch and will come back here for dessert. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 16:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Love brownies, but to be honest, I can't make them as good as Ghirardelli does. ] ] 16:37, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::These are Ghirardelli, I've long since given up doing anything else. You can get them in the UK? '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 16:59, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Yes/ Amazon. ebay but cheapest at Costco. ] ] 17:04, 29 December 2024 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 ==
:::::I'd suggest that you develop a draft, with references, in tour userspace at ]. You can write and collect references there without deletion. In generfal, unreferenced new articles don't fare well, so it's vital that you find high-quality references in newspapers and other publications to support the article. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 11:21, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


] from the past month (December 2024).
== Could you please block this user... ==


<div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap">
], according to a message he left on my talk page he is a way for ] to evade his block. ''<font face="times new roman">]]</font>'' <sub><font color="blue">(])</font></sub> 18:32, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
:Taken care of - wasn't very long ago, and his parting shot had to be oversighted. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 19:00, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
::Just in case your feeling block-happy, I have another case for you, ]. He is abusing talk page privileges. Could you also handle this. ''<font face="times new roman">]]</font>'' <sub><font color="blue">(])</font></sub> 20:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
:::Acalamari already took care of it; thanks for the heads-up. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 20:09, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


] '''Administrator changes'''
== Morgan-Manning House ==
:] ]
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''CheckUser changes'''
Hi: We have a problem with ]. He keeps re-adding specious information to ] originally introduced by ] and repeatedly corrected by a number of well meaning editors. Thanks in advance for any assistance you can provide.--] (]) 01:16, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
:] {{hlist|class=inline
:You might want to discuss it directly with him, don't you think? I wouldn't call the material he's reverting spam, although it reads like a little bit of local boosterism, but I'm not convinced that the use of sniper rifles and the relationship that gave the house its name are particularly germane. Blueboy's reasonable; talk to him about your concerns. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 01:39, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
|]
::Will do--] (]) 10:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]
:] ]


</div>
== Starving the trolls - "Riverton High School" ==
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
]


] '''Oversight changes'''
Hi Acroterion, <br />
:] {{hlist|class=inline
Though this of course doesn't show up in the edit history, I jumped in and added,
|]
<blockquote>
|]
'''Riverton High School''' is a ] located ], ], ].
|]
</blockquote>
|]
with the edit summary, "Starve troll by wikifying article".<br />
|]
Is it OK with you if I re-start the article? --] (]) 12:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
}}
:Fine with me; I took is as a test article creation by someone showing off to friends, rather than real trolling. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 12:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
:] ]


</div>
== Swanton, Maryland ==
</div>


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
Hi.. back to your part of the world. Article ] demographics are out of whack. Any advice?--] (]) 00:32, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
* Following ], ] was adopted as a ].
:I'm not familiar with appropriate sources for that kind of demographic information: perhaps Nyttend might know where to look. Looking through the history I don't see a good version to revert back to. It's an area of high growth, so it could have changed population fairly quickly. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 03:46, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
* A ] is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.
] '''Technical news'''
* The Nuke feature also now ] to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.


] '''Arbitration'''
== Rebeca the Rocket] (]) 03:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)Nuggle09 ==
* Following the ], the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: {{noping|CaptainEek}}, {{noping|Daniel}}, {{noping|Elli}}, {{noping|KrakatoaKatie}}, {{noping|Liz}}, {{noping|Primefac}}, {{noping|ScottishFinnishRadish}}, {{noping|Theleekycauldron}}, {{noping|Worm That Turned}}.


] '''Miscellaneous'''
Hello, I would like to start out by saying that I am happy wikipedi has contributers like you to keep[REDACTED] fresh and accurate. Today an article was written about Rebeca the Rocket, a person that I personally know and is near and dear to me. I can assure you that this is a real person with a huge reputation in columbia. Its very important to me that she, Rebeca, gets the recognation that she deserves. If there is any editing I can peronaly do to improve the article, and sources, or increase its signifgance, please let me know as soon as posssible. You can contact me at <email redacted>.
* A ] is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the ]. ]


----
I appreciate the work you put into wikkipedia and hope you keep up the good work.
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}
<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 15:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1266956718 -->


== NMSU basketball ==
Nuggle09
:From what you've written, there are no references to substantiate the article's claims, nor is there any indication of compliance with the notability guidelines at ]. You might want to try editing in a sandbox in your userspace if you can provide references. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 04:41, 6 May 2011 (UTC)


No idea how to put this gently, but the ongoings under Heiar and Moccia were serious and are common knowledge in the I-25 corridor. Three players sexually assaulted three other players and two student workers, and a UNM player was killed by a NMSU player. "Hazing" doesn't describe what happened at all. ] (]) 16:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
==]==
:The references don't support your assertions. If you think it ought to be included, find explicit reliable sources. "Common knowledge" isn't admissible here, and the ] policy applies. Don't report rumors or unsubstantiated assertions of serious criminal conduct. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 18:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Could you educate me? There have been a series of edits of this article by a user named ''Registered1234'' or somesuch. No problem. But I look at his contributions and see no changed for most of them. The column on the left and right seem to be the same. What gives with this? ] (]) 02:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but recent sources such as this and this are unambiguous, they use wordings like "sexual assault" and "sex abuse" for the happenings on the NMSU basketball team. KFIX and ESPN are mainstream news sources with no particular agenda. It's permitted to call a spade for what it is. ] (]) 20:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:Usually that means there was a spacing change, since a space won't show up in red. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 02:22, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
::Thank you, I am new at this. ] (]) 03:57, 7 May 2011 (UTC)


:To add to this: two of the men who were assaulted were paid 8 millions in restitution. If you can get that amount in a settlement you know the cSe had merit. ] (]) 20:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
==Reviewer==
::Then don't call it "rape." And we don't infer from sources that anything "has merit" in that manner from a civil proceeding, that doesn't establish criminal culpability, only that there was a settlement. Yes, bad things happened, but we can only report on what reliable sources explicitly state. Inference is of no use here; stick to the sources and don't embellish or interpret. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 20:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Could you support me to become a reviewer on[REDACTED] ].
''Thanks'' ] ] 14:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


The report from NM DOJ does not mince words. The executive summary on pg 3 uses words like "sexualized hazing" and "sexual assault", and on page 10 the DOJ is explicit in stating that Heiar was terminated for cause shortly after the abuse was reported to police. That Moccia was terminated for cause is not disputed, that fact is widely reported in the news. "Scandal" is too mild a word for what went on at the institution.
== Why the delete? ==


As far as criminal proceedings go, two of the three suspects have pled guilty, and the third one is currently at trial and is looking at 5 years of prison. The complaint from the State is for "Criminal Sexual Penetration", "Criminal Sexual Conduct" and "Conspiracy to Commit Criminal Sexual Conduct", it's not great.
Hey, I just started a page for the Buell Motor Company and you deleted it right away.
The Buell motor company is NOT the same as the the Buell Motorcycle Company that followed it which needs to be known and it's history documented.
Regards
Gavin <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:58, 11 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Replied and userfied at your talk page. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 01:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)


(Aside: US criminal law is a mess, many actions that ought to fall under criminal law are instead brought as civil actions, most infamously police misconduct. The public prosecution needs to stay in the good graces of the police, so the injured party brings a civil action and then settles before the case gets to a jury. At some point the "non-admission of liability" clause ends up being not really meaningful. Someone suffered injury, and they are awarded much money, and we can't call it for what it is. Suspicious people will say that was the intention all along.) ] (]) 19:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
== Page deleted? ==


:We call it exactly what reliable sources say it is. The problem with the edits this weekend was with amplification beyond what the sources said. There is no bar to stating the issues (in accordance with ], and remembering the requirements of ]); we just need to stick to the references. All I want you to do is to stick to what reliable secondary sources say in accordance with policy, and we can talk about the problems with the program. We just have to do it with care and accuracy; this is the #7 website in the world, and we have a responsibility to get it right. No editorializing. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 22:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi there


== Block of ] ==
You previously deleted an entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/Internet_Business_Group.


This user made one edit, the creation of a promotional userpage, and was reported to UAA. Seeing the report, I deleted the page, and made a choice ''as an administrator'' to warn rather than go for the no-warning block.I made this clear at UAA.
I have reviewed the original content, and have re-created it citing references as per the guidelines for the pages regarding organizations.
I'm curious as to why you thought it was appropriate to override my decision an hour later, when they had made no further edits? I believe my choice was within the bounds of administrative discretion and should not have been overridden without good reason. ] ] 00:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


:We have different ideas of what constitutes a promotional-only account with username issues, I guess, it looked pretty clear-cut to me. I didn't think of it as ''overriding '' you, please don't take it that way, and honestly I didn't check to see ''who'' might have deleted the page; we shouldn't have to go walking on eggshells around certain administrators. We've all had occasions where we've taken a more gentle or lenient approach, or abstained entirely, and had another admin take a different action. This is the nature of our distributed administration of this website. I have a less optimistic idea of what demands a promotional account is likely to impose on our volunteers than you do, I guess.
I am recreating the page with the references (and corrections to any issues regarding objectivity) and would appreciate your feedback directly if anything is still amiss.
:However, I am happy to reverse the block, as always, if another admin disagrees. While you may not think so, my overall approach to spammish accounts is pretty close to yours, and I believe I've made that clear in the RFC. I have different reservations about promotional usernames than you do, and it bothers me that we tend to act more harshly on accounts that at least are being more honest with us (like this one) than somebody with a throwaway username that's doing the exact same thing. I don't have a wise solution, except that the editing interface for user page creation might offer better guidance that WP isn’t like Facebook, and if you’re looking to expand your social media presence, you’re in the wrong place. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 02:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::To be clear, I don't think anyone need walk on eggshells around me, but I do feel that any admins decision to take a particular course of action shouldn't overriden without a compelling reason. I see blocks I wouldn't have made all the time, but I don't just go undoing them unless they are truly egregious.
::I think the thought of some sort of caution or warning when creating a user page/sandbox is a good one, and not an idea I believe I've seen before. We clearly have an issue where lots of people every day think this is the place to come to "get the word out" and something like that could help curb it at least a little bit, although knowing how the software is we'd want to make sure it actually works on the mobile apps as well.
::As I recall, the community has asked in the past for something similar when usernames are created, that being the obvious other facet of this issue, but I don't think we ever actually got it. ] ] 06:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:::An absence of action isn't easily discernable here, and given the way the various queues and happenstance work it's not always the case that a deletion without a block indicates some kind of forbearance. However, I would have figured that out if I'd looked at the talkpage; most of the time it's just a speedy deletion flag, but sometimes not, as in this case. Keep in mind that those who patrol the edit filters look at the edit filter detail output, which is usually more diagnostic than what might have been successfully saved.
:::However, it was my impression that you were not particularly concerned with spam username/spam actions, but rather an apparently good-faith username with spammish content who might be brought around to being a contributor, and userspace deletions. There may be a unicorn out there who registers a promotional name and posts promotional content, who might be persuaded to be a contributor, but I haven't encountered one yet. I've nursed promotional editors along, and can't say that I've had any successes. I've had better luck with vandals, who aren't financially or ideologically committed to vandalism. We've got a recent serial sockpuppeteer who is somehow trying to edit on behalf of the UAE Federal Tax Authority, who is an example of the more extreme sort, who has rejected patient advice and who presumably has been commissioned to establish an FTA presence on all platforms no matter what.
:::Spambots are another matter, and we should show no mercy there. They're prohibited by the ToU, and should be treated as LTA block evaders. They're tailored to superficially look like good-faith accounts, and they've been running as long as I've been here. They're much less of a problem than they used to be.They're instantly recognizable once you've seen a few, and I always tag the deletions and blocks with custom summaries: "spambot."
:::As I've pointed out, my practice, and that of most admins, is to delete and warn for the promotional content without an accompanying promotional username, but the usernames that represent organizations pose a general username policy issue apart from promotion; it would be more of a question whether to softblock or hardblock in those cases. I would generally softblock if there was no accompanying promotion, or more likely just wait and see what they do (which is a standard answer at UAA), since a lot of those accounts have second thoughts and never edit. I'm not actually sure how the 499 edit filter interacts, I think it logs only and doesn't warn. There are a lot of false or ambiguous positives with 499 (as I said at the RFC, about half can be ignored), perhaps a more narrowly-tailored filter might target a smaller subset with a warning, but that's outside my skillset to construct or even propose in much detail. Perhaps 499 could be tailored for a fairly general reminder to not be promotional and to remind that WP isn't social media. I'd prefer proaction over reaction, which is the current state of affairs. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 12:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


== ] ==
Cheers!


{{u|Acroterion}} (I'm also tagging {{u|Liz}} in this request as a draft deleter who is), can you undo ] because the player is expected to debut () at ] in the ] which ], and I believe that the draft can serve as a kind of starting point for the development of the article before its debut, which after its debut will be concretized into a full article. ] (]) 01:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
] (]) 22:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
:I'll wait for Liz, but as usual, I have no problem with undeleting these drafts so you can work on them. Let me know if you don't hear from her; weather depending, I may be away for a while tomorrow for some minor eye surgery. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 02:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::Okay, if there's no reaction from {{u|Liz}}, then I'll let you know and wish you a speedy recovery. ] (]) 02:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for returning the draft article! ] (]) 00:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)


== Could you please take a look... == == You've got mail ==


at ] and tell me if CSDing is needed. ''<font face="times new roman">]]</font>'' <sub><font color="blue">(])</font></sub> {{You've got mail|dashlesssig=<span style="font-family: Arial; padding: 2px 3px 1px 3px;">] ]</span> 12:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}}
:Seems reasonably notable, but lacking in sources. Pretty much anything to do with Gropius and the Bauhaus would be notable, and I recall reading about the dances. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 23:48, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
::I am still on the edge so I will do an AfD, not to get it deleted but to attract attention so people can improve it. On an unrelated not, could you also take a look at ]. ''<font face="times new roman">]]</font>'' <sub><font color="blue">(])</font></sub> 00:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
:::AfD really isn't a good way to improve references: not that it doesn't work, but it's not an appropriate use of the process. I'll see if I can round up some references. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 00:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
::::] zapped; WP isn't a game guide. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 00:08, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::I have done AfD several times in order to improve article, yes I know I am a conman. :). ''<font face="times new roman">]]</font>'' <sub><font color="blue">(])</font></sub> 00:09, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
::::::Could you please delete ]. ''<font face="times new roman">]]</font>'' <sub><font color="blue">(])</font></sub> 00:16, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::::Done. Now we can improve the article from the sources. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 00:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
::::::::I found a pretty good, up-to-standard reference but, as a precaution to not break anything, I will let you interpret the information, the source is '''{{ Plainlink | url=http://books.google.com/books?id=ZXB8rX5AsgUC&pg=PA158&dq=Bauhaus+dance&hl=en&ei=zijLTaSpEo-ctwf89O3yBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=Bauhaus%20dance&f=false | name=Bauhaus, 1919-1933 By Magdalena Droste, Bauhaus-Archiv }}'''
:::::::::Nice reference, feel free to incorporate it, or I'll see what I can do once I've finished cleaning up from dinner. I've removed the AfD notice from the OP's userpage, since that kind of thing can be off-putting for new contributors. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 00:32, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


== IP 123.231.94.55 == == Revdel request ==


Could I get a revdel for this please. Thank you. ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 20:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the block. Unfortunately, it's a game of whack-a-mole as a range block on would impact a large number of legitimate editors in addition to the vandal. I think it's the same editor from the article and talk page at {{al|Reporters Without Borders}}. Multiple IPs in the same range had been edit-warring in the article over POV material followed by edit-warring on the talk page over the restoration of personal attacks (resulting in both the article and the talk page being semi-protected). --- ] <small>(] • ])</small> - 04:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
:Ironically, they decided to make common cause with an obvious racist IP from Atlanta when they reverted ] in their "Ghandian protest." I thought for a minute that the Atlanta vandal was using proxies. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 11:36, 12 May 2011 (UTC) :In general, ''pro forma'' racist vandalism isn't normally revdel'd, unless it concerns a specific individual or is particularly gross (i.e., "kill all ***). But they've earned themselves a week-long block and a place in my watchlist. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 20:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::Got it 👍 ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 20:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:::An elaboration - the "grossly-insulting" modifier is important, as opposed to the obnoxious-racist-jackass-who'd-better-watch-their-damn-mouth-if-they-don't-want-to-spend-a-week-at-the-dentist stuff. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 20:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::Okay, so I didn't make the request but I am a little confused. I was earlier told on a talk page to report an edit very similar to the one reported. Am I not supposed to request revdel these kind of stuff? <span style="font-family: Arial; padding: 2px 3px 1px 3px;">] ]</span> 20:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Well, going by the way ''I'' read the policy, it didn't rise to the level of grossness usually revdel'd. We get a lot of dumb nasty vandalism, and we don't need to scrub the histories of all of it; revdel should be employed somewhat sparingly. We remove things that can bring harm or express a desire to harm, are copyright violations, insult or degrade specific living individuals, are the products of sustained disruption campaigns. or reveal the identities of people who wish to remain anonymous. For stupid schoolboy vandalism like this, it can stay there as a monument to their ignorance. Your request above was similar to this one.in its level of obnoxious rather than gross. Other admins may have a somewhat lower threshold for removal from the history, but it has never been meant for all vandalism. There does seem to have been a trend to apply it more generally to ethnic slurs like this one, but it's not uiniversal. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 20:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


== ''The Bugle'': Issue 225, January 2025 ==
== Room 130 ==

We were not attacking our "subjects"
We were simply describing our classroom why did you delete our article <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 17:26, 12 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:You were using the article to attack your teacher. As a veteran of drafting/AutoCAD classes, I know the feeling, but Misplaced Pages isn;t the appropriate forum for your views. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 18:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

== ] ==

FWIW, it was also a hoax. ''']''' ''']''' ] 18:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
:Yeah, I was running out of space in the deletion rationale. I'll nominate the images for deletion on Commons too. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 18:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
::Just for future reference, what would be a valid rationale for deletion for those images? ''']''' ''']''' ] 19:13, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
:::I use "out of project scope:personal images of a minor," which usually works. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 19:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
::::Alright, thanks. ''']''' ''']''' ] 19:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
==claudia beamish==
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:CSD#cite_note-Hasty-2
please restore i have only just created it and filling it out and notable under http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:POLITICIAN <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Restored minus the initial copyright violation. In the future, please don't copy material from politicians' websites to start articles. It's easy enough to create a single well-composed article and use that as a template, rather than copying copyrighted material and changing it to a one-sentence stub that provides no context. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 20:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
:: sure i only had to click save as my browser was crashing otherwise i only put in my own wordings <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 06:16, 15 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Barnstar ==

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Thanks for Reverting Vandalism to my Homepage :) ]<sup>]</sup> 21:08, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
|}<!--template:The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar-->
:Thanks - it's Saturday night in the UK and the vandals are having their fun. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 21:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

== Hi Acroterion ==

As you correctly point out in my talk page, my comments in the VegitaU talkpage weren't polite, so i delete them. Now, can I ask you why you delete my comments in the Talk:American Airlines Flight 77, being understood that this is a page for discussion. Thanks in advance. --] (]) 14:33, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
:Talkpages are not platforms for personal opinions on the subject of the article: they are to be used for discussion of article improvement. Please take the time to find the timestamp for discussions: you appear to have been complaining about actions by VegitaU that were three years old, and you've been spamming the 9/11 pilots link all over the page in old discussions; if you have something new to say that relates directly to article improvement, please add it in a new topic at the bottom of the page.. In general, as I advised in my reply to one of your comments, advocacy organizations are not acceptable sources for anything but their own beliefs: they exist to promote a particular point of view and make no pretense of neutral, scholarly research. In particular, the 9/11 pilots group lacks credibility even among 9/11 conspiracy theorists. It is in no way an acceptable source except as documentation of a fringe group largely rejected by other fringe groups. Please do not spam the link, and please do not use Misplaced Pages as a forum for personal opinion. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 16:00, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
:: I understand. I will not continue posting the link, but I am still believe they are not a fringe group. Thanks for informing me about the rules. --] (]) 16:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

==could you have a look at this users edits==
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Derek_Mackay&diff=prev&oldid=429207843 <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:26, 15 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:They certainly have a rather promotional tone: I assume this is Mr. Mackay or someone closely associated. A gentle expression of concern about ] would probably be in order - their edits are much milder than many I've seen by politicians or their staff. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 15:53, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
::thought that too given the schools info etc. though probably accurate if it is from the horses mouth theres probably no sources backing it all up. Yes i thought it was mild too no opposition bashing started(yet at least).] (]) 16:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
:::I hate to sound cynical, but I'd agree that this is pretty restrained compared to some. Still, the additions may certainly be trimmed and rendered less glowing and more encyclopedic. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 16:03, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

== Medieval art ==

May I ask for your attention on this article? There is a RfC going on plus a noticeboard: ]. --] (]) 15:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

== Canyons of the Teton Range ==

I just did a list/article on ]...should it instead be ]? The reason I mention this is because all the real canyons are in the park and I intend to do a similar list for lakes, various animal/plant lists and related and they will be park specific....suggestions?--] 19:44, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
:While it's generally true that the big time canyons are in the park, there are some features on the back side/west side of the range, like Teton Canyon, and other features to the south around Teton Pass that are called canyons. I think you should stick to ] and the few that aren't in the park can be so noted. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 19:55, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
:That works...thanks for the input.--] 10:33, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

== Garnett123456789 ==

Thanks - I was just about to post at AIV to say I didn't think a block was necessary unless he returned to the charge. I hesitated whether to block, but I thought he had been rather BITE-ily met with warnings and no welcome, and deserved more explanation. I wish there was some way to explain to this sort of user ''when they register'' that if they think this is a free advertising platform they are in the wrong place. regards, ] (]) 14:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
:Your instinct was right - he posted the ad twice more, and I have now blocked. ] (]) 14:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
::I've long been frustrated with the amount of spam from new users, and have occasionally succeeded in redirecting spammers into more-or-less productive activity, but it takes a lot of work and the success rate is low. I think they read an article about social media and think WP is like Facebook or Twitter. I usually start out with a level 2 warning rater than the red stop sign and give them a couple of chances, so my initial instinct (leading to the withdrawal of my block) was similar to yours. Unfortunately, this one was determined. At least we tried. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 15:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

== How? ==

] (]) 15:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC)How can you ask for a speedy deletion?
I really want to know because I have seen some random stuff. Or things without resorcous. Also, how can you ask for a block or ban because I have seen some people with obseen names...
:You can find the criteria and templates for speedy deletion at ]. Deletion should be approached with caution; if you tag things inappropriately, you may not be allowed to edit, and some of your recent contributions have been of a questionable nature (like ], which I just deleted - if you don';t understand why it's inappropriate, you shouldn't be doing deletion tagging). For more general deletion, you can use ]. Again, you need to understand what you're doing first. If you see problematic names you can report them at ]; please read the account name policy (referenced on that page) first, and at all times, please avoid ]. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 16:01, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXII, April 2011 ==


{| style="width: 100%;" {| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" | | valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{| {|
| ] | ]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">''']'''</div> | width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> <div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project News: ''] * Project news: '']''
* Articles: ''] * Articles: '']''
* Members: ''] * Book review: '']''
* Editorial: ''] * Op-ed: '']''
</div> </div>
|- |-
|} |}
|} |}
<span style="font-size: 85%;"><center> <div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section ]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the ]. ] (]) 21:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)</span></center> ''The Bugle'' is published by the ]. To receive it on your talk page, please ] or sign up ].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from ]. Your editors, ] (]) and ] (]) 07:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Ian Rose@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:The_ed17/sandbox3&oldid=1266423875 -->


==Disambiguation link notification for January 16 ==
== What's wrong? ==

What were you talking about? I didt see any thing wrong.
] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 22:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==Talkback==
{{talkback|Karl 334|Sympathy|ts=21:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)}}

== RevDel request ==

Recent edits at ], just reverted by me. New editor apparently trying to ridicule a private person. Thanks. ] (]) 02:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
:Done, and warned the user. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 02:56, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
::Thanks, and thanks for handling the revdel on the other page he hit. I'd put in a request for oversight on that one, but it looks like you got to it first. ] (]) 03:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
:::Yeah, that one was worse. OS can decide if they want to obliterate it . '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 03:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

== Entry deletion ==

Hi there, I was wondering why you took off the link I added for social bookmarking sites? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:47, 19 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:In genera, a link should not be added unless the subject is notable. Since I deleted the article as lacking in an assertion of notability, I removed the link on the same grounds. As I noted on your talkpage, you're welcome to develop an article in your userspace, where you can sort out notability and referencing at your convenience. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 03:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

==Harold Camping==
I thank you for your warning and I respect you administrating articles. However, I do not personally see my edit as vandalism. I do admit, however, that openly saying he is a "crazed lunatic" was the incorrect way to go about doing things. I believe in the merits of[REDACTED] and that it should strive for truth and excellence. There is absolutely no place in the current article about Camping that states science disagrees with his statements. Instead, the only mentions of disagreement are "As a result, some individuals have criticized him for 'date-setting'" and "they believe his entire method of Bible interpretation is flawed." If you would like, I can pen a section about the invalidity of his arguments from a fact-based scientific stance. If I cannot do it, someone most certainly should. Otherwise,[REDACTED] is no more than a medium for which inaccurate science can propagate through the minds of the public. When looking at a page such as homeopathy's, the second sentence reads "The collective weight of scientific evidence has found homeopathy to be no more effective than a placebo." Do you not think statements such as those made by Camping should get the same treatment? On a final note, 24 hours from now nearly the entire article I edited will be proven nonsense. The second sentence under this text box states "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." Yet, despite this, the second paragraph of his page states:

"He has used Bible-based numerology to predict dates for the end of the world. His current end times prediction is that the Rapture will be on May 21, 2011 and that God will completely destroy the Earth and the universe five months later on October 21. He had previously predicted that the Rapture would occur in September 1994."

The only verifiable thing regarding these predictions is that they are wrong, yet that statement is nowhere to be found. Tomorrow evening, or Sunday if you wish, please add the sentence "He was wrong about both of his previous predictions" to the opening paragraphs of his page.

] (]) 22:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

:My only concern was the "crazed lunatic" change. Feel free to make your concerns known on the article talk page. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 00:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

== Re "The gay cowboy movie" ==

That was the slowest speedy deletion ever.

Can you please salt that page? It's a 4chan target today. <span style="cursor: crosshair;">--] ]</span> 00:05, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
:Protected now. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 00:08, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

== Advice please ==

Hello,
Im an unclear as to why my post is a candidate for speedy deletion. It does refer to a company and website that offers a valuable and unique service for pet owners. This is significant to the millions of pet owners who, through internet forums, have expressed a desire for more information on natural, holistic veterinary medicines as well as their frustration at the lack of reliable information on the internet. Can you please explain to me why the entry is getting a tag for speedy deletion? This is my first entry and Im new to the[REDACTED] community so Im trying to learn the rules as quickly as i can. Is there some way I can (should) alter it so that it will be accepted. Im honestly not trying to advertise through[REDACTED] and that was never my intention but i do think its a very important entry. Thanks in advance. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 02:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I've removed your advertisement from this page and deleted the article, which was pure advertising. Misplaced Pages does not accept any form of advertising or promotion. You are discouraged from editing on subjects in which you have a direct interest, such as yourself or your business. See ] and ]. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 02:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

== Why did you delete a page I Made? ==

I created a page and you deleted it. I think you have no justification at all. Please reply. --] (]) 09:26, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
:Please read ] for notability guidelines for web content. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 15:34, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

== Nice work ==

{| style="border: 1px solid black; background-color: #D3D3D3;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|]|]}}
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Dam Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I hereby award you this <s>damn</s> dam barnstar for all your great work creating and expanding several articles on dams. Good job! <small>By the way, you are the inaugural recipient.</small>--] <small>]</small> 10:18, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
|}
:Thanks! I was filling in material on the ] to support Mongo's FA work on ] and it kind of grew from there. The new dam(n) barnstar looks fine, by the way. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 15:36, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
::Your welcome. It is amazing how one thing (or redlink) leads to another, especially in this subject area. Thanks for the compliment on the barnstar, I am no graphic artist but I tried. It was, however, of WP:BARNSTAR though. Mostly because of my inability to read the entire page though.--] <small>]</small> 02:58, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

== Skullgirls Deleted Page ==

Hey there.

The "Skullgirls" page I created was a copy/paste of the page I wrote for Giant Bomb. I didn't think that counted as copyright infringement, since I wrote it in the first place.

How much will I need to edit in order to sidestep any such "plagarism" issues? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:42, 22 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:In general, content may not be introduced from external websites unless the site explicitly is licensed under the same CC-by-SA copyright as Misplaced Pages's, or is public domain, and even then is considered bad practice. You should avoid citing your own work in any case: all material should be cited and sourced to independent third-party sources in major media, which also helps to establish ]. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 19:47, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

== Black Hat PPC ==

I tried to create a new entry for Black Hat PPC. It's a term that is used among online marketers in the UK and the article was to explain what it was about and how it came to be. Could you let me know what you didn't like about the post and I'll amend it. Thanks. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:You need to indicate how the term is notable according to ] and ] by reference to independent third-party sources. If you want, I'll place the content into your userspace for you to develop and source. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 21:48, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
If you could do that it would be most appreciated. Many thanks. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 09:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Category adds ==

Hoover Dam is not in a NPS unit. (most of the lake is, other than that very close to the dam, but that does not include the dam). I don't think Grand Coulee is either. Are you sure you are working from a reliable list?--] (]) 14:25, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
:I was unaware that Hoover Dam itself was not within the boundaries of LMNRA: I'll remove those and leave Lake Mead and FDR Lake in the categories. I'm contemplating some form of summary article on dams and reservoirs in U.S. National Parks (including proposed schemes), focusing on parks, proper, as opposed to the well-known national recreation areas. I had my doubts about Grand Coulee in particular and was just now looking around for some substantiation - cart before horse. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 14:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
::I think it is effectively an enclave within the LMNRA. Perhaps you could massage the name of the category a bit to include dams that impound lakes which are within NPS boundaries? I am not a dam expert but NortyNort and I brought Hoover Dam up to FA for the 75th last year and I helped him out a bit with Grand Coulee, so they are still on my watchlist.--] (]) 14:35, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
::::This brings up an issue of definition: ], for instance, is solidly within ], but is owned and operated by the USBR, effectively an inholding. I'm not sure about ] in Yosemite - I assume the dam itself is owned by the City of San Francisco and has a property line around it. While the reservoirs are fairly easy to deal with, , I'm not entirely comfortable with excluding the dams from the "inside the park" category on the basis of property lines as opposed to geography - "in" vs. "within," I guess, which might be how the category should be worded. Any thoughts or suggestions? '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 14:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::"in or adjacent to"? Avoid arguments that way.--] (]) 14:46, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
::::::It's imprecise, but you're probably right; finding reliable sources, avoiding OR and avoiding arguments would seem to argue in that direction. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 14:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::::Imprecise, yes, but broad. Which will help anyone using the category.--] (]) 14:49, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
::::::::True, categories should avoid editorializing about content. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 14:51, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::::::Just saw my watchlist explode and saw this conversation here. For a few reasons, I would say exclude dams from the category and maybe drop "dams" from the cat's name. Many of the dams are owned and operated by separate entities although they still might be under the Department of Interior. Many I see in ] are USBR-owned. I don't have a list of which are within NPS units and it would take awhile to do the research. Another point is with the reservoir/dam article similarity argument that sometimes appears on Misplaced Pages. Only with dams in the U.S. do you often see a separate reservoir article here. In general, they are closely associated and I think just reservoirs in the category can help solve a few of the questions/problems above. You can still effectively categorize something associated with the dam. If the NPS doesn't own and operate the dam then it can be deduced that the dam has its own little "free zone" I think. I am about to call it a night and can look into this more tomorrow.--] <small>]</small> 14:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::::::I was thinking "colocated with" too but that may be misconstrued as well.--] <small>]</small> 15:04, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
<undent>I'll pull the dams out, since the NPS ''owns'' no major dams. Apart from the technical issue of ownership, I do think some form of recognition/categorization of the issue of dams in national parks, and the symbiotic relationship between NRAs and dams/reservoirs should be addressed, somewhat complicated by the fact than not all national recreation areas are administered by the NPS. The tension between water rights and preservation is a major theme in NPS and USBR history that is understated, in my opinion, and I was trying to feel my way through it via the category, which is probably the wrong way to work through it. The word "colocated" has always given me hives as technobabble. There must be a way to figure this out, but in the meantime I'll scale back the cats. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 15:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
:I seem to remember that when I first visited Hoover Dam in 1996, they had a sign at the ticket window saying that they were not part of the recreation area and that the Golden Eagle Passport was not usable there.--] (]) 15:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
::I was there in 2003 and had an annual NPS pass; we would have used it had it been valid for dam tours, but I seem to recall that we had to pay, and that the visitor center and tour was a USBR operation. There was no NPS presence at the dam VC apart from perhaps a booth with a seasonal ranger. The main NPS VC is a couple of miles to the west. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 15:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
:::How about a separate and sub-category "Dams associated with (for, coupled with, of) reservoirs in U.S. National Park Service units" would help address the controversy?--] <small>]</small> 15:26, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
::::Could be a possibility. I was grappling too with the matter of dams/reservoirs for non-NPS NRAs, so I think I'll have to diagram out how some kind of category tree might wok on a piece of paper. I believe I'll hold off until I've had lunch and feel smarter. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 15:29, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

== Reverting your own edits? ==

Hello. Why on earth did you revert all the valid edits you've recently made to all the dam articles? I don't see any reason to ruin those articles you had improved before. ] (]) 15:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
:See the conversation immediately above: I wanted to remove a category and forgot that I'd made the last bazillion contributions. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 15:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
::Yes, be careful with using rollback. It's really only for fighting vandalism. The good old "undo" button does the job. I've already some of your reversions but you might still want to have a look at those articles. ] (]) 15:29, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
:::Actually, self-reverts are permissible, but can lead to problems per above. I've tidied up after myself. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 15:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

== Hi Regarding deletion of Page Roadster diner ==

Hello you just speedily deleted the page I have created http://en.wikipedia.org/Roadster_diner :)
While writing the page I used the same structure used by another Lebanese restaurant chain http://en.wikipedia.org/Crepaway , since their page has not been deleted it seems weird that the entry which represents the other most famous lebanese diner chain is.

If you want me to rewrite the page again based on some other guidelines please just let me know.

Kindly let me know that you have responded to my request. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:57, 28 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:You wrote the article as an advertisement, not as an encyclopedia article. I'm not opposed to an article on the topic, but it must be strictly non-promotional. While the Crepaway article is tagged as being written like an advertisement, it's not nearly as promotional as the Roadster Diner article was. I would not use Crepaway as an example of a good article to emulate. Please write any new version in an appropriately non-promotional manner, please provide ] and] sources, and please review ] for issues on conflict of interest. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 22:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)


Thank you, I will try again :) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 11:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Yeay.me article/page ==

Hello,

I'd like to follow-up with you about recently added and deleted page, http://en.wikipedia.org/Yeay.me

My goal is to create a similar page as http://en.wikipedia.org/Blippy. Since it is my 1st wiki contribution I'm sure I missed some steps and it was deleted.

Would you please tell me what was the main reason of triggering deletion? Was it because it has too few information?
Also, is it possible to delete it completely so it won't show that deletion message? Until I'll put together a better content.

Thank you in advance.
] (]) 04:08, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Oct87

:There was no indication that the subject was notable. ] has been covered in major third-party media, conferring notability. See ] for information on notability guidelines for web content. You may delete the notice on your talk page, but please read it first, as it explains why the deletion took place. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 13:03, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

== WTC7 talk page revert ==

Whatever your interests in promoting falsehood are, I cannot help but not you claim to be an architect. Not a structural engineer. If you had real knowledge on the subject ({{rpa}}) you would ask questions that need to be asked, such as why the 9/11 commission report did not mention WTC7 at all, or why if there has never been a steel framed building collapse due to fire how did three buildings (that were engineered to prevent this from happening) fail on the same day. Might i mention again both WTC1 and 2 were DESIGNED TO TAKE THE IMPACT OF A 707, FULLY LADEN WITH FUEL. Neither of the planes that did hit the towers had full tanks of fuel, nor would the resulting inferno be hot enough to weaken the steel. There are so many discrepancies within the 'official' reports that it would be downright ignorance to not follow them up. If[REDACTED] is supposed to support factual information freedom, do your duty as a moderator and inquire... ] (]) 03:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
:'''Note''': Comment refactored with {{tl|rpa}}. --<span style="text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">] <sup>]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-3.5ex">]</sub></span> 03:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
::There are many forums on the Internet devoted to the Truther agenda; Misplaced Pages is not among them. Misplaced Pages is not an appropriate place to discuss conspiracy theories in general, except to the extent that these conspiracy theories are documented for their own sake. Misplaced Pages is not a place to right great wrongs, or to reveal information that is outside the mainstream of scholarly thought. Misplaced Pages does not publish original research, nor does it pursue or publish independent investigations. It is not my responsibility to pursue investigations: it ''is'' my responsibility to remove posts devoted to theorizing, as opposed to serious discussion of article improvement. I won't bother to correct the fallacious arguments you present: neither this page nor any other talkpage on Misplaced Pages is an appropriate forum, except to note that much of what you apparently believe has been shown to be untrue, and none of it is admissible in an encyclopedia based on mainstream sources. Resorting to personal attacks does not increase your credibility. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 04:22, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

== Page Deleted ==

The page I created called "Delaney's Dog Haus" was deleted by Phantomsteve on May 31, 2011 at 03:11 for "A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject (CSDH))" and I fixed it and added more information as I could about the company including references and saved it and at 03:24 on 31 May 2011 you deleted the page again for "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion", but I don't own this company nor am I involved with the company and there are many other restaurants that do the same thing as my articles did, but yet they haven't been deleted I request the page be restored. Please reply here and also on my talk page. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:38, 31 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:The article was obviously promotional from beginning to end, and was entirely unsuitable as an encyclopedia article. Whether or not it is your company is beside the point: Misplaced Pages is not a vehicle for press releases or promotion, whatever the source. "All hamburgers are hand-made and our french fries are seasoned with our own blend of seasoning. We are the only hotdog place around that delivers!!!" "Kevin even brought along Bill from New Jersey who has years of experience in the food services industry, so come on in and say hello!" "The price of the meal is $9.99 and comes with a drink." It was advertising, apart from the fact that it appears to be a non-notable business and could be (and was) speedy-deleted as no assertion of notability. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 03:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

== Some ass-hole deleted Karl Watsons page....He is the biggest black skater in the Bay Area ....Notability verified ==

Excuse me ....what about this posting fits criteria for speedy deletion? This Wiki that I have created is legitimate....about a notable person and I have provided references to prove his notability. Also it doesn't violate any copyrights. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Overlooking the personal attack in the section title (and in your edit summary when you posted the material), there was no credible '''assertion''' of notability. I read it all, twice, and just checked it again; all I got was that he is a prominent local skater who organizes youth events, eats wild fish, and seems like a decent guy. You need to tell us about his accomplishments as you would expect an encyclopedia article to be written. . I'm open to the possibility that Watson is notable, but the article did not explain how and reads like the obviously copied feature article it is, rather than as an encyclopedic biography. Please read ]; notability should be more than purely local and should be verifiable through multiple references in major media. There are lots of references to Watson on a Google search, but there are few in reliable Misplaced Pages-acceptable sources - see ] - and we don't keep bios that aren't reliably sourced. I've run across this problem with snowboarders, who tend not to be covered so much by mainstream media either. I think a credible bio could be created, but sourcing will be a challenge.
:The material was directly lifted from a copyrighted source, which quite clearly states at the bottom of the page "Copyright (WUN) Magazine. All Rights Reserved" Please stop posting cut/paste from copyrighted sources. Please note that you also appear to have a ] and should not be writing on this subject at all, or at least with greater care. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 02:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

==DYK for Fontenelle Dam==
{{tmbox
|style = notice
|small =
|image = ]
|text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ''... that the collapse of ] in 1976 was foreshadowed by a similar near-disastrous failure at ''']''' in 1965?'' You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and add it to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ].
}} ] (] '''·''' ]) 16:17, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

== What the Heck? ==

Dude, I'm trying to set up a theory of Government and then you come waltzing in with your technicalities. Back off! <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:09, 4 June 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Please redelete the page. <span style="background:silver;font-family:Kristen ITC;">]</span> 00:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

==Quick Question==
Acroterion, I am planning to edits and create a few pages on American architects and see from your Contributions and User Page that you have considerable experience in that area, besides being an architect. Can you tell me, based on WP preference for using Prose in pages, are pages about currently living architects supposed to be written entirely in prose, or, is it accepted that they can be part prose and part bulleted building lists (i.e., lists of major buildings designed by the architect with city, country, year completed). If there is a particular WP rule that applies to using lists for Architects, I would appreciate knowing about it, because I want to be sure that I am doing this correctly. Thank you in advance for your help. Cheers!] (]) 16:08, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
:It depends on who you ask. For my part, I would want to see a substantial section of prose, followed by a selective list of the architect's most prominent works. I think that works best for mist readers. When it's somebody really prominent or prolific, I'd go with all-prose and a separate "List of buildings designed by Architect X." That's what I did with ] and ], for instance. The only policy I know of is at ], but I'm sure there's other material discussing this that I'm not aware of. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 16:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

== Why Deleted? ==

Hi,

I recently started a page for a new company called ZangZing that was deleted. It's a company that was recently covered in the Wall Street Journal, Techcrunch and other places...

WSJ article - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703509104576329272101144568.html
Techcrunch article - http://zan.gy/kmLSMG

Thanks!

Joseph <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:41, 4 June 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:The article was deleted because it made no assertion of notability. The WSJ reference is useful, although it doesn't go into enough depth to be a very useful source, but multiple references of that kind will go a long way to establishing notability. I'd suggest that you work in a user subpage, such as ] and develop the article, including a credible assertion of notability backed up by references in third-party media. See ], ] and ] for additional guidance. '''<font face="Arial">] <small>]</small></font>''' 21:02, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXIII, May 2011 ==

{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| ]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">''']'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project News: '']
* Articles: '']
* Editorial: '']
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<span style="font-size: 85%;"><center>
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section ]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the ]. ] (]) 21:58, 4 June 2011 (UTC)</span></center>


An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ].
== Me thinks thou protest too much... ==


(].) --] (]) 07:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
No? You have no agenda here which causes you to attack my comments? You cannot claim "Agenda!" if you do not have an agenda of your own, or you cannot judge. Remember that there are no 'absolutes' save those that cloud the human mind and all human 'judgements' such as you are making are made on a relative basis. Your "Truth" versus my "Truth". Misplaced Pages strives to avoid just this sort of thing. You are propagating it. I am simply commenting on my view of the veracity of the article which on a factual level demonstrates only that Weizmann and the others had good reason to be familiar with these ideas and might well have incorporated them into a manifesto aimed at recruitment. No one, no human, makes 100% perfect decisions. So whether the Protocols are genuine or not, this article does nothing to dispel one or the other opinion and relies so much on what could be viewed as self-serving opinion that it does more to hurt than to help. It shold be rewritten. That is why my comments were in the COMMENTS and not in the ARTICLE. You have no right to censor my comments particularly when I give you solid references that you can read for yourself. When you have read the other side which is heavily suppressed albeit coming from an unimpeachable source that the zionists do, in fact, plan on ruling the world, you might take pause and reflect on all of the things you may have yet to learn about your little earth here and may hope to not learn the hard way. Again. Educate yourself. Then respond with censorship if you think my views 'extreme'. You, in fact, are part of the suppression mechanism.

Latest revision as of 23:20, 20 January 2025

Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
If you leave a message for me: I will respond here. Either add this page to your watchlist or ask me to notify you of a response on your talk page.

If I leave a message for you: Please respond on your talk page. I will add it to my watchlist, so you don't need to notify me, unless I don't respond when a response is expected.

This helps keep discussion easily readable and in one place.
Please leave a new message.
Archiving icon
Archives

Q2 2007 Q3 2007 Q4 2007 Q1 2008 Q2 2008 Q3 2008 4 2008 Q1 2009 Q2 2009 Q3 2009 Q4 2009 Q1 2010 Q2 2010 Q3 2010 Q4 2010 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Q1 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4_2016 Q1_2017 Q2_2017 Q3_2017 Q4_2017 Q1_2018 Q2_2018 Q3 2018 Q4 2018 Q1 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q1 2021 Q2 2021 Q3 2021 Q4 2021 Q1 2022 Q2 2022 Q3 2022 Q4 2022 Q1 2023 Q2 2023 Q3 2023 Q4 2023 Q1 2024 Q2 2024 Q3 2024 Q4 2024



Fixing your profile

Here is the newly edited version. Feel free to use it. " Auxiliary213 (talk) 15:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Just been blocked for abusing editing privileges. Doug Weller talk 15:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, no surprise. I was busy baking for friends who are coming for lunch, a much more rewarding exercise than trolling the noticeboards or dealing with them. Acroterion (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good, what are you baking? Doug Weller talk 16:20, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Just brownies, nothing complicated, but the kitchen smells great now. We're all going out for lunch and will come back here for dessert. Acroterion (talk) 16:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Love brownies, but to be honest, I can't make them as good as Ghirardelli does. Doug Weller talk 16:37, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
These are Ghirardelli, I've long since given up doing anything else. You can get them in the UK? Acroterion (talk) 16:59, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Yes/ Amazon. ebay but cheapest at Costco. Doug Weller talk 17:04, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2024).

Administrator changes

added Sennecaster
readded
removed

CheckUser changes

added
readded Worm That Turned
removed Ferret

[REDACTED] Oversight changes

added
readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

NMSU basketball

No idea how to put this gently, but the ongoings under Heiar and Moccia were serious and are common knowledge in the I-25 corridor. Three players sexually assaulted three other players and two student workers, and a UNM player was killed by a NMSU player. "Hazing" doesn't describe what happened at all. 67.209.213.65 (talk) 16:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

The references don't support your assertions. If you think it ought to be included, find explicit reliable sources. "Common knowledge" isn't admissible here, and the biographies of living persons policy applies. Don't report rumors or unsubstantiated assertions of serious criminal conduct. Acroterion (talk) 18:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but recent sources such as this and this are unambiguous, they use wordings like "sexual assault" and "sex abuse" for the happenings on the NMSU basketball team. KFIX and ESPN are mainstream news sources with no particular agenda. It's permitted to call a spade for what it is. 67.209.213.65 (talk) 20:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

To add to this: two of the men who were assaulted were paid 8 millions in restitution. If you can get that amount in a settlement you know the cSe had merit. 67.209.213.65 (talk) 20:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Then don't call it "rape." And we don't infer from sources that anything "has merit" in that manner from a civil proceeding, that doesn't establish criminal culpability, only that there was a settlement. Yes, bad things happened, but we can only report on what reliable sources explicitly state. Inference is of no use here; stick to the sources and don't embellish or interpret. Acroterion (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

The report from NM DOJ does not mince words. The executive summary on pg 3 uses words like "sexualized hazing" and "sexual assault", and on page 10 the DOJ is explicit in stating that Heiar was terminated for cause shortly after the abuse was reported to police. That Moccia was terminated for cause is not disputed, that fact is widely reported in the news. "Scandal" is too mild a word for what went on at the institution.

As far as criminal proceedings go, two of the three suspects have pled guilty, and the third one is currently at trial and is looking at 5 years of prison. The complaint from the State is for "Criminal Sexual Penetration", "Criminal Sexual Conduct" and "Conspiracy to Commit Criminal Sexual Conduct", it's not great.

(Aside: US criminal law is a mess, many actions that ought to fall under criminal law are instead brought as civil actions, most infamously police misconduct. The public prosecution needs to stay in the good graces of the police, so the injured party brings a civil action and then settles before the case gets to a jury. At some point the "non-admission of liability" clause ends up being not really meaningful. Someone suffered injury, and they are awarded much money, and we can't call it for what it is. Suspicious people will say that was the intention all along.) 206.206.141.101 (talk) 19:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

We call it exactly what reliable sources say it is. The problem with the edits this weekend was with amplification beyond what the sources said. There is no bar to stating the issues (in accordance with the due emphasis guideline, and remembering the requirements of the biographies of living persons policy); we just need to stick to the references. All I want you to do is to stick to what reliable secondary sources say in accordance with policy, and we can talk about the problems with the program. We just have to do it with care and accuracy; this is the #7 website in the world, and we have a responsibility to get it right. No editorializing. Acroterion (talk) 22:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Block of User:Kelly Club NZ

This user made one edit, the creation of a promotional userpage, and was reported to UAA. Seeing the report, I deleted the page, and made a choice as an administrator to warn rather than go for the no-warning block.I made this clear at UAA.

I'm curious as to why you thought it was appropriate to override my decision an hour later, when they had made no further edits? I believe my choice was within the bounds of administrative discretion and should not have been overridden without good reason. Beeblebrox 00:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

We have different ideas of what constitutes a promotional-only account with username issues, I guess, it looked pretty clear-cut to me. I didn't think of it as overriding you, please don't take it that way, and honestly I didn't check to see who might have deleted the page; we shouldn't have to go walking on eggshells around certain administrators. We've all had occasions where we've taken a more gentle or lenient approach, or abstained entirely, and had another admin take a different action. This is the nature of our distributed administration of this website. I have a less optimistic idea of what demands a promotional account is likely to impose on our volunteers than you do, I guess.
However, I am happy to reverse the block, as always, if another admin disagrees. While you may not think so, my overall approach to spammish accounts is pretty close to yours, and I believe I've made that clear in the RFC. I have different reservations about promotional usernames than you do, and it bothers me that we tend to act more harshly on accounts that at least are being more honest with us (like this one) than somebody with a throwaway username that's doing the exact same thing. I don't have a wise solution, except that the editing interface for user page creation might offer better guidance that WP isn’t like Facebook, and if you’re looking to expand your social media presence, you’re in the wrong place. Acroterion (talk) 02:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
To be clear, I don't think anyone need walk on eggshells around me, but I do feel that any admins decision to take a particular course of action shouldn't overriden without a compelling reason. I see blocks I wouldn't have made all the time, but I don't just go undoing them unless they are truly egregious.
I think the thought of some sort of caution or warning when creating a user page/sandbox is a good one, and not an idea I believe I've seen before. We clearly have an issue where lots of people every day think this is the place to come to "get the word out" and something like that could help curb it at least a little bit, although knowing how the software is we'd want to make sure it actually works on the mobile apps as well.
As I recall, the community has asked in the past for something similar when usernames are created, that being the obvious other facet of this issue, but I don't think we ever actually got it. Beeblebrox 06:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
An absence of action isn't easily discernable here, and given the way the various queues and happenstance work it's not always the case that a deletion without a block indicates some kind of forbearance. However, I would have figured that out if I'd looked at the talkpage; most of the time it's just a speedy deletion flag, but sometimes not, as in this case. Keep in mind that those who patrol the edit filters look at the edit filter detail output, which is usually more diagnostic than what might have been successfully saved.
However, it was my impression that you were not particularly concerned with spam username/spam actions, but rather an apparently good-faith username with spammish content who might be brought around to being a contributor, and userspace deletions. There may be a unicorn out there who registers a promotional name and posts promotional content, who might be persuaded to be a contributor, but I haven't encountered one yet. I've nursed promotional editors along, and can't say that I've had any successes. I've had better luck with vandals, who aren't financially or ideologically committed to vandalism. We've got a recent serial sockpuppeteer who is somehow trying to edit on behalf of the UAE Federal Tax Authority, who is an example of the more extreme sort, who has rejected patient advice and who presumably has been commissioned to establish an FTA presence on all platforms no matter what.
Spambots are another matter, and we should show no mercy there. They're prohibited by the ToU, and should be treated as LTA block evaders. They're tailored to superficially look like good-faith accounts, and they've been running as long as I've been here. They're much less of a problem than they used to be.They're instantly recognizable once you've seen a few, and I always tag the deletions and blocks with custom summaries: "spambot."
As I've pointed out, my practice, and that of most admins, is to delete and warn for the promotional content without an accompanying promotional username, but the usernames that represent organizations pose a general username policy issue apart from promotion; it would be more of a question whether to softblock or hardblock in those cases. I would generally softblock if there was no accompanying promotion, or more likely just wait and see what they do (which is a standard answer at UAA), since a lot of those accounts have second thoughts and never edit. I'm not actually sure how the 499 edit filter interacts, I think it logs only and doesn't warn. There are a lot of false or ambiguous positives with 499 (as I said at the RFC, about half can be ignored), perhaps a more narrowly-tailored filter might target a smaller subset with a warning, but that's outside my skillset to construct or even propose in much detail. Perhaps 499 could be tailored for a fairly general reminder to not be promotional and to remind that WP isn't social media. I'd prefer proaction over reaction, which is the current state of affairs. Acroterion (talk) 12:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Milot Avdyli

Acroterion (I'm also tagging Liz in this request as a draft deleter who is), can you undo Draft:Milot Avdyli because the player is expected to debut (after being transferred in this transfer window) at Vorskla Poltava in the Ukrainian Premier League which according to Misplaced Pages is a fully professional league, and I believe that the draft can serve as a kind of starting point for the development of the article before its debut, which after its debut will be concretized into a full article. BalkanianActuality (talk) 01:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

I'll wait for Liz, but as usual, I have no problem with undeleting these drafts so you can work on them. Let me know if you don't hear from her; weather depending, I may be away for a while tomorrow for some minor eye surgery. Acroterion (talk) 02:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Okay, if there's no reaction from Liz, then I'll let you know and wish you a speedy recovery. BalkanianActuality (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for returning the draft article! BalkanianActuality (talk) 00:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Gaismagorm (talk) 12:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Revdel request

Could I get a revdel for this please. Thank you. Tarlby 20:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

In general, pro forma racist vandalism isn't normally revdel'd, unless it concerns a specific individual or is particularly gross (i.e., "kill all ***). But they've earned themselves a week-long block and a place in my watchlist. Acroterion (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Got it 👍 Tarlby 20:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
An elaboration - the "grossly-insulting" modifier is important, as opposed to the obnoxious-racist-jackass-who'd-better-watch-their-damn-mouth-if-they-don't-want-to-spend-a-week-at-the-dentist stuff. Acroterion (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Okay, so I didn't make the request but I am a little confused. I was earlier told on a talk page to report an edit very similar to the one reported. Am I not supposed to request revdel these kind of stuff? Gaismagorm (talk) 20:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Well, going by the way I read the policy, it didn't rise to the level of grossness usually revdel'd. We get a lot of dumb nasty vandalism, and we don't need to scrub the histories of all of it; revdel should be employed somewhat sparingly. We remove things that can bring harm or express a desire to harm, are copyright violations, insult or degrade specific living individuals, are the products of sustained disruption campaigns. or reveal the identities of people who wish to remain anonymous. For stupid schoolboy vandalism like this, it can stay there as a monument to their ignorance. Your request above was similar to this one.in its level of obnoxious rather than gross. Other admins may have a somewhat lower threshold for removal from the history, but it has never been meant for all vandalism. There does seem to have been a trend to apply it more generally to ethnic slurs like this one, but it's not uiniversal. Acroterion (talk) 20:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 225, January 2025

Full front page of The Bugle Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nathalie Dupree, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hamilton, New Jersey.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

User talk:Acroterion: Difference between revisions Add topic