Misplaced Pages

User talk:TigerShark: 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 04:22, 24 November 2013 editTParis (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators30,364 edits →Joefromrandb's block: I'll give TigerShark some time, it's only been a few hours, he's probably hit the sack for the night.--~~~~← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:26, 18 January 2025 edit undoTigerShark (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators17,661 edits →Talk page access for 217.180.232.54: ReplyTag: Reply 
(230 intermediate revisions by 58 users not shown)
Line 6: Line 6:
:'''2009 - ''' ] :'''2009 - ''' ]
:'''2011 - ''' ] :'''2011 - ''' ]
:'''2015 - ''' ]
:'''2021 - ''' ]
:'''2023 - ''' ]


== Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of artists who have recorded "Jingle Bells"‎ ==


==****** Please place new discussions below this line ******==
Hi, you have just closed this minutes ago as keep, no concensus. As there were several policies/guidelines quoted for the reason for delete/merge and no reason or cause volunteered for why it should be kept I am surprised at your interpretation of the discussion. Surely the weight of argument was firmly against retention? What should be the next step, do I have to list again for deletion? Feel free to answer here or on my talkpage, as you wish. Cheers. --] (]) 10:10, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Scott Haze's birthday is incorrect. Please remove it from his page. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 22:49, 21 June 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== help me ==
== ] ==


hey help for protect my user page from anonymous edits. thanks ] (]) 17:15, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
I wondered if you could possibly explain your reasoning behind closing this AfD as '''Keep (no consensus)'''? From a layman's perspective, I thought that the reasoning behind the delete arguments was made solidly and reflected community consensus, whereas the 2 weak keeps and the creator's perspectives were far less convincing.
I very much appreciate you taking the time to read this. ]<font color="green">]</font>] 22:50, 18 December 2011 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==
== re: deletion/Gummi (software) ==


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
Hey.
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Regarding your decision to delete ] based on the discussion ], I was wondering:


If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
It seems the reason to delete was based on the (admittedly relevant) argument that proof of notability via 3rd party sources was lacking. However, several other articles on (La)tex editors, for example ] don't provide 3rd party sources either, and from a quick Google search it seems that Kile and Gummi are at least comparable in their popularity.


</div>
It's too bad I missed the chance to participate in the deletion discussion, but it seems to me establishing notability for Gummi shouldn't be too difficult, as long as the same criteria for notability are applied as to the other editors.
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1187131902 -->


== Invitation to participate in a research ==
What I'm trying to say: doing a search for Kile or Lyx (a very popular editor that I think definitely deserves an article), it is difficult to find non-blog sources to establish notability. But if blogs are included as reason to establish notability, I don't see how Gummi can be considered non-notable.


Hello,
-- ] (]) 13:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this ''''''.


You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
Thanks for your answer on my user page. I'm not exactly an expert editor, but I am more or less familiar with the requirements outlined by ]. The argument I wanted to make above was not phrased very clearly, so I'll try to paraphrase:
I understand that, in general, blogs are not considered reliable 3rd party sources. However, in the context of software articles, there seems to be a de facto understanding that blogs and other less-than-completely-reliable sources, such as gauging the Internet /can/ indeed be used to establish notability. I proceeded to give an example: one of the most popular (Latex based) document processors for Linux, ]. I argue that it is unlikely that anyone would seriously question the notability of Lyx and propose deletion of the article (simply because its influence and spread is so self-evident on the Internet), but trying to find reliable, non-blog sources will be, even in this case, rather difficult. In other words: I can try to establish notabilty for Gummi, but if the 'no blogs' requirement is to be taken strictly, I will fail to do so -- but then a significant number of articles about open-source software would fail that test as well, simply because their notability is mainly manifested on the Internet, and can not really be gauged by looking at more traditional sources. Please note that I am not suggesting to redefine Misplaced Pages's notability definition, but just trying to put into words what seems to be the de facto notability standard for many (open source) software articles.


The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] .
-- ] (]) 17:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
== Closure of Runtry ==
I modified your closure of ] like . If you wish to respond, please do so here. ] 16:29, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
:Hi. Thanks very much for doing that. I've done the same thing a couple of other times recently, but have caught them myself. Thanks again for picking it up this time. ] (]) 17:12, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


Kind Regards,
== AfD closes ==


]
Not sure if you're using a script to close AfD's, but you forgot to remove the {{tl|REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD}} template when you closed a few recent AfD's (] ]), which keeps them in ] inappropriately. ]&nbsp;<sup><small>]</small></sup> 04:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
:Hi. Thanks for letting me know. I'm not using a script BTW. Thanks again. ] (]) 11:13, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
== ] ==
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins&oldid=27650221 -->
Hi, I read through the recent discussion about the reasons to delete this page but I wanted to point out reasons that Dr. Kahn does satisfy the requirements for being an important academic, which goes beyond editing Green Theory & Praxis.
1) He is the primary author (co-listed with Douglas Kellner) of a 2004 essay that is the most cited article in the world on how developments in New Media (including Misplaced Pages) potentially represent a democratic awakening and oppositional potential that will lead to the rise of social movements and political revolution.
2) He founded an important field within education called Ecopedagogy and is listed alongside notable personages such as bell hooks in the definitive reader for the field of Critical Pedagogy of education. To this end, he is considered a global leader and is regularly invited to speak and lecture internationally as the founder of this field.
3) He is a founder of the field of Critical Animal Studies and a founder of the Institute for Critical Animal Studies, which is a burgeoning global field of studies and of high reputation. It also has a[REDACTED] page.
4) He is also cited within Misplaced Pages in the David Icke page as a leading scholar of Icke's highly popular conspiracy philosophy.
5) His previous blog, Vegan Blog: The (Eco)Logical Weblog is listed by CSPAN has one of their Top 100 blogs of note on their website.
My understanding is that he would satisfy the requirements of an academic for being listed in Misplaced Pages for point 1 alone. Considering his unique achievements and widely regarded publications in numerous areas, it seems to me that the recent discussion by editors to delete his page did not fairly understand or consider these points. I would ask that the deletion be reconsidered for these reasons. Thanks. (Sorry for any etiquette errors here; I'm not a power user.) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:24, 31 December 2011‎ (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:Hi. Thanks for your note. If you feel strongly that the subject of the article can meet Misplaced Pages's notability criteria (see ]) then I would be happy to userfy the page for you, so that you can work on it (see ]), before re-submitting it. Let me know if that is something that you'd like to do. Alternatively, you could consider raising the issue at ]. Cheers ] (]) 13:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
==Soar into the Sun==
BY --] (]) 02:32, 29 January 2012 (UTC)


== Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research ==
== MSU Interview ==


Hello,
Dear TigerShark,


I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ].
My name is Jonathan Obar ], I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and


Take the survey ''''''.
Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's


Kind Regards,
Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we


]
teach students about becoming Misplaced Pages administrators. Not a lot is known about your community,


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 -->


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
[[Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_82#Learn_to_be_a_Wikipedia_Administrator_-
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
_New_class_at_MSU|HERE]], where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training,


</div>
motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 -->


== Continous vandalism of .NET by 78.190.58.136 ==
of our students.


Hiya! I'm quite new to contributing to Misplaced Pages, so I'm not sure if this is the right place to point this out, but given that you've given a warning to this user for engaging in an edit war on .NET before, I'm just giving you a heads-up that they're continuing their behavior. I don't think .NET being open-source is somehow up for debate (I would be happy to debate it, if it is, though!), and I do believe the edits are in bad faith, so I think there should be ''something'' done about this. ] (]) 00:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)


:Thanks for letting me know. I have blocked them for a week from the article and left a note on their talk page. 00:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC) ] (]) 00:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
So a few things about the interviews:
* Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
* Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of


== Talk page access for 217.180.232.54 ==
communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
* All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will


Hi ], thanks for blocking them. It seems however that they are abusing their talk page (). Do you mind revoking their access? ] (]) 16:01, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
* All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an


:Hi ]. Thanks for letting me know. They are making a number of silly edits to their talk page, but I would be inclined to let them keep their ability to edit it, unless they make any seriously problematic edits. Hopefully they will get bored pretty quickly, if they don't get any further attention. ] (]) 17:12, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
::Are you sure? Since in the meantime they've made this edit , which is unsourced and a violation of ] (which they have done repeatedly). ] (]) 17:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
* The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics
:::Thanks. Yes that's a BLP violation although I would suggest that it is on the lower end, because it's only on their talk page, and is just silly abuse rather than a claim that would likely to be taken seriously. I'd generally rather not block the talk page of a blocked user, but would be happy to if they made more problematic edits. ] (]) 17:26, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have

been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak

with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I

will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your

name ] instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be

more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --] (]) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --] (]) 21:48, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

== Happy Adminship Anniversary ==

<div style="align: upperright; padding: 1em; border: solid 3px #2B547E; background-color: #E6E6FA;">] Wishing <b>]</b> a very '''happy adminship anniversary''' on behalf of the ''']'''! ] <sup><font color="#E3A857">]</font></sup><sub><font color="#008000">]</font></sub> 00:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)</div>

== A few more small van Persie edits ==

Hey mate. First off thank you for editing the van Persie page. Its great to see that Arsenal name off, I could not handle that anymore. Anyway I just have a few requests (if you dont mind, sorry). At the bottom there is a sporting positions table for Arsenal captain. It still says van Persie 2011–present when really it should be 2011–2012. And on the right box it should say that he was succeeded by ]. That is all. Cheers. --] (]) 12:05, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

== Atlantis of the Sands ==
I appreciate your input on this article. I have amended it by adding a reference but if you have any further concerns, I would be happy to discuss them with you, thanks. ] (]) 06:03, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
: Thanks for getting in touch, and I had a look at the source you provided. I think that the "punishment by god" statement in the article could be interpreted as suggesting one of two things:
#<b>That the city might actually have been destroyed by god, or
#That religious texts say that it was destroyed by god and/or that some current day believers believe that</b>
:At the moment, I think it reads as the first interpretation, and I think it should probably be written to suggest the second interpretation instead. I think that the article ] covers the latter interpretation quite well, and perhaps we need something like that in the article.
:In other words, I don't think that the article should actually suggest that it was destroyed by god (and I think that we would struggle to find a reliable source to back that up), but that it should instead make it clear that religious texts and, perhaps, current believers, suggest that it was destroyed by god.

:It would be good to hear your thoughts on the above. ] (]) 13:58, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

::Thanks for your constructive comments. I did consider point 1 but felt that the word "legendary" dealt with it. I guess "legendary" could be moved into the first sentence, e.g. "legendary lost city". The challenge with an article like this is to tread a fine line between theories, legends, beliefs and the actual search for Ubar. Similar articles have quickly descended into whackiness. As this is the introductory paragraph, I don't think there's any need to expand on the religious aspect here, but I'll have another look at the body of the article. ] (]) 15:13, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]

The article ] has been ]&#32; because of the following concern:
:'''Tragic but ].'''

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be ].

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] 16:22, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ].

The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> ] 16:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

== ? ==

Hello, I reported Official.theboldandthebeautiful and you deny the reportation. Therefore, I would like a more profound/depth explanation on why this user is not blocked. &nbsp;—&nbsp;] (], ]) 11:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
:Hi. You reported the account at ] which is only for obvious incidents of vandalism or spamming. The edits from the account do not seem to fall into those categories. I believe that you have also requested a block on the basis of username. You may also want to consider whether the account's actions may be against the ] restrictions. ] (]) 11:40, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

== Facts.people / Official.theboldandthebeautiful ==

Thank you for your help with this user and their sockpuppets. However, shouldn't we also block the first account, given that it's likely they're going to return and just continue their edits once more? ''']''' ] 14:13, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
:{{ping|TigerShark}} Okay. Thank you! I just know that they will not stop until their point is across. It's disappointing, especially given their warnings and their clean inability to stop with the potential of ] and ] action. ''']''' ] 14:20, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

== Vandalism ==

You have just blocked {{vandal|Runcs under bus}} for one week. This account is a sock of ], and as such should be indefinitely blocked. Could you do this, so that the vandal cannot return to this account next week. <span style="font-family: Papyrus">] (])</span> 14:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
:Done. Thanks for letting me know. ] (]) 14:39, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks. <span style="font-family: Papyrus">] (])</span> 14:59, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

== 68.97.40.112 ==

I noticed you blocked {{userip|68.97.40.112}} indefinitely. Since it's an IP, can you reduce it to 1 year, in case it's assigned to someone else at a later time? ] (]) 16:22, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

== Chinese POV-pushing on ] ==

Hello. I noticed that you PC-protected the article, and so did the POV-pusher from Nanjing, China, since he tried to remove the protection template (). FYI the Nanjing IP is '''not''' a new good faith editor but an editor with a long history of Mainland Chinese POV-pushing on multiple articles, which is why I reverted him on ], just like I reverted him on ] just minutes earlier. A POV-pusher who never engages in discussions or consensus building but is only interested in getting his preferred version of things into whatever article he is currently attacking. Which is why semi-protection would be a better choice than pending changes. And there's a precedent for semi-protection on an article he attacked in May of this year, ], where semi-protecting the article for a month made him leave it alone.

And there's no doubt whatsoever about the editor on that article in May being the same editor as on ]. He has used four different IPs ({{IP|117.90.158.246}}, {{IP|121.232.240.17}}, {{IP|180.118.123.79}}, {{IP|117.90.240.73}}) while editing "List of tallest buildings...", while the IP used in May on ] was ({{IP|117.90.241.213}}). Which fits right in with two of the IPs he has used now, and the ] is made even louder if you compare made by one of the current IPs only minutes before attacking the current article, and , an edit that was repeatedly made by the IP in May, with both IPs among other things systematically changing every mention of "Republic of China" in the article to "Republic of China (Taiwan)", the term used in Mainland China. So I suggest that you change the protection from PC for a month to semi for a month, '''and''' revert his latest systematic changes of "Hong Kong" to "China", and equally systematic change of the flag of Hong Kong to the flag of PRC, on "List of tallest buildings...", because those edits are against the standard used on hundreds of articles here on en-WP. ] ] 18:53, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
*TigerShark, I think you accidentally hit "indefinite" . Thanks, ] (]) 03:39, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

== Joefromrandb's block ==

So I'm not sure this block is deserved. Hear me out a sec. I genuinely hate the guy, I think he's a dick of the highest order and he knows that's how I feel. That said, I think the editors at ] and the editor reverting him mistakenly believes his comments about inhuman and disgusting are about the subject's transgender status while Joefromrandb is actually reflecting on the subject's charges for child porn. He says he can't outright say such because the charges were dropped because of a mistake on the prosecutor's part that resulted in the subject not being convicted. So it's be a BLP violation to say "subject is a pedophile" because there was no conviction. That has nothing to do with the subject's status as a trans and so the revert of Joe's edit citing BLP is actually compliant with BLP. Joe pretty much confirms my assumptions in where he calls the subject a predator. The editor reverting him is failing to AGF and mistakenly citing the BLP exemption to 3RR. You blocked the wrong guy.--v/r - ]] 01:10, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
::Perhaps a brief comment might be helpful. The penultimate sentence of the Misplaced Pages BLP is this: "Fox News reported that according to Sax, Reich's 30 followers were also acting as recruiters for this cult and that Speigel 'said she was certain that he was '''''living as a woman in order to get close to little girls''''''" (emphasis added).
::The deleted statement by Joe was this: "While ] prevents me from spelling it out in detail, suffice it to say that this so-called 'gender change' was done for one of the most disgusting reasons humanly imaginable." Maybe it would have been better if Joe had included the word "allegedly" or something like that, but Misplaced Pages has to pass some kind of judgment on the credibility of this matter in order to decide what pronouns to use in the article, what title to use on the article, et cetera. So, I'm not sure the word "allegedly" was necessary here. Certainly Joe took great care not to spell out the allegation, and so I hope you'll re-think the block.] (]) 03:29, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
::*{{U|TParis}}, I'm not going to overturn this block, but if you wish to bring this up at AN for a review (if TigerShark does not wish to reconsider), you have my support. ] (]) 04:16, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
:::I'll give TigerShark some time, it's only been a few hours, he's probably hit the sack for the night.--v/r - ]] 04:22, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:26, 18 January 2025

Archives:

2005 - 17th April
2006 - 4th April - 22nd May - 11th June - 23rd June - 15th July
2007 - 3rd February - 10th March - 31st August - 8th September - 7th November
2008 - 14th February - 4th May - 10th October
2009 - 16th May
2011 - 15th December
2015 - 12th May
2021 - 19th April
2023 - 28th May


****** Please place new discussions below this line ******

Scott Haze's birthday is incorrect. Please remove it from his page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.208.5.129 (talk) 22:49, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

help me

hey help for protect my user page from anonymous edits. thanks Jhonblvk (talk) 17:15, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Continous vandalism of .NET by 78.190.58.136

Hiya! I'm quite new to contributing to Misplaced Pages, so I'm not sure if this is the right place to point this out, but given that you've given a warning to this user for engaging in an edit war on .NET before, I'm just giving you a heads-up that they're continuing their behavior. I don't think .NET being open-source is somehow up for debate (I would be happy to debate it, if it is, though!), and I do believe the edits are in bad faith, so I think there should be something done about this. Ascpixi (talk) 00:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have blocked them for a week from the article and left a note on their talk page. 00:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC) TigerShark (talk) 00:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Talk page access for 217.180.232.54

Hi User:TigerShark, thanks for blocking them. It seems however that they are abusing their talk page (). Do you mind revoking their access? Tenshi! (Talk page) 16:01, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi User:TenshiSWR. Thanks for letting me know. They are making a number of silly edits to their talk page, but I would be inclined to let them keep their ability to edit it, unless they make any seriously problematic edits. Hopefully they will get bored pretty quickly, if they don't get any further attention. TigerShark (talk) 17:12, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Are you sure? Since in the meantime they've made this edit , which is unsourced and a violation of WP:BLP (which they have done repeatedly). Tenshi! (Talk page) 17:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks. Yes that's a BLP violation although I would suggest that it is on the lower end, because it's only on their talk page, and is just silly abuse rather than a claim that would likely to be taken seriously. I'd generally rather not block the talk page of a blocked user, but would be happy to if they made more problematic edits. TigerShark (talk) 17:26, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
User talk:TigerShark: Difference between revisions Add topic