Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:55, 26 January 2009

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

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

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 7 days

White Brazilians

Hello...

I received your message about edit war. I understand that this continuous reversal of edits is nasty, but I don't think I am the main responsible for it. The changes I have made seem perfectly reasonable, and they do not constitute vandalism at all. The section I suppressed was terribly written (being about Demography by Cities, it listed a few very small towns, and did not have any content about the demography of Brazilian big cities). The other changes I made were either new material or corrections of imprecisions in the previous version (for instance, the previous version gave the impression that the French and the Dutch came to Brazil as immigrants in the XVI century, when they actually conquered parts of the country; it stated that White Brazilians are predominantly Catholic and Protestant, with a Jewish minority - White Brazilians are predominantly Catholic, with Protestant, non-religious, other Christian, Kardekist, and Afro-Brazilian minorities, and the Jewish minority is quite smaller than all those).

I tried to discuss the issue in the discussion page, but the other user systematically reverses my changes.

Thanks for your attention,

Donadio (talk) 01:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The user Donadio keep the edit-war even after your 3RRR advice. He keeps removing sourced informations in that article, arguing he finds them not necessary. However, the informations are sourced and follows Misplaced Pages's rules. Moreover, he keeps including unsourced and informations based on his personal opinion (such as this religion thing, which is also not sourced). Please, do not let that article be destroyed. Opinoso (talk) 14:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The user now removed information from another article . Opinoso (talk) 14:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello,

I'm sorry to disturb you again with this subject. This other person has sent the following message to my talk page:

Donadio, if you keep removing informations from this article and posting the "fact tag" in informations that already have a source, I will contact an administrator once again. Also, you are posting with this IP numbers (189.27.6.23, 189.27.19.95), witch are your sockpopets, which is also not allowed here (to use sockpopets is also a vandalism). Please, stop it. Opinoso (talk) 01:14, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

So, please let me explain what this is about.

First, I do not use sockpuppets, but I eventually do forget to login, and, when I am in the web from home, it sometimes happens that my login expires, so eventually my contributions are signed by my computer IP instead of "Donadio". I hope this is not a breach of policy; I certainly do not intend to evade responsibilities by doing it.

Second, the "fact tag" I have been placing. This person has linked to a supposed "source" to back his claims. But from what I read from that source, it does not corroborate the claims. Besides, the subject under discussion is Brazilian demography; the source in case is merely a commercial association (Câmara Italo-Brasileira de Comércio), that does not have any special authority regarding the subject. Moreover, this person's claims are contradicted by the official source for such matters, the Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE). I have tried to make a somewhat neutral edit, keeping his claim and his source, but adding the correct information and the IBGE as its source, but he has reverted the edit, alleging, as he uses to do, "vandalism".

In fact, he seems to behave as if he was the "owner" of that article, trying to avoid people who disagree with him from editing.

Could you please take a look on what is going on on that page, or refer me to someone that can do it?

Thanks,

Donadio (talk) 15:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

A thank you

Thank you for disabling the clock-by-default; I've now re-added Friendly (as a tickbox Gadget) and shall unwatch the related pages. If you'd like constructive feedback for any further Friendly-related future feature additions, then you are most welcome to drop me a note; and I can try to review the code and make any suggestions about it's likely impact or wider reception. Once again, many appreciations for your work on Friendly. —Sladen (talk) 18:52, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle as a Gadget

Really? Why wouldn't it? The gadget doesn't do anything differently, and javascript has no namespaces so Twinkle will still find the (global) TwinkleConfig set in the monobook.js (or won't override it with the defaults, whichever is executed first). Or am I mistaken? --Amalthea 19:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Says right on the gadget description: "When installed as a gadget, Twinkle uses the default settings only; to customize Twinkle you must install it the traditional way." Not sure if that's accurate or not, but my recommendation is always that if you want to customize Twinkle (or Friendly, for that matter) with additional configuration, you should install it into your monobook. Do some testing and find out for us! Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 20:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I just did, and it works. I'm going to invite Remember the dot over since he created the description at the time. Cheers, Amalthea 20:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Wait, it does work? As I recall, I have tried customizing Twinkle when installed as a gadget and it didn't work for me... I always just assumed it had something to do with the order scripts got executed in or something. 「ダイノガイ千？！」 12:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

It works for me. When I add TwinkleConfig.showRollbackLinks = ; to a script that is loaded by my monobook.js and look at the latest diff of some page, the rollback links disappear. If I remove it and refresh the page, they are back again.
The Twinkle scripts take care not to overwrite config options that have already been set, so the order of script execution should not affect it (except possibly options that are used in the onLoad hook). --Amalthea 16:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

This is good news, then... *goes off to add the twinkleclock back* 「ダイノガイ千？！」 21:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, sorry for all the confusion I've caused then. I've edited the description so that it no longer includes the bit about not being able to customize it. Happy Twinkling! —Remember the dot 22:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Cheers, Amalthea 22:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Friendly can also be customized even when installed as a gadget - I'm looking at the FriendlyClock right now, which I like better than the clock gadget. 「ダイノガイ千？！」 22:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

White Brazilian once again

Hello. The user Donadio, even after getting blocked, keeps removing sourced informations, changing informations without discussion and causing troubles in the article White Brazilian. He is now including "fact tags" after informations that already have sources, and also does original research. He is also using different IP numbers. Please, take a look. Opinoso (talk) 21:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

QuackGuru block

There's some discussion going on on ANI... Misplaced Pages:Ani#Doctor of Chiropractic. Also you should note on the arbcom enforcement page Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement as there were outstanding arbcom case findings related to him and the topic... Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the reminder! Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 14:55, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey there, this article is still causing problems. See Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Doctor_of_Chiropractic. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:31, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Friendly leaving an "undefined" value with sharedipedu

See . a new parameter for the template or something? –xeno (talk) 17:49, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Nope, looks like that was just a bug. Should be fixed now. Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 17:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

cheers, –xeno (talk) 18:08, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Article Question

Hi loeth, First let me say that I had to think about this for a couple days, but I figure I'll never know if I don't ask. My question(s) revolve around the Larry Sanger article. I don't want to jump on any bandwagon, kick anyone who's down, or stir up a shit-storm with anyone. I'm fairly new, and in response to an RfC, I responded to the article mentioned. Specifically, I ended up editing the Citizendium vs. Misplaced Pages section here, and each effort was reverted very quickly. I was attempting to make the section more NPOV, and the edit comments and talk page didn't make it clear (at least not to me) why my edits were rejected. I understand that a Sanger article may point out Misplaced Pages short-comings, but the section (in my eyes) after the Sanger quote appear(ed) to be stating fact, rather than a detractor's or independent editors opinion.

I did first go to the admin. who had contributed to the talk page, but when I saw that she was "semi-retired", I thought I might approach you. Again, I'm not trying to throw fat into the fire, I was just seeking some constructive advise about my edits. My edits were on January 15 and 16 I think. Thank You. Ched (talk) 02:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Your edits were reverted because they did not improve the article. In your first set, you linked to the project space. We don't do that. You altered the wording of WP:V, which was stated in the article as it is in the policy, and you changed wording that read better the way it was. In your subsequent edits, you attributed "quotes" to "independent editors" and added quotation marks around the bullet points, which were not quotes. QuackGuru reverted all of your edits. Probably would have been best to contact him with your concerns, or to ask on the article's talk page. If there are changes you think should be made, discuss them on Talk:Larry Sanger first. لennavecia 05:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)