Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:22, 3 October 2006

Welcome!

Hello, Billy Blythe, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question. Again, welcome!-Runcorn 20:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Mindy Kaling

Just to help with no dispute (hopefully), can you directly cite the specific articles in Dartmouth Magazine/Name Directory? I know you did it before. Thanks for continuing the search for knowledge! Williamnilly 20:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Our little edit collision on Top Tank

Do you know why it didn't warn me about an edit conflict? That is the second time in twenty minutes I have accidentally stepped on somebody else's more thorough edits, and it didn't even warn me I was doing so... ?!? --Jaysweet 16:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about my kind of snide comment on your user page, then. Just a mistake, I guess. Have a nice day. Billy Blythe 16:42, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I probably shouldn't say that on my User page anyway ;) I was feeling particularly persnickety when I wrote that. Just deleted it.

So no idea why it didn't warn me about an edit conflict??? When I first clicked "Edit", your speedy-delete tag wasn't there yet, and when I clicked "Submit changes" it didn't warn me at all... What gives? --Jaysweet 16:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, but it's no big deal. Billy Blythe 16:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh well... I just wish I knew what happened so that I could avoid it in the future. It's really embarassing when somebody makes a better edit than me, faster than me, and I end up blowing away their changes! ;D Ce la vie, I guess. Have a good one!! --Jaysweet 17:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Not sure if you are interested at all... but incidentally I did figure out what happened the other day. I was looking at the edit history of the article right before I went to add the prod tag, and rather than clicking the "Article" tab, I clicked on the most recent revision in the edit history. The WikiMedia software parsed this as if I was trying to initiate a revert, in which case you don't get edit collision warnings. D'oh! :) --Jaysweet 01:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

superman returns prod

We had JUST forked it off of the main article and were in the process of building it up. rootology (T) 17:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Have a smile

Runcorn has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

--Runcorn 21:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

LBofill

Image:LBofill.jpg would probably be best suited to the promoposter fair use template. --David Mestel 21:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Catullus 16

I appreciate you defending Catullus against deletion, but the page is supposed to be a redirect per Wikiproject Catullus (http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Catullus). The poem is not notable enough to have its own article, and we are trying to minimize the numbers of simple translation articles. Thanks, Sophy's Duckling 23:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I completely disagree. If Every Rose Has Its Thorn is notable enough for its own article, Catullus 16 certainly is. I will defend it to the end. Billy Blythe 23:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

If you're going to insist on including Catullus 16, could you please do so in the correct format, found at Catullus 1? It would also be really good if you cited sources. Also, please join the wikiproject catullus. Sophy's Duckling 00:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm responding here after being flamed for removing the gangster rap version of Catullus 16. It was certainly rude of me to describe it as "retarded and offensive", and I should have created a profile before changing it; however I stand by the change - the version you posted is irrelevant to the poem, and frankly it's bad rap. You evidently have expertise in Latin, and I certainly appreciate your translating Catullus 16 for us, and agree with you that it's an important enough poem to warrant its own article, but the rap translation is nothing if not stupid. I also take issue with your suggestion that I have "a history of making offensive article edit summaries." I don't think I do, and would appreciate it if you would point up other changes that I've made that you disagree with. User:Alexwoods

You insult me once, and then come to my talk page and insult me again? If you think the rap was so bad, write a better one. I've never heard a better gangster rap version of a Catullus poem. Does one exist? I seriously doubt it. As for your other issues, I'm not interested in investigating you. Somebody else will let you know about your civility issues, I'm sure. Billy Blythe 05:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Does your English translation of Catullus belong on Misplaced Pages? I think it probably does. I certainly found it to be an edifying read. Does your ridiculous, tacky, and frankly embarassingly bad translation of same poem into a vernacular that you do not understand belong in an encylcopedia? No, it belongs on your homepage, if anywhere. Unless you have some kind of legitimate criticism of me to make, I'm not interested in discussing this further, and I'm sure that other users, or your high school teachers, are more willing and better situated, to help you develop into a more mature person. I stand by my deletion of your "gangster rap" version of Catullus 16. Alexwoods

In re Catullus

I see I didn'te xplain myself properly. You see, having any translations of Catullus on[REDACTED] is really, really pushing the envelope on Wiki policy...and I just got out of a rather heated debate/sometimes argument and just barely managed to keep *some* of the translations on wikipedia. Hence the insistence on using the table and citations--the[REDACTED] community, so quick to write detailed articles on Pokemon characters, has a sadly hostile view towards the Carmina (at least translations and uncited material concerning them), and I don't want anything to jeopardize what has been allowed. Sophy's Duckling 05:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Uh oh

I wrote the above before I saw what you did to the article. I should let you know that this NOT the rules of Wikiproject Catullus you are violating; you are violating the ones regarding uncited material, original sources, maybe original research (although I'd defend you in a flame war against that one, having added so many of my own translations), and you are dangerously close to violation of 3RR. You also are not assuming good faith or being civil in calling me a bully. I will once again revert it and point you to Catullus 1's table (which I will reproduce here; just delete the third line if you don't want to do the scansion):

|- |1 ||cui dono lepidum novum libellum ||To whom do I give this nice new little papyrus roll ||cuī dōnō lĕpĭdūm nŏvūm lĭbēllŭm

|- |2 ||arida modo pumice expolitum ||Just now smoothed with dry pumice? ||ārĭdā mŏdŏ pūmĭce ēxpŏlītŭm

|- |3 ||Corneli tibi namque tu solebas ||To you, Cornelius: For you were accustomed ||Cōrnēlī tĭbĭ nāmquĕ tū sŏlēbās

|- |4 ||meas esse aliquid putare nugas ||To considering my trifles to amount to something ||mĕās ēsse ălĭquīd pŭtārĕ nūgās

|- |5 ||iam tum cum ausus es unus Italorum ||Already at that time, when you alone of the Italians dared ||iām tūm cum aūsŭs ĕs ūnŭs Ītălōrŭm

|- |6 ||omne aevum tribus explicare cartis ||To unroll every age in three papyrus rolls, ||ōmne aēvūm trĭbŭs ēxplĭcārĕ cārtīs

|- |7 ||doctis Iuppiter et laboriosis ||Filled with learning (by Jupiter!) and filled with labor. ||dōctīs Iūppĭtĕr ēt lăbōrĭōsīs

|- |8 ||quare habe tibi quidquid hoc libelli ||For this reason have for yourself whatever this is of a little papyrus roll, ||quāre hăbē tĭbĭ quīdquĭd hōc lĭbēllī

|- |9 ||qualecumque quod o patrona virgo ||Such as it is; let it, O patron maiden, ||quālĕcūmquĕ quŏd ō pătrōnă vīrgō

|- |10 ||plus uno maneat perenne saeclo ||Remain enduring for more than one age. ||plūs ūnō mănĕāt pĕrēnnĕ saēclō |}

Thank you. Sophy's Duckling 05:42, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay! I'm done with Catullus! Leave me alone!

For goodness' sake give me some peace. I'm through with that stuff. Billy Blythe 06:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Your inclusion of the translation may not have been appropriate, but was done in good faith as far as I can see. I've handed out a warning to be civil to you. Just ignore any further personal attacks and let me or another admin know. Metamagician3000 14:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Unacceptable comments

M.Snow's comment that the article looked like 'stalking' may not have been appropriate. I don't know quite what he meant by it - perhaps you should have asked him. Assuming good faith, he may have been referring to the appearance of the article, rather than to the author's motivations. I really don't know. But I can see how it could be interpreted as a personal attack, and I can see how it might upset you. The remedy is to discuss it civilly, or ask independent people to take a look at it.

However, these comments are quite unacceptable in any context. They are, in any reasonable reading, personal attacks, and they verge on very threatening behaviour. Do not personalise disputes. I am very tempted to block you for a very long time. However, given the temperature here, and given that Snow is on wikibreak, I will see whether you can calm down without being blocked. Consider this a first, final, and very lenient warning.--Doc 08:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar. :) Sophy's Duckling 01:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk

The talk on your talk page wasn't visible. If you've finished with the talk, then archive it, but it should be easily accessible still. Tyrenius 23:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Billy Blythe 23:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

List of insular languages

Hi, I'm afraid I don't quite see the CSD applying there - the article does have some encyclopedic content (languages with the most speakers), and lists are not automatically CSD A3 candidates. As it already is at AfD, let's just wait the AfD out, no harm done. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

There's no reason to waste time and resources to let this go on in AfD. I strongly dispute your ruling, and I want a second opinion from another admin. I've seen you do this before, because I remember that pic with your sloppy long hair. Billy Blythe 12:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Uhhh, well... 1) I'm not an admin, 2) what I did wasn't a ruling, 3) I haven't often done that before, 4) the guy with the sloppy long hair isn't me, 5) feel free to add a !vote for "speedy delete" to the AfD discussion, and see if any admin follows it, 6) it's really not much use squabbling over, because the page is very likely going to be deleted anyway, 7) it's just my sense of following due process. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I, on the other hand, am an admin, and I'd like you to know, Billy, that your remark above was uncivil, please restrict yourself to the issues and not personalities. Guy 14:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I wasn't offended, just amused - the only thing that irritated me is that, while it was you who wanted to avoid waste of "time and resources", it was also you who ended up seemingly stirring up all the fuss, when really all you'd have had to do to get the desired result was to sit still and wait for things to run their course. But other than that, no harm has been done, so I suggest we just forget about it all. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I didn't slap a bloody great warning template on, it was not a personal attack, it was just a mild rebuke for a thoughtless choice of words. Billy needs to be a bit more careful, is all. I guess that, like me, you can take a certain amount of robust debate in your stride, but there are some delicate flowers out there. If I thought Billy was being malicious I'd have been a lot more assertive. Guy 16:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, sorry Guy, just in case that wasn't clear, the "you" in my post above was directed at Billy, not you. Somehow this affair has a tendency of going all into the wrong directions, it seems... ;-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I understood that> Billy was apparently upset at my comment, see my Talk and his user page. Guy 17:34, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

List of airports in the Boston area

I agree that "Boston area airports" is a snazzier title, but I've moved the page back for consistency with all the other articles listing local airports. See Category:Local airport lists for a long list of articles with titles in the format "List of airports in the XXX area". David 01:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Your Username

Hi there, thanks for your note and I appreciate your openness to learning about the policies and process of Misplaced Pages. May I also point out in that spirit that you should consider changing your user name as it the same as the childhood name of Bill Clinton, and so is in violation of WP:USERNAME. You can read about this policy and how to change your name here: Misplaced Pages:Username#Inappropriate_usernames. If this can be proved to be your actual real life name, then a compromise solution can be worked out. regards, Bwithh 15:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

He was adopted shortly and achieved fame as Bill Clinton. There's no confusion as I see it under the policy. Most people don't even know his original name. Billy Blythe 15:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

He didn't change his name until he was a teenager. And the birth name is in all his official biographies like this one, and is commonly used as his name in a derogatory way in right-wing discussions. Bwithh 18:57, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, hell, it sounds like pistols at sunup then, Hoss! Billy Blythe 19:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Trolling (again)

Keep your trolling and moralizing off my Talk page. Surely just as the people who edit the article on Rape do not condone nor approve of said act, I neither necessarily approve of the acts/people/events/etc that I edit on Misplaced Pages. You should find more constructive things to do with your time than look down your nose at other editors and their choice of articles to edit. — Linnwood 21:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

The problem, laddie, is that you think you own that article. Billy Blythe 22:21, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Eleemosynary

I strongly advise you to leave Eleemosynary alone. Your past comments to this user have been intemperate and uncivil. Quite wat good you expect to achieve by goading them about calling the cops is unclear to me. Guy 21:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Considering what that user has said to me, I've been rather kind. My aim in "goading" is to make this user "put up or shut up." It works better than blocks do. Billy Blythe 22:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Not really, no. Blocks actively prevent further abuse. Getting drawn into a battle will only get you blocked as well. Guy 13:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

You've been blocked for one day for "considerable personal attacks, incivility over a considerable period of time". The block lengths will double each time if you continue as you have been. JesseW, the juggling janitor 21:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

That wasn't a prudent decision. Billy Blythe 22:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Your previous history with Misplaced Pages

Hi! I notice that your early edits on Misplaced Pages are unusually adept. Could you tell me more about your history editing Misplaced Pages before starting this account? Thanks, William Pietri 11:27, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Not without my lawyer. At quick glance, you seem like an investigator for Misplaced Pages, official, or self-appointed. I don't want no trouble, man. End of story. Billy Blythe 17:04, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

An inappropriate comment. William is renowned for his assumption of good faith, and asked a perfectly reasonable question. You do not necessarily have to name your previous accounts, if any, but it would not compromise you to say if, for example, you are a long-term anonymous contributor, or you previously used another account but chose to switch for some stated good reason. Genuinely new editors who wade into project space in the first days of editing are vanishingly rare, and this does tend to invite suspicion which it would not hurt you to allay. Guy 17:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I said I don't want no trouble. Billy Blythe 17:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not an investigator of any sort. I was trying to figure out how to weight some of your comments in other contexts, and looking at your contribution history is a good way to do that. Yours is certainly unusual, and started out with a number of playful edits. They were also uncommonly skilled, which made me curious. Your reaction here certainly brings Proverbs 28:1 to mind, but as Guy points out there are other reasonable explanations. William Pietri 20:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Trolling (3 time is not the charm)

I am going to ask you one last time to please keep your trolling off my talk page. — Linnwood 18:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

The answer you seek is "No." It wasn't trolling. It's a serious question with serious legal ramifications. Billy Blythe 19:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

It looks a lot like trolling. Legal ramifications? Please. Suggesting that people should treat others as children, just in case they may be children is absurd. -- Ec5618 19:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Who on earth are you? Linnwood's dad? How's it goin', Mr. Miller? Are you putting your two cents in now? Accusations of trolling are cheap. Action is far dearer. If you want to talk dirty to a possible minor, be my guest. Billy Blythe 19:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

If this isn't trolling, then the alternative explanations are even more disappointing. It's certainly a violation of WP:CIVIL. I think you're smart enough to know why this behavior is inappropriate. If you honestly can't come to grips with it and have sincere questions, don't hesitate to ask. And if you have serious questions for Linnwood in the future, I'd recommend you run them by another editor, as Linnwood would be perfectly justified in opening an RFC about your recent behavior. William Pietri 20:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for violating Misplaced Pages policy by trolling and personal attacks. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org. .

This edit was completely unacceptable. This block is for 48 hours. Guy 20:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC)