Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:57, 28 February 2007

Welcome!

Hello, Steve Dufour, 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 need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Keep up the good work with Burbank!--ragesoss 23:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Muir and Thoreau

Hi, The rewrite of the first paragraph of Muir was very well done. Is Thoreau within your scope? The first paragraph there could use some help. It's beyond me. Thanks KAM 23:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Peace (rose)

Hi Steve - just to let you know I've moved your para on this out of rose to its own page Peace (rose), it is sufficiently noteworthy to have its own page. Also expanded a little on details. - MPF 00:24, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey! I see what you wrote, has been turned into it's own article. Very nice! :) --HResearcher 22:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for saying so. Steve Dufour 05:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Unification Church

Dear Steve Dufour,

Regarding your edit:

Many other Christians, most of whom expect Jesus to return in a supernatural way, strongly reject such a proclamation, citing the Gospel of John (see Chapter 14, verse 6) in which Jesus of Nazareth states with finality that "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

I consider myself a Christian but I do not believe that Jesus will return in a supernatural way. I believe that Christ returns every day in the hearts, thoughts and actions of good men and women (metaphorically speaking). I would say that most Christians probably believe that the Second Coming of Christ is mysterious and transcendent of their ability to understand, but not "supernatural." It just seemed like a sweeping personal view on your part to say that "most of whom expect Jesus to return in a supernatural way." You may be correct. I just don't know. Do you have a source for that info?

What do you think? (could you please respond on the Unification Church talk?) With Respect Marknw 16:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Shasta daisy

Sure do. commons:Leucanthemum x superbum. You can always check the Commons for images, as they do tend to have a lot of em -- Chris 73 | Talk 23:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

And they are free. This seemed to be the problem with your last image, as we cannot accept copyrighted images. See also the most excellent Misplaced Pages:Finding images tutorial (ahem ... written by myself ... ahem) -- Chris 73 | Talk 23:52, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

acacia

Image:Eat267.jpg and Image:Elephants around tree in Waza, Cameroon.jpg. You really should check the commons before asking -- Chris 73 | Talk 05:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I just learning how to do that.Steve Dufour 06:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Let me know if you need help. Best wishes, -- Chris 73 | Talk 06:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.Steve Dufour 06:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Pope Benedict XVI

Please do not disrupt Misplaced Pages to make a point. There are much more productive ways to discuss this issues, for example actually discussing it on the category's talk page. Please avoid disrupting articles to make a protest like this. Thanks, Gwernol 21:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Point taken. Steve Dufour 21:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

LOL, you're hilarious Steve. No offense to Gwernol and I agree with the statement, I just thought Steve's response was funny in a good and non-harmful way while still showing agreement. --HResearcher 04:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Barbara Schwarz involuntary psychiatric treatment

Steve, can you look at the talk page. I'm trying to get the information about Barbara Schwarz' involuntary psychiatric treatment into the article. To me this is notable and apparently it has drawn a lot of attention as it occured in Germany. I'm waiting for some sources on this, they will have to be translated from German. Anyway, can you please help on the discussion page. Vivaldi is acting very strange (animosity). He has been using the article as an attack page for more than a year now and still seems more interested in cherry-picking information that supports his agenda rather than writing about some notable events such as the involuntary psychiatric treatment and a deprogramming attempts by Cyril Vosper. By the way what ever happened to the EL33 person? I haven't seem him/her around for more than a week now. --HResearcher 22:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on it and see what I can do to help. Steve Dufour 01:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Steve. I found references on the violent deprogramming that was conducted by Cyril Vosper. I am still gathering references on the unlawful psychiatric incarceration and abuse. Tilman said he had one on the psychiatric incarceration, but it was a misleading source and basically anti-scientology. Do you know Barbara Schwarz's email address or can you contact her in USENET? We need references she has on the unlawful psychiatric incarceration and abuse. Tilman suggested that she has them and can scan them for the web or can email them to someone here in Misplaced Pages. --HResearcher 04:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm all for adding the information about all of Barbara's involuntary deprogrammings and psychiatric committments to Misplaced Pages assuming that verifiable sources are found to cite. I'm not sure why I am being subjected to personal attacks by HResearcher (talk · contribs · count), but I object to them wholeheartedly. My motives are to improve the quality of Misplaced Pages. I want all the notable and verifiable information about Schwarz to be included.

As for the "friend" of HResearcher, ESL344G (talk · contribs · count), it was permanently banned from editing on Misplaced Pages for being a sockpuppet. The Schwarz article seems to attract a number of sockpuppet accounts, this being at least the 4th such account that was banned. Vivaldi (talk) 02:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Again, what are you talking about? One cannot be banned from Misplaced Pages for being a sock puppet. I bet you cannot cite the policy that states it is a violation. --HResearcher 03:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Well perhaps you should read the comments of the admin that wrote in the block log of ESL344G (talk · contribs · logs). The edit summary says, "15:05, 15 August 2006 Kilo-Lima (Talk | contribs) blocked "ESL344G (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (sockpuppet)" You can read it here. You also might want to read the official policy on sockpuppetry which contradicts what you are saying. Vivaldi (talk) 09:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad you've decided to take a neutral and comprehensive approach to the article on Barbara Schwarz. --HResearcher 04:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

"Eco-terrorists"

Hi Steve!

with reference to the Eucalyptus article, the reason that the expression "Eco-terrorists" would have been deleted was and still is that it is not given a context.

Despite the fact that the reference is there, in an encyclopedic article you have to state exactly what is meant. An "Eco-terrorist" could be, for example, the person who has just decapitated four rare owls in the UK.

To put it in context, you need to say something like:-

• In California the Eucalyptus is so invasive that it is referred to among as conservationists as the "Eco-terrorist". (cite reference) or

• Referred to by conservationist John Bloggs in his book bla-de-blah as the "Eco-terrorist", the Eucalyptus has invaded vast tracts of blah-de-blah and destroyed bla-de-blah. (cite reference)

If you use a name in inverted commas then you either have to state who said it, or it must be so widely-known an expression that everybody understands it, or it must be totally self-explanatory or else a well known common name.

I haven't fixed this. I'm hoping that you will go back and have another go at this sentence for the benefit of those of us who are not from the US and who value our "Gum trees" very highly.

--Amandajm 10:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I will change the wording. Steve Dufour 16:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Luther Burbank article

Hi. I see you attempted to nominate this article for featured article candidacy. The way you went about it isn't actually the proper way to list a nomination. Please reivew the instructions at the top of the FAC page I linked to, and that will tell you exactly how to go about listing a page for FAC. Good luck and thanks for contributing. Ryu Kaze 01:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Hm. On second thought, it might not be your fault. I think this might be a technical glitch. Just a second. Ryu Kaze 01:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I see what happened. The main issue with its appearance was that you were supposed to place the article's name within === === on the candidacy page you created. By the way, new nominations go at the top of the list. I've fixed both of these matters for you. Good luck with the FAC. Ryu Kaze 01:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Steve Dufour 02:57, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. We all need a little helping hand at one time or another. Ryu Kaze 13:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

When I started the Luther Burbank article I was appalled that we had no information on him in the Misplaced Pages! You've taken that humble beginning and made it so much better. The concerns of "Featured Article" voters are not always those that most improve an article, so I would expect it will pass the next time, after a few citations are added. Nice work on the article. - Nunh-huh 18:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Korean names for True Family

Steve, there are some templates for expressing Korean names in Hangul along with their English equivalents and/or transliterations. Let me know if you need help. --Uncle Ed 14:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Ed. Steve Dufour 17:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Greetings

Hi there.I don't really know what to say. It's hard for me and I assume it must be complicated for all the people in my situation to try a new language out. You see, I've been studying English language since 1995 but, for some reason, I still keep my doubts on the subject. I joined Misplaced Pages on July 26, 2006 —the Spanish version — and as for a sudden I became deeply acquainted with the English one. I cannot trust myself to do it better, but I would like to; believe me when I say that is my priority. Up to now I've written an average of 30 articles in the Spanish Misplaced Pages, most of which are based on English and American literature authors and movements. My best ones by so far are es:Frederick Douglass and es:William Shakespeare. On the same way I wrote one article for this wikipedia, originally a translation from Spanish into English. I also added further information to a geography stub. My intention is to help and take part of this wonderful experience, but to do that I may need a hand. Can we work together? Do you want to keep in touch with me? I'm on the web almost all the time. If I'm not here I'm there, always fooling around. Thanks for reading my terrible message. God save me, lol. --Gustavo86 20:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Let me know what you wrote here in English and I will see if I can help with the English. Keep up the good work. Steve Dufour 01:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Picture for Hak Ja Han page

Steve, I was trying to re-establish a faulty link to the Family Federation web site that Ed had put on Andrew Wilson (theologian), and I ran across a picture that I think would be ideal as a secondary picture for the Hak Ja Han article (and perhaps others). You'll recall that I thought a picture of Sun Myung Moon in prayer would be a helpful addition for that page, to tell the story of that side of his identity (and the picture you found is a good one). In the same way, if you go to 9/4/06 - Hoon Dok Hae and Victory Celebration at East Garden (today it's near the upper-right hand corner, but probably not for too much longer), there are 21 pictures under the main one, and the 3rd row 3rd collumn picture with all the leaders at the long dining room table with Mrs. Moon at the head of the table would be excellent in my view. Rather than showing Mrs. Moon only as some quiet adjunct to her husband, this picture shows her in a leadership role, meeting with church leaders in an impressive setting. It might even suggest something along the lines of Ed's concerns that she be recognized as the official successor and that East Garden is also a public place where leaders meet. The picture says copyright FFWPU-USA, so they would have to release it under GNU or something similar. I'm guessing you could find out about it more easily than I could. Also, a primary picture for that page would be nice! -Exucmember 23:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I will see what I can do. Steve Dufour 01:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

It seems that the only picture on the Hak Ja Han page now has been deleted. I thought that picture was a good one, the wedding photo. Any chance you can get a released copy of that picture too? A portrait photo might also be good for the top of the article.

Btw, twice now I've thought about emailing you - I don't remember what about, but something that seemed email was better than posting here. It might be a valuable option for you to add. If you just go to "My preferences" (at the top-right of every page) you can enter an email address.

One more thing. For a long time now the Unification Church page has had two sections for theology/beliefs (Unification_Church#Theology and Unification_Church#Overview_of_the_beliefs_of_Unificationists), and the presentation is very uneven (not representative). If the upper section is simply integrated into the lower one as is, however, it will be even more uneven, and may even have the unintended and undesireable consequence of misleading people into thinking that most of what Unification theology is about is an explanation of messiahship leading to Rev. Moon's claim of messiahship. I think there should be only one section, most of the detail should be in the Unification theology article, with just the most cursory sketch in the Unification Church article, and perhaps the Divine Principle article can be the one to be most representative, following the systematic theology outline of that text. But all 3 need more on Principle of Creation. I probably won't have time to get to all this, but these 3 articles are lacking. Perhaps one of the theologically trained people working on the encyclopedia project would like to at least give some advice and do a little editing. -Exucmember 19:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Those seem like good ideas to me. I've been really busy lately so I can't take on such a serious project right now. I'll see what I can do about the pictures. I'll post my e-mail address too, however if you leave me a message here I will see it since I visit WP every day. Steve Dufour 00:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Bigfoot

Greetings Steve and thank you for your positive feed back concerning your comments in the discussion article for Bigfoot
User:Berniethomas68 02:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I am thinking of nominating it for a featured article. Steve Dufour 13:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Bigfoot intro

Hey Steve. Re your comment on my talk page in which you asked if it is really necessary to mention in the intro that some people don't believe in Biggie. Yes it is. Your intro was "Bigfoot, also known as Sasquatch, is a legendary creature, which many people believe is also real." OK, that's a believers' POV, so what's wrong with balancing it. Tell you what, l will change one single word in your intro and ask you how long the the intro would have survived. Change the (second occurrence) of the word "also" to "not", so that your intro now becomes "Bigfoot, also known as Sasquatch, is a legendary creature, which many people believe is not real." Imagine the shock horror from the believers. And yet, you want the intro to say there are Biggie believers, but not to balance it by also saying there are disbelievers. Sorry, don't agree, which I why I amended it. Also, your intro says Biggie is a "legendary creature". So, Wiki was effectively advancing the POV that a creature actually exists, which is why I changed it to say Biggie is the name of a phenomenon. Incidentally, the word legendary doesn't only mean mythical.Moriori 22:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe in Bigfoot, but if it is real that would really be cool.  :-) Steve Dufour 01:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Tilman whatshisname

While I trust the article about this guy on religiousfreedomwatch about as far as I can throw a small house, I'm not sure that we can say it makes "untrue insinuations": By nature, insinuations are neither true nor false. And saying that it is telling porky pies would mean having to prove everything it says is false. In my opinion, just saying it is a CoS smear website is all that is necessary. What is your opinion? Yandman 07:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

You are right. "Untrue" is POV. I realized that soon after I posted it, but I thought it would be better to let someone else take care of it. Steve Dufour 00:59, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

STEVE DUFOUR, WHY ARE YOU VANDALISING WIKIPEDIA???

Steve Dufour, why are you vandalising Wikiepedia? I happened to go to "Ethnic Slurs" (I go there once every couple of months), and I see that you have deleted dozens of entries. Why are you doing this? I happened to have contributed one entry in there, the entry for "Zulu". You have deleted it, along with dozens of other entries. Why did you vandalise this Misplaced Pages topic? Why don't you go someplace else and play your juvenile games? You're not wanted here. -

Posts to that article are supposed to be cited. Steve Dufour 00:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC) p.s. I also removed some anti-white slurs, because of the same reason--they were not cited.

Motivation for Sun Myung Moon's anti-communism

Steve, I've just made 4 edits to the Sun Myung Moon article, to the Views on Communism section. The argument that Sun Myung Moon is anti-communist because he was mistreated by them - and not for philosophical or theological reasons - seems like such an obviously empty accusation to those who are even a little bit knowledgeable about the man and his organization(s). But did I go too far? I want to be fair even to viewpoints I don't agree with, and you seem to have a good sense along such lines (you seem to have a similar perspective of trying to be fair). Please take a look at today's edits and let me know what you think. -Exucmember 18:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks.

It looks ok to me. However I still think his anti-communist activities should be covered as a topic unto themselves as a very important part of his life and his contribution to the world; not mainly as an issue for debate between critics and supporters--although that could be mentioned in the criticism section. Steve Dufour 23:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It is a very important part of his life and work, and deserves its own article. Why don't you start it? -Exucmember 17:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me. Steve Dufour 23:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Joke

Hey. Sorry for doing that. I probably just made a mistake. Sorry!

-)

Lbr123 22:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Primetime

FYI, user:Primetime was banned by Jimbo Wales for widespread and duplicitous plagiarism. Primetime's favorite article was List of ethnic slurs, where he is a strong inclusionist. Since his banning he has reappeared as user:I discovered America, user:╗Creat╚, user:Ñểẅ ựşễŗ, and most recently, user:Ymg55, among many others (see also Misplaced Pages:Long term abuse/Primetime). You've apparently been the target of some attacks from him using IP addresses. Don't take them personally, you're just doing your job. Thanks for contributing to the project. -Will Beback 20:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Mormonism

Mr. Dufour, are you a Mormon? I'm not trying to single you out, but I noticed on the Rev. Moon page that you added "Mormonism" to the list of Abrahamic religions, along with the comment, (not an exact quote) "Best to include them, too." As far as I know, the LSD Church is a subsect of Christianity, not a completely different religion. And, no, I'm not a Mormon; I'm actually a Roman Catholic. I'd just like to hear your reasons as to why you included it in the list; no final judgements yet. Peace be upon you. George "Skrooball" Reeves 00:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, LDS Church, not LSD. Sorry about my schmuckiness. George "Skrooball" Reeves 00:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I am a Unification Church member. You are probably right, Mormons should be considered Christians. I am not hostile to any religion. Steve Dufour 04:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I can tell you from experience that always opens a huge can of worms. While Mormons self-define as Christians, no Protestant, Catholic, or ecumenical movement between them recognizes them as such. This is per Mormon rejection of the Nicene Creed. I can't speak to its inclusion as an Abrahamic religion. CyberAnth 04:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

UTS image

I am trying to save the aerial photo of UTS (Image:UTS_aerial.jpg), but it is listed as "fair use" and there are people who take a hard line in enforcing every point of the guidelines regarding them. It may be deleted in less than a week. Any chance you could get an aerial image (I think the aerial perspective is nice) - perhaps a bigger one - that has the copyright released or licenced or whatever? Giving permission just for Misplaced Pages is not allowed. The rules are quite complex, and I am not well-versed in them, but a "free" image is best. Perhaps Ed knows more about this. Btw, any progress on the photo of Hak Ja Han with leaders at East Garden (and other photos of her)? Also, btw, the UTS page is an example of a page where my contributions have been wholly supportive (other examples are New Hope Academy, including extensive discussion on Talk:New Hope Academy; Andrew Wilson, Moonies, etc. The bigotry that had been so prominent on the New Hope Academy page was my initial impetus to do some editing. Have a look. -Exucmember 18:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

For some reason the direct link above didn't work (so I de-linked it), but it worked when I copied and pasted it into the search box. Anyway, it's the picture on the Unification Theological Seminary page. -Exucmember 18:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

It's a nice picture. I really appreciate the work you are doing here, even if I have to disagree with you sometimes. Ed might be a better person to ask about pictures than me. I haven't been able to make much progress. Like you say it's hard to explain WP policies to someone who doesn't know WP. Steve Dufour 03:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, the best solution is to have a picture that we want to use released into the public domain. Then anyone can use it without worrying about copyright. I think the people at New Future Photo, or other people who do photography seriously, would easily understand that. So if a public minded person is willing to release a particular picture into the public domain, making it freely available, then the problem is solved. It becomes complicated when people want to retain some rights to try to make a profit. Perhaps that's not a problematic issue with the public church photos we're talking about. Maybe some of the people you work with on the encyclopedia project could help. I'll ask Ed too. -Exucmember 05:08, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I did get one person to release a photo to public domain. But it was of a slime mold.  :-) I was working on an article on them for the encyclopedia project. Steve Dufour 05:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

re j-clo

hi steve,

thanks--like i said, i do agree with you that the article needs work, but the point of the bio noticeboard is not to review the article, but to address a serious complaint. thanks for understanding/allowing removal of your comment (which i think could be interpreted the wrong way by sk and doesn't address the complaint...)

wishing best to you also, (i went to ucb too/go bears! :-) Cindery 19:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Anti-Racism

Steve, I applaud you for your anti-racism. If I could give you an award I would. Well done.

Selig Percy Amoils

Hi Steve, I see you reverted the birthdate in the above to show just the year, citing WP:BLP. On the discussion page I stated that Amoils had given me his birthdate with the intention that it should appear in the article. Also to quote from WP:BLP Privacy of birthdays "if the subject of a biography complains about the publication of his or her date of birth, err on the side of caution and simply list the year of birth rather than the exact date." The subject obviously has not complained as he provided the information in the first place. Would you please revert the date to what it was. Thanks Paul venter 19:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe I have been over zealous in removing birthdays. If you put it back I will not remove it. Steve Dufour 19:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Views of the Christian cross

Hey, Steve, how about an article on how various religious groups (or theologians or politicians, etc.) have viewed the cross? Some have revered it as a symbol, others criticized it; our own church has a somewhat novel view. --Uncle Ed 19:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea. I'm not sure if I will have time to do it however. Steve Dufour 20:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Yams

Hi Steve - saw your notes at Talk:Yam (vegetable). I'd agree, it is worth doing some re-writing; I've also suggested a page split to separate out the botanical information to a new Dioscorea page, as far from all of the c.600 Dioscorea species are edible yams. Would be interested in your thoughts. - MPF 16:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll wait a day or two in case others want to comment - MPF 17:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks from WTRiker

Thanks SD, but if you could, maybe be more specific and, if possible, maybe do some categorical groupings on my "homepage". --WTRiker 05:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Wise Use

You were right to put it in the neutrality project perview. I can definitely help, and would be happy to. I'll see if I can't do a bit today. NinaEliza (talk • contribs • logs) 00:09, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Use of "claim"

I have tried and failed to track down any WP guideline or policy against "claim" as a word to characterize, well, claims. Could you direct me to the exact citation? Thanks. Robertissimo 04:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Here you go: Misplaced Pages:Words to avoid

Spero Dedes

Hi Steve, I noticed your edit of Spero Dedes page. As has been discussed extensively, the edits are tangible and notable. It is neutral, factual information relating to Spero's career. The cites fall within Wiki's guidelines, as a Rutgers beat reporter made a note of it, representing NJ's largest newspaper.

Your notation that we should remove "negative" information - I take it we can remove all mention of the double murders from OJ Simpson's page? That's pretty negative. MattyFridays 00:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

If only one newspaper columnist had said that it should be removed, yes. Steve Dufour 14:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Spero the play-by-play commentator for one of the most legendary franchises in the NBA. Not only is that notable enough for a WP Bio, the fact that he was on a national stage and screwed up his research is pretty notable. And two columnists noted it. MattyFridays 15:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that it is very cool that he is the play-by-play commentator for the Lakers. However merely having a job does not make a person notable on WP. Steve Dufour 15:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Barack Obama

Hey there. Good changes! Not sure if you caught the talk page message, but the article is currently under featured article review. Feel free to leave your comments! Gzkn 03:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Wash Times

In reply to the comment left on my talk page, I have no doubt that the Moonies own the Times and UPI, but saying so on WP still requires a source to be cited. It's not the kind of "generally known" info, like "the sky is up", that can be left unsourced. - Crockspot 16:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Unification Theology

Steve, your recent edits and comments seem to indicate that you are not aware of the existence of the Unification theology article, but I can't believe that's the case. Anyway, it would be nice to distribute some of the UC teachings material there too, and to give some needed attention to that article. Both Unification theology and Divine Principle could use substantial revisions, as they were never edited thoroughly from beginning to end, to create a coherent article, by anyone (see especially the history of Unification theology). To me this is the single biggest deficiency in UC-related articles. The main overhaul should be done by a church member, not by a critic, so that the core presentation is true to what Unificationists believe. -Exucmember 18:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I was aware that the Unification theology article existed. To me as a member the article on Divine Principle seems like it should be the main article. We members almost never use the expression "Unification theology". I'll see what I can do in improving the articles. Thanks for your support. Steve Dufour 19:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand are the beliefs of the Unification Church really something that should be covered in Misplaced Pages at all? If people want to know they can visit church websites and find tons of info. But there has been almost no research or discussion of them by non-church sources. Steve Dufour 06:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Stanley Crouch on Obama

Hey Steve. The idea of that paragraph (and most of the Pop culture section) is that the sources are almost all saying people like to see themselves in Obama. Crouch's view is the less popular one, and so it is added to promote balance. It needs to be stated plainly so people can get the contrast. I take your point about using a more complete quote. How about using this quote from the third to last paragraph of Crouch's article?

"when black Americans refer to Obama as 'one of us,' I do not know what they are talking about while he has experienced some light versions of typical racial stereotypes, he cannot claim those problems as his own - nor has he lived the life of a black American."

Hope this makes sense. Be sure also to check the notes, the title of the article referenced immediately before this one suggests that one article inspired the other, "black like me", "not black like me"... Without contrary sources (Crouch, and also Noonan) the section risks getting ripped up by people who read it as too flattering of Obama. Let me know how you see it. Thanks. --HailFire 16:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd not really sure what the point of Crouch's article was. I don't think it was really critical of Obama, more like just a rant about how the world was changing and leaving him (Crouch) behind. If you put the quote you prefer in the article I will not object. Steve Dufour 16:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

That's right. Crouch is not criticizing Obama at all, he is criticizing the way he feels others (specifically African Americans) see themselves in Obama. The whole idea of the Pop culture section is to talk about Obama's celebrity and how it interplays with social perceptions, not substantiated facts. That's what makes it so tricky. The multiline quote you put in looks a bit disproportionate for the idea it needs to convey, but we can let it ride for now. Thanks again. --HailFire 17:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Generally we are not supposed to cut up quotes putting in three dots ... whatever you call that. So I just pasted in the whole paragraph. BTW the more I think about it the more unreasonable Crouch seems to me. He spent his life struggling against racism and then when things have improved and young people don't suffer the same things that he did he complains about that. Steve Dufour 17:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree! But the sentiment Crouch expresses has been pushed into the article before and unless it gets addressed, will certainly be pushed again. I think this is a good place to allow some room for it. Makes sense? Still thinking about how we could trim it down a bit. Maybe move the full quote to the Notes section, like was just done for the "I inhaled" quote that would not go away? --HailFire 18:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Better? Be sure to check footnote! --HailFire 20:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

At least that quote let's people know there is some controversy. :-) Steve Dufour 20:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI - the Crouch piece is getting more play - this week's Newsweek has a sidebar about Obama's not coming up through the civil rights movement, and Crouch's piece is prominently discussed. Tvoz | talk 18:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Josette Sheeran Shiner. Please be careful not to remove content from Misplaced Pages without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Smee 18:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I will continue to give reasons. Steve Dufour 18:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

advice

I find it's probably best not to edit typos in other people's talk comments - you absolutely meant well, but people get funny about such things. Anyway, that's just my take in general - I don't see anything in your corrections that could bother anyone. Just thought I'd pass that along. Tvoz | talk 18:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

He's right. Don't edit other people's comments unless:

1. They know you and like you (like me :-)
2. You're not involved in a debate or dispute with them, or
3. It's a newbie with atrocious spelling or grammar

And well you're at it, try to get along better with smee and exuc ;-) --Uncle Ed 18:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks guys. I will be on better behavior from now.  :-) Steve Dufour 18:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

He's a she, and your behavior is fine - I only came here because of your edit summary question. Tvoz | talk 18:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I do joke around some times more than I should, especially when the topic is so serious as who is to be the next president. Steve Dufour 18:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Jonathan Wells

You weren't one of the people I was referring to, just so you know. I'm not sure I always agree with your edits, but you've always been cool-headed. eaolson 16:38, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Article about you

I have added a speedy deletion tag as the article does not assert notability. This will hopefully speed up the process of getting the article deleted. Thanks, Yonatan (contribs/talk) 18:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Steve Dufour 18:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's been deleted. Yonatan (contribs/talk) 02:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much!!! :-) Steve Dufour 03:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Other resources for editor disputes

Steve, in reply to your question at the Village Pump:

• If editors can't agree on the talk page, they can ask for help through Misplaced Pages's dispute resolution process, such as asking for a "third opinion", or requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Admins usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
• If it ever actually does reach the level of threats or other open breach of policy, consider reporting it to Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (WP:ANI); or if it becomes blatant vandalism, then Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV).
• For extensive tutoring, there are experienced Wikipedians who offer mentorship, "adoption", or advocacy; and many admins will also make the time to answer earnest questions on their talk pages (though some are either very busy or away on "Wikibreak").
• Any time you feel overwhelmed by the complexity of it all, you can simply post {{helpme}} on your talk page, with a description of your questions or problems, and someone will show up to help you find answers or solutions.

I've taken the liberty of wikilinking the words "talk page" (on your userpage) to this talk page. If you didn't want that done, then I apologize. -- Ben 23:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Blocked one hour

Hi Steve, I have blocked you for one hour for violating WP:POINT and causing disruption on L. Ron Hubbard and Dwight D. Eisenhower. If you have a problem with the Barbara Schwarz article, you need to settle it through appropriate dispute resolution channels. Please use this hour to review those channels and let me know if you have any questions I can help with. Thank you, Johntex\ 17:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Now I can get some work done. Barbara Schwarz is clearly an attack article and should be removed, no matter how many hundreds of person-hours of work have gone into its creation. Steve Dufour 17:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

You made that same argument here and did not find consensus that it was an "attack article" in the sense of CSD G10. I cannot imagine why you would think such an article which has survived three AfDs would be appropriate for speedy deletion and frankly, I don't think you did. -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

If someone with WP itself looked at the article and judged both Barbara's lack of real importance and the hostile tone of the article it would be removed right away as an attack article. Steve Dufour 17:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea what you mean, if anything, by "with WP itself". -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:23, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know who they are either, but I am sure there are some people responsible for the site itself. Steve Dufour 18:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

• Hi Steve, thanks for the message and welcome back. If you will follow the link above to "dispute resolution", you will see several possible avenues for resolving a dispute. The first is to work on the article with other editors at the article's talk page. I think that process is ongoing and should be given more time to work. Your first comment to the Talk page (at least your first recent comment - I have not checked all the archives) was just within the past few days. That is far too little time to have given up on discussion as a way to improve the article. Also, please keep in mind the following: Sometimes failure to win other people over to your viewpoint is not evidence that the other people are wrong. In other words, while trying to persuade others of the rightnight of your opinion, please spend some time trying to consider their views as well. Perhaps your suggestions would improve the article, perhaps they would not. I encourage you to keep discussing your ideas. Best, Johntex\ 19:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Steve, I have had extensize conversations with members and ex-members of Scientology. There's some heavy stuff there which is better left untouched: allegations of kidnapping, murder, etc. If you want to do an expose, why not work on the Genocide article. There are tens of millions of well-documented cases of mass murder there, if you want to point them out.

But if that's not your cup of tea, how about joining me in Change of blood lineage, a stub I just started? :-) --Uncle Ed 15:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Ed. I know very little about Scientology and don't get involved with controversies about their actions, however I do defend their legal rights. I'll check out your new article too. p.s. I am defending Barbara Schwarz who is under attack from both Scientologists and anti-Scientologists as a personal favor, I know her from Usenet. p.p.s. I am fairly confident that nobody is going to kidnap or murder me because of my comments here. :-) Steve Dufour 19:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Excellent Change to "Conversely"

Great change. This is much better than "On the other hand". Your help in improving the language in the wiki article is greatly appreciated. Thanks - Eisenmond 17:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for saying so. I guess I'll keep hanging around here. :-) Steve Dufour 17:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I noticed the revert as well. I will look into this when I have some more time. Unitl then, thanks for working to improve this article! - Eisenmond 23:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Barack Obama

Re: Well, according to the sources, apparently the answer is yes. It must have been quite the feat to get the timing down though.--Bobblehead 19:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

AN/I on User:Antaeus Feldspar

Hi. Since you are somewhat involved in this by having been accused of WP:PA on the BLP noticeboard by User:Antaeus Feldspar, it is appropriate that I let you know about it and invite your comments. While I have requested that the "usual suspects" refrain from commenting, you are directly involved and implicated by the charges of WP:PA by User:Antaeus Feldspar that figure into the incident. Please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Attacks_and_disruption_of_noticeboards_by_User:Antaeus_Feldspar Thanks. --Justanother 14:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)