Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:49, 7 March 2008

Lawrence Cohen is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.

Archives

● 30 August 2007-17 January 2008 ● 17 January 2008-now

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

re Mantanmoreland ArbCom

Hi. I have noted your comments restricting M to one account, and various sanctions. I wonder if you have considered extending your wordings to encompass editing under ip addresses, and the effect on the sanctions applied to the remaining account? My work in the workshop on my own proposals is a little stale - otherwise I would add it myself - but your section is still active so I thought I would suggest it to you. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Free Republic amended

In light of continued disputes, remedy 4 adopted in Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Free Republic is amended by adding:

"Additionally, any uninvolved administrator may impose a reasonable editing restriction (for example, 1RR) or page ban upon any editor who repeatedly engages in disruptive or uncivil editing of Free Republic or any closely related page. Prior to imposing such a ban or restriction, a warning should be given on the affected user's talkpage. All bans and restrictions shall be logged at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Free Republic#Log of blocks and bans."

All editors, particularly including single purpose accounts and editors who have or may reasonably be perceived as having a conflict of interest, are strongly urged to edit Free Republic and related articles only in conformity with all Misplaced Pages policies and with this committee's prior decision. If the enhanced administrator authority provided in this ruling does not improve the situation on this article after 30 days, a request for a more formal Arbitration Committee review may be submitted.

For the Arbitration committee, Thatcher 16:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Hey, could you pop by AIV again, and, take another look at the report you made, please? SQL 17:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• See above cmt. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk

Just saw and replied. Weird. Lawrence § t/e 17:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Your note

Can you show me which edit I did while the page was protected (besides the self reversion)? Crum375 (talk) 20:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

On the history:

1. (cur) (last) 20:49, 22 February 2008 Crum375 (Talk | contribs) m (142,822 bytes) (restore pp notice)
2. (cur) (last) 20:47, 22 February 2008 Crum375 (Talk | contribs) (142,782 bytes) (Rvt - missed Alison's protection - but BLP should be removed anyway (by someone else))
3. (cur) (last) 20:45, 22 February 2008 Crum375 (Talk | contribs) (142,798 bytes) (→Editors/admins here have been "drawn offsides" by WB before: another BLP redaction)
4. (cur) (last) 20:44, 22 February 2008 Alison (Talk | contribs) (142,822 bytes) ({{pp-dispute}})
5. (cur) (last) 20:44, 22 February 2008 Crum375 (Talk | contribs) (142,782 bytes) (→External stalking: redacted BLP violation)
6. (cur) (last) 20:44, 22 February 2008 Alison (Talk | contribs) m (Protected Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence: This is ridicuous (expires 22:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC)))
7. (cur) (last) 20:40, 22 February 2008 Lawrence Cohen (Talk | contribs) (142,878 bytes) (→External stalking: rvt Crum375 - stop it)

Bold is her protection, Reds are your disallowed edits. You need to go back to the last pre-pp version, this one. You probably just missed it off timing. Lawrence § t/e 20:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I think I got them all now. Thanks for letting me know. Crum375 (talk) 21:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Waterboarding. For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 17:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

ANI/Elias

It's just the user's whole tone - both anchored links took me straight to where Elias was quoting policy, and linking to Stormfront of all sites seems like a troll's move. Will 00:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Probably, maybe. Eliaslucard's commentary about his beliefs however isn't helpful to building an encyclopedia, however, and his screeds about how (from a glance) everyone from the Jews to the Martians are anti-Christian are just going to lead people to respond nastily. Why even post material like that? Lawrence § t/e 00:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, without diffs, I personally wouldn't drudge through 80kb of troll fighting. Personally, looking at it with a proper glance (more than flicking my eyes at it), it looks like six of one, but at least Elias is trying to restrain himself with his civility. Will 00:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

True enough, on that. I simply wish people didn't feel the need to expound on their personal beliefs in that way--it's only common sense that this sort of thing is just going to set folks off. Lawrence § t/e 00:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not simply a matter of "personal beliefs" on a talk page (which is already proscribed per WP talk page policies).It's a matter of using a talk page for anti-Semitic rants, and Jew-baiting of other editors (i.e., me). Is this tolerated on wikipedia? Can I make racist rants against other groups (non-Jews) and have people simply point out how Boodlesthecat "is trying to restrain himself with his civility" and have editors, in response to my racist rants, "wish people didn't feel the need to expound on their personal beliefs." If an editor complained on ANI about my racist rants, would that editor be told to "shut the hell up" like Will told me? Is that the extent of how Misplaced Pages responds to overt anti-Semitism and Jew-baiting of editors on Talk Pages? tell someone who protests it to "shut the hell up?" I am finding this exceedingly disturbing. Boodlesthecat (talk) 01:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Your note 2

Hi Lawrence, thanks for your message. It's very much appreciated. Crum375 (talk) 13:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Email please?

Hello, Lawrence. If you're able, please email me: palabrazo@gmail.com Thanks! --WordMail (talk) 17:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Notice

Just FYI, your talk was altered as part of a mass canvass and mass revert. Franamax (talk) 07:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed. Thanks. Lawrence § t/e 14:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Email

You have mail - urgent. FT2  17:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Received and replied. Lawrence § t/e 17:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Great Idea!

The new NPOV noticeboard is exactly what the project needs. Thank you so much. --QuackGuru (talk) 18:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

important tag

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Chiropractic&diff=next&oldid=187991945 The tag you originally added...

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Chiropractic&curid=197022&diff=194750294&oldid=194744428 ...has been removed.

Who decides which articles will be under probation. Chiropractic related articles are related to homeopathy. They are both alternative/non-traditional treatments. QuackGuru (talk) 22:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Left him a note. The community decides, or specifically people that aren't already involved on the articles on either side. Lawrence § t/e 22:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I would like to notify the other editors involved about the probation but would like a neutral party to this. There are a lot of people to notify. QuackGuru (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Ask on the homeopathy incidents page. Lawrence § t/e 22:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Here we go again. An involved editor removed the tag. The editor voted delete in the AFD. This article is related homeopathy and the main chiropractic article. Thoughts. QuackGuru (talk) 01:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Some of the talks at the chiropractic article seem to be more about wikilawyering rather than an intent to improve the article. I want the article to be a neutral presentation according to the WP:RS references. Misplaced Pages does not enforce NPOV at this time. How can I achieve the NPOV standard when some editors do not want that to ever happen. QuackGuru (talk) 07:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Here we go again. Another involved editor who voted at the AFD to delete the article off of Misplaced Pages has removed the tag. QuackGuru (talk) 01:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Enjoying that wikibreak?

Just kidding. But if arbcom doesn't directly address the issue of the MM/SH etc socking, then there is no "constitutional crisis." They just haven't addressed it, and the community is free to do so. It would be a different thing if one of the proposed findings was MM=SH, and the arbcom voted it down. But there is no such finding - so thus no contradiction if the community decides to address that issue by itself. Risker (talk) 07:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		For seeing a need and attempting to fill it, by boldly implementing the Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. Moonriddengirl 13:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Good luck with it. :) I hope it thrives and serves well the Wiki. :D --Moonriddengirl 13:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Lawrence, as you started this new Noticeboard I think you should publish information about its existence on appropriate places at WP. As it is now, few people find it. MaxPont (talk) 17:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Help me out

The admins are trying to destroy my campaign.--Uga Man (talk) UGA MAN FOR PRESIDENT 2008 05:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Invective

Just so you know, not all older admins enjoy using or seeing invective. Take me for example. GRBerry 03:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Edits at talk:Jimmy Wales

I think that you made two edits and accidentally switched the places or something. Could you look and format it right? I appreciate your comments, but it will be confusing for others if we leave it. Thanks! - ђαίгснгм 17:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Does it look ok now? Reformat if needed. Lawrence § t/e 17:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I think I understand what happened now. I created that exact section at the same time as you with that question. I think that the server automatically added my comment to it, or something. I was just totally confused why you posted above me. I was just commenting that the tag should stay, because someone tried to remove it. Sorry about the confusion! - ђαίгснгм 17:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

How do I change this? Now it looks like I'm upset at you, because my comment is a response to your question and it is kinda mean. I just wanted to comment on a vandalism made for future reference... Uh... this Jimbo stuff is a mess. - ђαίгснгм 17:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)