Misplaced Pages

re

Thanks for the note, I will read the reply, I have no 'follow up' or extra questions. Hobartimus (talk) 17:13, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Attack the comment not the editor.

I do not take personal attacks lightly and this editor has done so to me on other occasions. was an attack on me and my[REDACTED] knowledge. It was not constructive and I added a warning template to that users page. If that user attacks me again, I will add another and so on. I hope it never needs to get that far. Another editor has accused me of using the talk page as a forum, so I added the appropriate template to that user's talk page, since my use of the Obama talk page was solely based on whether or not the page should be locked, which was the heading of the section to begin with. Disagreeing with my template additions is your right. But I was not sure if you knew why they were added, so I am letting you know now.--Jojhutton (talk) 20:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

But that wasn't an attack. And WP:DTTR. Grsz 20:23, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

You may not have considered that an attack, but I did. I do not appreciate other editors using humor as a jest or to prove some point at the expense of others. It was not civil nor was it productive. As for WP:DTTR, I personally feel that[REDACTED] policy trumps essays that are not policy. And that editor has been told to lay off the attacks before, which makes LOL, are you new? sound even more like an attack, because he knows perfectly well that I am not.--Jojhutton (talk) 21:13, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, responding to an editor joking about you possibly not understanding[REDACTED] ettiquette by leaving him a message that doesn't really follow[REDACTED] ettiquette isn't really the best way to make friends and influence people. Dayewalker (talk) 21:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Not to be rude, but this is a user talk page and not a discussion page. I was refering all of my comments to user Grsz11. If you would like to hold a conversation with me, please do so on my talk page, as it is not fair to this user whose talk page you are using to voice opinions about something you were not involved in. I'm sorry Grsz11 that that happened to you.--Jojhutton (talk) 23:19, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I seriously doubt Grsz11 will mind. Any editor can comment on anything on wikipedia. If you want to hold a private discussion with someone, see if they'll email you. Otherwise, everyone's comments are always available for discussion. Dayewalker (talk) 23:33, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Closing that discussion

I wanted to get a second opinion on closing the discussion down on the talk page. Usually, I'm very much against that type of action, however, it just wreaked of attracting trolls and further disrupting the article. Obviously, this article doesn't need anymore disruption. Anyways, I just wanted to get your opinion. Regards, Digital 21:19, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

The one on interest groups? Closing it would be no problem. Grsz 21:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. It has been closed. Additionally, I'm going to be creating some articles this afternoon. If you're going to be around, I might ask for some formatting help with pictures. If your busy, no worries :) Digital 21:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing my help request. The citation I'm referring to his this one: ref name="CZUB">"CZ 2075 RAMI". CZUB.COM. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help); Unknown parameter |access date= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help). It is number 4. The web address won't show up. Also, under the "Safety Features" section, the "edit" button appears superimposed over the text. I'm having a hard time with that as well. Thanks!! Digital 01:40, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

You just didn't have the url field for cite 4. Grsz 01:41, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, you fixed it! Thank you!! Do you think it is ready to be moved to mainspace yet? Digital 01:41, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

It looks good. I would say keep a copy in your userspace for the time being, but it is certainly acceptable. Grsz 01:44, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Olympic Airlines

Many thanks. Dr.K. (talk) 23:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Talkback

I added more since the talkback tag. CTJF83Talk 03:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if you have my page watched...but do you IRC chat...It makes life easier! CTJF83Talk 05:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if you got the above post, with all the drama on your talk page. CTJF83Talk 16:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Scarian has closed the report, and blocked the abuser for 12 hours, who accused us of being sockpuppets. CTJF83Talk 16:45, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Not that he doesn't have other accounts to use. Grsz 16:48, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

LOL, ya...and do u not use IRC or what? CTJF83Talk 16:51, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't. Grsz 16:54, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Awww :( you should! lol CTJF83Talk 16:56, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

You're the master puppet catcher!!! I also responded to you on my talk. CTJF83Talk 05:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you let people have their say at least.

Please let users have their say on the Obama talk page. The main page is locked, so there is no possibilty of any vandalism. As far as I could tell this new section ] was very differant from any other debate so far. It was a very valid question and was not a disruption. Please do not be so quick to dismiss all discussions. So that you do not think I am being biased, my response was this:

On the surface your request makes sense, but that catagory only applies to persons born in various countries. African American is justified in this case since Obama was born in the U.S. and not Kenya.--Jojhutton (talk) 01:03, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I was able to add it to the discussion after another editor placed the section back on the page.--Jojhutton (talk) 01:03, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

No, it's the same "Obama's not black" argument that's been throw out again and again. Grsz 01:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Others, as it turns out, have disagreed with you, and it was reverted back for active discussion.--Jojhutton (talk) 01:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Wrong, it was brought up by one more person. Are you serious? Can you not read the tone in which the IP posted? He did not post it to generate good discussion, he posted it to make a point. Don't feed the trolls. Grsz 01:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

The page is still open to all users and belongs to the community. If you do not wish to participate in the discussion, then it is your right, but please allow the others to do so.--Jojhutton (talk) 01:49, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

You haven't been around long enough to realize just how disruptive it is when this same crap is posted all the time, again and again. It is perfectly acceptable and on the Obama page commonplace to simply delete these disruptive sections, as they will generate no constructive comments. Please see WP:FORUM. Grsz 01:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it can be disturbing to see the same questions over and over again, but we must be careful not to bite the newcomers, even if you don't agree with them. As for not being around long enough, I have been watching longer than you may think.--Jojhutton (talk) 02:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Baby Not On Board

No problem. -Wildonrio (talk) 05:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Steelers

I don't know, it wasn't even sold out (1000+ seats left). There were a ton of Steelers fans there, you could hear them chanting in the background on SportsCenter afterward. Blackngold29 05:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard of it, looks interesting though. Blackngold29 05:12, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Are there any books about it? Blackngold29 05:26, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

La revolucion mexicana

Si quieres hablar acerca de este tema, pegame un correo un dia de estos. Es que estoy harto de las pendejadas por aqui. Aunque no uso ni acentos, si los hablo. Acaso podemos platicar. Suerte con tus estudios.--Die4Dixie (talk) 07:33, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Wow lots of editors

Doesn't seem like there are now an avalanche of editors on Barack Obama now. It seems like we don't need to be watching it as much as we had to before. Hopefully we don't have to deal with the SPA's as we had to before he was elected! Though I will say it was semi fun, in a masochistic kind of way. It seemed like every day/hour there was someone trying to push one conspiracy then another. I enjoyed working with you and the others and hopefully we'll still get to have some kind of editing fun! (OH, long live the knights who say nee cabal!) Brothejr (talk) 13:00, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Zeituni Onyango re-written

This article has been rewritten. Please visit the AfD discussion to see if your concerns have been addressed. Thank you. -- Banjeboi 22:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

As a relative latecomer to helping to keep the Barack Obama related articles neutral and not-nutty, I'm extremely appreciative of everyone who has been working on the article these last months. And to keep the Barack Obama article at Featured Article quality through the election was an impressive feat. Congratulations! ~ priyanath  00:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Pittsburgh

Good job contributing to the History of Pittsburgh article. It looks good. I just made small wording clarifications about Pitt, but I don't think it needs more coverage about it other than what it has, especially since Pitt has its own history article. I'm going to look over the article some more tomorrow, but it is in good shape. have a good night CrazyPaco (talk) 05:43, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Your DYK submission of Ghost Town Trail

Hello! Your submission of Ghost Town Trail at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Politizer /_contribs 03:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Pittsburgh climate

Hi, please visit Talk:Pittsburgh#Climate and add to the discussion I started here a week or so ago. This climate information seems to get reverted back and forwards every few days and the facts need to be laid out and consensus established on this. Thanks. Mfield (talk) 04:03, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

PrimeFan - Del arte case

The evidence here is overwhelming that these are all the same person. I'm unblocking User:Del arte, which seems to be the real master, to time served with a warning not to sock again. I advise interested parties to watch the IP range and articles related to this case. I am also renaming Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/PrimeFan to Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Del arte and retagging the socks. This decision was made in consultation with other checkusers and a member of the arbcom. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Wehrum

Sterling work on Wehrum, Pennsylvania. I've never been there, but I used to drive past Vintondale, Pennsylvania on my way to Penn State from Pittsburgh. You might want to expand on the Orthodox church. It seems that they moved it to Vintondale, and its founding pastor was later made an Orthodox saint, at least according to the Vintondale website. It might be worth verifying. Pustelnik (talk) 02:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I added it. Pustelnik (talk) 02:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Obama

I apologize for the violation. One of the times I reverted was because the change had been swept up with vandalism reverted by another user. It won't happen again. »S0CO 04:25, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Obama in Kenya

Please explain your deletion of referenced information on the Barack Obama talk page sub section I have initiated. Be sure to fully explain how you have interpreted WP:UNDUE, and how it applies in this instance. Glen Twenty (talk) 05:07, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

RE:Euryalus's talk page

What was wrong with this? Seems like a valid question. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 19:58, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Holy

Jerks put it on Versus and I didn't see it! Lange was pretty excited though. I can't wait to watch the highlights. They should threaten to trade Staal more often, lol. Blackngold29 02:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Ghost Town Trail

This user is not worth the trouble

Hint: . Just ignore him ;) .--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 16:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Ya I came across those. Oh well, he's got a 3 week block to shut him up. Grsz 16:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Indef. would be nicer, but I'm not the judge here.--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 16:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I think that if he keeps editing/commenting the way he has, then a much much longer block will happen. But like The Magnificent Clean-keeper said, just ignore him. Brothejr (talk) 17:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Info

Thanks for the info. History2007 (talk) 15:06, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK

To answer your question, anyone can review articles at DYK. I would suggest familiarizing yourself with the rules before doing so though. You may also want to watch how seasoned reviewers respond to articles. Since you're new, don't be surprised if more seasoned reviewers shadow your comments to make sure you are being fair and/or not missing anything. Good luck and welcome to DYK.Nrswanson (talk) 03:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome. In addition to the rules written at the top of the suggestions page, you should also read these User:Art LaPella/Unwritten rules, which are also applied as stringently by DYK reviewers as the "written rules".Nrswanson (talk) 03:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Question about the "Spook"

I was just wondering when it was discovered that LukeTheSpook was socking. Was it when Rlevse ran a checkuser or before that? This may sound like an odd question, but I'm a very curious person. Heh. Thanks! Enigma 04:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Seicer discovered Luke was using the same IP as and Sum44, who was blocked as a sock of PeaceOfSheet, I think. I'm not entirely certain, as I was out undoing all of Luke's edits. Grsz 04:27, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Obviously there was some suspicions before the checkuser was run; the checkuser only confirmed the suspicions. The bigger problem is that he has admitted that he used his second accounts disruptively, including creating one just for the sole purpose of creating extra work for the admins. He is also unrepentant about that action, so I see no reason why he needs to be unblocked at this point. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Good work

Good job with the recent conflict about President Obama on AN/I. I am an Obama supporter, but even if it were McCain, or especially a different, upstart, president that I didn't agree with, issues like that cannot be ignored. Those users do not seem to know what they are talking about, or they are biased. This really isn't a place to say if edits like that are credible or not, because you never know, an admin might step in and debunk a threat like that, but say on December 21st we hear that some terrible thing has happened. You just don't know when the next "not credible" threat will happen, so let's just try to prevent it from happening in the first place. Jock Boy (t/c) Sign 00:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

AN

I hadn't, thanks.--Tznkai (talk) 02:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: That page you asked me about

Sorry, no... The deleted page contained nothing that would be appropriate even for your userspace. It was pure trash, and if you think a valid article could possibly be created under that title, it would be best to create one from scratch, because there really is nothing there worth preserving. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the article was basically an attack on Leary using all the "He ripped off Bill Hicks" stuff, but laced with profanities. There was really nothing at all worth preserving there. Go ahead and create the article again, if you like, with sources and references and neutral language and that will be fine. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama cabinet

The box I created for Cabinet members was much more organized than the already existent one. I'm sorry but the other one is such a mess! All names are in random order. Also, I stated my source about Napolitano and Pritzker (CNN). Please stop editing my contributions! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inthefuture (talk • contribs) 05:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

edit removed from history

Hi. I just noticed your request to have an edit removed from your talk page history. If you could please let me know where you've seen this done previously I'm sure this should help your case. Cheers, --Rebroad (talk) 18:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Scottsdale

WP:Manual of Style (links)#Internal links: "Items in Misplaced Pages articles can be linked to other Misplaced Pages articles that provide information that significantly adds to readers' understanding of the topic" (emph added} and further on the guideline "An article may be overlinked if ... Low added-value items are linked". Linking to a disambig page is clearly a low value add link, in fact it adds nothing to the reader other than adding confusion as to which Scottsdale was intended. -- The Red Pen of Doom 02:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

notice

I am calling for your resignation on WP:ANI. It's not a personal thing. I wish you the best in your future endeavors. However, it's best that you swiftly conclude your time here on Misplaced Pages. Jayhawk of Justice (talk) 14:35, 22 November 2008 (UTC)