Misplaced Pages

User talk:Meishern: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:47, 8 March 2012 editMisconceptions2 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,423 edits File:Bolender kurt ss.gif listed for deletion← Previous edit Revision as of 23:41, 11 March 2012 edit undoMisconceptions2 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,423 edits feedbackNext edit →
Line 494: Line 494:


Thanks--] (]) 21:47, 8 March 2012 (UTC) Thanks--] (]) 21:47, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
==Third opinion: help preventing edit war, solving conflict==
Please give your opinion here, it would be most welcomed: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#William_Muir.27s_opinions_in_Life_of_Mahomet

Thanks in advance--] (]) 23:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:41, 11 March 2012

Leave me a New Message
Please click here to start a new Section below and leave me a message. Cheers!


Sobibor Jews

Thanks for your edits. They are great.--Jacurek (talk) 20:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Leon Feldhendler.jpg

Hi. This copyright for this image is actually held by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Copyright is asserted on this page: http://inquery.ushmm.org/uia-cgi/uia_doc/photos/2245 --Rrburke 14:21, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi. You are correct that the USHMM claims to hold copyright. The legal problem is two fold with their assertion of copyrights.
(1) This photo was taken in Poland 64 or so years ago and according to Polish law, all photos taken in Poland prior to 1990 are considered public domain.
(2) The use of this image falls under fair use for historical images since
(a) It is a historically significant photo.
(b) It is of much lower resolution than the original.
(c) It is only being used for informational purposes.
(d) It depicts a non-reproducible deceased historic figure with no free equivalent available.
The use of this image to illustrate the article about Mr. Leon Feldhendler satisfies all four requirements regarding fair use.

Cheers! Meishern (talk) 21:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock #1514835 lifted or expired.

Request handled by: Closedmouth (talk) 16:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

Autoblock expires in about 20 minutes. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Tampan language

I was about to post a "Nice Catch" on your deletion, but then I thought I'd approach the internet search a little differently. I googled "mafia tampan language" and got multiple hits! Heres one: http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20080810/ARTICLE/808100348?Title=Gotti-arrest-has-Tampa-in-Mafia-territory-again

You might read through a few of those google hits, and draw a different conclusion, one which may prompt your re-addition of the deleted material. Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 02:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for double checking google.
The link you posted : http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20080810/ARTICLE/808100348?Title=Gotti-arrest-has-Tampa-in-Mafia-territory-again
If you read the newspaper article, and see what we had on the[REDACTED] article (before i removed it), the language is practically identical. The newspaper article states : "Authorities credit the Trafficante family with creating a mob language known as "Tampan," a hybrid of Italian and Spanish created to confuse police." Misplaced Pages had "The Trafficante family was also credited for creating the language known in the old mafia days as "Tampan." Tampan was a language of an Italian/Spanish dialect. It was spoken by the Mob mainly because the police could not understand the language." I just checked revisions for Trafficante article, and this paragraph about Tampan has been around since at least January 2008. The article from Tribune was written in August, 2008. Chances are, the reporter just rephrased the information from wikipedia. I've been reading about mafia for a long time, lived in Brooklyn and Tampa, and this is news to me. I will look on google some more maybe "mafia tampan -tampa", but for right now lets remove this Tampan unless either one of us finds something concrete. What do you say?Meishern (talk) 02:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Well That was a nice catch. I have failed to consider that WP was the primary source for the Herald article. *shakes head sadly. The axiom "Don't believe everything you read in the papers" is becoming more and more true! I will do some research on "Tampan" as well, and perhaps together, if indeed there is such a dialect in use, we can write something definitive.
I should mention that I have also done alot of reading on criminal organizations, but my research tends more to the early appearence, and development of such. I started the article Five Points Gang as a matter of fact! Since I started it, it has grown into quite a nice article on the subject. Good work, on your part though...Kudos! Best regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 18:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

ip problems

{{ProcseeBot|{{blocked proxy}} <!-- 119.82.249.58:8080 -->|119.82.248.67|On hold per comments noted below. There's no autoblocks, simply a proxy block. We could do an IP exemption after investigation. NJA (t/c) 06:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC)}}

Hi, I am not a bot. Please unblock me and check my edits from past 1/2 year from same location. Meishern (talk) 21:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, we know you're not a bot. You appear to have been caught as part of a block against an open proxy, which are not allowed to be used at Misplaced Pages. I have reported this to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject on open proxies for further investigation. Please be patient to see what they turn up. --Jayron32 22:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
On the advice of the good folks over at WP:OP, I have granted this account IP Block Exemption status, allowing you to edit through any hardblocked IP addresses. Please be aware that this IPBE status has certain stipulations which basically say that you should not attempt to game or abuse this status, doing so can result in sanctions. However, given the likelyhood of being caught by collateral damage in the case of this IP-block, I am granting the IPBE in good faith. Please see WP:IPBE for more details. Should the folks at WP:OP ever sort out the details on this IP address, and the hard block is removed, the IPBE may be revoked as unneccessary. However, as it stands now, you should be free to edit. --Jayron32 18:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Jayron. Appreciate the vote of confidence. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 23:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Oakland Ebonics controversy

On these edits of yours: If you'd like to write up your fantasies about language, please do so on some other website. -- Hoary (talk) 00:16, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I will get photocopies of the research paper then get consensus. Don't call my edits fantasies, since you cant back it up, I suppose I must demonstrate that either you have a political agenda or simply full of hot air. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 00:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Hoary, I am unable to reference what I wrote (in either article) and so far can't produce the same research paper I used as a basis to edit. I am not a linguist but have an acute memory and know I read an accepted publication in Brooklyn College 15 year ago regarding this topic and paraphrased its conclusions in my edits from memory. The edits I made were not bizarre, perhaps the word 'unpolished' suits better, yet they were not malicious inventions either. Thats besides the point since I can't reference them. I take back (what turned out to be my own hot air) that you 'have a political agenda and full of hot air' and apologize to you. My hat (if I wore one) is off to you for protecting this article from unreferenced information. I am not giving up in my search, now more for my own curiosity than for Misplaced Pages. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 14:03, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. And sorry if I was unnecessarily abrupt -- it's just that this article and some closely related to it suffer rather a lot from undesirable edits, so the patience of their long-term would-be protectors is already strained before we start to read the latest addition. Happy editing! -- Hoary (talk) 14:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
You weren't abrupt. You caught me just like that pop-song my daughters keep playing "With my pants on the ground". I usually am much more careful with references, trapping people who try to disprove my edits, but this time I was caught unprepared. Perhaps in the future, if I have a dispute elsewhere regarding something that is referenced, I may ask for an opinion from you? Meishern (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes of course. Though I can't promise in advance that I'll be able to give it. Meanwhile, if you as a non-linguist are interested in AAVE or in the kerfuffle about it or both, I highly recommend John Baugh's Beyond Ebonics, a shortish, non-technical, and excellent book. There are several other excellent books on this or related subjects, but Baugh's is the best I've seen. ¶ I've taken the liberty of altering the unnecessarily bellicose title of this thread; hope you don't mind. -- Hoary (talk) 15:09, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
You see, I moved to Brooklyn, NY, Coney Island Projects when I was 10 years old from Russia (1982). I learned English from the Puerto Ricans, Blacks and a few Caucasians from the Projects who only spoke AAVE. Five years later I moved to an all Caucasian high school in New Jersey and had to 're-learn' English so the teachers wouldn't fail me. Now I am just as comfortable speaking with professors in standard English as in AAVE (we just called it street talk in Brooklyn). I non the less have a very heavy Brooklyn/NY accent that I am unable (nor do I want) to change. So whenever I had to do a presentation at work, I always saw mid-western executives smile at my AAVE influenced grammar and pronunciations that normally come out when I am relaxed. I don't think I need to read a book about Ebonics, since I am bi-lingual in English (AAVE & Standard Grammar English). I am moving to China in August to continue medical school, so if you have a book on Chinese Ebonics, I will gladly read it. :) Cheers! Meishern (talk) 15:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Just a note

Hello, I have your talkpage on my watchlist (not sure why) but I noticed you removed your own comment because you felt you had gotten too personal. If you are uncomfortable with any personal details you wrote might I suggest contacting an oversighter to remove the comment from your talk page history? Just a friendly note :) Bunnies!Not just any bunnies... 16:40, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem OohBunnies. Now that I am sober I will just restore my comment since it wasn't as embarrassing or personal as I thought it was. Thanks for the heads up regarding the oversighter. So I am on your watch list? People told me I am fascinating. :) Cheers! Meishern (talk) 02:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Oh yeh. East Harlem Purple Gang is why we are acquainted. Meishern (talk) 16:36, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Ah yes, you were the one who pointed out that it seemed to be made up :P I assume the info in there now is at the least verifiable? Bunnies!Not just any bunnies... 05:01, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Yeh the article now looks like it had a gastric bypass. The info about the gang looks more realistic and referenced. I will add a couple of sentences, and I don't see much else that can be done with the Purple Gang. I am working on Aryan Brotherhood rewrite and Sobibor rewrite, but since Purple Gang wont take much time, and I made such a stink about it, I will spend a few hours on it now. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 05:57, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Well, it's not very important if you ask me, but it's good you brought up issues on the talkpage, we don't want articles with false information. Good luck on your rewrites and keep up the good editing my friend! :) Bunnies!Not just any bunnies... 03:58, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

East Harlem Purple Gang

I must admit I do not much about this gang, but I will see what I can find. - DonCalo (talk) 17:31, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I think you will like my latest change to Jewish-American organized crime. - DonCalo (talk) 19:08, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Not bad. I like it. I gotta re-read the whole thing again, but (at least in my view) the tone of the article became more neutral and balanced. Its 4am here in Cambodia and I gotta go to a wedding in 2 hours, I will hold off till my head is more clear. If you need any help, let me know. My expertise is World War 2, Nazis, Concentration Camps, Soviet Union and Organized Crime. Perhaps we cold collaborate on rewriting some of these mob articles, since too many of them sound like a 1930's pulp fiction novels. Cheers! -meishern 4am, March 27, 2010 (damn keyboard stuck)

I think this is overdue!

The Original Barnstar
Please accept this barnstar for your hard work, well written content and general nice-ness. :) Bunnies!Not just any bunnies... 04:20, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Cool! Thanks! Meishern (talk) 07:04, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Harry S. Truman/archive1

Hi, a lot of work has been done to bring this back up to FA standard. Can you revisit it please, and explain whether you think the article should be kept or removed as FA? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:51, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Please give me 12 hours to read the article a few times over. I will give my 5 cents with a detailed explanation. Meishern (talk) 17:18, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
It looks alright. Referenced well from legitimate sources. POV is not blatantly partisan. There are a few minor things that could be rewritten or rephrased in my opinion, but nothing major sticks out to warrant deletion of this article. Needs a bit of polishing, thats all. I just read the article about Rudy Giuliani, and that article should be completely redone. Truman looks fine and in my view up to standards on an encyclopedia article. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 20:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

May 2010

Please do not add defamatory content to Misplaced Pages, as you did to Talk:Bilal Skaf. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ***Adam*** 04:37, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Adam, I have not added any defamatory statements to any Misplaced Pages articles. I have expressed an opinion on a Discussion page using no racial terms. If this opinion (which is backed up by referenced news sources) offends you, perhaps you should learn more about freedom of speech and expression. I didnt add this opinion to the article itself, even though its backed up by referenced sources, so I wouldn't get threatened, intimidated and insulted by people like yourself and others who contacted me so far. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 05:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Wow 3 death threat emails so far and 1 complaint here. I didnt know that a convicted gang rapist Bilal Skaf had such a loyal fan base. Is he a role model for Lebanese children? He must be truly the pride of the community due to the hate e-mail I am receiving. My wife asked me to remove my email from here, but NO, I will not be intimidated so easily. I stand by what I wrote, and gathering sources to make some referenced additions to this article that others (I suspect) are too scared to make. P.S. Please make 100% of your threatening emails in English, Russian, Ukrainian, Thai or Khmer since I don't speak other languages. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 07:39, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
All the same, edits like this one are extremely unwise, don't you think? Inflammatory even. There's no "freedom of speech" here, just a bunch of articles we're trying to improve. Please be more tactful. Arguments that refer to reliable sources are always more convincing than those that refer to analogy or opinion. --John (talk) 07:48, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes. I made a mistake getting into discussion of this article in the first place. My friend told me his daughter (who I know) was one of the victims this week. Never even heard of this crime before. Emotions (and beer) got the best of me. I broke my own rule never to comment/edit articles unless I am neutral. I'm going to leave it alone. Cheers Meishern (talk) 08:03, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Ironically

Nice. This is a word that should almost always be in a quote, or not at all. Like "seminal". Keep up the good work. --John (talk) 07:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Hahaha. I was trying to think if you been sarcastic, sardonic or ironic. I decided that you are just being zany. I only saw 'seminal' used in lectures on reproduction or porn movies, and dont remember any quotes, not that I was looking . Cheers! Meishern (talk) 07:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Using words like that breaks WP:NPOV and WP:NOR in most cases, unless it is sourced, so well done for taking it out. --John (talk) 07:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it seemed POV to me as well as nonsensical to insinuate that drinking a Heineken beer while playing pool equates to shooting heroin. The movie scene tries to make it ironic (and fails i think), but since the movie is narrated by Renton, its a depiction of a heroin addict's justifications. Just a wrong use of the word 'ironic'. It would be ironic if Begbie injected cocaine and meth while putting down Rent-boy for injecting heroin. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 07:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, the book is much better of course, the movie oversimplifies it, though it's also good. --John (talk) 07:59, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Book is great. I like Porno and Glue as well. Welsh matured a bit and the quality of writing improved. I doubt Porno will be made into a movie due to content, McGregors reluctance and Carlyle/Welsh dislike of each other. Glue could be made since Renton is barely in it (can use body double) and its an excellent story. Meishern (talk) 08:07, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

2009 Richmond High School gang rape

Hey Meishern, the article you used as a reference is clearly an opinion piece. The article is in written in the first person and the author expresses her own surprise at certain reactions she noted from some readers (which contradicted her own opinion about the incident). But the bigger issue is that by mentioning the races of the involved parties in the Misplaced Pages article this heavily implies that race was a significant factor in the rape. However the only source you supplied to back this up comes from opinions expressed by a select group of readers which does not make for a reliable source. SQGibbon (talk) 18:39, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Many articles and books are written in a 'first person style' which are valid as references. The reporter (not author), discloses the race of the victim and the alleged rapists in a non-opinionated sentence. Her LA Times pedigree gives credibility to the disclosure. The significant factor of most rapes are psychological problems, opportunity, intoxication, and sexual urges; not race. Yes this victim was of a different race than the alleged rapists as well as the observers. Nobody assisted the victim for hours while she was beaten, raped and had objects inserted inside her. Did race play some role? The question here is if such behavior would have been allowed by the spectators had the victim been of the same race as they are. I can't find a source on that question yet. Thus, I will hold back editing this article until one of the alleged rapists decides to testify. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 18:59, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
SGGibbon@ This user is also responsible for adding content like this (removed) to talk pages regarding gang rape. ***Adam*** 23:44, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Adam, please use a link in your signature. I stand by the comments I make on talk pages, that is what they are there for. I am careful when editing articles to be neutral as well as reference my edits. Yes in the past 36 hours I may have gone a bit over the line with some comments. However none are racist or repressive and I can reference them too. Adam, it saddens me that freedom to discuss referenced information offends you so much because of your POV. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 00:12, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Adam, do me a favor. Stop instigating about the other article. I made my response on the talk page there. There are too many people who got hurt by these nuts without your assistance as per your comment above. I will take the link out of your comment, for safety of my family. Meishern (talk) 00:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alexander Pechersky

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Alexander Pechersky you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. I am making some minor edits while I review. Ishtar456 (talk) 18:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

hi again, I'm not quite finished with the review, but I thought I would give you a heads up about an issue that would cause me to put it on hold. The lead only summarizes his part in the uprising. It should be a summary of the whole article, including early life, his induction into the military, his marriage and his death, etc.--Ishtar456 (talk) 19:25, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
i added some of the things u wanted. the problem is that he lived as quiet as a mouse. a man few would remember seeing in a room with other people. a non-descript, quiet man who spend years before and after the war teaching amateur violinists and saxophone players. nothing can be referenced about his marriage but the 1 sentence how he met his wife, and that is in the main part of the article. I saw no reason to repeat it in the intro since he never spoke about her, and it is unknown whether his marriage was successful or not. Pechersky was basically a nobody who for 21 days shined and did something so incredible that his deed must be remembered, praised and emulated by all oppressed people today and 1000 years from now. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 00:32, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The summary should represent the whole article. It is perfectly acceptable to repeat info. that is in the main article. "He was married and had (insert number of) children." "He died on (insert date)". Since these details are in the article, they must also be in the lead.--Ishtar456 (talk) 05:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

See, but they don't have to be in the lead. Show me the Misplaced Pages rule that states that the lead must list everything in the main article. He refused to talk about his wife, didn't live with her, didn't talk about his children (0 refrences). I am not sure what you expect if there is nothing referenced regarding even the names of his children or their gender. Look at article about Napoleon and see how many of his relatives (who were appointed kings of major European countries) names are listed. Meishern (talk) 10:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alexander Pechersky

The article Alexander Pechersky you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Alexander Pechersky for things which need to be addressed. Ishtar456 (talk) 21:07, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I did what you asked. Please see if there is anything else I should do. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 00:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

You are not over the seven day limit. I was going to give you a little extra time anyway, since I guessed you were away. I am going to be busy, at least until Wednesday, so you have a little more time to work on the lead, spend a little more time "tweaking" it. Mention his family. Break it into a few paragraphs (2-4 is acceptable). I just looked at it quickly tonight and I see "World War 2" , the 2 should be Roman (II) and it should be wikilinked. The first mention of a phrase like that should be wikilinked. After I give it a good read I will let you know what I find. I will not fail it without giving you some time to fix anything I might find, if it is small I will fix it myself. I think it is an excellent article, just have to give it an excellent lead.--Ishtar456 (talk) 05:25, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The introduction to the article about Napoleon never mentioned the love of his life Josephine. The introduction to article about Ronald Reagan says nothing about Nancy. I can mention dozens of other featured articles that don't mention wifes, dogs, cats and favorite brand of underwear in the intro paragraph. Your insistance to mention Pecherskys wife in the intro paragraph has no benefit or logic. I think your criteria is off. I would like another person to review this article. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 10:12, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I will not do the strange suggestions you requested to 'gimp' the article. I would prefer you fail the article than implement your suggestions that would weaken it. I spend over 40 hours researching and writing it, and I feel it is fine as is without mentioning Pechersky's unknown children and wife, along with your other strange ideas. I prefer to spend my time writing original content than listening to editorial suggestions that I know make no sense. You are entitled to your opinion however. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 10:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

A spouse is not a favorite brand of underwear. If you had not mentioned a wife in the article, I would not suggest you add her to the lead summary. The lead summary should represent the article See MOSlead. I did not say "gimp", I said "tweak", which means "to make better". I'm shocked by your reaction. I think that you are a half centimeter from having me pass this article and you are asking me to fail it. I'll let you think about your request today and if you do not change your mind I will fail the article tomorrow. What a shame.--Ishtar456 (talk) 11:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

on second thought. I have your wish. I will fail the article as you suggested. I too have better things to do than get into an edit war over something as minor as this. I think I tried to help you improve your article and have it pass GAN fairly easily. I think there maybe a language barrier, or something impeding out communicate. Anyway. Take Care.--Ishtar456 (talk) 12:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I dont understand what specifically you want. Perhaps my reaction was a bit out of order, yet you were never clear about your expectations besides changes to roman numerals and inclusion of wife into the intro section that should be expanded into 2-4 paragraphs. I spend 30 minutes looking at featured articles. Unfortunately this article will never qualify, since there just isnt enough referenced info. If you would please give me a list of what you expect to see in the intro, or anywhere else. I feel Mr. Pechersky deserves recognition so I will follow your lead as long as those suggestions dont interfere with the flow of the article. Sorry again if I snapped out a bit. I guess I am sensitive about the content I write. heh. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 11:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I told you that I would not have time to give it a good read until after today. I am on my way to the hospital right now for a friend's surgery and had planned to give the article my full attention this tomorrow. I peeked in this morning to see that you had attacked me is several places. I think that you are an okay writer, but I don't think you read carefully. In any case I think that you overreacted and you have you wish I will fail the article. Anymore communication on this matter should be on the GAN discussion page.--Ishtar456 (talk) 12:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Dont worry about article. Friend more important. I will move discussion to GAN. I already apologized for snapping out (overreacting). I was sincere in my apology. In any case I rewrote. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 12:15, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I received your message this evening on my user page. The thing is I already failed the article at your request. I got your apology much too late. Yesterday I removed the article from the nomination list and posted that it failed at your request. I said: "I am failing this article at the nominators request. I felt I was following the MOSlead guidelines. What has resulted is an unnecessary edit war between nominator and reviewer.--Ishtar456 (talk) 12:01, 6 July 2010 (UTC)" If you go to the discussion page for the article and read the box that explains that the article failed, you will see that you have the option of requesting a "reassessment" or you can renominate it. I have washed my hands of it.--Ishtar456 (talk) 01:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

You were fair since I did ask for the article to be failed. Sometimes my temper does more harm than good. You received my apology, and I hold nothing against you. Wish you the best. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 02:14, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Re:Alexander Pechersky

Hello, Meishern. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-FASTILY 21:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Ten Commandments

I am glad it is sorted out! For what it is worth, I believe that three general viewpoints: that of the classic midrashim, that of the classic commentaries (e.g. from Mikraot Gdolot) and modern (critical i.e. higher and lower criticism) scholarship all have a place in Misplaced Pages. Obviously with regards to the Ten Commandments, I think there should be one article on different religious points of view (beginning with Judaism versus Christianity) and a separate article on different views among higher critics. As for your most recent comment: if we succeed in establishing two separate articles and lifting the page protection, I think it would be a great service if you began a section reviewing any debates or major comments by Jewish sages.

Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy will demand careful attribution of any view (so that it is always x's interpretation of a text, and I think it would be important to distinguish between the views of the tanaim and Amoraim and medieval commentators), but I think Misplaced Pages needs articles on each book of the Bible, or Biblical topics, to incorporate Jewish commentary. I cannot do this, but you do not need to complain about other editors who do not see things your way. As long as the POV is clearly identified, you and others can just go ahead and start incorporating these views. Slrubenstein | Talk 15:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I didn't use a name during stating my opinion of him/her ;) ... But seriously, some editors do need to be kept in check, and are, otherwise edit wars, and other problems that hold back progress occur. However this person in particular is a bit strange in my view. To get back to your main point.
I agree that every single view has a place on Misplaced Pages, and thats what separates it from a 20 volume traditional encyclopedia. I like your view about creation of Judaism vs. Christianity article, that may work (i give it 50/50). I made an honest, intellectual reply to a question a few days back, when someone asked why Christians call the Old Testament the Hebrew Bible, and was accused of trying to start a Holy War. I don't think Judaism vs. Islam on 10 commandments will ever work. I edited an article about an Islamic gang rapist to include referenced info, and received 20 death threats in email. If thats the reaction for a gang rapist I can only imagine the reaction for creating a true NPOV article.
I am not sure why there is still page protection here since there's such an overwhelming consensus. I say, lets just edit through it. If it is reverted, I am sure you know the laws of Misplaced Pages as to how to properly proceed. I just write articles or commentary or edit; POV, not to revert more than once, and not to insult people directly in comments are the only laws of Misplaced Pages I know.
I will gladly begin compiling referenced commentary and looking for what the sages said on all versions. Lets just isolate the real (Jewish) version away from the other ones. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Why "more problems?" Because kwama reverted my edit? Of course he reverted my edit! he is a "POV-pusher" and will not accept consensus. He will keep reverting edits. He is not interested in dialogue and I do not think it is worth my time to try to explain things to him any more. It is up to editors who share the consensus to keep restoring the consensus version. If he keeps reverting, we can report it to the Administrator's noticeboard. But no single editor can be allowed to hold an article hostage. Slrubenstein | Talk 10:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I dunno. He an admin, pretty much invincible if he chooses to sabotage this. I foresee a battle over every verb, adverb and noun in the article since the lopsided consensus must have upset him. We are just getting a taste of it now. Non the less I am still collecting what we spoke before about, and its up to you and others to stop this tyrant. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 14:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Need a reviewer for Chinese economic reform

Hello; I have nominated the above article for GAN for several weeks and it has not yet be reviewed. I noticed you were reviewing GA nominations right now and I would like to ask you, if you have the time and inclination to do so, to review my article as well. Thank you very much.Teeninvestor (talk) 15:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I will when I finish with current article. I worked on Wall St a few years, have an MBA, so maybe it will be article right up my alley. Give me 5-6 days with my current edits. If you don't hear from me, please drop me another message here. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 15:29, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm a regular visitor of Mergers and Inquisitions so I guess I have an interest in this too. Thanks for your help!Teeninvestor (talk) 15:32, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Heads up that you requested after 5 days (don't begin if you're not ready though, there's no pressure).Teeninvestor (talk) 18:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! i am almost done with this Greek article, 48 hours more. Sorry, took much longer than I thought. If you want I can start on your article, but u gotta factor in the time for me to finish the Greek article first? Is that fair? Cheers! Meishern (talk) 21:01, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, the link you gave me is dead. And the books are cited in a series (like the book China's Great Transformation is a collection of academic papers, so they are not "individual books" so to speak). How would I cite this (collection of academic papers in volume).Teeninvestor (talk) 23:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Nvm. I think I fixed it. Cheers!Teeninvestor (talk) 15:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Cool. I will see if they will allow me to review two articles at the same time, since from reading portions of yours, nothing serious is jumping in my face. i will just check a few of the refs, and follow the checklist. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 16:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

<----

Teeninvestor, you didn't mention that this article is in the middle of a heated debate/edit war. #4 point i look at is "The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars." I am not gonna quick fail it, but will put it on hold until I finish reading the article, better understand the issues behind the conflict regarding the content of the article or consensus is reached. There is no way to GA this article when there are dozens of edits and reverts in the past 30 days which are likely to continue. I suggest you and the other editors reach a compromise as was done on dozens of other emotionally charged articles. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 16:55, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Noemvriana

That are great news! Although I did write most of it, your constructive criticism and critical input was very important. Thank you! Best wishes!A.Cython (talk) 21:07, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I learned about History. So win/win situation. Good luck! Cheers! Meishern (talk) 22:45, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Thieves in Law

Hello! But I certainly did not write that myself!!! It was laready there, and I thought it was very strange indeed, but then I thought maybe it's true, as if the thieves had brought peace... I did not dare change it to the more logical "World of Thieves" as I have no background on the topic. So PLEASE take a look at the edits I did make and not the text that was already there and that was not at all my doing. ))) --Cata-girl (talk) 22:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I looked at the edit history, and it looked like the edit came from you. I am sorry if I made a mistake. In any case that article needs some major re-writes since its practically unreferenced, often vandalized, has some POV issues as well as a mix of referenced facts mixed with folklore and practically a whole section taken verbatim from a gangster pulp-fiction book. If you are new to Misplaced Pages, please try to reference when you add new info (unless grammar/spelling corrections) even if you are editing a topic you are unfamiliar with. If something sounds wrong to you, check google for a reliable reference, and change it. But don't be shy, and please edit/add new content! Cheers! Meishern (talk) 22:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

He there again. The edit didn't come from me, but maybe it looked like it did because I was about to change it to "Thieves' World", so maybe I actually started to do that but then stopped. However, I never saved those particular changes. Hmmm, oh well. nyway, that's basically what I was trying to do, was to fix some of the most outlandish parts of the article. I'll try to be more referential in the future, but some of it was just plain common sense. The article has some serious problems, but I think it's beyond me to fix them right now, as I don't know enough about the topic. Thanks for the feedback anyway. Take care! --Cata-girl (talk) 22:29, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

- I was thinking about the changes you made to the article in question, and it occurs to me that you may be wrong. We both know that the Russian word "mir" has 2 translations in Egnlish, peace and world (I studied Russian for 4 years at university, and yes, it was my specialization. I have not lost touch with the Russian-speaking world and speak Russian on a regular basis even here in Barcelona. There is a large Russian community. Also, I am in touch with the former Soviet world through my husband, who is Ukrainian and who grew up and studied in the Soviet Union.) Now "воровской мир" may very well be "Thieves' Peace", as an ironic statement about how the end of the "Russian Revolution" (which was basically a bloody civil war with "rampaging" lawlessness) may have been brought about by bandits and thieves coming into control. What did YOU base your edit on??? I see no references to anything in your edit. The author may have known what he or she was talking about, though the article may be poorly written and the English not quite up to standard. When I decided not to change the translation, it was because I was unsure, and also because I looked on internet for the term in Russian and found didly squat. However, I will ask my husband, who is currently in Ukraine, what could be the true meaning of the phrase, but I would not just jump to the conclusion that it's not "Thieves' Peace". I was also looking at my edits from yesterday. What I did was add the Russian-language version of Vorovskoy mir in parenthesis (as well as correct the English, I believe. If I remember correctly, the English version said "Thieve's peace". And you can see that that is wrong. Also, I may have added the italic format to the phrase "Vorovskoy mir", I can't remember for sure now). I also changed the first part of the sentence (improved style: "according to + author's name") and the first part of the quote in the sentence which now reads "Furthermore, according to Michael Schwirtz, "ethnicity has rarely determined whether someone can join the club, and ...", as the author of the article had MISQUOTED Schwirtz. He had written something along the lines of "ethnicity doesn't matter", which skews the sentence a bit and leaves a lot out, when you think about it. So, let's see what we can come up with to clear up this mystery, but I have a feeling the author of the article was right about the "Thieves' peace" translation... --Cata-girl (talk) 06:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Cata-girl. I was born in the Soviet Union (St. Petersburg) and lived there prior to escaping to America, so I am 100% fluent reading/writing/speaking. I am not proud of it, but I was part of the criminal world, and Vorovki Mir is the lifestyle, the world, the behavior of its criminal members. There is the world of law abiding citizens who have their own rules created by politicians; and there is the world of the thieves with their own rules, customs, slang, etc.. To an extent such a world (vorvski mir) exists in every country, and the rules are quite similar. In an American prison (just as in Polish, Russian, Cambodian, Brazilian, Egyptian) there are certain laws that must be followed. For example, child molesters, people who informed on their fellow prisoners or cooperated with police to testify against accomplices are usually murdered by their fellow prisoners, so must be kept in isolation. This is an example of vorovski mir. It is the world where the rules of a law abiding society do not apply. It is world where the bank robber has a higher status than a burglar. This concept is the same in all criminal underWORLD (vorovski mir). mirovoi mir means world peace. however in the context of vorovski mir, the word represents world (underworld) and not peace, love and happiness. I will put some references regarding this, including photos of my tattoos (since they aren't copyrighted) that identify a zoknie vor (vor v zakone). Cheers and thank you for your input! Meishern (talk) 06:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

- Wow! Well, then I guess you are truly an expert! Sorry if I sounded vindictive, I didn't mean to. Anyway, I believe you now! In addition, my husband says he just doesn't know about the phrase, so there's no contradiction there. Take care Meishern. )) --Cata-girl (talk) 09:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Misplaced Pages:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —DoRD (talk) 01:27, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Meishern

Hi Meishern. I noticed you created a Requests for Adminship page some time ago; I was wondering as to what the status of that request might be. I think it's fair to warn you that new users are rarely successful at RfA and that the Misplaced Pages editing community sets very high standards for editors running for adminship. That being said, I strongly urge you to read WP:GRFA, User:Davidwr/Administration is not for new users, and WP:NOTNOW, and ask you to reconsider whether you really do wish to go through with your candidacy; please understand that you stand very little to no chance of passing RfA at this point and that you are strongly discouraged from running for adminship. If you are still intent on running for adminship with that RfA and are absolutely positive this is what you want, please do let me know; otherwise, I'll go ahead and delete the RfA page for you in about a week or so from today. Regards, FASTILY 07:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Fastily, If you feel 16 months editing, is a new user still, I will go with your advice which I appreciate. Please delete the app if it has no chance of success. Thank you for your advice. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 07:43, 25 August 2010 (UTC),,,,,,,,,, Let me ask you though, should I get one of those bots so I can get 20k edits quick? Because I see people who were approved for admin, were here not as long as I, but have tens of thousands of edits, which I am not sure is possible without a bot. Any feedback would be appreciated. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 07:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
100% of all recent successful RfA candidates have ~1½ years of experience AND 5,000+ (this is bare minimum, the average is around 10k). The reason I'm warning you is because many members of the RfA community find it extremely distasteful when an inexperienced user runs. Although of course, if you want to continue, that's not my call, but I do strongly advise you against running at this time. I think you may have "bots" confused with tool-assisted edits. Bots are automated program scripts that run on special accounts. Tool assisted edits are made with scripts or programs where the user approves every action the tool makes. For example, a popular anti-vandalism tool is huggle; you can make a large number of edits in a short time with the tool, but you still are controlling every action the tool makes, as opposed to a bot, where you don't need to control any of the actions. -FASTILY 20:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Fastily, Please withdraw my application. I don't want to disrespect anyone, and if I am not ready I will do what I have to do. Thank you for taking your time to reply and give me pointers. I appreciate it. I am quite happy being an editor and continuing what I've been doing. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 04:36, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Babi Yar

You charge of "highjacking" the article is uncalled-for and out of line. Your edits were in good faith, but factually incorrect and unencyclopedic. Again, Jews comprise 1/3 of the victims of Baby Yar, and many of the latter were in fact Ukrainians, some notable ones.-Galassi (talk) 12:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Hijacking is my personal opinion on the talk page, and I stand by it. There seems (in my view) an attempt to rewrite history on the article page. 80,000 Ukrainians were killed at Babi Yar and around 40,000 Jews? Would be very interesting to see references for that. I am collecting references now from witnesses and historians who feel otherwise. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 04:43, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Instead of vilifying Ukrainians you might want to save your passions for this - http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Blood_libel.--Galassi (talk) 14:36, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
I think I will stay away from Babi Yar, and I am not touching Blood Libel with a 10 foot pole. I already have strong personal views regarding both topics, so I think its best I stay away from both of those articles. However I still don't agree with the Babi Yar article. I don't vilify Ukrainians. Christian Ukrainians didn't die by the thousands in Babi Yar nor in Rwanda. Why try to insert Ukrainians and 100,000 Gypsies using sources that say nothing about either? Right now, there is not 1 reference in the article that backs up the claims it makes except about.com (which probably just paraphrased Misplaced Pages) and a forum posting (can a forum even be used as a reference?) I will contact admins interested in this segment of history to take a closer look at this article. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 00:39, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
They didn't die by the 1000s, but they were regularly shot there in smaller numbers, mostly as zalozhniki. Smaller numbers accumulate over 3 years, naturally. At least 621 of them (killed in the antiOUN actions) are known by name. There are plenty of references apropos, largely in Ukrainian. The reliability of these sources is not disputed. I agree with your sentiments re participating in these articles. As for myself, being of both J. and U. descent gives me a pretty fair perspective of the issues.--Galassi (talk) 13:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I understand Ukrainian well. I read accounts of ã few hundred Ukrainians being executed at Babi Yar, and a few hundred Gypsies, Communists and Partisans. However the article tries to make claims that Jews were the minority of the victims. Just as the vast majority (90%+) of concentration camp guards were born in Ukraine which you feel is incorrect despite facts. There are just too many eyewitnesses (who proudly admitted to their participation), German trial testimony, and survivor testimony. Lots of nations hate the Jews, there is no need to pretend Ukrainians loved them. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 11:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:C.Wirth.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:C.Wirth.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:51, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

(1) This photo was taken in Poland, 64 or so years ago by Nazi SS Photographers, which became part of the US Govt. Archive (public domain). According to USA law this is the equivalent of a mug-shot of a criminal, which is public domain. Besides, according to Polish law, all photos taken in Poland prior to 1990 are considered public domain.
(2) The use of this image falls under fair use for historical images since
(a) It is a historically significant photo.
(b) It is of much lower resolution than the original.
(c) It is only being used for informational purposes.
(d) It depicts a non-reproducible deceased historic figure with no free equivalent available.
The use of this image to illustrate the article about Mr. Wirth satisfies all requirements regarding fair use. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 11:29, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

German submarine U-35 (1936)

I've added in more sources to the article. Any more comments to the GAN would be nice to see what else I need to do to get it passed :)--White Shadows 22:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Dude

Re your contribution to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/International Burn a Koran Day, seriously, you need to toke up or chill or something. Comments like these make it harder for other editors to work with you in the future and thus tend to compromise your ability to edit to your best ability. I recognize it's a fraught subject, but we need light, not heat. Herostratus (talk) 13:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

  • I second that. I find it difficult to believe that an editor in good standing would make such a comment, and removing it would be a very good thing--not because Misplaced Pages is censored, but because the comment is revolting and adds nothing to the discussion. Drmies (talk) 19:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Answer: I apologized about pigs and toilet usage on the link above. I had 2 friends who died in Tower 1, I was heated, drunk and should not have made that comment. HOWEVER, I didn’t make it in a live encyclopedia article, or in an article discussion. I gave a short statement behind my vote as the rest of editors.
I believe 100% in the wisdom of the 1st Amendment right of US citizens to freedom of speech and expression. So if people want to burn Brittney Spears CD's or Korans, it’s entirely up to them. There are no Federal US laws that forbid the burning of the Korans or Brittney Spears CD’s.
If you choose not to work with me, it’s ok. My edit/original article history speaks for itself. I made 1000+ productive edits, never abused privileges that Misplaced Pages granted me, never started an edit-war, and when I saw one form I withdrew from the debate without using rollback. I look for consensus before making edits.
If you didn’t like my personal intoxicated opinion (for which I apologize), and choose to ignore me, that is also fine. I wish you both the best in writing quality articles and making npov edits. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 09:12, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I just noticed your apology here. Who got fired for doing it? Just curious. --BorgQueen (talk) 18:15, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Derek Fenton was fired for burning the Koran by NJ Transit during 9/11 demonstration besides where the towers stood. He was not wearing a uniform and was not on duty. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 19:23, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
I would not necessarily agree that all of your edits are productive. I checked your contribs after reading your pretty uncivil responses to the 2010 Qur'an burning controversy article, and decided to come here to see if others have commented on the POV you instil in articles. Among them, you clearly insert anti-German bias into Forced labor of Germans in the Soviet Union: You captioned an image to label a group of people "grinning murderers" and added an unbalancing section about the forced labour of Soviets in Germany. Misplaced Pages needs facts, not appeals to emotion. - BalthCat (talk) 02:53, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
BalthCat, read my 3 articles about SS Concentration Camp Guards. Find 1 word about 'grinning murderers' or any other skewed expression. They are balanced articles. If out of 1200+ edits you found 1 which you feel is not productive, perhaps you should spend more time writing original content rather than nit-picking to prove an obtuse point. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 19:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alexander Pechersky

The article Alexander Pechersky you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Alexander Pechersky for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:33, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Please check the article. I've corrected what you requested. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 13:31, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Ernie Fletcher

You have new messages
You have new messages
Hello, Meishern. You have new messages at Talk:Ernie Fletcher/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Acdixon 14:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your review. I'm glad you found the article to meet all the requirements. I agree, it's been a pleasure, but since nearly all my work is done on political articles, our paths may not cross again for some time! :) Acdixon 18:23, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Well if nobody else is willing to tackle complex and lengthy articles, after a break, I will do another. I see you have 2 more in the queue. I just don't want people thinking we are in collusion. For now I am finally doing a complete rewrite of Sobibor article, with enough solid refs to stop revisionists. I liked how your article had practically every sentence referenced. I am going to model Sobibor article on your reference style. Keep up the good work! Cheers! Meishern (talk) 20:21, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

José Paranhos, Viscout of Rio Branco

Hi, Meishern. Will you resume your review of José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco? Regards, --Lecen (talk) 10:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I am sorry I had Anatomy mid-term exam that just finished. Will get to it within 24 hours. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 19:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I was counting on that! Cheers, --Lecen (talk) 19:10, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Minor edits

Hello. I have noticed that all of your edits are marked as minor yet most of the are not. Please read this Help:Minor edit to understand what a minor edit is. If you have checked the "mark all edits as minor" box in your editing preferences please go in and uncheck it. If, on the other hand, you are clicking the "this is a minor edit" box before you save and edit please only do so when your edit truly is a minor one. Your cooperation in this will be appreciated. Thank you for your efforts here at[REDACTED] and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 11:44, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi,

I just looked, and the box was checked. Thanks for pointing it out for me. Sometimes a minor edit turns into a major one, once I start reading the editing screen. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 13:02, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome and you are correct about what can happen when you start editing. Cheers of the holiday season to you. MarnetteD | Talk 16:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

ShadowCrew

You have misunderstood me if you think I am defending an informant of any kind. I was just saying for you to talk down on that guy (which I don't disagree with), yet threaten to inform on me for the 3R is pretty much the same thing. In my opinion, all informants should be killed. I have too many friends in prison, both state and federal, who would never have been there and been taken from their children and wives if not for some low-life who betrayed the only people who ever helped him. I despise informants and believe they should be EXPOSED. Look at the Black Mafia Family article; I quasi-know Demetrius and felt the names of those who betrayed him and the organization should be exposed, so I listed them all up on there. Anyways, I agree this article needs to be re-written, it's never been Misplaced Pages-quality. If I knew enough about it and had enough cites I would. jlcoving (talk) 20:46, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Late here and time to get back to real life. However, if you want to team up editing this thing, its fine by me. Yet it pisses me off when I see people getting 15 years for carding and a gang rapist getting 5. Its hard to describe the nice feeling I used to get browsing trw dumps, trading, and i want to incorporate that in the article as well as the point of view of society, law enforcement and whoever else. so when people read it, they will see the points of view of all the parties involved and draw their own conclusions. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 20:58, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't have a PACER account anymore, but if you have one I bet most of the documents needed that would source a lot of this would be there. jlcoving (talk) 01:40, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
right now i have a word file with 21 different sources. within the article all those <add source tags> i put there because i got the source, i just am trying to figure out the direction i am going in first. It would be nice if can list all the sub-forums somewhere. and i gonna take a snapshot of the way site looked at its prime, upload and link to it.
there is also a lot of discrepancies about who the guys with the most power were (admins). the two people i put as founders are on every list, but after that, there seems to be a lot of confusion and finger pointing.
PACER would be great, cuz after sentencing these guys just vanished into thin air. i got indictment document for 19 of them which is quite useful, and i also got interview with that snitch david thompson (sp?). hard to wade through the nonsense. it seems all 4000 members were there just to help abused women get new identification to escape their husbands and start a new life. heh Cheers! Meishern (talk) 01:55, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Odd edits

I'm a bit curious about an edit by you. this appears to be some kind of joke or vandalism. Could you explain? Hobit (talk) 03:44, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hobit. I was present at the 2010 medical school commencement at Nantong. The first year headmaster spoke with a deep bass voice in English but when he spoke Chinese, he sounded completely different, speaking in a high tone and nasally. I wrote my observations down, and added them to the page much later, since the page lacked content. It is written a bit tongue-in-cheek, yet foreign applicants to that school made similar observations. Yet since its not referenced, like every other statement on that entire page, I will look for some to make the page up to standards. Thank you for taking your time. Cheeers! Meishern (talk) 07:20, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

October 2011

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of killings of Muhammad (2nd nomination). Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. –Roscelese (talkcontribs) 03:03, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Roscelese,
I am saying it like it is Misplaced Pages:Spade. I have multiple examples of you distorting or inventing quotes to damage editors reputations or portray them as fringe hatemongers and thus devalue their vote. Your actions are becoming a pattern, so please stop this disruptive style of editing - character assassination.
I think I've been quite civil considering the quotes you attributed to me. Please make sure the things you claim people say are actually there on the page, before attributing horrendous viewpoints and wild statements in quotation format to editors.
Please help Misplaced Pages win the war against Character Assassination which is the leading cause of attack against the assassins according to Meishern (talk) 07:27, 2 October 2011 (UTC).
Cheers! Meishern (talk) 07:27, 2 October 2011 (UTC)


Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 04:45, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:CIVIL

I have been perusing through the AfD discussion for the List of Killings of Muhammed, and I noticed instances that seem to broach the lines of WP:UNCIVIL on your part. Specifically, accusing others of "deceiving people by making up/lying/inventing quotes" constitutes a breach of WP:AGF, and such comments should not be made, even if you believe them to be true. I understand that deletion discussions involving religious figures and subjects can be the subject of heated emotions, but I ask that you reflect on your edits before submitting them and consider what their tone and style say about you as an editor. Much thanks, VanIsaacWS 11:26, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Vanisaac, so does that mean I can hypothetically write that you just wrote in the 1st sentence above "I have been perusing you with the intention to besmirch your legacy through the AfD discussion and seen you conspire with vandals to desecrate the List of Killings of Muhammed, and I noticed that you cursed every person twice using the foulest of words which is mighty WP:UNCIVIL on your part." So even though its easy to tell that my quote of what you said have 0 in common, and my quote is something made up/invented that I just attributed to you, it would be uncivil of you to let others be aware that those are not your words but that meishern is making up/lying/inventing those quotes? Because if you say nothing, that would mean that you accept my version. Need to add rule to reference quotes of editors, but thanks in any case, i was driven a bit loony in there, I hope there won't be a 3rd deletion review. lol Meishern (talk) 16:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Erich bauer sobibor.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Erich bauer sobibor.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Misplaced Pages (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Hoops gza (talk) 23:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thats fine. I agree with your assessment Hoops gza. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 05:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Franz Stangl.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Franz Stangl.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Misplaced Pages (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Hoops gza (talk) 03:51, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

A long list of problems

The user you are currently dealing with about images has undergone a lengthy list of problems on Misplaced Pages with regards to understanding our policies. Just on the surface, there have been numerous false image licensing tags, attempts to delete or move articles without consensus, as well as a string of improper category creations. The user means well, but doesn't really seem to think he/she will really get in trouble for disregarding our policies and pretty much acts as they please - so far, there has been no real repercussions. I've tried to draw admin attention to this, but there really was never any interest. Maybe with this new round of knowingly uploading images with false license tags, people will start to listen. -OberRanks (talk) 21:24, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

The above two images he deleted, I could have used the nice ones he replaced them with also. However they don't fall under fair use. As to whether the editor means harm or not isn't relevant since harm is caused. I am certain no drunk diver means harm either getting behind the wheel, and though my example may be a bit rough, deleting all images on Misplaced Pages only to replace them with copyrighted content will surely make Misplaced Pages more fun to read, but ... these photos aren't public domain. I seen this editor argue about fine points and details of Misplaced Pages policy on admin boards, so a simple concept such as copyright can't be above their level of comprehension. I understand your frustration though, OberRanks. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 21:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Meishern, I'm confused. I see nothing wrong with this new upload, which only improves things. The photo you had uploaded of Franz Stangl is the same as this one, only this one is of higher quality. The photo you uploaded had the copyright tag of 70+ years old on it, so I applied the same tag to the new file. Also, regardless of whether the photo is actually 70+ years old, it is certainly in the public domain, as it was used when Stangl was a wanted fugitive.Hoops gza (talk) 23:27, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't think I used 70 year rationale. For Nazis I use this:
(1) The use of this image falls under fair use for historical images since
(a) It is a historically significant photo.
(b) It is of much lower resolution than the original.
(c) It is only being used for informational purposes.
(d) It depicts a non-reproducible deceased historic figure with no free equivalent available.
Yad Vashem is claiming they own that photo and on their info page they list requirements if anyone wants to use it. Just change rationale of image and use it. I am not a lawyer and if some 100 year old nazi ss photographer wants to claim copyright let him sort it out with Yad Vashem. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 21:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Bolender kurt ss.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bolender kurt ss.gif, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Hoops gza (talk) 19:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good. Article looks really good now with the new photos you found. Cool. Meishern (talk) 18:42, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

feedback

can you tell me if there is anything wrong with the article mentioned in this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Misconceptions2#Request_for_comment

Thanks--Misconceptions2 (talk) 21:47, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Third opinion: help preventing edit war, solving conflict

Please give your opinion here, it would be most welcomed: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#William_Muir.27s_opinions_in_Life_of_Mahomet

Thanks in advance--Misconceptions2 (talk) 23:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Meishern: Difference between revisions Add topic