Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:44, 10 April 2012

This is DangerousPanda's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15Auto-archiving period: 15 days

Thanks and a question

Hi Bwilkins, thanks for the welcome message! I requested permission to edit a semi-protected page, Tim Tebow's, and it appears to be granted but I still don't seem to have the option to edit it. I have read the Biographies on Living Persons policy and have citations for all of my claims (links to Bestseller lists, listings of the books on publishers' websites). If you could give me help with how to proceed that would be great.

Thank you!

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/ronjohn

The instructions do not state I have to listen to "counsel" in addtion to that the guidelines make no mention into the amount of edits one must have before applying. Please refrain from adding your biased opinions regarding my application or telling me that it will be torpedoed unless you plan on purposely doing so. --Ron John (talk) 00:30, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

"Biased opinions"? Yeah, I've been through RFA twice, and know what it takes to succeed on this project as a whole. Any wannabe admin who does not listen to "counsel" will never make admin; period. However, please feel free to transclude your RFA ... you'll get lots of additional counsel. Off you go (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:36, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Ron John appears to believe he has completed his self-nomination. Perhaps, rather than deletion, the best option would be to transclude his RFA for him and to step away? Catfish Jim and the soapdish 22:09, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Heh ... what, and be the cause of whatever unwelcome "counsel" he receives? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:10, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

It's a shame it got closed as quickly as it did. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 09:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Never mind, I see it's open again. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 09:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I am going to enjoy every moment of this RfA. I'm anxious to see how he responds to all the opposes particularly to my "Oh god no" comment.—cyberpower _{Limited Access} 11:50, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't take too much joy in the discomfort of others :-) Unfortunately, my bet is that he retires angrily afterward, rather than take any of the comments constructively (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:00, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

And your recent post on their talkpage is 110% inappropriate: they have already stated they will NOT withdraw and want it to proceed. They have also clearly stated they will not accept any discussion about it on their talkpage - that is why it was removed, and re-adding it is therefore disruptive. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

That explains what you posted on my talkpage so I'll remove it.—cyberpower _{Limited Access} 13:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Second that. I can't tell you how many times I was tempted to close and I'm still tempted to close but, I agreed not to do so.—cyberpower _{Limited Access} 14:10, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks like Tom Morris closed it. Cyberpower, I'm glad you didn't - remember you participated in it so it would be completely inappropriate for you to close. Worm · (talk) 14:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

WTT: the editor has (in at least 5 places) said he declined a snow/not now close. I'm with you - this is not editor review, but hearing from a dozen more commenters was important. Even now he's complaining it was closed (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:03, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

J'accuse

Hi Bwilkins. To put it very bluntly, I think you could have dealt with the Hghyux situation better. Cussin' is OK for us more robust editors, but I don't think they were in the appropriate register to be used there. --Shirt58 (talk) 11:59, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, (contrary to unpopular belief) I never said the comments were appropriate ... I merely was trying to play Devil's Advocate and get them to understand that multiple meanings occur in the written langauge. I was trying to bring them around to better ways to engage/withdraw and perhaps the "thicker skin" concept as well. I really was trying to find a solution for them ... but of course, some editors just like to misread the obvious and fuck things up for everyone (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:08, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

So what do I do about incorrect submission?

I submitted the "My Library" (seminal Javascript library that was deemed "irrelevant" back in 2008) for un-deletion (or at least incubation). You indicated the submission was incorrect, but why did the site allow me to submit such a thing? In other words, I just clicked a button and there was no indication this was an incorrect action.

The guy who deleted it ("Pedro" or something like that) was going to help on this a couple of years back, but I've been busy. And yes, I am the author of the original page (as well as the library in question). There isn't any question that is relevant (at least in the context of Javascript libraries, which are mostly dubious creations). The question is how to "prove" the relevance when discussions regarding the history of such things are relegated to newsgroups and blogs. Mine is discussed mainly in the former as I do not make marketing deals (e.g. link exchanges) with bloggers.

Thanks in advance for your help on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.186.15.4 (talk) 03:34, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

You'll have to provide some better/clearer links to what you're talking about ... even tracking the contribs of an anonymous IP isn't helping (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:11, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

wrong

as a new user how am i suppose to trust someone that is violating wiki policies themselves by heeding their warnings? as i mentioned in my unblock request i stopped after a user posted on my wall that it was a violation...i understand that i have to read through the links which u posted but by you not unblocking me it seems you feel blocks are a punishment which is wrong and telling me it should take another day to read through the links therefore u will decline the request is a violation of wiki policies. blocks are to prevent further violations not punishments. Baboon43 (talk) 09:00, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Blocks are not punishment. It was clear that your disruption would continue because you did not understand even the most basic of Misplaced Pages policies - THAT was protecting the project, and THAT was why I declined your unblock request (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:05, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

still not a good idea because while i was reading the links i could not ask questions to other editors because i was BLOCKED...the block feature not only prevents editing of articles but simply communicating with the[REDACTED] community and that i feel is injustice and the project was already locked for 3 days from editing i should of mentioned that. Baboon43 (talk) 09:27, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

No, you're not prevented from asking questions or communicating. {{helpme}} is still available to you when blocked. Protecting the project for 3 short days is not an injustice when someone is being disruptive. There's no time limit to improving this project - giving you an extra day to be properly prepared to edit within the guidelines is a fortunate thing for you, rather than having been indefinitely blocked from the project the first time. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:43, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

you misunderstood me i meant not being able to communicate is an injustice but i meant there was no reason of keeping the block SINCE the project was already locked for 3 days so its not necessary for my block to be on...i wasnt aware of the help me feature thanks for that Baboon43 (talk) 09:57, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

There's no way technically to prevent disruption on Misplaced Pages, yet still allow you to communicate outside of your talkpage - and trust me, there are many many times when we even remove access to that. You were afforded the luxury of continued communication, as per WP:AGF, but the project was protected as required (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:27, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I suspect he means that as the article he was editwarring on was protected then his block was more punitive than preventive. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:48, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Undeletion request SensoMotoric Instruments GmbH

Hi,

my company has added the page SensoMotoric Instruments GmbH (it´s the name of the company) and we were asked to add URLs. Now I have the all needed links:

http://blog.humlab.lu.se/2009/12/09/eye-tracking-180-people-in-three-days/

www.emotional-engagement.com

http://autonomos.inf.fu-berlin.de/technology/eyedriver

http://events.r20.constantcontact.com/register/event?llr=opkebjcab&oeidk=a07e57geyr3d1743bc3

www.eyetracking-glasses.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u5mI6PoNkk&list=PL5429CC21E46401B2&index=1&feature=plpp_video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjbMmc1S18g&list=PL5429CC21E46401B2&index=2&feature=plpp_video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGzUe_UbDtc&list=PL5429CC21E46401B2&index=10&feature=plpp_video

and I do not understand why the page should be deleted. There are also other pages, which look like ours and they are not deleted yet(e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/Tobii_technology ) Hopefully, now could be the page new created.

Sincerely — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senso m (talk • contribs) 12:10, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

1. You cannot write an article about a subject with which you have WP:COI;
2. None of those "sources" appear to be reliable;
3. Youtube or blog links are clearly not permitted
4. The existence of any other article cannot justify your own (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:33, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Request for Permission re: Use of Photo

Kmbgm469 (talk) 22:16, 28 March 2012 (UTC)kmbgm469

Normally please respond on that page, as many admins can action things, and we always keep conversations together. However, you'll note that we cannot take your word: the owners of the copyright will need to provide formal proof of valid release of copyright to WP:OTRS (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I am totally confused as to how to respond to your questions. I'm also overwhelmed. How does the photographer give you proof that he has given us permission to use a picture he took of Ron Williams? Kmbgm469 (talk) 22:34, 28 March 2012 (UTC)kmbgm469

The owner of the copyright clicks on WP:OTRS, after first clicking on Misplaced Pages's WP:COPYRIGHT rules and image use policy. On the OTRS page they have instructions to prove they are willing to release the images according to Misplaced Pages's requirements. Please also see the huge menu of links I provided on your talkpage (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Why?

Why leave this in, when it's clearly a personal attack on good-faithed editors? -- MST☆R 11:19, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Because action is quite likely to come from his rant, one way or another. It's better to have the leopard show his spots so very publicly. We don't typically remove vio's of WP:NPA unless they're extremely offensive (racist, etc) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

edit warring

Hi BW, trying to gauge the punishment for edit warring? I have seen other users blocked for set periods of 24 and 48 hrs for sustained edit warring, so why is it that User:Gravyring has received an indefinite block for 4 edits over 4 weeks? Only 2 of the edits were the same and I believe 2 edits were attempts at gauging consensus. Also in your block denial you quoted a wiki policy that not many users are familiar with let alone new users. Do you expect new users to know all the wiki policies? I suggest you take time to review the block and perhaps be less aggressive in your request denials. This is wiki not a Battle ground as you put it.Hackneyhound (talk) 12:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

There is no such thing as punishment. Blocks escalate, and are often based on mitigating circumstances. The user you note not only continually made provocative edits on an article, that article is subject to very strict guidelines due to its political nature. The additional mitigating factor was their behaviour towards others: this is a collaborative, community project: actions against that concept are not well-received - that's CORE policy that everyone agreed to when they created an account. So, a simple edit-war could start at 24 hours, escalate to 48 and so on, but add mitigating behaviours, it jumps up exponentially. You ALSO should know that indefinite is not the same as infinite - indefinite means "until the community is certain it will not recur" - as the unblock request did not convince me (and I'm one of the lenient ones), then there's no choice but to decline the unblock. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:45, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Serbia100

It must have slipped passed you but this user has restored their inappropriate user talk page. SÆdon 19:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh noes, a legal threat!

You said this a week or so ago on a heavily edited page, so I won't find the diff, but you should know that "this is what happens when a tornado meets a volcano" made me laugh so hard that I choked on a carrot when I read it just now. If I had died, I have no doubt my family could have sued you for wrongful death. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

LOL ... I'll take near-choking as a true sign of approval! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:14, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Help us develop better software!

Thanks to all of you for commenting on the NOINDEX RfC :). It's always great to be able to field questions like these to the community; it's genuinely the highlight of my work! The NOINDEX idea sprung from our New Page Triage discussion; we're developing a new patrolling interface for new articles, and we want your input like never before :). So if you haven't already seen it, please go there, take a look at the screenshots and mockups and ideas, and add any comments or suggestions you might have to the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

deleted my page...

3/30/12 I created a band paged named M3rcy and it apparently didnt meet the standards. I was wondering what I need to do to have the page up. I had references toward the band that the new band had emerged from which did have tangible references and was learning the html required to create a history to follow but the page was deleted before I could fix it. Now the new band doesn't have an album and live shows are pending but everything will be coming this year. So what do I need to make the page tangible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MercyLino (talk • contribs) 23:43, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Misplaced Pages is for articles about subjects that are already notable. Articles about the potentially notable and the up-and-coming are going to be deleted as a matter of course. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Please, look into Baboon43's behavior and edits. Thank you.

Since you are the last administrator who left a message, which he removed twice (here and here, on Baboon43's talk page (previously, he has used 70.54.66.158), therefore, I am approaching you for help. He constantly ignores and discredit all the peer-viewed sources provied by the other editors. He doesn't seem to be able to make up his mind:

• Ahbash follows shafi madhab
• Ahbash follows Ashari doctrine

Currently, he is engaged into edit-warring in the name of "expansion" without even getting consensus from the other editors who have been on that page for years. Please, looking into that. Thank you. AmandaParker (talk) 22:52, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Your signature

Hi. Just to let you know that this user has copied your signature. — Abhishek  15:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

• Although imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, normally we at least acknowledge our sources! Thanks for letting me know. Cheers (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank You

After over a week of waiting, I am finally welcomed here in wikipedia! Thank you Mr. BWilkins! Talk to you soon! Flywitheli (talk) 09:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

You were welcome the moment you arrived - not everyone gets a formal welcome notice - you seemed to need some background (following your request for permissions), so I thought I'd help you out. Welcome aboard (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:27, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

ABUSE BY YOU

WP:ANI

Could you suggest what needs to be done for Ankitbhatt and Ashermadan following the report? It seems that they need to stop those comments, which they do not seem to do, hence I feel a block is necessary. Should I open an RfC or something like that? Secret of success 12:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, I think Ankit has been looked into. Could you suggest whether a block is needed for Ashermadan, because he just vandalized my talk page today? I don't think he shows any sign of changing, as of the moment, given his attitude. Secret of success 12:29, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello DangerousPanda. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Misplaced Pages, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang 02:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Please confirm my account Misplaced Pages:Requests for permissions/Confirmed#User:Khan810 Khan810 (talk · contribs) 16:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

No. You clearly don't get Misplaced Pages yet. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Disscussion for Deletion of Bbuddah... Hoga Terra Baap 2

Hello if there is not any problem in the page then why do you want to delete this page Khan810 (talk · contribs) 16:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

There's major problems with the page. The film is not notable yet. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit notice for User talk:Cyberpower678/Flipper/Hash

Can you make an edit notice for that page up there and have it be transcluded from User talk:Cyberpower678/Flipper/Hash/Editnotice?—cyberpower _Online 19:53, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello?—cyberpower _Offline 12:52, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry

I am so sorry i didn't give attention while removing the deletion template Khan810 (talk · contribs)

User:Smolders

Hi Bwilkins! This is Tristessa over from WP:UTRS. I've received and declined an unblock appeal from Smolders (talk · contribs), a user you blocked recently. However, I've noticed that the block reason and template you used for the indef appears to be wrong — you used {{UsernameHardBlock}}, but the block seems to have been to do with COI/spam editing (and there's a sockpuppet template on his userpage) since his username appears to be perfectly alright. For the sake of clarity to the user, I've explained this in my decline e-mail and I've reblocked as WP:SPAM. Cheers, --Tristessa (talk) 23:44, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually, his username isn't quite right. You'll notice in the only article he's worked on, he inserts his name into the infobox ... and redlinks it for future use. In that way, he does meet the original. Otherwise, it works either way. Cheers (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:27, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Amber Rose

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Amber Rose". Thank you.--Ron John (talk) 11:32, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I have no involvement in that article, outside of an administrative capacity (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:28, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi - An invitation

I'm not exactly sure which editors who have been involved in the original discussions I should notify of this - Bad Faith and Mr Bratland - but rather than mistakenly leave out, I'll instead include. Regards, Rivercard (talk) 13:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I still don't think ANI is the right place, as per the previous thread. WP:RFC/U is likely best. Thanks for letting me know (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:18, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I doubt it ruined your day or anything...

...but still, I've clarified at Jimbo's talk page that my issue wasn't with anything you did, but rather the response he got on the talk page. I should have been clearer earlier, sorry. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:55, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012

WP:BRD is not policy or guideline and you're not discussing, WP:CONSENSUS is. Even if it were a policy, you're not following it yourself. You were bold in your revert but now you're not discussing. Bad form.

Talkback templates are the correct way to communicate when attempting to draw the attention of another editor. I will continue to use them here and other locations despite your edit notice, particularly when you don't bother to read my edit notice indicating that I will move discussions to the articles.

Sorry if I removed your talk before moving it to the correct location. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

You clearly horrifically misunderstand. If someone adds something, and it gets removed, someone cannot tag-team to re-add it - the discussion portion must occur for it is re-added. I'm happy to discuss my removal - but you never have cart-blanche to re-add until the discussion takes place - re-adding it twice is edit-warring (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:22, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm a little surprised here, but I think you've made a slight error in judgment; since it wasn't vandalism you were fixing by removing that characterization in the first place, you were involved in a content dispute -- I think maybe you shouldn't have blocked there, but AN:3RR'd it instead. --jpgordon 16:54, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I actually don't see how I was really involved in a content dispute there whatsoever. Unsourced (yet minor) addition, I removed it. Someone mindlessly reverted. I tried to speak to him directly, and he mindlessly reverted again. I'm happy to unblock him IFF they simply agree to self-revert until new consensus exists. if someone else wants to take over the block, feel free. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Bwilkins, I agree with jpgordon here, I do not think you blocking was appropriate here. You were involved in the content dispute, so you should not be blocking the editor and demanding that they agree to self-revert to get unblocked (that appears to me to be a use of using the block tool to get your way in the content dispute). Regardless, if Walter continues to edit war over the article, then anyone my re-instate the block. - Kingpin (talk) 18:29, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Clearly, you have also misread the situation, based on the disgusting tone of your unblock. I give 2 shits about the article, and it is inappropriate for you to suggest that I was using anything "as a tool" in a content dispute. Absolutely beyond inappropriate. Un-fucking-believably inappropriate if you had even bothered to read and look at any of the background. Fuck, really - not a bad unblock, but an absolutley fucktarded comment above and unblock message. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:44, 10 April 2012 (UTC)