Misplaced Pages

User talk:JzG

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JzG (talk | contribs) at 16:46, 29 April 2011 (→Ken Ring (astrology): ahem). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 16:46, 29 April 2011 by JzG (talk | contribs) (→Ken Ring (astrology): ahem)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Archiving icon
Archives
no archives yet (create)
Gastrich, PRT, October 2005, December 2005, January 2006, January 2006a, February 2006, February 2006a, March 2006, April 2006, May 2006, June 2006, July 2006, September 2006, October 2006, November 2006, December 2006, January 2007, February 2007, March 2007, April 2007, May 2007, June 2007, July 2007, August 2007, October 2007, December 2007, January 2008, February 2008, March 2008, April 2008, May 2008, June 2008, July 2008, August 2008, September 2008, October 2008, November 2008, December 2008, January 2009, February 2009, March 2009, April 2009, May 2009, June 2009, July 2009

Obligatory disclaimer
I work for Dell Computer but nothing I say or do here is said or done on behalf of Dell. You knew that, right?
This user is an administrator on the English Misplaced Pages. (verify)
[REDACTED] This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

busy

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Christian Zionism in the United KingdomDougweller (talk) 07:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if this interests you, but a while ago it was cleared up, it's now a mess again with the same editor replacing his earlier stuff. "It is a commonly held belief, whom some see as an established fact, that within the politics of the UK today the Israel Lobby is extremely influential, as is the case in the US, but admittedly in Britain to a smaller yet still substantively significant degree." with no source, as an example

Page about MEDINA

Hello JzG,

thank you for your advices and comments about the page about MEDINA. Please, remove your request for speedy deletion due to CSD A7 since this criterion can only be applied to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works.

Furthermore, please notice that I added some more appropriate citations from reliable sources (see reference 2,14,15).


Regards Hobramski — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hobramski (talk • contribs) 12:46, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

That ANI posting!

Hi Guy,

Just to say that I redacted that posting from the history at WP:ANI after Fred removed it. Basically, it's a ReallyBadIdea™ to post the contents of private correspondence on-wiki - we have precedent for that here - and it's particularly unacceptable if it's from an OTRS queue. Jes' sayin' ... In this case, the person mentioned in the original posting claims not to be involved and that this was part of an ongoing campaign against them. Given that their RL name was involved, I felt it better if this was removed. A request had also been posted to Oversight - Alison 20:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

  • There was nothing in there which identified the sender, and I checked that there was nothing there which was not also available online. Fred's response makes sense, his judgment on this seems sound to me. Removing the thing is of course absolutely fine with me since it seems the real-world posting was a troll. The message to OTRS was not, I think, form a troll, but from a concerned citizen (whose identity I thought I had removed from the pasted content? If not then that was definitely careless). I'd probably have mentioned it if I'd seen the original myself. And of course it's not the first time I've been trolled and it won't be the last :-/ Guy (Help!) 21:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Notice of RfAr/Clarification

names you as involved, though it asks for no sanctions against you. --Abd (talk) 06:24, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Ken Ring (astrologer)

Not sure why you deleted the predict weather section. It is an important part of his biography and his main claim to fame before the earthquake business. Improving it would be nice, but we can not just delete it. Cheers AIRcorn (talk) 09:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Because it was written like a press release whic had then been polished up by his advertising executives. Guy (Help!) 14:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Nervous?

This looks a bit unusual... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:43, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

  • I think it's fair to say that letting Abd loose on any article where he has one of his advocacy interests is a stupid thing to do. Guy (Help!) 14:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I absolutely agree. I'm just confused by your non-monotonic editing, with text growing, shrinking, being summarized, and then regrowing ;-). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
I think the phrase "oh no, not again" summarises the situation nicely. In the end the final argument was the best: the request embodies precisely the behaviours which led to the ban. I believe it's a footgun job but I do not know and frankly the very idea of yet another go round Abd's thousand-times-refuted claims makes me feel physically ill. There is literally no way to get Abd ever to drop an assertion once he's made it, he is the sole bearer of enlightened truth and the rest of the world just needs to keep hearing it until they believe. Take the blacklisting: he argued for delisting for, what, a year or more? Eventually he hits the discussion page on a day when nobody's around who remembers the original problem, and bang, he's "vindicated". Bullshit! I linked the site because Jed Rothwell spammed it, Jed Rothwell's acolytes spammed it in proxy for him after he was banned, and Abd and his mates kept linking to copyright violations hosted there. That is the objective truth, but Abd never accepted it, never will accept it, and interprets the delisting as full and final vindication of his many-times-rebutted view that listing it was "abuse" that caused "damage" by not allowing people to cite copyright violations for "convenience" (something the intellectual property lawyers foolishly forgot to write in as a permitted exception) and by suppressing WP:TRUTH which is, of course, ruthlessly suppressed in all the reliable sources. I cannot express how much I despair of his deceitful POV-pushing. Guy (Help!) 15:44, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Category:
User talk:JzG Add topic