Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Renamed user hu45b523gg (talk | contribs) at 13:08, 23 August 2019 (→David Norris: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

/2005 - 2006 /Jan - Jun 2007 /Jul - Dec 2007 /Jan - Jun 2008 /Jul - Dec 2008 /Jan - Jun 2009 /Jul - Dec 2009 /2010 /2011 /2012 /2013 /2014 /2015 /2016 /2017 /2018

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Misplaced Pages and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For the classic line: "End the tryanny inflicted on the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya! Liberate the French Republic! Stop the oppression of the United Mexican States! Won't someone please think of the State of the City of the Vatican?!" That po-faced debate seriously needed lightening up. Keep up the good work. JonC 21:54, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...

Irish topics
... you were recipient no. 1575 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:57, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Two years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:49, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Fake revert

Please desist from making fake reverts, as you did at Karen Bradley. It is fine to re-add the material with refs, what is not fine is to pretend that you were reverting when actually you were adding sources. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 18:10, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure I follow. I hit 'undo' and added references in that edit. Is there something wrong with that? I didn't pretend or 'fake' anything. Bastun 18:34, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes because it appears you reverted when actually you didn't. It's unhelpful for other editors. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 11:23, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Funny ref names

FYI, I asked at the Village Pump about those funny <ref name=":0"> things. The discussion is here. The bottom line is that we're stuck with them, for a whole lot of complicated reasons. Scolaire (talk) 09:23, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Computers, eh? More trouble than they're worth! ;-) Cheers, Bastun 09:42, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Terence Flanagan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Woods (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

British cats?

You should probably remove this cat's nationality too. It's one of Larry's "colleagues"... https://en.wikipedia.org/Palmerston_(cat)

All your base are belong to us. Hahaha. Nice.

Edit warring: Siobhan Fahey

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 94.6.78.201 (talk) 15:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

An anon IP issuing templated warnings? Why don't you log in, there, and use the one account... Bastun 20:38, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring: Larry Sanger

Your recent editing history at Larry Sanger shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Two editors have identified problems with your changes. QuackGuru (talk) 14:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Category:Irish Romanists

Hello, Bastun,

You tagged this empty category for deletion on CSD C1 grounds. However, it is also a category redirect and so it is not eligible for speedy deletion even though it is empty. Thank you. Liz 03:58, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Good Omens

Thanks for the request for page protection on Good Omens. I suspected that IP was evading a block, but didn’t have much to go by. Hopefully he/she will settle done now. ----Dr.Margi ✉ 22:04, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Do look up what a dynamic IP is while you're at it. I'll be back next week for the cast updates. Cheers. 115.64.238.117 (talk) 02:53, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

BLP alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33 QuackGuru (talk) 04:30, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

David Norris

Dear Bastun, I have continuously upgraded David Norris' Misplaced Pages article David Norris (politician) to contain the short account of an online and significant counter-campaign. Unfortunately, I have seen this account (which is legitimate and relevant) continuously undone. I have already raised objections with Spleodrach concerning this on the view history page. He appears to have understood and has since left 'undoing' the addition of my counter campaign. Regrettably, it seems that you have now begun to continuously undo the addition of this account(which, I repeat, is legitimate and relevant). Hence, I wish to re-affirm my former defense of this account. Number 1 - although 'anybody can set up a website' nobody else did set up an online counter campaign and Number 2 - this online campaign reached a considerable degree of attention with the Irish Independent and journal.ie reporting on it. In conclusion, I wish to make it clear, that I will not cease to continue to include this appropiate account (of this counter-campaign). Tomás Deb. --Tomás Deb (talk) 13:08, 23 August 2019 (UTC)