Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kaj Taj Mahal (talk | contribs) at 15:59, 11 November 2013 (→Accusations of Rude Behaviour: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

• Please write in a new section at the bottom of this page.
• Please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~.
• (Don't bold first words - they will be unbolded at my discretion.)
• I will reply here.
• If I comment on your talk page, please respond there. I watch my watchlist, and I don't bother with {{Talkback}}, so don't you bother.

Thank you!
Start a new Talk section.

Heirarchy of Disagreement

See that pyramid on the right? I actually _do_ prefer to stay in the top tiers. Unfortunately, the pyramid assumes that all actors are discussing in good faith, stating true facts, and not misrepresenting others' words. I'm afraid these do not hold true for deletionists and trolls, who choose to bend the language, meaning, and spirit of policy, and even outright lie, to achieve maximum destruction, and maximum disturbance to the encyclopedia project. So the reader will find me stepping off the pyramid from time to time to sternly deal with raging deletionist and troll behavior. Sorry if this is upsetting, but please see WP:DUCK and WP:SPADE for more on opening one's eyes and seeing the facts before one. --Lexein

SmackBot

<grin> Think of it as the smack at the end of a Swedish massage, or the smack of a Homer like pate when saying Doh! Whatever makes you comfortable... The name was never intended as a reprimand, although some users have taken it as such, just a passing pun. Regards Rich Farmbrough, 07:39 6 April 2007 (GMT).

SubRip

Stash

Screencap of a prior edit which has been copied to a userspace page, so that links can be shown.

TUSC token c07f8068a22fa9d8a75e59ccfa3b3dc2

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

ThrashIRC

(Moved to Talk:Comparison of Internet Relay Chat clients)

Maybe not so bad after all...

ENeville has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

Nom nom nom

Yunshui has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made him happy and he'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

Holiday cheer

		Holiday Cheer
		Michael Q. Schmidt is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings.

New messages

References to support personal opinions?

(replied to and moved to WT:Paid editing (essay))

One question about the Archive.is fuss

Hi, I saw you had a calming part on the discussion about archive.is. I am a long time contributor (with another id) on the french pages of wikipedia. I am also a webmaster of some websites (NGOs, no profit of any kind, but copyrighted material). I have been drawn to http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Archive.is_RFC page because I recently discovered archive.is for peculiar reasons: copies ("snapshots") of many pages on my web sites and many others started to come up in google search results.

It was quite difficult to have these pages removed from archive.is: no answer from webmaster@archive.is for 10 days. Only when I mailed to the french webhosting company to complain about copyright issues, did the copies cease to work (but were still found by google...)

I see the usefulness of a snapshot service, don't mind beeing cached by google, archived by archive.org, BUT *not* having those snapshots exposed to google, indexed and shown in google (or bing)... I made those remarks to webmaster@archive.is without getting any answer.

You seem to be in touch with Mr. Denis Petrov and rather benevolent to him. If he runs archive.is in good faith, can you ask him about archive.is snapshots showing in google, and why he does not prevent this from happening (very easy to do for any unskilled webmaster). To me, it seems there is a business plan behind such a behavior.

Thanks in advance.

max Maxoufix (talk) 17:44, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't know that I have had any sort of calming influence: I'm unhappy about the aggressive swarm-editing of Misplaced Pages and at the loss of a high-data-quality archive, even though it is, as you point out, imperfect in ways irritating to some content creators. I'm glad you were able to get your archived pages taken down, though I'm of the opinion that small operations like archive.is should be given 30 days to perform such takedowns, where there's no real time urgency or harm to persons involved, and they're not under U.S. legal jurisdiction anyways.

You're correct that Google does present cached results, and does so long after the original has been deleted or changed. I've seen this when I've made changes to Misplaced Pages articles; it seems to take many days, sometimes weeks, for Google to reluctantly catch up. You're correct that "noindex" or robots.txt could be asserted by archive.is, but I've seen Google ignore noindex as well, failing (or seeming to take forever) to remove pages on which <meta name="robots" content="noindex"> has been asserted.

If archive.is is gaming ranking to appear higher than source site results, the Google algorithms will be tuned to drop those results far down in ranking. This has happened for all archival sites in time. All SEO fails over time. --Lexein (talk) 18:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for answering me. But I think I know how slow google can be, and as far as I could check they always take exclusion directives into account sooner or later. What amazes me is that archive.is has not excluded its snapshots from search engines crawlers and I thought you might ask Mr. Denis Petrov why it is so, why he does not exclude archive.is snapshots from crawlers in the first place since it is *not* their purpose to be found by search engines. After all *he* knows and you are in touch with him. Please, can you ask him? Maxoufix (talk) 08:07, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi again. Did you have the opportunity to ask? DId you get an answer? Thanks Maxoufix (talk) 08:05, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

1. If you will please review my attempts at communication at WP:Archive.is RFC/Rotlink email attempt, you may perceive a lack of straight answers to some direct questions about operational details. 2. I would prefer not to extend the scope of my discussion with the putative owner/operator of archive.is beyond the scope of the swarming edits and the RFC; it doesn't seem right for me to take up your cause, when Misplaced Pages's cause was my point. 3. You released your content on your entire site under CC irrevocably (as seen on the live and archived pages), and so have literally no standing to complain about archiving, IMHO. I'm on the side of the literal meaning and application of Creative Commons licensing. 4. IMHO it's more up to Google to tune its algorithm, than for Archive.is to NOARCHIVE; Google will always crush SEO games, it's just a matter of time.

For these reasons, after some thought, I have not pursued your question. I'm not standing in your way; I just don't think I could help in any concrete way. To reach Rotlink, I used User:Rotlink's "Email this user" link, and I refrained from abuse; I just expressed my feelings and interest as literally my feelings and interest, and not as an attack. Sincerely, good luck. --Lexein (talk) 13:45, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Appreciate your courage

Hi! I was reading the comments about archive.is and archive.org and finding it ridiculous how the admins felt the IPs need not only be banned, but rollbacked so that dead links remain unverifiable. It's such typical bureaucratic behavior: when you didn't approve of them, they say you're defending the use of spambots. If every user who did things that policies strongly disapprove of, has all their edits, useful or not, reverted, Misplaced Pages wouldn't have much left. Because almost every single arbitration case ends up in blocking or topic banning users with countless contributions (usually focused on the topics they were banned for).

I mean, I always knew bureaucratic organizations could get unreasonable ( = some cherry picked examples... or so I thought) but I believed it was something uncommon I would never see.

These people just want to punish people who disobey them, by deleting them out of existence. The behavior could have been a complicated moral question, but the obedience addiction becomes obvious when you considered that they never reverted Anders Breivik's edit , because Breivik apparently didn't upset Misplaced Pages's admins. What are Misplaced Pages administrators thinking? "Breivik was a bad man, but not disobedient to me, so I leave him alone. He deserves no further punishment. Meanwhile, Archive.is needs more than just banning from Misplaced Pages: we need to aggressively punish him even while doing so hurts ourselves and Archive.org and uses up man-hours."

I do not edit/comment a lot on Misplaced Pages, so I can't really help you in those long discussions. DontClickMeName _talk 20:23, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Reverts

Lexein, {{Infobox shopping mall}} no longer supports the 'parking' parameter. Didn't you read my edit summary? — Bill william compton 06:06, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

No worries, I'm reverting in prep for its restoration. See Template talk:Infobox shopping mall for my responses and request for restoration, as offered by the deleting admin. When it's restored, perhaps renamed to encourage proper (numeric) use, there will need to be another AWB sweep to restore/rename all the correct usages, at least. --Lexein (talk) 07:03, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

I've no opinion whatsoever on the restoration or removal of parameter. User:TenPoundHammer asked to remove all the instances. If a consensus is reached to restore it I'd be happy to help out. Regards. — Bill william compton 10:17, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Requested stop there. It would be helpful if AWB'ers checked the claims of requestors. --Lexein (talk) 13:43, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, Bill, the discussion at Template talk:Infobox shopping mall has closed, with restoral to the original name "parking=", with improved documentation. Now that restoring the parameter uses in articles will have a visual effect on article rendering, it's probably appropriate to use AWB to restore them. But if a true bot can do better, maybe that could save you some labor. --Lexein (talk) 01:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

You should ask someone to do it with bot assistance. If you have any problems just ping me and I can do it for you. — Bill william compton 06:11, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Watchlisting transcluded templates

Hi. After our earlier discussion, I realised there might be a way to accomplish what you want without additional tools. For pages whose transcluded templates you want to watch list, you can do the following:

1. Click on Edit
2. Scroll down to "Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page:", below the editing box, and expand the list
3. Copy the entire list into a text editor
4. Use find and replace to remove "(edit)", "(view source)" and "(protected)"
5. Paste the remaining list into the raw watchlist editor

It's more work than an automated tool, but it should accomplish what you want (minus the "for all pages ever edited" part). As always for adding large numbers of pages to your watchlist, it'd probably be a good idea to save a copy of your current watchlist before you begin. Hope that helps. wctaiwan (talk) 16:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Misplaced Pages Library Newsletter

• Read the full newsletter
• Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:04, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Using Archive.is

It looks like Archive.is is a startup web business being promoted and ties to Misplaced Pages, and I think your de-linking of the How-to page to the RfC is entirely inappropriate. I've taken the matter to Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#De-linking_of_Wikipedia:Using_Archive.is_a_challenged_How-To_to_its_RfC. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

You took a content matter, and an RFC and MFC discussion point to AN/I - that's not usually done. IMHO, you overshot: if you had just hatnoted that Archive.is was under discussion at the RFC, you wouldn't have heard a peep out of me. And you didn't notice the neutral, truthful note I put at the top, 29 minutes before you filed. --Lexein (talk) 01:51, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I read a flat, aggressive rebuttal of me trying to introduce a link to the RfC. I spent a little time checking on the facts/links, and was somewhat confused by what seemed your out-of-character attempt to hide the RfC from the how-to page, and so my intention was to dump the matter on ANI and leave it to others. I saw you had further edited, but missed that one was your addition of your hatnote. My apologies.

I do see a problem with Misplaced Pages being used to turn Archive.is into a high profile business, especially if Archive.is later turns profitable by showing ads to Misplaced Pages readers following Misplaced Pages reference links. I'm not sure what the answer it is, but I don't think the MfD was a proper discussion of the matter. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

SmokeyJoe, yep, it's clear since time has passed that you and I were at loggerheads over misunderstanding each other's intentions, and my deletions should have been edits instead. It just took me too long to realize that the minimum neutral message was useful, and is what you really intended. Live/learn/repeat. I agree that the MfD was redundant, since the howto depended on the RFC anyways. I think (now) I would have preferred an AN/I over RFC - at least policy-based !votes, and facts, and discussion comments, would have all been regarded at closure (theoretically).

I don't see the problem you do about directing ads to Misplaced Pages users especially, because according to the email conversation at WP:Archive.is RFC/Rotlink email attempt, Archive.is mostly used (by volume) for porn archiving, and has more pressing problems than Misplaced Pages's infighting. In terms of "encouraging Archive.is as a business" - I'm not seeing it: Google might see lots of links, but the actual traffic for deadlink source refs is damnably light; people have to actually care about refs, and actually click on the link. It hardly happens, AFAICT.

Finally, I've been distressed lately by what appears to be serious Firefox and Chrome cache lagging, so I've been missing up to 1-hour-old edits by others. So thanks for discussing. --Lexein (talk) 00:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Has "Archive.is" been blacklisted?

I think "Archive.is" is a great resource. After reading the Archive.is RFC discussion and seeing the Using Archive.is page, it looks like "Archive.is" has been blacklisted so editors can't add its pages as a reference anymore. Is that correct? The discussion page was not very explicit on whether or not it was banned. I couldn't find it on the Spam-blacklist page.

Do you know what the outcome was? Are new links banned for everyone or just for IP users? Are old links going to be removed? Jaguar766 (talk) 00:42, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

If you look again at the RFC, you'll see the outcome. It's the closure column down the right side of the page by a non-admin editor. Most non-admin closures are just fine. In this case, I've requested a review of the closure merits by an admin at WP:AN. This is not intended to block the closure, just to clarify it, because I find the closure incomplete. I don't necessarily expect a reversal, just a clarification of what the closure really is, and if it fairly considered the policy-based weights of each !vote.

To clarify, perhaps unnecessarily, Archive.is links were only intended to be used with |archiveurl= within citations, not |url=.

Finally, yes, it looks like it is on its way to being deleted everywhere, IMHO due to fearmongering and petty vindictiveness, and without regard to the fact that edit filters now prevent its addition by any IP editors or bots from now on. --Lexein (talk) 00:54, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. It's not what I wanted to hear, but oh well. (sigh) Jaguar766 (talk) 23:24, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Duckduckgo rename timeline

Moving this comment to my own Talk page, because it explains the timeline of events surrounding Duckduckgo's good faith request for rename. Edited for full names, instead of pronouns.

Unfortunately, user Duckduckgo didn't say, and Blethering Scot and Orangemike (and I!) didn't notice:

23:15, 6 November 2013 (UTC) Blethering Scot posted at Duckduckgo, then, 18 minutes later, at

22:33, 6 November 2013, Duckduckgo requested renaming at WP:CHU(without comment here), 82 minutes before

23:55, 6 November 2013, when Blethering Scot posted at WP:UFAA, and almost 3 hours before

01:25, 7 November 2013, when Orangemike blocked.

An unfortunate, but not really horrible, sequence of events, which better communication, or better checking, could have avoided. Duckduckgo's snark 3 minutes before step 1 sounded like refusal, and so didn't help. But, all done, everybody's okay. --Lexein (talk) 17:54, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

Hi Lexein. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Misplaced Pages:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 20:44, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Permission

Hello, I am new to Misplaced Pages editing and am responding to your request for more info re: photo deletion. I have full permission to use the photo, as it is not copyrighted. How do I upload it so that it is not deleted again? Thanks, --Bentsman (talk) 02:41, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Here's the deal. Unfortunately, you saying you have permission isn't enough. It needs to be freely licensed, and proof needs to be shown of that. The copyrightholder must release the image with a specific free use license granted, like Creative Commons: CC-BY-SA:

1a. This is best done by them, hosting the image on their own website, with that license granted right on the page with the image.

1b. Or, they could upload the image to Flickr under their own user account (not yours), and set the Flickr image permissions to "CC-Sharealike with Attribution".

2. Otherwise, get proof of free licensing to our OTRS department. This will be an email from the copyright holder's email address & business domain, with a low-res copy of the image attached, and proof that they are the copyrightholder, and granting free use license Creative Commons: CC-BY-SA, sent directly to OTRS: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. See Misplaced Pages:COPYREQ for the full details and steps and form to copy/paste/fillout for the copyrightholder. And example.

--Lexein (talk) 03:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

HWOF

Accusations of Rude Behaviour

Hello, thank you for noticing my edits and for the welcome. There must be some misunderstanding, you see, the link to Joli OS was probably shameless self promotion on the part of some hapless, worthless scum who couldn't otherwise attract users to Joli. The link was completely out of place and nonsensical. I'd be happy to continue this conversation at length over other mediums. --Kaj Taj Mahal (talk) 15:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)