Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Xerton (talk | contribs) at 03:13, 20 February 2018 (→please stop insulting me). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

3RR

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! ==

Kelli Ward

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
• We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

• We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

• ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
• Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Scott Pruitt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

please stop insulting me

I am not interested in hearing your opinion of my ability (or lack thereof) to understand words correctly. It's one thing to ask me what I think about the meaning of something, but it's another thing altogether to proffer a derisive opinion of me by stating what you think about me as a person in demeaning terms, such as you did here. Please stop. Xerton (talk) 02:49, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

It's not an insult to state that you don't know what words mean. It's a suggestion that you learn. When different people come to a similar conclusion through differing processes, that is pretty much the opposite of "groupthink." NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:55, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Please understand the following:

1. You are not a linguistic expert
2. Even you were, you are not an expert in assessing the minds of other people
3. But even if you were that too, I am not interested in your opinion of my level of understanding

If you want to say that you think I am misusing a word or term, go right ahead, but DO NOT tell me that don't know what a word means. In one instance, I've made a mistake; in the other, I am defective. And that you doubled down by telling me I need to "learn", tells me your message is that I am defective. Thus, I am asking you politely to please keep your personal opinion about me to yourself. Xerton (talk) 03:05, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

PS: Please read Groupthink which states Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. This quote exactly backs up how I use the word; but I did not use it on the page you insulted me on. I said "group", not groupthink, though perhaps I should have. Xerton (talk) 03:08, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know how you feel. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 03:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok, let's drop it now. Also, I do see where I said "group-think", so though I feel that my usage was correct there, I do see that I mis-cited myself during this dialog. Xerton (talk) 03:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)