Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:50, 17 October 2006

Archives 1 2 3 4

It went many years,

But at last came a knock,

And I thought of the door

With no lock to lock.

I blew out the light,

I tip-toed the floor,

And raised both hands

In prayer to the door.

But the knock came again

My window was wide;

I climbed on the sill

And descended outside.

Back over the sill

I bade a "Come in"

To whoever the knock

At the door may have been.

So at a knock

I emptied my cage

To hide in the world

And alter with age.

--The Lockless Door by Robert Frost

Instant Karma

This amuses me quite a bit, so thanks. :-)

Thank you for unleashing the plague.--Jimbo Wales 00:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

The Erotic Network

Hey, could you look at this and vote. I deleted it when the author changed the content to "Where's the article?", but I looked again and decided it should at least go through AFD and should likely be kept. After deleting it after another party put a speedy tag on it, I didn't want to just resurrect it and leave it. Kind of a funny situation. But ho-hum, such is Misplaced Pages. --DanielCD 04:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Chose to answer here although normally I would have answered there....

Hey... I do appreciate your popping by and trying to help. I'm frustrated too. Thanks and happy editing. ++Lar: t/c 19:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

RFAR mess

Hi Flo, Be aware when fixing the mess made by the anonymous Gundagai editor in response to my RFAR that she cut and pasted a huge section of Talk:Gundagai, New South Wales onto the arbitration page, containing peoples' comments that she cut and pasted there without proper attribution. So for example Nuclear Umpf and Durova's comments originally come from Talk:Gundagai, New South Wales and User talk:Durova respectively, and may not reflect their intended participation in the case. She has also interspersed her own comments in various places since the massive crosspost (all without signing), so it will be a job figuring out what her response actually is. Thanks. Thatcher131 15:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I think I'm going to move some of it to a subpage after I refactor it a bit more. And ask the ano to fix it by shortening it and using diffs to other peoples comments. --FloNight 15:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Good luck with that now. :) Thatcher131 15:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Pile-on

All I can say is that you misunderstood me, but Malber didn't, withdrawing in response. See my response to AnnH here - CrazyRussian talk/email

Vandalism user...

This user 152.163.100.139 is apparently on some kind of vandalism spree. Can you check thier history?

Thanks!!!

trezjr 20:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Nursing Portal & wikiproject

Hi, You may or may not be aware that User:THB has crated a Nursing Portal and Nursing Wikiproject aiming to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Nursing. It would be great if all Wikipedian nurses got involved. — Rod 19:16, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Escalation on Farrell, Shays, CT

FloNight, you mentioned I might leave a message on your talk page if BLP problems began to emerge: they have, along with numerous failures to assume good faith. I've invested a lot of time in providing long explanations of edits and policies on the talk pages of all 3 articles (Diane Farrell, Christopher Shays, and Connecticut 4th congressional district election, 2006), trying to explain policies early on, in the hopes that editing won't get out of hand as the election nears. Editors so far have deleted well-sourced text, inserted text not sourced to reliable sources, violated WP:BLP with direct misquotes of candidate statements and vague weasely statements not sourced to reliable sources, made attackish edit summaries and talk page headings, and failed many times to assume good faith. I approached Francisx (talk · contribs) about her repeated failures to assume good faith towards me, but I'm making no progress there. Francisx is making posts to my talk page, accusing me of WikiStalking because I've requested correct sourcing of statements on all the CT candidate articles. There have only been two or three BLP violations to date, one still stands (but is not blatant-egregious, just a weasly and poorly-sourced statement about Shays, using Farrell's campaign as the "reliable" source). I don't know if you want to get involved, or if I should take it elsewhere? Dispute resolutions might not be timely or effective, considering the BLP issues; matters may worsen if anon editors start also injecting POV from both sides as the election nears. I don't think it's reached the level of needing BLP attention, and I can continue to revert BLP violations, but I'm being falsely accused of bias and wikistalking because of doing that. I don't see any progress or de-escalation either, and the talk page discussions don't indicate a hopeful prognosis. What next? Since I've not been successful in conveying the importance of well-sourced edits on BLPs to these editors, the articles may deteriorate as the election nears. Sandy 20:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not asking for a ban: it's more a matter of someone else might be better able to explain policy than I have, as they don't seem to trust me as the source of the explanation of the importance of getting it right, and sourcing things correctly. In fact, maybe they're not even reading what I'm writing :-) Thanks for having a look. Sandy 20:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid the problem is growing: I'm not sure if I should revert this right away, if it falls under BLP, if it falls under copyvio, or what I should do with it. Please have a look at soon as you can: maybe I do need to post to BLP for advice and help now. It seems tendentious and unencyclopedic to reproduce Farrell's campaign ads on Shays' article. Sandy 03:50, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I would normally not start a debate on another user's talk page, but this seems like a significant misrepresentation. What Sandy terms "campaign ads" are reliably-sourced quotations from Chris Shays that articulate his views on the Iraq War issue. They are provided without prejudice, POV or commentary. Sandy seems to feel that they constitute an "attack," and has said that they are taken out of context. I have encouraged her to place them in context or provide more information, and yet she has not done so. Frankly, I do not understand her concern. I do, however, regret having my hard work summarily reverted, as happened here. So as not to waste your time, I won't continue this argument on your talk page, but I don't want you to have any misconceptions about the situation.--Francisx 06:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Please do not misrepresent my position. I have never used the word "attack" to describe the inserted material. We are talking about a possible copyvio, where you created and structured an entire section in Shays' article directly from Farrell's campaign ad, including exact wording from her ad (selective, biased press quotes taken out of context). My edit corrected that problem, as well as 3 other problems discussed on the talk page, and was not a restore of only the Iraq section. Copies of an opponent's campaign ads in an article during a closely-watched election does not reflect well upon Wiki. The material needs to be reverted quickly, and then re-written in NPOV. The Iraq section, copied from Farrell, is not salvageable: it needs to be completely rewritten in neutral, encyclopedic tone. Reverting to the original version provides a better starting place, and eliminates the campaign ad copy. This is now the third insert of Democratic campaign material into Shays' article. Sandy 06:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Aaron Brenneman posted it to ANI, nobody paid attention, admins all busy fighting over incivility. POV, OR, undue weight, and unbalanced, tendentious, piling on, unencyclopedic edits continue. I tagged the article POV. Had I known it would escalate this far, I certainly would have asked for protection or banning to avoid tendentious editing. Sandy 21:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I asked for a cite for original research/synthesis: lack of civility continues. Sandy 21:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Instead, engage them. Work with the editors and re-write the content together on the talk page of the article. Sure: I haven't been trying that for a week, have I? Thanks. Sandy 22:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Note to all: Sandy is doing some POV pushing him/herself. Why isn't a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee a good enough source to show Russell is backed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee? This user is twisting policy for his/her own aims. Arbusto 23:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

FloNight, the message in this entire incident has been delivered loud and clear: we don't enforce WP:NPOV, WP:CIVIL, or WP:AGF policies, we don't follow WP:NN or WP:DRV guidelines, we don't express concern about tendentious editing (sourcing and then copying verbatim a biased campaign ad into an opponent's bio), and we don't orient relatively new and basically single-topic editors towards the importance of the most fundamental policies of Misplaced Pages. I don't see how this is a good message to send, and it has certainly empowered others to persist in lack of civility towards me, POV editing to articles, and harassment on my talk page. I won't again trouble you with diffs, as that doesn't appear productive. Thanks much for the help towards a better understanding of the workings of Misplaced Pages, Sandy 11:10, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Why blocking ...

At some point, when the same problem keeps on cropping up over and over again, and nothing else is getting through, there aren't many options left. --Cyde Weys 23:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Vivaldi

What's the status of Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Vivaldi? Is been about a month. Does it usually take this long? Arbusto 23:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protect Ben Savage

The Ben Savage bio has been assaulted with no less than 7 vandalism incidents in the last 2 days. Is this enough to request semi-protection again; or is this a non-solution?

Thanks!

trezjr 03:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

thanks...

Thank you.

trezjr 12:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Socks

The thing to do is organize some people and then start a discussion at WPT:SOCK. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 03:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Images

Hello. I got several questions from several people but please pass on my response to you for others. Thank you for your attention and concerns regarding copyright status of the images. I’m photographer since 1992 and made numerous photo materials from many conflict zones, countries and places. Many of which are of my work and featured on Gettyimages, Reuters, Eye of Georgia, etc. For some I decided to upload to Misplaced Pages instead of selling them (which I do via gettyimages). Those images which have my signature @Luis Dingley, I am the author and copyright holder. As for parliament.ge images. Georgian parliament has huge collection of images which do not have any copyright and actually are covered by the Georgian law on the images of the government, see here Some images which I uploaded have the following statement: “images which belong to me, uploading to wikipedia.” Being the member of various photo distribution companies, I purchase on monthly bases photographs which are for sale on auctions and through dealers. After the purchase is completed, images are transferred under my name of which copyright status is distributed on me. I agree, maybe I did not place a correct tag for which you must forgive me. I’m not very much familiar with Misplaced Pages image tagging and confuse between them all the time. But feel free to do whatever you need to do. My only intention was to enrich Misplaced Pages with rare photographs which sit on my computer and are not available for public. Ones again thank you very much for your help, All the best. :) Ldingley 14:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)