| Revision as of 13:39, 20 September 2008 editRainBowAndArrow (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers14,888 edits →Shell to Sea conflict of interest: new section← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:20, 5 November 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,308,064 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Lapsed Pacifist/Archive 5) (bot | ||
| (375 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 75K | |maxarchivesize = 75K | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 5 | ||
| |algo = old(90d) | |algo = old(90d) | ||
| |archive = User talk:Lapsed Pacifist/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = User talk:Lapsed Pacifist/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| {{archives|auto=yes}} | {{archives|auto=yes}} | ||
| == ] nomination of ] == | |||
| == ETA Categories == | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>I have nominated ], an article that you created, for ]. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.{{-}}Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. <!-- Template:AFDWarning --> | |||
| You may disagree with current categorisation but ignoring the ongoing discussion, constantly inventing new categories and removing the ones that are in there isn't the way to move forward. You have already been asked to leave the article alone while we discuss it on talk yet you continue to ignore these requests. Similarly, whatever is the point in replacing four descriptive NPOV categories such as Organisations designated as terrorist in the UK by a new invented omnibus category Organisations designated as terrorist in the UK, Canada, USA and the EU which you've just set up? There may well be a case for renaming the parent category organisations designated as terrorist by adding "by governments or supranational organisations" but as has been pointed out to you by at least four editors, it makes no sense to remove the individual entries. Please wait and discuss on talk rather than wasting peoples time. ] (]) 09:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == '']'' == | |||
| re https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/search/?title=The_Politics_of_Heroin_in_Southeast_Asia&curid=4478626&diff=326194225&oldid=324636244 : It's been a while since I read it, but I recall the heroin use among US troops was was affecting ] because heavy use contributed to physical issues. Does that really fall under 'morale'? --] ] 18:27 ] ] (GMT) | |||
| Lapsed Pacifist, many people disagree with you, and no one agrees, i.e. you are the '''only one''' that changes the categories. Please stop doing it. ] (]) 09:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| == Controversial page moves == | |||
| <div class="afd-notice"> | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
| The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
| Lapsed Pacifist, you seem to be moving a lot of articles lately, and some of the moves seem to be controversial. Can I ask you to please slow down a bit? Per ], moves should only be done if they are not opposed. If there is any chance that a move might be controversial, it is better to first suggest the move at the talkpage. If no one disagrees after a few days, then go ahead and move the page. If there ''is'' disagreement though, then it will be incumbent upon you to build consensus for a move, and to let a neutral party make the decision as to whether or not there is consensus. Thanks, ]]] 17:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| : P.S. Your talkpage is awfully long, over 140K, and some people's browsers start having trouble with anything over 32K. If it's alright with you, can I set up an auto-archive bot? That will automatically archive any threads older than a certain amount (such as 30 days), and then you won't have to worry about it. :) --]]] 17:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :: Archive bot setup, with 90-day cutoff, as requested. These things generally run on about a 24-hour cycle, but I don't know when the next "pulse" is. You should definitely see it kick in by tomorrow. If you have any questions, let me know! :) --]]] 18:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. | |||
| == Nuclear weapons and Israel == | |||
| <!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> ] <small>''<sup> ]</sup> <sub>]</sub>'' </small> 16:02, 21 September 2022 (UTC) | |||
| == "]" listed at ] == | |||
| ] Please stop. If you continue to violate Misplaced Pages's ] by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles{{#if:Nuclear weapons and Israel|, as you did to ]}}, you will be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-npov3 --> -- ] (]) 13:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| :Adding information that is not cited is a violation of wikipedia's rules against ] and ]. Please only add properly cited material. Thank you. -- ] (]) 02:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 9#2001 New York attacks}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 15:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ==Image source problem with File:Shell to Sea poster.gif== | |||
| ] | |||
| Thank you for uploading ''']'''. | |||
| This image is a ], containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work. | |||
| While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall ] status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. | |||
| == POV == | |||
| see your home page <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 11:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''', as described in ]. If the image is copyrighted under a ] (per ]) then '''the image will be deleted ] after 16:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)'''. If the file is already gone, you can still make a ] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion --> If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-dw no source-notice --> ]] 16:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Arbitration Enforcement == | |||
| I have blocked you for 48 hours due to and your subsequent revert to replace the material. The restriction the ArbCom placed on your clearly indicates that you are no longer to edit articles about the conflict or make controversial edits about the conflict, full stop. Please stop trying to find ways to continue the problems that led to the case - drop the subject entirely and don't edit about it in any article. <font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#2B0066">] <sup>]</sup></font> 18:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == DRV of Category:British occupations == | |||
| As a participant in ], you may be interested in the ] that has been listed regarding my closure of the discussion as "no consensus". Regards, ]] 23:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Talkpage etiquette == | |||
| Lapsed Pacifist, though not required, could I ask you to please make a small change to the way that you sign your posts? Currently you keep all posts left justified, and you sign with your signature two lines before your post. This can make the reading of some discussions a bit difficult, since your signatures are non-standard. So, would you please consider indenting your posts with <nowiki>::</nowiki> marks (one colon per "tab" of indent), and signing your post on the same line as your last sentence? It would be much appreciated, and would keep discussions easier to read. Thanks, ]]] 00:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| As a result of the above-named Arbitration case, the ] has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to Israel, Palestine, and related conflicts. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad ], described ] and below. | |||
| *Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. | |||
| *The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project. | |||
| *Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines. | |||
| *Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently ]), or the Committee. | |||
| These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions. | |||
| Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary. | |||
| This notice is only effective if given by an administrator and logged ]. | |||
| --]]] 01:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Lapsed Pacifist, I am concerned that some of your edits have not been in accordance with talkpage ]. For example, at the article ], you re-added the text "''The Israeli Prime Minister's office appeared to defend the massacre''" However, a week earlier, talkpage consensus (where you appeared to agree with other editors) was to not include that phrase. You also re-inserted the language "''The US claimed''", even though, again, the talkpage discussion (to which you appeared to agree) showed a consensus against that phrase. If you disagree with talkpage consensus, you are welcome to continue discussion at the talkpage, but please don't just edit war on the article itself. It may be considered disruptive to say "''Fair enough''" or "''Fair comment''" on the talkpage, and then continue to edit war at the article. I am hoping that this is just a misunderstanding; however, I did want to make you aware that the topic area where you are editing, has been subject to a considerable amount of disruption, and so the Arbitration Committee has authorized uninvolved administrators such as myself with wide latitude to impose discretionary sanctions. For now, I am not placing any additional restrictions, but I do strongly urge you to be very cautious when editing in this topic area, to ensure that you have consensus for making controversial changes, and that you are careful to only add things which are backed up by ]. By doing that, the articles will stay high quality, and reflect positively on both us, and Misplaced Pages, as well as providing the best possible resource for our readers. Thanks, and let me know if you have any questions, --]]] 01:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :: Lapsed Pacifist, again, you seem to be making edits that are not in accordance with talkpage consensus. At ], there is a clear consensus at the talkpage that the term "settlements" is preferred to "colonies", and yet you continue to edit-war at the article about this. This comment at the talkpage was also uncivil. Please stop, and consider this my last warning on the matter. If you make another edit which is outside of consensus, or make another uncivil comment, there will be further restrictions on your editing, from a ban on editing an article, up to having your account access completely blocked. Please stop editing in a tendentious manner, and instead try to work with talkpage consensus, to keep your comments civil, and to include clear ] for any edits that you wish to make. Thanks, ]]] 05:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Removing templates from pages == | |||
| Hi Lapsed Pacifist! It is contrary to Misplaced Pages policy to remove templates like {{tl|unreferenced}} from pages, like to did to ]. Please refrain from such actions again. -- ] <sup>(])</sup> 14:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Autoformating dates == | |||
| Please don't change dates away from their autoformating required format: <nowiki>] ] or ], ]</nowiki> It doesn't enable the autoformating if you change them to day ]</nowiki> and leads to more American/British English disputes. ] (]) 14:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Hi LP, I've most of your edits to ]. Please read ] before changing any more date formats. Regards, ] (]) 11:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hi again. With all due respect, it's clear you didn't even bother to read ] before restoring your edits. The MoS states: | |||
| ::*"Date elements that do not contain both a day number and a month should '''not''' generally be linked; for example, solitary months, solitary days of the week, solitary years, decades, centuries, and month and year combinations." | |||
| ::*"Consistency should be maintained within an article, unless there is a good reason to do otherwise." | |||
| ::In case you're still unsure how your edits went against this, let's take a quick look at the first few dates in : | |||
| ::*You left ] ] intact. | |||
| ::*You changed ] ] to 20 ]. Linking to ] is of no use to the reader and, as I noted above, the MoS recommends against linking month and year combinations. | |||
| ::*You changed ] ] to ]. Here you've introduced a pointless red link, again violating the MoS. | |||
| ::Three dates, three different formats — two of which are deprecated by the Manual of Style. And that's just the start of the article. | |||
| ::More to the point, if you genuinely couldn't understand why I thought your edits violated the MoS, it would've been helpful if you'd taken the time to clarify what I meant ''before'' reverting. Your constant edit-warring is disruptive to the project. And I notice that your accused me of "]" — I'm curious to know what you meant by that. Regards, ] (]) 12:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Frankly, your claim that "I can't find your quotes in the MOS" is astonishing: all you have to do is ] and read it (or, if you can't be bothered to read the whole policy, just search the page for the text I quoted). It would be extremely helpful if you could take the time to read our policies and guidelines before edit-warring. ] (]) 14:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Are you kidding me? You expect me to believe that someone with 9,000 edits on this project is unable to locate a direct quote within a single webpage? For the record, the quote "Consistency should be maintained within an article, unless there is a good reason to do otherwise" is from the very first paragraph of the guideline. The other quote is from the ] section (third paragraph). | |||
| ::::You know damn well that you were edit-warring when you restored your changes to the date formats: even though I'd clearly pointed out that I believed this was a violation of our guideline, you ignored my comment, didn't even bother to read the guideline I linked to (three times), and restored your formats without addressing my concerns. ("I don't understand" or "I don't know how to read a web page" is not an excuse for restoring changes that another editor has expressed concerns about.) | |||
| ::::Anyway, if you ever get around to actually reading ], perhaps you could explain why you think your formatting is compatible with it. Regards, ] (]) 15:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Apologies, I thought it was obvious that "I don't understand" and "I don't know how to read a web page" were not direct quotes. I certainly didn't mean to imply that they were, and I'm sorry if that's how they appeared. | |||
| :::::I genuinely have not been trying to provoke you. I've honestly tried to engage in a productive discussion here, but you've consistently refused to even read the guideline that I quoted in my original edit summary, so I don't know how to proceed. ] (]) 17:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == External Links == | |||
| Hi, I have noticed that you have restored links to to http://jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.php?articleid=2374198 in ] and ]. Why? The article is not used to support any fact in the article nor it is a comprehensive study that goes well beyond our requirements for the FA article as required by ]. It is just an opinion piece, keeping this reference would probably violate ]. Morover, looking to the ] by Peeteeree it appears that this is a single purpose account only spamming links to the Jamestown foundation. Why do we need to support a spammer? If the Jamestown article contains NPOV material that is missing in our articles, we should just add the material there ] (]) 07:14, 13 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Settlements == | |||
| LP, I am concerned that you are once again edit-warring over the word "colonies" vs. "settlements", this time at ]. As you may recall, this was discussed at ], and a clear consensus was confirmed for the word "settlements". Yet you are using the word "colonies" at the Oslo article. Of even more concern, is that you added a source which seemed to the word "colonies", ''but the source has nothing to do with the Oslo Accords''. This is a very serious matter, adding an inappropriate source to an article. Please consider this your last warning on the matter. If you again engage in a dispute about this colony/settlement matter, without providing a ''relevant'' source, and/or ensuring consensus for your edit, your account access will be blocked. Please, moderate your own behavior so that this is necessary. You make many other good edits, but please try to avoid the controversial ones. Thanks, ]]] 15:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Stub tags after categories, please == | |||
| Hi, Please add stub tags '''after''' the categories in an article, not before as you did for ] - it makes life just a little easier for people doing ]. See ] which says "By convention this is placed at the end of the article, after the External links section, any navigation templates, and the category tags, so that the stub category will appear last." They go in front of any interwiki links, but after everything else. Thanks, ] (]) 15:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Lehi == | |||
| Your further comments ] would be appreciated. Thanks, ] (]) 15:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Unqualified "Terrorism" == | |||
| I'd appreciate your comments ]. Thanks, ] (]) 18:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Hey Lapsed, I just spotted you on Domer's talkpage - you seen to have annoyed himself and Dunc. ] is a Wiki article you might find interesting. (Yes, apparently it is the same person from up above who doesn't like you calling Israeli colonies...well...colonies! ] (]) 16:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Your expert == | |||
| Have you managed to get a hold of your categorisation expert? It's been over two months. | |||
| ] (]) 13:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :] is a ]. ] is on a ] until at least September. May I take this opportunity to say that I am fully aware that if an article is in a subcategory it is not normally also in a parent category. This is a guideline not a rule. If you look at my contributions, I am currently trying to add stub articles for all persons who have been members of ] since 1918. Using the ] category, I can see there is 867 at present, out of approximately 1118. Also having the TD articles in one category allows for easier searching, rather than having to remember which Dáil the person was a member of and so on. For these reasons, I'd like you to refrain from removing TDs from the category for now. I'm sure you have more constructive editing to do on Misplaced Pages than silly edit warring with me. ] (]) 00:10, 7 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Not good enough. Stop double-adding categories, they will just be removed. If you have a problem with how we categorise, take it elsewhere. | |||
| ] (]) 10:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Go lecture someone else, you ]! | |||
| :::Wow lets all stay ] and ] ] (]) 11:59, 11 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Snap, however annoying you may find the rules that govern categorisation, there's no need to take it out on me. If you disagree fundamentally with how it's done, I suggest you try to change it. The beauty of Misplaced Pages is that nothing is written in stone. But I will ask you to respect our guidelines in the meantime. | |||
| ] (]) 15:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::What I find annoying is you and your attitude. When I said you were a hypocrite, it wasn't name calling or incivility or abuse, it was simply calling a spade a spade, when I see an object of a certain type, I say look there is an object of a certain type. To explain, you consistently add uncited POV statements to articles like Enda Kennys to name but one. You tried to repeatedly to add extrajudicial punishment into the Gardai article, it took about 4/5 other editors combined to put a stop to it. Most galling of all is that you have admitted that you are actively involved in the Shell to Sea campaign, yet you continously edit that and related articles. This is a clear conflict of interest, wikipedia guidlelines state if your are a notable person, you don't edit your own article, or if you are a member of a campaign/pressure group then you don't edit articles on that subject as this is a clear conflict of interest. Of course, you are blind to this obvious statement and see no conflict of interest and the guidelines don't apply to you. Yet you pontificate and tell others what to do and admonish them for breaching guidleines. You have two choices: Do the decent thing and stop editing articles on groups you are a member of or stop telling others what to do! ] (]) 09:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Please see ]. --] (]) 16:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :You are blocked for a week in accordance with the ] case. ] (]) 16:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == George Orwell quote == | |||
| Hello. You asked if anyone could find a source for a supposed quote from Orwell about revolutionaries. I have found it and have posted a reply at ]. Cheers. ] (]) 21:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == ] ] == | |||
| Hello. I've encountered you quite a bit in the last day or so, through my edits to Corrib-gas related stuff. You appear to have a conflict of interest, according to . I'd just like to make you aware of the ], which prevents users from editing anything they are related to. Any questions, gimme a shout. Thanks! ]]] 13:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 14:20, 5 November 2024
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Articles for deletion nomination of Pat O'Donnell
I have nominated Pat O'Donnell, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Pat O'Donnell. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.
The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia
re https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/search/?title=The_Politics_of_Heroin_in_Southeast_Asia&curid=4478626&diff=326194225&oldid=324636244 : It's been a while since I read it, but I recall the heroin use among US troops was was affecting combat readiness because heavy use contributed to physical issues. Does that really fall under 'morale'? --Gwern (contribs) 18:27 16 November 2009 (GMT)
Nomination of O'Rahilly's historical model for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article O'Rahilly's historical model is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/O'Rahilly's historical model until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Eddie891 Work 16:02, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
"2001 New York attacks" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect 2001 New York attacks has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 9 § 2001 New York attacks until a consensus is reached. GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 15:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Image source problem with File:Shell to Sea poster.gif
Thank you for uploading File:Shell to Sea poster.gif.
This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.
If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F4 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Misplaced Pages:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. mattbr 16:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
