Misplaced Pages

User talk:ThuranX: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:06, 26 February 2009 editChed (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users64,984 editsm comment: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 02:13, 20 October 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,013,851 editsm Fixing Lint errors from Misplaced Pages:Linter/Signature submissions (Task 31)Tag: paws [2.2] 
(447 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Not around|3=November 2014}}
'''Welcome!''' '''Welcome!'''


Line 23: Line 24:
*] *]
*] *]
*]
*]}} *]}}
==Wanting to delete all Batman movie templates is laughable==
So you don't want any templates remotely related to any Batman film series, huh? So then what do you want then. Like I said, there are numerous other film series related templates beyond Batman. Why have film related templates, if you don't want things to be as comprhensive as possible? Also, having templates for strictly the Joel Schumacher, Tim Burton, and Christopher Nolan set of films was the best compromise when compared to simply grouping them up in one setting. ] (]) 5:19 p.m. 8 January 2009 (UTC)


===Your edits on the Batman film template===
It's way too Burton era centric if you ask me (at least in terms of the number of crew members). There should be a mini-section for each of the directors, producers, writers, composers, etc. (just like for the cast). Also if you're going to work in the music section, then you might as well only list the individual soundtracks rather than being extremely selective with the songs (it looks incredibly sloppy in my estimation). That's why I would prefer doing a split of the Burton films and the Schumacher films (just like there's an individual one for the Christopher Nolan Batman films). ] (]) 10:48 p.m., 15 January 2009 (UTC)


==Reporting repeated disruptions==
== Who is a Jew - (deleted comment) ==


You might like to know that I have reported 3 users (, , ) who are violating Misplaced Pages consensus on ] to the ArbCom probation enforcement page. Feel free to leave any comments, if you'd like. All the best, --] 02:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, today I added a comment in the Who is a Jew discussion page. Later I noticed (at least I think) that this comment was deleted. Since I am new with all this I couldn't find the previous version in order the revert the comment.


== ] ==
As you were the last one to edit and archive the discussion page (and you did that today) I thought (although by no means sure) that maybe you deleted my comment.


Hi there. Would you mind reconsidering your !vote now the article has been expanded significantly? I would like to take it to DYK but I cannot do so before the AFD is not settled so I'd like to ask you whether you'd object if the nominator withdrew the AFD request. Regards ''']]''' 09:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
If this is so, please explain to me kindly what or if I did something wrong. Please bear in mind that this is the first time I made a serious effort to contribute (after reading through all comments - which are pretty long) and I was extremely upset that immediately the comment was deleted. I am a newcomer so please be kind and understanding.


Thanks--] (]) 19:22, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


== Socks and puppets == ==waeselly talk on INc- hulk==


How is moderatley (in light of the fact that the budget was less for the first film and it has performed well in dvd sales, now 306 million gross) weaselly? i dont think so. Factual and understated, even ecyclopedically restrained. rather than describing a a 61 and 54 RT and MC scores as mixed for the first hulk and 61 and 66 scores as generally positive, i would say that is weaselly. going off topic a bit the reason everyone thought the first hulk was a flop was mainly because avi arad and ang lee and the studio did not see eye to eye, and marvel especially in regards to profits which is why they now develop in house. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I do not believe I am familiar with that acronym, but also, he's just another sock master on a long, long list of socks I've helped put to rest. I'm a seasoned sock hunter, at least as far as I can tell. I put on my hunting cap, I gather the ''written in stone'' diffs, I gather the evidence, and the sockmaster is stambed, '''BLOCKED'''. It's all in a day's work.— ''']]<sup> ]</sup>''' 07:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


== ] ==


Hello. I reverted edit while watching RC's. I know nothing of the subject but noted you had reverted the same IP executing the same edit and trusted your judgement. If you could give me some pointers on what to look for it would help me stay out of trouble on my reverts. If the page has enough eyes on it, just let me know and I'll stay out of the way. Regards ]] 05:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


== I've responded to your comment on my talk page ==
== Summery of events ==


You can read it or ignore it as you choose. I'm just letting you know there is a response. -- ] (]) 05:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
It has been posted, see .— ''']]<sup> ]</sup>''' 09:55, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
==Independent sourcing for Elements of Fiction==
I believe you have expressed the opinion that current draft of ] is too lax on the grounds that independent sources are required to demonstrate that an element of fiction is in some way notable. Instead, could you accept the arguement that an element of fiction that is the subject of substantial real-world coverage from a reliable source could demonstrate notability at some point in the future? It would not be unreasonable to assume that if there is good quality coverage from sources that are not independent, then an element of fiction may be important enough for independent commentators to write about it as well. If you agree this may be the case, then perhaps we can compromise on the current draft of ], and this guideline can be rolled out for community approval. I feel agreement on this version is close, so I would be grateful if you could give serious consideration to making you willingness to compromise on this point at ].--] (]) 10:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


==Glenn Beck==
== Thanks for being ] ==
ThuranX, I replied to your comment but wanted to leave a personal message. I think some of your comments have become uncivil and border on personal attacks (at least I felt they were to me). It would be better if we could discuss the content as it relates to the relevant policies. I expect you believe we should follow ] and ]. Our discussion on that article would be more helpful if we focused on the content and how best to apply Misplaced Pages standards. I only started reviewing the article myself a couple weeks ago, so I'm not some long time editor protecting it. I would apply the same standards to any biography I get involved with. I do take the view that this is an encyclopedia and not a web profile listing news, meaning that a biography should reflect what you would expect to see in an encyclopedic biography of a notable person. This is also the view of Misplaced Pages. This may also reflect your view, and perhaps we just need to work out the degree based on wiki policies. In any case, I hope that you'll consider a more constructive approach as we do need good editors to improve the article. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>13:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)</i></small>


Let me also add that in truth, I can live with the quote as written, but do have concerns as I noted. I would just like someone to discuss those concerns. If I lay out a logical and policy driven reason why something is a concern, I would hope editors working for inclusion would layout a counter logical and policy driven argument for inclusion. Instead I get attacked. How are editors suppose to respond to that? It then becomes aggressive as an editor defends a policy driven argument against an emotional one, when in reality, it doesn't matter much if the content is included or not. Like that quote, I don't care if it's in there, but I would like some rational, logic, and policy to drive it (as there arguments for not including it). I can get behind a logical discussion and lend support, but I can't get behind an emotional one. Hope this helps to explain some of my edits and will increase our productive collaboration. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>14:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)</i></small>
You'll be on the attack list next after your . Oh well. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 00:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
: ThuranX, please let the ANI thread run its course, thanks. --]]] 00:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


:I'm not sure that I've been protecting Bytebear. I disagree with him, but I think he's made some valid arguments that require discussion, not dismissal. I agree there is consensus on including content - I'm part of that consensus, but I'm not sure what that means as far as content as most people just come in and complain. Bytebear is at least explaining his position and presenting an argument. I'm not interested in making Beck look like a saint either, but "balance" is something defined in policy, not some measure of 50/50 saint / devil. Biographies have a much higher threshhold for including criticism and praise. I know people are upset, but that's not reason to disregard our job as civil editors that respect the policies of the encyclopedia. I sort of feel like we have a few people trying to have a constructive discussion of entries in the mists of an angry mob with pitch forks. Bytebear may be unconvinced, but there are several others that also have similar concerns. We should work to address them, not dismiss it with the ]. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>14:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)</i></small>
== Two Face edit ==


Just to clarify, the statement the president has '''repeatedly exposed himself''' as having a deep-seated hatred... is referring to Beck's belief regarding Obama's agenda for reparations and social justice for blacks. That was the discussion for that entire week on Beck's show. If you look at the entire quote, it becomes more clear that he was talking about ], which is why I think the context is needed. There are different definitions for racism, and I don't think Beck implied that Obama thinks blacks are superior to whites. So that's what I was getting at... hope this clarifies it. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>17:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)</i></small>
Nah not that I can see, just stuff about using multiple cameras for them motion capture. Nothing about going through filming it twice. ]] 03:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


:I can see that point. I had it originally worded differently that I think expressed your point but it was trimmed down. In late July 2009, Beck argued that ] and ] were driving President Obama's agenda, discussing issues of ] and ].<ref name="ObamaAgenda">{{cite news| url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534643,00.html | title=What's Driving President Obama's Agenda? | date=2009-07-23 | accessdate=2009-08-01 | last=Beck | first=Glen}}</ref> That week in response to the ], Beck stated that Obama has repeatedly exposed himself as having... Still may be considered SYN, would have to look at the sources. I'll think of how we might be able to clarify using one of these other terms based on what we have in the direct sources. I'm fine with removing the reparations from this section and moving it to the politics. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>18:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)</i></small>
==WP:FICT==


Thanks for the forum check, should have just kept my mouth shut. :-) ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>15:52, 01 September 2009 (UTC)</i></small>
I don't know what to say. Your accusations are off base. Please either assume good faith or take a break from the discussion and come back when you can engage more calmly. ] (]) 17:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


==Blocked for edit warring==
==Discussion==
<div class="user-block"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for {{#if:24hours|a period of '''24hours'''|a short time}} in accordance with ] to prevent further ] caused by your engagement in an ]{{#if:|&#32;at ]}}. During a dispute, you should first try to ] and seek ]. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek ], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request ]. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --><nowiki>{{</nowiki>unblock|''your reason here''<nowiki>}}</nowiki><!-- Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --> below. {{#if:|] <small>| ] | ]</small> 20:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock -->


I see four reverts in less than 24 hours. . You are well aware that you were doing this as you warned another editor for it, and you have been here long enough to know this is not acceptable. I see and understand your concerns about the Beck article, but you are not making things easier with your behavior over there. --] <small>| ] | ]</small> 20:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm good friends with Betsy's Voice and Lilo and Stitch star Daveigh Chase we met in MySpace and she told me that they are currently working on Season 2 of Betsy's Kindergarten Adventures which starts on August or September and they were working on episodes of Season 2 like Betsy Has a Cold, Betsy is Late for School, Grandparents Day, Betsy Makes a New Friend, and much much more. This is true i'm serious she told me that they're working on new episodes. ] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment was added at 22:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


:Yes, punish those who work with others, those who follow the system, and reward the POV pushers. The Civil POV Push wins again. Good Job. Genius. ] (]) 20:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
== Inferior education ==
::Feel free to request an unblock, though I'm guessing that's not your style. You obviously didn't "follow the system" in that you broached 3RR. That was not necessary. And this is not about civility at all, though you really do need to tone it down on the article talkpage. I get your complaint about what's going on over at ] Thuran&mdash;I really do. I'm going to see if something broader can be down about the problems over there. When you edit war and throw bombs on the article talk page though, you cloud the core issues and make it harder to do something about them. It gives me no pleasure to block you or anyone else, but I can't very well block Bytebear for (far more egregious) edit warring and then simply ignore the fact that you were doing the same thing and yourself broached the 3RR "bright line." You're welcome to think this a terrible block and demean my capabilities as an admin, but I would request that you try to see things a bit from my perspective as someone trying to be impartial in dealing with edit warring. --] <small>| ] | ]</small> 20:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


::Whatever. That page has a large handful of editors arguing the points of making a good article up against two or three people only interested in protecting Beck's article from the reality of Glenn Beck himself. That sooner or later some of those editors would wind up in dangerous territory is a result of their excessive efforts to AGF and try to work with such obvious trolls. You'll note that there are admins already involved there, (Will Beback), and others (Oronem) Who warned Bytebear when he was past 3RR, but didn't block him for it. To then decide to block me and warn Paglew shows your inability to actually read through the large amount of evidence I provided, instead relying on the idea that since I've got a block log already, you can point at it and say 'he must be guilty', and hope you'll get away with it, and point to blocks of people from both sides as proof that you surely must have been neutral in assessing this situation. I haven't 'thrown bombs' at all there, and believe me, I could. The dossier posted about Bytebear's POV conflicts and CoI was removed, and I didn't even once restore it, though it would've done a great deal for my case that he's an intractably concreted user. But you'll keep insisting that we humor him and be kind to him and AGF till our cocks fall off, because you cannot recognize a 'Civil POV Push' when you see it. Raul654 wrote a lengthy essay on the matter, you would do well to read it. ] (]) 21:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
You misunderstand my point when I say ''Well (Moral) Objectivism is a widely understood concept outside (well depending on your education) the US'' - I'm not commenting ''in the slightest'' about the american education system - I'm saying it's a widely understood concepts by those who have studied higher degrees ''in other nations in the right subjects'' - especially the UK where I was a prof. So I wouldn't automatically expect someone from London who didn't go to university to have come across any of the concepts. It's not really an either/or for us because Rand's stuff isn't widely taught at universities, well it's not taught at all really except as a footnote to say "not to be confused with..." --] (]) 10:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


Just calm down a bit will you. No one is saying that American education is inferior, but making the simple point that Rand is little known outside of the US and that Objectivism means something completely different in academic philosophy, especially outside of the US. --] <small>]</small> 16:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


==Doom's talk page==
Thuran, easy tiger. Cameron and others have made clear their POV and bias. Just let it stand and stick to the content issues at hand. Don't sink to the level of ad hominem attacks and sarcasm that these editors seem to relish. Being a party to the reveling in ignorance that sometimes goes on is upsetting I know, but such is life. There's no need to get into the mud with the pigs. :) Cheers. ] (]) 17:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
: Well that is a revealing edit. I must admit to an increasing interest in the sociology of this particular belief system. --] <small>]</small> 17:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
::What the hell are you talking about? ] (]) 17:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
::: Oh sorry, I thought it was self-evident. I have a long term interest in minority belief systems and self-reinforcement. I only came to the Rand pages as a result of a bit of vandalism on the Philosophy article and stayed to get some form of balance in place (still trying on that). I can't say its enjoyable, but there has been an interesting side benefit for my research on complex adaptive systems, pervert belief structures (I am using pervert in the Lancian not the sexual sense by the way) and aspects of cognitive filtering. The material on these pages is proving useful source data for a paper or two. --] <small>]</small> 18:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


Your brazilian nemesis left a message for you on there.] (]) 19:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
== Red Hulk Identity Edits ==


== ] ==
If you look in the history, the 'characterization' section (which I altered to identity recently) was already a source of contention and it was decided it would stay. This was MONTHS before you came along and made the edit (without giving a reason).


Hello, {{BASEPAGENAME}}. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. {{#if:|The thread is ]. }}{{#if:|The discussion is about the topic ].}} <!--Template:WQA-notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 05:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
When you clarified, you suggest the section has "innuendo" or "speculation" - it was fact that Quesada referenced it in an interview, and it is fact that the identity is unknown. Leaving the section as is gives no speculation as to the identity, but instead clears up rumors.


== ] Warning ==
Please leave it alone. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 13:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


Comments such as you made are unacceptable. Do NOT repeat such transgressions. — <small><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;"><b>]</b> : ]</span></small> 05:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


:Learn what NPA is, and go read that talk page. He's spent days on end objecting to any and ever source, nitpicking against any number of editors. You can redact this bogus warning any time. ] (]) 06:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


== ] ==
Hey did you see that like, immediately someone edited that section with speculation? That's what I was worried about. Can we maybe come up with something (grammatically) better together that says something like "At this point Red Hulk's identity has been hinted at to be several different characters, but the actual identity has yet to be revealed."? What are your thoughts?


A thread has been started on ] that you may be interested in, you can find the discussion . ] (]) 22:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
I think it would be necessary to discourage further additions of who people think it might be.


== Thanks... ==
Thanks--] (]) 14:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
For giving me a red link... ] (]) 06:35, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


:You're welcome!
== Earth-Two Superman as a Black Lantern ==
:It's been fixed. Dunno why it looked right, then posted wrong. I think the colons and if statement are some fancy behind the scenes stuff that get completely borked by a diff link in that field of the preset warning system. ] (]) 06:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
::That was meant as a general "D'oh"/facepalm comment at my not spotting it sooner, rather than an insult. No offense or insult meant. My apologies ] (]) 06:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
:::I'm going to make a great physical effort at AGF, and return to a 'none taken'. In the future, when you're opening multiple complaints against editors, try to avoid calling them dumb. ] (]) 06:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
::::I can try to find instances where I've done the same thing, it's not really an insult to you but a general "wow, I can't believe I missed that" moment. ] (]) 07:00, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


== Thank you also ==
http://www.dccomics.com/dcdirect/?dcd=11569
For cleaning up my talkpage :) ] (]) 16:14, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


== ] ==
Lord knows all this "notability" stuff is going to be Misplaced Pages's end one day. If this isn't good enough for you, then I don't know what is. And no, I don't need to be reprimanded on "policies". ] (]) 04:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for you comment, though... looking into the birth date of ] and the one of ], you must agree that this is not a contemporary (!) comment, maybe should ask some ''professional'' assistance on this subject. That is, if you do not mind. ] (]) 08:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


You are being very unfair here. Why did you put (Caution: Page blanking, removal of content on Howard Pyle. (TW)) (top) when this is not correct ? We both know this was not the case. The rest, I leave it to other people to check. ] (]) 12:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
== WP:WQA ==
:You seem not to understand: Time will tell..., and I consider this discussion as closed. ] (]) 15:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


==Red Hulk==
Just an FYI, you've been mentioned . ''']]''' 19:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I've started a consensus discussion on the edit conflict on Red Hulk . Can you offer your opinion on the four points there? Thanks. ] (]) 15:20, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
:Thanks. You said the identity info should be in chrono-order. But what are your thoughts on whether it should be broken up or mentioned together? ] (]) 15:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


== KT == ==Ida Shaw==
Yeah, usually people who just sign up on Misplaced Pages have to learn things about lingo and syntax. ] (]) 17:46, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


== Re: Rants ==
Sorry about that. Thanks for the clarification. Would you like me to remove my comments? -- ] (]) 01:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
==Straw poll at WT:FICT==
There is no a straw poll being conducted at ] and I would be grateful if you would make your views known. --] (]) 21:46, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


Show me one thing he said that was either constructive or that even addressed the article rather than those editing it, and I'll gladly revert. ] (]) 16:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
== Foul Language on the Red Hulk Page ==
:You'll also notice significant time gaps, I noticed one edit and reverted, then had to run. I didn't have time, sorry<ref></ref>. ] (]) 18:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Thuranx, could you please tone down the language in this discussion and in your edit comments? I understand how frustrating it can be and I know I am betraying how lame I am but that language is kind of offensive. Besides, please remember that this is a page on a comic book -- There will be children reading it -- Hmm, after writing this, I realize that that is what was bothering me. If this were a Marvel MAX title or some such, it wouldn't bother me, but come on: it's the Hulk. --] (]) 23:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
: Re: TVM. It had been a long day, and I guess the edit comments exhausted me a bit (to be honest, I didn't really care about the discussion) Thanks for the links. I'm still working my way through the wiki-policies (and the syntax for creating links) Heh, somehow, I don't think you'll find many far right christians reading "Red Hulk". --] (]) 15:13, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


==Batman characters in Robot Chicken==
== 3RR Warning ==
If that's so, how come you allowed Joker's appearance to stay? ] (]) 5:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


== FYI ==
You have been reported to the Administrators' noticeboard. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
This might be of interest, and goes to disproving a certain claim. On the '''2nd January, 2009''', we see you congratulating me on my editing of the article '']'' : Note that references are ''out of the article and in footnote form''.
Then, note this: where I trialed a style that includes references in the article, and ''you support it''. Note the entry - '''22nd January''', '''2009'''. It is NOT June 2009, as I originally said.


Also, please remember that at all times, even when in disagreement, we must ''civil''.
== Hulk ==
] (]) 01:03, 3 September 2009 (UTC)


== ] ==
No problem - it's the wedge isn't it? "oh, put it in a separate section", "oh that separate section can be moved to the bottom", "oh we don't need this separate section"... --] (]) 21:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


FYI, the source of the information in that article appears to be in the public domain, and I've restored it per the author's request. See ] for the discussion. Informing you as the G12 tagger. Cheers, ] (]) 19:58, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
== re: Reopening ==


:Hi, ThuranX. I reviewed the copyright report on ] and added a comment to the talk page. The status is that the book from which the text was copy-pasted, , is in the public domain. The contributor added a proper summary note in the article history and a template at the bottom of the article to provide attribution. That is all the requirements needed per WP guidelines which say ]. So there is no copyright violation. However, just because it is public domain doesn't mean the text is appropriate. There is definitely some POV commentary that needs to be removed or revised. (I won't make any judgment about notability -- I'll leave that up to you.) Thanks for checking on the possible CV problem. Cheers. <span style="font-family: tahoma;"> — ] ]</span> 15:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Sure thing, if any editor (including the nominator) contests the close for a good reason, it is probably unsuitable by the very nature of that action, I agree with your reopening. Hope you're having a good day. :) <font face="Trebuchet MS"><b>&mdash; ]</b><sup><i>]</i></sup></font> 23:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


== Ex Machina ==
== Do not make personal attacks anywhere on Misplaced Pages ==


Given the revelations in the most recent two issues of ''Ex Machina'', would you consider it reasonable to conclude that the gardener really ''did'' gain powers by eating crops which had been fertilized with Mitchell Hundred's blood? ] (]) 22:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Comment on '''content''', not on the '''contributor'''. Personal attacks will not help you make a point; they hurt the Misplaced Pages community and deter users from helping to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about another contributor must be supported by evidence, otherwise they constitute personal attacks and may be removed by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to ].] (]) 17:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


== Gratin == ==Arguing with Idiots==
If you aren't going to put what he said in the correct context, then you should remove the entire thing. Period. <b><span style="font-family:Tahoma">]]]</span></b> 00:29, 24 October 2009 (UTC)


==Who is a Jew?==
Hi.. I couldn't help but notice your on ] from a little while ago. The thing is, what you removed was actually correct. ''Gratin'' is a cooking method, not a specific dish. Indeed, ''pommes de terre gratin'' is quite different from ''pommes de terre gratin Lyonnaise''; the latter has a cream sauce while the former is just browned without. //] ] 17:34, 28 January 2009 (UTC)</small>
A relentless, pro-Orthodox user has materialized at ] and I can't keep up. I immediately thought of you... Best, ] (]) 13:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


==Rjanag Conduct RfC ==
== ] episodes - notice ==
A has been opened concerning the conduct of ]. This follows the of a number of arbitrators at the . I am contacting you because you previously discussed Rjanag's conduct at the underlying referenced Simon Dodd AN/I.


The RfC can be found .
Hey there. As I reverted a bunch of your edits, I felt that it was only proper to give you a notice. You had redirected a bunch of articles about individual Burn Notice episodes to ] because they contained little information besides plot summaries. While I tend to agree with you, I feel the information should have been merged into the list first, so I have ''temporarily'' undid your redirect. Once I'm done, I'll revert myself back to your version. <font color="navy">]</font>''''' <sub>(<font color="green">]</font>)</sub>''''' 02:18, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
:Hold on, before you revert. I have not rewritten them ''yet''. It's something that I plan to do over the next few weeks. and I wanted to have the links active to refer to the plot summaries as I rewrite. <font color="navy">]</font>''''' <sub>(<font color="green">]</font>)</sub>''''' 03:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


Editors (including those who certify the RfC) can offer comments by:
==Joker==
:(a) ''posting their own view''; and/or
Hi ThuranX, I think that it is inevitable that the nursery attack section will be removed if the current opposition ratio remains. By adding the link with the explanatory note in the see also section, I wanted to show him that such a link can be sufficient and clear enough to replace the whole section (e.g., make the copycat salient in the article & inform the reader sufficiently so that he can decide to read more or not by clicking the wikilink). Kind regards, ] (]) 12:55, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
:(b) ''endorsing'' one or more views of others.


You may certify or endorse the original RfC statement. You may also endorse as many views as you wish, including Rjanag's response. Anyone can endorse any views, regardless of whether they are outside parties or inside parties.
== Abount the content, not the editor ==


Information on the RfC process can be found at:
Just a friendly reminder that, when in a content dispute, please try to make the discussion about the content and refrain from making it about the editor. While it may seem to be important to mention the editor by name, this can only serve to attack the editor and there point of view (which is often a view in good faith). Edits such as , can be construed as a bit extreme. I have no intention of blocking anybody for this content dispute, which is what it is. All I ask is that you make an effort to avoid pointing out a specific editor in a dispute and instead make the comments about the content in question! The can often resolve a large number of content disputes that stoop to name calling and finger pointing instead of resolving the underlying issue. As I said on my talk page, both sides are most often acting in good faith with the intent of providing the most reliable, accurate and relevant material. However, each side does thid differently due to personality differences and different understanding (or lack of understanding) of wikipedias policies and guidelines. Thanks! ]] <sup>]</sup> 16:27, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


:#]
:When he files the inevitable AN/I, I'll be coming to your talk page with a big fat I TOLD YOU SO. ] (]) 23:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
:#]
:#]
:#]
Thanks.--] (]) 21:04, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


::I have added a comment ] asking that you strike a comment. Given your previous history if you could do that I could see myself not providing an escalated block upon you for continuing incivility.--] <sup>]</sup> 01:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Thank you for your consideration and adjustment.--] <sup>]</sup> 02:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Whatever. I removed it. Other than being a shocking teen, he knows full well there's no reason to mention it. Given the controversy over the term, I saw no reason to mention it, since it's completely irrelevant to the filing. But thanks for ignoring the actual problem there and finding something to posture on instead. Yes yes, I know 'Misplaced Pages's not censored'. I'm a big fan of it. that, however, doesn't mean we can curse and be vulgar with abandon. If it did, I'd be allowed to point out that other than shock value, his comments added nothing, and were entirely designed for that provocative result. But I'm not. You can't see the hypocrisy of attacking me for discretion but not him for pointless antics.] (]) 02:04, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


== 3RR Warning == ==Kosovo-Israel==


Feel free to blank this, but you might want to monitor your reverts more carefully - you are at three for the day. - ] ] 03:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


Just leting you know that kosovo and israel have perfect cooperation Israel recognize kosovo passports will tell you 1 fact that ordinary people dont know regarding kosovo recognized by israel.The only reason why israel dont recognize kosovo is muslim world.If israel would recognize kosovo then the recognitions from muslim world would stop.
:No, I haven't. Stop Stalking me, stop trying to intimidate me. ] (]) 04:00, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
::arcayne, while I am not familiar with this particular event, it is obvious that thuranX is frustrated with you. I a.) beleive thuran is carefully monitoring his edits and b.)your notices offer little value other to inflame the situation. While I know you are frustrated, I recommend that you express all concerns you have on my talk page for me or other uninvolved editors to research. Thanks! ]] <sup>]</sup> 04:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Ah, Arcayne, now your noble protector once again returns to punish me. Just indef block me. I'm sick and tired of Chris showing up every time you pull this crap to protect you. this is fucking stupid. he can ignore consensus on multiple pages, harass me, threaten me, violate the rules, and then, when I tell him to just leave me alone, along comes an Admin to chastise me. ] (]) 04:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
::::Hi ThuranX, though the indentation might be confusing, I think Chris was asking Arcayne to not post here. . .I don't think he was chastising you. ] (]) 04:16, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::Oh good. Chris has HIS protector coming here now. ] (]) 04:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::Geez ThuranX, I have your page watched because you have often made good comments. I'm not trying to be a part of any "dogpile" :-) ] (]) 04:58, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::No, you're just here to protect Chris while he protects Arcayne, who is allowed to talk me. Got it. ] (]) 05:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::::ThuranX, the message Chris left is asking Arcayne not to post on your user talk page and telling him that "your notices offer little value other to inflame the situation." I think you misread his comment. Sorry you're frustrated with whatever situation you're in. Unfortunately I think it's got you reacting strongly even when people aren't coming at you. ] (]) 07:06, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


there are a lot of israeli counselors in Kosovo’s Prime Minister Cabinet one of them is David Klein, Israeli counselor for economy of Kosovo’s Prime Minister Hashim Thaci.
:::::::::Any editor who comes here and tells ''me'' to calm down and leave Arcayne alone is protecting Arcayne. None of them have looked at the situation, and seen him ignoring 8 editors on one page while edit warring. They just tell me to stop picking on poor, poor, Arcayne. If you're not going to examine the situation, you're just here to protect him, harass me, and waste my time. Chris posting here is NOT about defusing things, but reminding me that hes' endorsed Arcayne's policy of harassment, and R Baley showing up so fast to tell me to not say anything mean and naughty to Chris is t oshow me the admins are circling the wagons around Arcayne. ] (]) 12:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:Take it how you want. The comments were directed at aracayne. If you had payed any attention to this situation, at all, you would have seen that I left a similar note for him on my talk page. Now, if you keep attacking the people who stand up for you, the number of peopl epiling on is going to rise and the number of people defending you is going to fall. Sorry you misunderstood the origninal intent of my message however your continued assumptions of bad faith on my behalf and the other editors here is disconcerting. ]] <sup>]</sup> 13:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
::Also, if you continue this blatant show of bad faith towards good faith editors, you will very likley get blocked again. Not for anything to do with arcayne, or any other editor but based on YOUR own actions. ]] <sup>]</sup> 13:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:::AGF is not infinite. You gave him permission to wikistalk me and police me. You've done ntohing to rein him in. I don't have to assume you're impartial or trying t ohelp in light of your declaration that Arcayne can do whatever he wants to me. It's that plain and simple. Neither Arcayne, nor you, have any good faith towards me, and I thus, am in no way obligated to assume good faith to you. ] (]) 21:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
ThuranX, take a deep breath and read the comment from Chrislk02 that starts out "arcayne," again. It is not directed at you at all. ] (]) 17:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:I don't read it that way. Communications to Arcayne should be on his talk page. Communication to me goes here. The reason that conversation is placed here is so that I don't forget that Arcayne has friend in high places. ] (]) 21:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
::I am sorry you see it that way. I came in this with the intent of sticking up for you. I have no history of taking sides inappropriately and an extensive history of viewing all sides of a situation subjectively. My comments were not threats and I am not in high places. Administrators hold no more weight than any other editor. This is however not good enough for you so I am done sticking up for you. ]] <sup>]</sup> 21:56, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:::What the heck does that mean? You're done encouraging my stalking only a little? Now you're gonna stalk me too? Whatever. Arcaynes' behavior has again forced me off of multiple articles, and you keep coming here to champion him. I used talk, I disengaged, and yet the persecution keeps coming. Bad Admin, no donut. Go away finally. ] (]) 23:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
::::I will be watching your behavior. Editors with history of disruption and inappropriate behavior are subject to the scrutiny of more editors. In other words, yOu sleep in the bed you made. IF after a while you show that you have changed, most of those editors will go away. This is not stalking, however one of the ways that wikipedia informally maintains the highest quality content. Should you engage in any blatantly inappropriate behavior I will block you, no questions asked. Otherwise I don't care if you cry that you are being persecuted, or stalked or anything else. When you bite the hands of those who stand up for you you will quickly find that the pool of people willing to stand up for you quickly drys up. ]] <sup>]</sup> 16:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


also check this
You have never stood up for me. EVER. YOu have flat out told me that Arcayne is allowed to stalk me. You have flat out encouraged him to do so. When he does so, You protect him. You may be the most unethical admin I've ever seen, and any block from you would be from a highly involved an conflicted admin, and overturned for review by UNinvolved editors. You have absolutely no standing to block me. You now admit to the intent to JOIN Arcayne in the stalking and persecution. If you don't everse yourself and strike your threats against me, I'll take this to AN/I. ] (]) 16:55, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/Albania%E2%80%93Israel_relations
:You are welcome to take this to ANI if you feel that I have acted inapropriatley. I have asked arcayne to not address you and instead run concerns through me or another neutral party in efforts diffuse the situation. Please, if you are going to accuse me of endorsing stalking, please provide a link (because I know for a fact that I have never endorse stalking). Please read ]. It in no way prevents the tracking of another editors editsand specifically says, "Proper use of an editor's history includes (but is not limited to) fixing errors or violations of Misplaced Pages policy..." You have a long hidstory of inappropiate behavior and violation of policy. As long as you abide by policy and behave properly nobody cares (including myself). Again, you are welcome to take this to ANI as I do not respond to threats. Thanks! ]] <sup>]</sup> 17:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
::I as a further showing of good faith have posted this at ANI myself. Please feel free to review the timline I posted and ensure it is accurate. Any changes or mistakes that I have made should be posted below my section (and not added to the actual post). Thanks! ]] <sup>]</sup> 18:07, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


Precisely, only one Jewish family was deported and killed during the Nazi occupation of Albania. Not only did the
== Gratin ==
Albanians protect their own Jews, but they provided refuge for Jews from neighboring countries. The Albanians
refused to comply and hand over lists of Jews. Instead they provided the Jewish families with forged documents
and helped them disperse in the Albanian population. Some 1,200 Jewish residents and refugees from other
Balkan countries were hidden by Albanian families during World War II, according to official records.


Israel has been one of the richest countries to receive Kosovar Albanians refugees from Kosovo War in 1999.
First, kindly stop referring to me as a sock-puppet and kindly cease all other forms of abuse directed at me.
Many refugees were provided medical care, food and accommodation by the Israeli authorities, as a gesture of
thanks to the Albanian people after their contribution to the saving of Jews in the Holocaust period.


Why do you seem to be obsessively opposed to edits on the subject of ]? You have repeatedly removed factual and cited inormation, reverting to less accurate versions, either giving no reason or giving reasons that are nonsense. That is vandalism. Either make a constructive and factual contribution or none at all.


] (]) 08:38, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
:This user has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. ] (]) 21:27, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


i've added this cause i saw you have wrong percipience about Kosovo.--<span style="background:#27408B">] ] </span> 03:13, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
I will try to look at the article as a neutral third party under ]. I don't see any other attempt to do this since the recent spate of edit's broke out on the page. I won't do this until I have some agreement that any reasonable edits I make won't be immediately reversed without discussion - I have better things to do than get into an edit war over this article -- ] (]) 19:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
:Blue Square, ThuranX has done a good job dealing with a series of sock-puppets stirring up trouble on that page. There is no edit war on that article and a series of appropriate changes have been made. If someone has recommendations for further changes or is willing to explain their edits I don't think they will have any problem. ] (]) 21:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


since most of the users coming from countries that dont recognize kosovo those users dont like kosovo as independent state here on wiki also
== ] ==


i was refereeing to your last action of removing(revert) of KOSOVO Flag and COA on top (support for users who dont like flag on top ex.serbs)
Thanks for your comment and I'm glad you like the edits. I'm not done yet, though -- plenty of work left to do! I plan on doing a large part of the second season today. ] (]) 18:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


There is Consensus about this to put FLAG and COA on top just check the archive.--<span style="background:#27408B">] ] </span> 21:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
== ] ==


== ANI notice ==
Thank you for attempting to revive an article which focuses on the academic, scientific and cultural interests of an area. Sadly this article has once again been redirected by the same 3 spammers to their advert for a shopping mall. On behlaf of the hundreds of editors from all around the world who have been blocked by these spammers, could you please help try and rid the encyclopedia of this free advertising, so that a true and proper account of the region can at last be published. Many thanks.] (]) 02:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


Hello, ThuranX. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. {{#if:|The thread is ]. }}{{#if:|The discussion is about the topic ].}} <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. ]] 19:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
:if as i did, you search for 'drake circus bomb shelter' in google you will see the parts of the original article and this intresting link exposing the corruption of the same who are now blocking anyone attempting to challenge their spamming activity.] (]) 02:47, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


== AN/I == ==Your comments==
Hello. It is clear that you have a strongly negative emotional response to what you perceive is a cabal of Orthodoxy. I am uncertain as to the source of your reaction, but I respectfully request that you review and read all of the comments on ] carefully, and as dispassionately as you are able. I believe you will see that I am basing my stance on logic, not some superiority complex. I will say that when you respond to what I believe are respectful and logical statements with obscenity, dismissiveness, and condescension, it makes it difficult to follow the wiki process. Thank you. -- ] (]) 06:42, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


I've opened an ANI regarding the incivility brought up at the WQA; it's not good enough to blame others for your comments. ] (]) 05:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC) :I've been reading it for years. Don't talk down to me like you think is so 'respectful'. I know when I see the 'Orthodox is right' meme being promoted and whitewashed. I don't like it, and I won't stand for it on the page. ] (]) 06:51, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


I will reiterate that I think you are not responding logically but emotionally, and that is causing you to see memes where there are none. What we have there is a discussion about the best existing scholarship for practice circa 1000 BCE. You seem to think that 19th century scholars are better sources than 10th century or 3rd century sources, and you feel that way why? -- ] (]) 06:58, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
== February 2009 ==
<div class="user-block"> ] {{#if:72 hours|You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''72 hours'''|You have been temporarily ''']''' from editing}} in accordance with ] for {{#if:]|''']'''|repeated ]}}. You are welcome to ] after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here}} below. {{#if:true|] <sup>]</sup> 05:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-block2 -->


:I reiterate. Get good sources. Rabbis promoting the beliefs of a religion are biased primary sources. Get secondary sources, like this project requires. ] (]) 07:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
:Atlan, on the An/I - I was ASLEEP. I note, that yet again, the CIVIL POV PUSHERs win. I'm sick and tired of this bullshit. It's the same god-damned gaming as every other block I'm given. Some ass runs up the bad faith meter, I'm the only one willing to bluntly call them on their nonsense, and I get blocked for it. I'm not contesting this one, because it's just not worth it, the blocker and his supporters thinks they can solve things by blocking those who oppose the civil pov push, but I can assure them, they're simply inviting more by showing that 'if someone's polite, they can spend FOREVER on any fucked up tinfoil hat nonsense'. have fun in the meantime, I'm sure by the time I get back ,there will be more about BO and his kenyan/martian birthplace. ] (]) 12:58, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
::Alright I stand corrected. You make legitimate points. You're just not doing yourself any favors bringing those points across with incivility and attacks, which is a shame.--] (]) 14:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


== Anger problems == ==hallo from Uwe Kils==
can you please vote again on http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Uwe_Kils_(3rd_nomination).
Best wishes ] 15:55, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


== Help? ==
Thuran, although this is probally none of my business, i've been keeping an eye on you and Acrayne since last month, and i see you're blocked again. I came here to tell you what others have probally told you numerous times, you need to watch your temper. Once again this probally none of my bussiness since i'm a younger editor than you, but whenever you get mad you use the "F" word and every time you use the "F" word you get in trouble. And whenever you get in trouble you pass the buck claiming that "they insulted me first". It doesn't matter who made the personal attack, it's just as bad that you made an attack back. Editing Misplaced Pages can be stressful, but insulting others never help. And i'm not forcing you to be civil, this is just some friendly advice. ] (]) 12:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


It's not too late to help at all - being busy has kept the work on it to a crawl. ;) I'd like to represent what you are referring to; was it on the Abom talk page or somewhere else? ] (]) 14:36, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
:nah, I'm the one guy willing to say exactly what half a dozen others are thinking. Being cowed into submission by the civility patrol may be fine for others, but there comes a point when you have to stand up and say 'You're polite as all getout, but you're wrong, you know you're wrong, and you know you're running us all in circles, so knock it the fuck off.' We've had the 'obama is not our president' threads continuously on that talk page for months, sometimes two or three at a time. The same people open many of them up, with the same evidence, phrased in a slightly novel arrangement. It needs to stop. It's NOT a content issue. there's even Arbcom stuff about this, but it's simply never enforced, because some admin alwaqys portrays it as a content issue outside the arbcom, to avoid the headaches of ArbEnforcement. If the arbcom and admins won't do their job, consensus must be reinforced, and that's only happening by getting louder, because if you don't shout these Civil pov Pushers down,they'll just keep going and going, and the moment you choose to ignore them, they take silence as acceptance, and rewrite articles into horseshit. ] (]) 13:02, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
::Yea, I know these sorts of fringers are frustrating. One thing I try to avoid is the cesspool of off-article talk page conversations. Let them go off like a gaggle of hens, back-slapping and x2-ing each other as they rattle off the evil sins of the wiki's liberal bias, Obama crushes, etc... If they come to my talk page, I just revert with the msg of "keep it in the article talk space". Keep their ranting centralized, then there's more eyes there and less of a need for any one editor to be the Bad Cop, which can push most anyone into snapping. ] (]) 13:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
::: ...and my 2 cents: If you've been keeping tabs on the ANI, you'll know that I recognize the antecedent to your actions, and in a way I'm with ya on that one - but I agree that none of us can afford to switch to "fuck you" mode. The civility meter has to stay on the good side - look what's happened, we're now without one of our POV-fighters for 72 hours, which is something we can't afford, but we can't do anything about it now. (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">'''&nbsp;Bwilkins / BMW&nbsp;'''</span>]) 14:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


== Asgardian RFC/U ==
So what I see above is:


Hi there. I was wondering if you would help me finish up the RFC/U regarding ]. I'm going to put the RFC into place before the end of the year, so it would really be great if you could provide any help you are able to give. What I need most are diffs displaying the disputed behavior. I have some already ], but could use some more. I mean just a list of diffs to put in the first five or so categories I listed there, as I already have more than enough illustrative examples. Anything that you think is edit warring (mutiple similar edits to the same article in the span of a few days), incivility, inaccurate edit summaries, or other similar behavioral problems. List them on the RFCU talk page - just the diffs is all I need, because I want people reading the RFC to be able to draw their own conclusions.
Personal attacks are allowed. Responses are what's discouraged, so bend over and take it.


Also, I have come up with a and a based on the comments that have been gathered, and I would appreciate any responses to that on the talk page.
Civil POV pushers should be allowed to win. Ignoring them will work until they decide that the silence is acceptance, at which point you can either revert their edits and start an edit war, for which you will be blocked, or you can engage on the talk page, thus invalidating the entire 'ignore them', or simply let them win and have their way on the page.


Thanks! ] (]) 05:55, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Civility trumps facts, citation, consensus and everything else, so as long as you're civil, nothing else matters. I do not believe this, and do not agree. I can accept that many of you think I need to tone it down, I have since the last of these messes, and I will continue to, but if anyone thinks I'm going to roll over and let Civil POV pushers steamroll through talk pages and articles to put up nonsense like 'Obama's not really president because he's not really an American because this right wing blog says so', then they are very mistaken.


Hi there,
And this notion that it's always all my fault that perpetuates through these threads on me is still ridiculous. I got blamed for something I did not do. the other editor continued to insist I was in the wrong, when I plainly was not. I notice that he's still claiming Obama's a liar, and that I edited inside the archive box, when I did not. I notice no sanctions against him for his personal attack. I take responsibility for mine, it would be nice to see him take responsibility for his. I don't expect to be on again till after my block is over.] (]) 21:46, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
:Just an outside comment: Thuran, you've got it backwards. ''Incivility'' trumps facts, citation, etc. By being uncivil, you undermine all your efforts to edit articles. No one's asking you to roll over, they're just asking you to stop biting everyone. &mdash; <b>]</span>:<sup>]</sup></b> 22:45, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


I'm just letting you know that the Asgardian RFC/U ].
==Jim Steranko==
Hi. Thanks for participating so quickly in the discussion. However, I was still formatting the discussion so that the votes could be listed up front, as in other vote-oriented discussions. Would you like to format your post in that vein? I'd prefer not to edit your post myself. Thanks. ] (]) 04:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
:I didn't ask you to "reduce" it to a vote, merely '''''format''''' it in the way that I started it, meaning with a bullet, and a boldfaced vote, after which your elaborations could follow, much as everyone who posted after you did. Thanks again. ] (]) 07:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


Also, you made statements pertaining to the case, and I tried to reflect all the major points in my summary. If you feel there is something you wanted to be said that I did not cover sufficiently (or accurately enough to reflect your viewpoint), you may post an "Involved user view" below Asgardian's response section to elaborate. You may wish to copy, whole or in part, any previous statements you have made (with or without diffs or links) into such a new section as you desire.
== Good Humour ==


Thank you for your participation. ] (]) 06:15, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Good Humor'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | =) 'Nuff said. –<font face="Verdana">] (])</font> 15:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
|}


:Yes, thanks for weighing in there. All the best, ] <sub>]</sub> 08:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
== comment ==


== ] ==
I loved your comment on the AN board about "working" here. Made my day. Well, I'd love to stay and chat, but I have to head down to the accounting office, seems to be a mix-up with my pay when they issued last months checks. ;) ] (]) 04:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

], just to let you know there is a discussion ongoing . Do you care to weigh in with an opinion? ] (]) 19:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

==AfD==
I've nominated ], ], and ] together for deletion: ].] (]) 18:10, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
==Genealogy==
I've added back to the Genealogy article valuable resouces for our readers. As a former employee of a major genealogical library (the Newberry), I know firsthand the frustrations of people who are unfamiliar with books or articles that would solve many of their problems. This is especially important for dealing with genealogical resources in other countries. The titles furthermore demonstrate the wide range of genealogy today, especially as it links to social science. ] (]) 08:26, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

== removal of the juhurim in the who is a jew article ==

Dear Thuran X,
I do agree that self identification matters greatly in this section. My problem is that the claim has no source cited and I do not feel that saying citation needed makes up for the fact that there is no source. If someone can cite a source, I would have no objection to the line "they consider themselves jewish by patrilineal descent." ] (]) 20:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

== ] at FAR ==

Hey there. As you put a significant amount of work into ], I'm letting you know that the article has been put up for ]. ] (]) 22:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

== O'keefy ==

*re the alleged gag order, please see the talk page for the article - i researched it, and there's no proof of it existing. and i think o'keefe is a total douche, but let's keep the article accurate.--] (]) 21:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

== Courtesy notice ==

A discussion has been started about your actions on ] on the ], ''''']'''''. Best regards, ] (]) 00:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

== Stop ruining the article ==

Stop accusing people, calling it a smokescreen.

Worse yet, when there is a non-controversial prose improvement, as was most of the edit, do NOT make it bad again. This is being bad!

I removed your bad reverts but stuck the word professor in to satisfy you. ] (]) 07:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

:I'm not the one continuously ignoring consensus and insisting there's a conspiracy to call him a professor, when the university itself flat out says he was a professor. This is your agenda pushing, and it will be reverted. If you want to retain the OTHER paragraphs, which, frankly, are better written as they are, not as you want them to be, do it WITHOUT altering the first paragraph. It's pretty simple, there's a consensus against you, long has been, the evidence is against you, the citation is against you... clue in. ] (]) 07:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The evidence is actually against you. Somehow you are on a mad agenda to confuse the public. Actually, Senior Lecturer shows Obama is smart and worked his way up politically. If he were to become Professor of Law or Associate Professor of Law, he'd still be in Chicago giving lectures.

You are rude first and that makes everyone upset. So please stop doing it. Anyway, you win because I am getting out of this cesspool at least for a day or two. ] (]) 08:16, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

== Asgardian RFC closed, now at arbitration ==

Hello,

Thank you for participating in the ] regarding ]. The RFC has been closed, and the case is now at arbitration. You are neither required nor requested to participate, but you may view the ] (please do not edit that page), and you may view the ] presented and add more evidence if you wish, or simply follow the case. ] (]) 03:53, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

== seeking an independent view ==

I have suggested another user's comment may indicate anti-Semitism, and am now being accused of libel for it. I often respect your way of handling conflicts, and wonder if you'd provide an independent view but also go to ] and just use your "find" function for "holocaust" and see how often it comes up, and how. Thanks, ] | ] 12:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

:I appreciate your looking at it, but you needn't bothe at this point. What really upsets me is, anyone who raises questions about Jesus is being compared to a Holocaust denier. I think it is just mortifying, using the Holocaust as a weapon. I don't want to get into an argument aabout whether Jesus existed or not, I just do not want anyon to think that it is appropriate to ring up the Holocaust as if that were a constructive part of the discussion. Yet one user at the Christ Myth Theory does this all the time.

But I understand your weariness with conflict, don't worry about it. ] | ] 09:12, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

==Iron Man 2==
Hi, TX. You might want to look in on ] and ]. As happened with Iron Man, where the term Iron Monger was never used for Obadiah Stane, there's much rv'ing going on at those two pages re: the terms Whiplash, War Machine and Black Widow, which are never used in the film. I don't know if an RfC may be needed, or just some experienced editors to go in and take a look. I'm involved, and if I'm off base, let me know. I'm going with the examples from ], where War Monger was not used, and , Abomination was not to be used. With regards, --] (]) 02:24, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

:But it's always good to see you when you do! There's nothing like the old gang!--] (]) 12:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

==Barry Allen image==
There's a new candidate for the main infobox image I've decided to present, and I'd appreciate your thoughts at ]. Thanks! --] (]) 00:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
]] has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> -'''''—&nbsp;]<span style="color:darkblue">&nbsp;</span>'''''<sup>]</sup> 19:38, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

== You are now a Reviewer ==

]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "{{mono|reviewer}}" userright, allowing you to ] on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a ] scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not ] to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only ], similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at ].

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious ] or ], and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see ]). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found ].

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. <!-- Template:Reviewer-notice --> ] (]) 17:56, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

==Metalocaplyse Characters==
Hey, as someone that helped re-write and maintain the ] article, would you be interested in keeping an eye on the indivual band member articles:
::];
::];
::];
::];
::];
We discussed this issue last summer on ] and probably some other places too. Thanks. --<small><span style="border: 1px solid">]] </span></small> 20:09, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

== ANI notice ==

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is ]. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you.— ''']]<sup> ]</sup>''' 00:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

==Kudos==
Hey, T. Just want to say it's always great to see another editor turning passive voice to active voice. Such a simple thing, and yet it makes articles so much more precise and sharply written. Nice editing! Regards as always, --] (]) 02:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

==RfC: Partisan sources==

I have proposed an edit for the mainspace of an important Misplaced Pages policy, the ] policy. Essentially, I believe that some sources are so partisan that using them as "reliable sources" invites more problems than they're really worth. You've previously participated in the RfC on this subject, or another related discussion indicating that you are interested in this important policy area. Please indicate whether you support or oppose the proposed edit. The original discussion is . ] (]) 18:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

==Consensus discussion on Ivan Brandon photo==
Hi. I've started a consensus discussion , and would appreciate your input. Thanks. ] (]) 03:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:Hi. Since that discussion seems to have ended a while ago, I just thought I'd let you know that I'm going to leave that photo alone, due to my previous conflict with Brandon, and the accusation of COI on my part by him. So if you or someone else wants the photo switched, I'd prefer if someone else do it. ] (]) 01:06, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

==About Hulk==

I'd like to say that I wrote that on Hulk talk page ONLY because Hulk WASN'T included in Marvel Superhero's Category, unlike that bunch of villains. This has nothing to do with what you decided he is in his article. Thanks.] (]) 15:22, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

:Ah, ok, I understand. ] (]) 04:22, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

==Josh Adams==
Hi. A conflict with ] that is similar to the one we had with ] arose on Adams' article. You can see the details in that article's , and on the of the account used by the editor indicating himself to be Adams. The photo he insisted upon was way too dark and colorless, so I asked him if he could upload a better-lit version, and he did. Though I think his lips are a bit too red, I think it's a far better version, even though his rationale for changing the photo seems to flirt with ]. I just thought I'd let you know in the interest of transparency. ] (]) 06:53, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
:I tried looking through policies relevant to this, such as WP:AUTOBIO, and at ], it says, ''"If you do not like the photo, you can help Misplaced Pages by contributing a good photo under a suitable free content license. If you have a promotional photo you are willing and able to release under such a license, that's ideal for us and you."'' When I read that, I thought that the modified version of Adams' photo was adequate. Or should he have to go through OTRS before we can use it? ] (]) 20:41, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
::Happy New Year. So what is your feeling on the Ivan Brandon and Josh Adams photo matters? Should we leave the ones currently in the articles? ] (]) 07:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

==Need opinions on photos==
Hi. A disagreement has arisen over which of two photos would be better as the main Infobox image for the ] article. Can you participate in ? Thanks, and Happy Holidays. :-) ] (]) 04:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

==Article deletion discussion==
Hi. Can you voice your opinion on the ] deletion discussion ]? Thanks. ] (]) 02:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

==X-Men: The Last Stand==
Hey, T. Haven't seen you around the project for awhile. There's a potential fancruft issue at ] over that endless Quill/Kid Omega thing again, and I thought you might want to keep an eye on it. Hope things are going well in real life. Regards, --] (]) 20:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

==Grant Morrison photo==
Hi. Your opinion on what would be the best photo for the Infobox in the Grant Morrison article is requested . If you could take the time to participate, it would be greatly appreciated, but if you cannot, then disregard; you don't have to leave a note on my talk page either way. ] (]) 01:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

==I need your opinion==
Hi. I have a question for which I need objective opinions. Can you offer your viewpoint ]? I really need it in order to proceed. Thanks. ] (]) 02:18, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

== Moving ] - ongoing poll ==

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move ].
This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past.
It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. ] (]) 21:41, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

== WP Heroes ==

{{lw|WikiProject Heroes}}

Conversion to a ] is proposed and discussed in the talk page. Although I have no interest on the show, feel free. --] (]) 15:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

== Moving ] - ongoing poll ==

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move . I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. ] (]) 00:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

==Hi==

I haven't forgotten about our little game almost 6 years ago. I hope you are well. ] (]) 08:02, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

:Behavior like this is why I don't edit here anymore.] (]) 04:24, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

==Photo consensus discussion==
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on the matter discussed at the bottom of ? Thanks. ] (]) 02:26, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

== Article notability notification ==

] Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote recently, ], has been tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Misplaced Pages's ]. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be ], ], or ]. Please consider adding ] to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: {{find sources multi
|1 = Hulk Vs
|2 =
|3 =
|4 =
|5 =

|introtext = ''Find sources:''&nbsp;
|introlink = g
|introseparator = &nbsp;–&nbsp;

|link1 = gnews
|display1 = {{#if: | free news | news }}
|link2 = gbooks
|display2 = books
|link3 = gscholar
|display3 = scholar
|link4 = jstor
|display4 = JSTOR
|link5 = gfreeimages
|display5 = free images

|free =


}}. Thank you for editing Misplaced Pages! <!-- NOVOXEL:{{{1}}} --> ] 13:42, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

== Careful ==

When you removed the merge template from ] you also removed 2 other things by mistake. ] (]) 17:49, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

==Unblocking==
Hi. In case you didn't already know, Asgardian has been . Just thought you should know. ] (]) 23:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

:No surprise. Quality work is debased by crufters and trolls, who have more time to tear down than it takes good researchers and writers to build. ] (]) 04:26, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

== Clarification motion ==

A case (]) in which you were involved has been modified by {{oldid2|631252824|Motion|motion}} which changed the wording of the ] to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee --]] 15:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

== Global account ==

Hi ThuranX! As a ] I'm involved in the upcoming ] of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see ]). By looking at ], I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on ] and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ] with <nowiki>{{ping|DerHexer}}</nowiki>. Cheers, —]&nbsp;<small>]</small> 01:32, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

== Moving Burma to Myanmar - new 2015 poll ==

You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. ] ] (]) 09:05, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

== ] ==

{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692009577 -->

Latest revision as of 02:13, 20 October 2024

This user may have left Misplaced Pages. ThuranX has not edited Misplaced Pages since November 2014. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome!

THIS IS MY USER TALK. IF YOU VANDALIZE IT, I WILL REVERT THE VANDALISM. AS MANY TIMES AS IT TAKES. HITTING MY TALK WITH 'CEASE AND DESIST' VANDALISM WARNINGS FOR UNDOING YOUR BAD INFO, OR YOUR OWN VANDALISM, WILL ALSO BE REVERTED.

NEW COMMENTS GO AT THE BOTTOM.

Hello, ThuranX, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Dr Debug (Talk) 23:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Archiving icon
Archives


Reporting repeated disruptions

You might like to know that I have reported 3 users (Lontech, Sulmues, Spanishboy2006) who are violating Misplaced Pages consensus on Kosovo to the ArbCom probation enforcement page. Feel free to leave any comments, if you'd like. All the best, --Cinéma C 02:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Reality Killed The Video Star

Hi there. Would you mind reconsidering your !vote now the article has been expanded significantly? I would like to take it to DYK but I cannot do so before the AFD is not settled so I'd like to ask you whether you'd object if the nominator withdrew the AFD request. Regards SoWhy 09:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


waeselly talk on INc- hulk

How is moderatley (in light of the fact that the budget was less for the first film and it has performed well in dvd sales, now 306 million gross) weaselly? i dont think so. Factual and understated, even ecyclopedically restrained. rather than describing a a 61 and 54 RT and MC scores as mixed for the first hulk and 61 and 66 scores as generally positive, i would say that is weaselly. going off topic a bit the reason everyone thought the first hulk was a flop was mainly because avi arad and ang lee and the studio did not see eye to eye, and marvel especially in regards to profits which is why they now develop in house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.251.6 (talk) 21:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Dethklok

Hello. I reverted this edit while watching RC's. I know nothing of the subject but noted you had reverted the same IP executing the same edit and trusted your judgement. If you could give me some pointers on what to look for it would help me stay out of trouble on my reverts. If the page has enough eyes on it, just let me know and I'll stay out of the way. Regards Tiderolls 05:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I've responded to your comment on my talk page

You can read it or ignore it as you choose. I'm just letting you know there is a response. -- Moss&Fern (talk) 05:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Glenn Beck

ThuranX, I replied to your comment but wanted to leave a personal message. I think some of your comments have become uncivil and border on personal attacks (at least I felt they were to me). It would be better if we could discuss the content as it relates to the relevant policies. I expect you believe we should follow Misplaced Pages:BLP#Criticism_and_praise and WP:WEIGHT. Our discussion on that article would be more helpful if we focused on the content and how best to apply Misplaced Pages standards. I only started reviewing the article myself a couple weeks ago, so I'm not some long time editor protecting it. I would apply the same standards to any biography I get involved with. I do take the view that this is an encyclopedia and not a web profile listing news, meaning that a biography should reflect what you would expect to see in an encyclopedic biography of a notable person. This is also the view of Misplaced Pages. This may also reflect your view, and perhaps we just need to work out the degree based on wiki policies. In any case, I hope that you'll consider a more constructive approach as we do need good editors to improve the article. Morphh 13:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Let me also add that in truth, I can live with the quote as written, but do have concerns as I noted. I would just like someone to discuss those concerns. If I lay out a logical and policy driven reason why something is a concern, I would hope editors working for inclusion would layout a counter logical and policy driven argument for inclusion. Instead I get attacked. How are editors suppose to respond to that? It then becomes aggressive as an editor defends a policy driven argument against an emotional one, when in reality, it doesn't matter much if the content is included or not. Like that quote, I don't care if it's in there, but I would like some rational, logic, and policy to drive it (as there arguments for not including it). I can get behind a logical discussion and lend support, but I can't get behind an emotional one. Hope this helps to explain some of my edits and will increase our productive collaboration. Morphh 14:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I've been protecting Bytebear. I disagree with him, but I think he's made some valid arguments that require discussion, not dismissal. I agree there is consensus on including content - I'm part of that consensus, but I'm not sure what that means as far as content as most people just come in and complain. Bytebear is at least explaining his position and presenting an argument. I'm not interested in making Beck look like a saint either, but "balance" is something defined in policy, not some measure of 50/50 saint / devil. Biographies have a much higher threshhold for including criticism and praise. I know people are upset, but that's not reason to disregard our job as civil editors that respect the policies of the encyclopedia. I sort of feel like we have a few people trying to have a constructive discussion of entries in the mists of an angry mob with pitch forks. Bytebear may be unconvinced, but there are several others that also have similar concerns. We should work to address them, not dismiss it with the angry mob. Morphh 14:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify, the statement the president has repeatedly exposed himself as having a deep-seated hatred... is referring to Beck's belief regarding Obama's agenda for reparations and social justice for blacks. That was the discussion for that entire week on Beck's show. If you look at the entire quote, it becomes more clear that he was talking about institutional racism, which is why I think the context is needed. There are different definitions for racism, and I don't think Beck implied that Obama thinks blacks are superior to whites. So that's what I was getting at... hope this clarifies it. Morphh 17:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I can see that point. I had it originally worded differently that I think expressed your point but it was trimmed down. In late July 2009, Beck argued that reparations and social justice were driving President Obama's agenda, discussing issues of diversity and institutional racism. That week in response to the Henry Gates controversy, Beck stated that Obama has repeatedly exposed himself as having... Still may be considered SYN, would have to look at the sources. I'll think of how we might be able to clarify using one of these other terms based on what we have in the direct sources. I'm fine with removing the reparations from this section and moving it to the politics. Morphh 18:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the forum check, should have just kept my mouth shut. :-) Morphh 15:52, 01 September 2009 (UTC)

Blocked for edit warring

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24hours in accordance with Misplaced Pages's blocking policy to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. talk

I see four reverts in less than 24 hours. . You are well aware that you were doing this as you warned another editor for it, and you have been here long enough to know this is not acceptable. I see and understand your concerns about the Beck article, but you are not making things easier with your behavior over there. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 20:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, punish those who work with others, those who follow the system, and reward the POV pushers. The Civil POV Push wins again. Good Job. Genius. ThuranX (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to request an unblock, though I'm guessing that's not your style. You obviously didn't "follow the system" in that you broached 3RR. That was not necessary. And this is not about civility at all, though you really do need to tone it down on the article talkpage. I get your complaint about what's going on over at Glenn Beck Thuran—I really do. I'm going to see if something broader can be down about the problems over there. When you edit war and throw bombs on the article talk page though, you cloud the core issues and make it harder to do something about them. It gives me no pleasure to block you or anyone else, but I can't very well block Bytebear for (far more egregious) edit warring and then simply ignore the fact that you were doing the same thing and yourself broached the 3RR "bright line." You're welcome to think this a terrible block and demean my capabilities as an admin, but I would request that you try to see things a bit from my perspective as someone trying to be impartial in dealing with edit warring. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 20:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Whatever. That page has a large handful of editors arguing the points of making a good article up against two or three people only interested in protecting Beck's article from the reality of Glenn Beck himself. That sooner or later some of those editors would wind up in dangerous territory is a result of their excessive efforts to AGF and try to work with such obvious trolls. You'll note that there are admins already involved there, (Will Beback), and others (Oronem) Who warned Bytebear when he was past 3RR, but didn't block him for it. To then decide to block me and warn Paglew shows your inability to actually read through the large amount of evidence I provided, instead relying on the idea that since I've got a block log already, you can point at it and say 'he must be guilty', and hope you'll get away with it, and point to blocks of people from both sides as proof that you surely must have been neutral in assessing this situation. I haven't 'thrown bombs' at all there, and believe me, I could. The dossier posted about Bytebear's POV conflicts and CoI was removed, and I didn't even once restore it, though it would've done a great deal for my case that he's an intractably concreted user. But you'll keep insisting that we humor him and be kind to him and AGF till our cocks fall off, because you cannot recognize a 'Civil POV Push' when you see it. Raul654 wrote a lengthy essay on the matter, you would do well to read it. ThuranX (talk) 21:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


Doom's talk page

Your brazilian nemesis left a message for you on there.200.255.166.196 (talk) 19:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:WQA

Hello, ThuranX. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Soxwon (talk) 05:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:NPA Warning

Comments such as you made here are unacceptable. Do NOT repeat such transgressions. — Ched :  ?  05:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Learn what NPA is, and go read that talk page. He's spent days on end objecting to any and ever source, nitpicking against any number of editors. You can redact this bogus warning any time. ThuranX (talk) 06:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:AN/I

A thread has been started on WP:AN/I that you may be interested in, you can find the discussion here. Soxwon (talk) 22:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...

For giving me a red link... Soxwon (talk) 06:35, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome!
It's been fixed. Dunno why it looked right, then posted wrong. I think the colons and if statement are some fancy behind the scenes stuff that get completely borked by a diff link in that field of the preset warning system. ThuranX (talk) 06:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
That was meant as a general "D'oh"/facepalm comment at my not spotting it sooner, rather than an insult. No offense or insult meant. My apologies Soxwon (talk) 06:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to make a great physical effort at AGF, and return to a 'none taken'. In the future, when you're opening multiple complaints against editors, try to avoid calling them dumb. ThuranX (talk) 06:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
I can try to find instances where I've done the same thing, it's not really an insult to you but a general "wow, I can't believe I missed that" moment. Soxwon (talk) 07:00, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you also

For cleaning up my talkpage :) Soxwon (talk) 16:14, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Howard Pyle

Thanks for you comment, though... looking into the birth date of Vincent Van Gogh and the one of Howard Pyle, you must agree that this is not a contemporary (!) comment, maybe should ask some professional assistance on this subject. That is, if you do not mind. Ida Shaw (talk) 08:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

You are being very unfair here. Why did you put (Caution: Page blanking, removal of content on Howard Pyle. (TW)) (top) when this is not correct ? We both know this was not the case. The rest, I leave it to other people to check. Ida Shaw (talk) 12:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

You seem not to understand: Time will tell..., and I consider this discussion as closed. Ida Shaw (talk) 15:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Red Hulk

Hi. I've started a consensus discussion on the edit conflict on Red Hulk here. Can you offer your opinion on the four points there? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:20, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. You said the identity info should be in chrono-order. But what are your thoughts on whether it should be broken up or mentioned together? Nightscream (talk) 15:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Ida Shaw

Yeah, usually people who just sign up on Misplaced Pages have to learn things about lingo and syntax. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:46, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Rants

Show me one thing he said that was either constructive or that even addressed the article rather than those editing it, and I'll gladly revert. Soxwon (talk) 16:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

You'll also notice significant time gaps, I noticed one edit and reverted, then had to run. I didn't have time, sorryCite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).. Soxwon (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Batman characters in Robot Chicken

If that's so, how come you allowed Joker's appearance to stay? Rtkat3 (talk) 5:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

FYI

This might be of interest, and goes to disproving a certain claim. On the 2nd January, 2009, we see you congratulating me on my editing of the article Abomination : Note that references are out of the article and in footnote form. Then, note this: where I trialed a style that includes references in the article, and you support it. Note the entry - 22nd January, 2009. It is NOT June 2009, as I originally said.

Also, please remember that at all times, even when in disagreement, we must civil. Asgardian (talk) 01:03, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

James Pieronnet Pierce

FYI, the source of the information in that article appears to be in the public domain, and I've restored it per the author's request. See User talk:Jclemens#Copyright before 1964 for the discussion. Informing you as the G12 tagger. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 19:58, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, ThuranX. I reviewed the copyright report on James Pieronnet Pierce and added a comment to the talk page. The status is that the book from which the text was copy-pasted, History of Santa Clara County California (1922), is in the public domain. The contributor added a proper summary note in the article history and a template at the bottom of the article to provide attribution. That is all the requirements needed per WP guidelines which say In addition to the edit summary note, be sure to attribute the material either by using blockquotes, or quotation marks, by using an attribution template, using an inline citation and/or adding your own note in the reference section of the article to indicate that language has been used verbatim.. So there is no copyright violation. However, just because it is public domain doesn't mean the text is appropriate. There is definitely some POV commentary that needs to be removed or revised. (I won't make any judgment about notability -- I'll leave that up to you.) Thanks for checking on the possible CV problem. Cheers. — CactusWriter | 15:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ex Machina

Given the revelations in the most recent two issues of Ex Machina, would you consider it reasonable to conclude that the gardener really did gain powers by eating crops which had been fertilized with Mitchell Hundred's blood? DS (talk) 22:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Arguing with Idiots

If you aren't going to put what he said in the correct context, then you should remove the entire thing. Period. Joshua Ingram 00:29, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Who is a Jew?

A relentless, pro-Orthodox user has materialized at Who is a Jew? and I can't keep up. I immediately thought of you... Best, A Sniper (talk) 13:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Rjanag Conduct RfC

A Request for Comments has been opened concerning the conduct of Rjanag. This follows the suggestion of a number of arbitrators at the Rjanag RfA. I am contacting you because you previously discussed Rjanag's conduct at the underlying referenced Simon Dodd AN/I.

The RfC can be found here.

Editors (including those who certify the RfC) can offer comments by:

(a) posting their own view; and/or
(b) endorsing one or more views of others.

You may certify or endorse the original RfC statement. You may also endorse as many views as you wish, including Rjanag's response. Anyone can endorse any views, regardless of whether they are outside parties or inside parties.

Information on the RfC process can be found at:

  1. RfC Conduct
  2. RfC Guide
  3. RfC Guide 2
  4. RfC Rules

Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:04, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


Kosovo-Israel

Just leting you know that kosovo and israel have perfect cooperation Israel recognize kosovo passports will tell you 1 fact that ordinary people dont know regarding kosovo recognized by israel.The only reason why israel dont recognize kosovo is muslim world.If israel would recognize kosovo then the recognitions from muslim world would stop.

there are a lot of israeli counselors in Kosovo’s Prime Minister Cabinet one of them is David Klein, Israeli counselor for economy of Kosovo’s Prime Minister Hashim Thaci.

also check this http://en.wikipedia.org/Albania%E2%80%93Israel_relations

Precisely, only one Jewish family was deported and killed during the Nazi occupation of Albania. Not only did the Albanians protect their own Jews, but they provided refuge for Jews from neighboring countries. The Albanians refused to comply and hand over lists of Jews. Instead they provided the Jewish families with forged documents and helped them disperse in the Albanian population. Some 1,200 Jewish residents and refugees from other Balkan countries were hidden by Albanian families during World War II, according to official records.

Israel has been one of the richest countries to receive Kosovar Albanians refugees from Kosovo War in 1999. Many refugees were provided medical care, food and accommodation by the Israeli authorities, as a gesture of thanks to the Albanian people after their contribution to the saving of Jews in the Holocaust period.


i've added this cause i saw you have wrong percipience about Kosovo.-- LONTECH  Talk  03:13, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

since most of the users coming from countries that dont recognize kosovo those users dont like kosovo as independent state here on wiki also

i was refereeing to your last action of removing(revert) of KOSOVO Flag and COA on top (support for users who dont like flag on top ex.serbs)

There is Consensus about this to put FLAG and COA on top just check the archive.-- LONTECH  Talk  21:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello, ThuranX. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GiantSnowman 19:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Your comments

Hello. It is clear that you have a strongly negative emotional response to what you perceive is a cabal of Orthodoxy. I am uncertain as to the source of your reaction, but I respectfully request that you review and read all of the comments on Talk:Who is a Jew? carefully, and as dispassionately as you are able. I believe you will see that I am basing my stance on logic, not some superiority complex. I will say that when you respond to what I believe are respectful and logical statements with obscenity, dismissiveness, and condescension, it makes it difficult to follow the wiki process. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 06:42, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I've been reading it for years. Don't talk down to me like you think is so 'respectful'. I know when I see the 'Orthodox is right' meme being promoted and whitewashed. I don't like it, and I won't stand for it on the page. ThuranX (talk) 06:51, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I will reiterate that I think you are not responding logically but emotionally, and that is causing you to see memes where there are none. What we have there is a discussion about the best existing scholarship for practice circa 1000 BCE. You seem to think that 19th century scholars are better sources than 10th century or 3rd century sources, and you feel that way why? -- Avi (talk) 06:58, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I reiterate. Get good sources. Rabbis promoting the beliefs of a religion are biased primary sources. Get secondary sources, like this project requires. ThuranX (talk) 07:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

hallo from Uwe Kils

can you please vote again on http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Uwe_Kils_(3rd_nomination). Best wishes Uwe Kils 15:55, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Help?

It's not too late to help at all - being busy has kept the work on it to a crawl.  ;) I'd like to represent what you are referring to; was it on the Abom talk page or somewhere else? BOZ (talk) 14:36, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Asgardian RFC/U

Hi there. I was wondering if you would help me finish up the RFC/U regarding User:Asgardian. I'm going to put the RFC into place before the end of the year, so it would really be great if you could provide any help you are able to give. What I need most are diffs displaying the disputed behavior. I have some already here, but could use some more. I mean just a list of diffs to put in the first five or so categories I listed there, as I already have more than enough illustrative examples. Anything that you think is edit warring (mutiple similar edits to the same article in the span of a few days), incivility, inaccurate edit summaries, or other similar behavioral problems. List them on the RFCU talk page - just the diffs is all I need, because I want people reading the RFC to be able to draw their own conclusions.

Also, I have come up with a desired outcome and a description of the case based on the comments that have been gathered, and I would appreciate any responses to that on the talk page.

Thanks! BOZ (talk) 05:55, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi there,

I'm just letting you know that the Asgardian RFC/U has begun.

Also, you made statements pertaining to the case, and I tried to reflect all the major points in my summary. If you feel there is something you wanted to be said that I did not cover sufficiently (or accurately enough to reflect your viewpoint), you may post an "Involved user view" below Asgardian's response section to elaborate. You may wish to copy, whole or in part, any previous statements you have made (with or without diffs or links) into such a new section as you desire.

Thank you for your participation. BOZ (talk) 06:15, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for weighing in there. All the best, Doczilla STOMP! 08:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

The Holocaust

ThuranX, just to let you know there is a discussion ongoing here. Do you care to weigh in with an opinion? Bus stop (talk) 19:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD

I've nominated List of former Jews, List of former Christians, and List of former Muslims together for deletion: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of former Jews.Kitfoxxe (talk) 18:10, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Genealogy

I've added back to the Genealogy article valuable resouces for our readers. As a former employee of a major genealogical library (the Newberry), I know firsthand the frustrations of people who are unfamiliar with books or articles that would solve many of their problems. This is especially important for dealing with genealogical resources in other countries. The titles furthermore demonstrate the wide range of genealogy today, especially as it links to social science. Rjensen (talk) 08:26, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

removal of the juhurim in the who is a jew article

Dear Thuran X, I do agree that self identification matters greatly in this section. My problem is that the claim has no source cited and I do not feel that saying citation needed makes up for the fact that there is no source. If someone can cite a source, I would have no objection to the line "they consider themselves jewish by patrilineal descent." Rawleary (talk) 20:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Captain Marvel (DC Comics) at FAR

Hey there. As you put a significant amount of work into Captain Marvel (DC Comics), I'm letting you know that the article has been put up for Featured article review. BOZ (talk) 22:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

O'keefy

  • re the alleged gag order, please see the talk page for the article - i researched it, and there's no proof of it existing. and i think o'keefe is a total douche, but let's keep the article accurate.--Milowent (talk) 21:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy notice

A discussion has been started about your actions on Rich Dad Poor Dad on the biographies of living persons noticeboard, here. Best regards, Yworo (talk) 00:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Stop ruining the article

Stop accusing people, calling it a smokescreen.

Worse yet, when there is a non-controversial prose improvement, as was most of the edit, do NOT make it bad again. This is being bad!

I removed your bad reverts but stuck the word professor in to satisfy you. JB50000 (talk) 07:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not the one continuously ignoring consensus and insisting there's a conspiracy to call him a professor, when the university itself flat out says he was a professor. This is your agenda pushing, and it will be reverted. If you want to retain the OTHER paragraphs, which, frankly, are better written as they are, not as you want them to be, do it WITHOUT altering the first paragraph. It's pretty simple, there's a consensus against you, long has been, the evidence is against you, the citation is against you... clue in. ThuranX (talk) 07:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The evidence is actually against you. Somehow you are on a mad agenda to confuse the public. Actually, Senior Lecturer shows Obama is smart and worked his way up politically. If he were to become Professor of Law or Associate Professor of Law, he'd still be in Chicago giving lectures.

You are rude first and that makes everyone upset. So please stop doing it. Anyway, you win because I am getting out of this cesspool at least for a day or two. JB50000 (talk) 08:16, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Asgardian RFC closed, now at arbitration

Hello,

Thank you for participating in the recent RFC/U regarding Asgardian‎. The RFC has been closed, and the case is now at arbitration. You are neither required nor requested to participate, but you may view the initial statements for the case (please do not edit that page), and you may view the evidence presented and add more evidence if you wish, or simply follow the case. BOZ (talk) 03:53, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

seeking an independent view

I have suggested another user's comment may indicate anti-Semitism, and am now being accused of libel for it. I often respect your way of handling conflicts, and wonder if you'd provide an independent view here but also go to talk: Christ myth theory and just use your "find" function for "holocaust" and see how often it comes up, and how. Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 12:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your looking at it, but you needn't bothe at this point. What really upsets me is, anyone who raises questions about Jesus is being compared to a Holocaust denier. I think it is just mortifying, using the Holocaust as a weapon. I don't want to get into an argument aabout whether Jesus existed or not, I just do not want anyon to think that it is appropriate to ring up the Holocaust as if that were a constructive part of the discussion. Yet one user at the Christ Myth Theory does this all the time.

But I understand your weariness with conflict, don't worry about it. Slrubenstein | Talk 09:12, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Iron Man 2

Hi, TX. You might want to look in on Iron Man 2 and Blacklash (comics). As happened with Iron Man, where the term Iron Monger was never used for Obadiah Stane, there's much rv'ing going on at those two pages re: the terms Whiplash, War Machine and Black Widow, which are never used in the film. I don't know if an RfC may be needed, or just some experienced editors to go in and take a look. I'm involved, and if I'm off base, let me know. I'm going with the examples from Iron Man (film), where War Monger was not used, and

But it's always good to see you when you do! There's nothing like the old gang!--Tenebrae (talk) 12:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Barry Allen image

There's a new candidate for the main infobox image I've decided to present, and I'd appreciate your thoughts at Talk:Flash (Barry Allen)#Infobox image 2010. Thanks! --CmdrClow (talk) 00:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Cite your edits

Template:Cite your edits has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -— Gadget850 (Ed)  19:38, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Misplaced Pages:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:56, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Metalocaplyse Characters

Hey, as someone that helped re-write and maintain the Dethklok article, would you be interested in keeping an eye on the indivual band member articles:

Pickles (Metalocalypse)‎;
William Murderface‎;
Skwisgaar Skwigelf‎;
Toki Wartooth;
Nathan Explosion‎;

We discussed this issue last summer on Talk:Dethklok#Character Bios and probably some other places too. Thanks. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  20:09, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Ban of Sugar Bear/Ibaranoff24. Thank you.— dαlus 00:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Kudos

Hey, T. Just want to say it's always great to see another editor turning passive voice to active voice. Such a simple thing, and yet it makes articles so much more precise and sharply written. Nice editing! Regards as always, --Tenebrae (talk) 02:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

RfC: Partisan sources

I have proposed an edit for the mainspace of an important Misplaced Pages policy, the Misplaced Pages:Identifying reliable sources policy. Essentially, I believe that some sources are so partisan that using them as "reliable sources" invites more problems than they're really worth. You've previously participated in the RfC on this subject, or another related discussion indicating that you are interested in this important policy area. Please indicate here whether you support or oppose the proposed edit. The original discussion is here. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 18:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Consensus discussion on Ivan Brandon photo

Hi. I've started a consensus discussion here, and would appreciate your input. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 03:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Since that discussion seems to have ended a while ago, I just thought I'd let you know that I'm going to leave that photo alone, due to my previous conflict with Brandon, and the accusation of COI on my part by him. So if you or someone else wants the photo switched, I'd prefer if someone else do it. Nightscream (talk) 01:06, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

About Hulk

I'd like to say that I wrote that on Hulk talk page ONLY because Hulk WASN'T included in Marvel Superhero's Category, unlike that bunch of villains. This has nothing to do with what you decided he is in his article. Thanks.200.191.155.118 (talk) 15:22, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah, ok, I understand. ThuranX (talk) 04:22, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Josh Adams

Hi. A conflict with Josh Adams that is similar to the one we had with Ivan Brandon arose on Adams' article. You can see the details in that article's History, and on the talk page of the account used by the editor indicating himself to be Adams. The photo he insisted upon was way too dark and colorless, so I asked him if he could upload a better-lit version, and he did. Though I think his lips are a bit too red, I think it's a far better version, even though his rationale for changing the photo seems to flirt with WP:COI. I just thought I'd let you know in the interest of transparency. Nightscream (talk) 06:53, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I tried looking through policies relevant to this, such as WP:AUTOBIO, and at WP:AUTOBIO#Problems in an article about you, it says, "If you do not like the photo, you can help Misplaced Pages by contributing a good photo under a suitable free content license. If you have a promotional photo you are willing and able to release under such a license, that's ideal for us and you." When I read that, I thought that the modified version of Adams' photo was adequate. Or should he have to go through OTRS before we can use it? Nightscream (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Happy New Year. So what is your feeling on the Ivan Brandon and Josh Adams photo matters? Should we leave the ones currently in the articles? Nightscream (talk) 07:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Need opinions on photos

Hi. A disagreement has arisen over which of two photos would be better as the main Infobox image for the Ben Templesmith article. Can you participate in this discussion? Thanks, and Happy Holidays. :-) Nightscream (talk) 04:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Article deletion discussion

Hi. Can you voice your opinion on the Beth Sotelo deletion discussion here? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

X-Men: The Last Stand

Hey, T. Haven't seen you around the project for awhile. There's a potential fancruft issue at X-Men: The Last Stand over that endless Quill/Kid Omega thing again, and I thought you might want to keep an eye on it. Hope things are going well in real life. Regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 20:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Grant Morrison photo

Hi. Your opinion on what would be the best photo for the Infobox in the Grant Morrison article is requested here. If you could take the time to participate, it would be greatly appreciated, but if you cannot, then disregard; you don't have to leave a note on my talk page either way. Nightscream (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I need your opinion

Hi. I have a question for which I need objective opinions. Can you offer your viewpoint here? I really need it in order to proceed. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:18, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:41, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

WP Heroes

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Heroes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Conversion to a task force is proposed and discussed in the talk page. Although I have no interest on the show, feel free. --George Ho (talk) 15:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi

I haven't forgotten about our little game almost 6 years ago. I hope you are well. Mcflytrap (talk) 08:02, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Behavior like this is why I don't edit here anymore.ThuranX (talk) 04:24, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Photo consensus discussion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on the matter discussed at the bottom of this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:26, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Article notability notification

Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote recently, Hulk Vs, has been tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Misplaced Pages's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: Find sources: "Hulk Vs" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Thank you for editing Misplaced Pages! VoxelBot 13:42, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Careful

When you removed the merge template from Who is a Jew you also removed 2 other things by mistake. Debresser (talk) 17:49, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Unblocking

Hi. In case you didn't already know, Asgardian has been unblocked. Just thought you should know. Nightscream (talk) 23:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

No surprise. Quality work is debased by crufters and trolls, who have more time to tear down than it takes good researchers and writers to build. ThuranX (talk) 04:26, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Clarification motion

A case (Palestine-Israel articles) in which you were involved has been modified by motion which changed the wording of the discretionary sanctions section to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 15:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Global account

Hi ThuranX! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:32, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - new 2015 poll

You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. New move attempt of Burma>Myanmar Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:05, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

  1. Beck, Glen (2009-07-23). "What's Driving President Obama's Agenda?". Retrieved 2009-08-01.
Categories:
User talk:ThuranX: Difference between revisions Add topic