Misplaced Pages

Reverting Palin

A before the fact reference for an interview is inappropriate after the interview has occurred. You deleted my text for the Gibson interview, which accurately described what was in the reference, and substituted a piece published prior to the interview that did not mention the actual content of the interview. Please be more careful before you delete material and use less relevant references. --Zeamays (talk) 14:33, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

No, I didn't replace a reference. Take your whining elsewhere. Grsz 14:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, no you didn't replace my reference, you deleted it, and replaced it with an old one that didn't substantiate the text that I included. Please do no use language like "whining". That is inappropriate here. --Zeamays (talk) 14:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Nor did I remove a source. I changed the wording of the text to go along with the source that was there. Get your facts straight. Grsz 14:50, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Here is my edit by the way, in case you couldn't find it and realize I didn't remove or in any way change the source. Thanks, Grsz 14:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Careful

Hi there, you deleted a whole paragraph and called it a 'slight reword' in the edit summary. Careful there, this kind of thing has consequences. Thanks, LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 19:19, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Oops, that was a mistake. I only thought I was editing the foreign policy paragraph, and didn't realize I got that other section in there too. Grsz 19:36, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

My turn to get whacked for nuthin', eh? That's ok. LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 00:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Gravina

You are using an improper usage of the 3RR warning. I am reverting clear vandalization of the article, and have consistently warned the party every time. He has already exceeded 3RR and is in repeated violation of blanking, OR, and NPOV, per my and other persons' reverts and warnings. I have also previously posted in the discussion page about this. Duuude007 (talk) 15:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

No absolutely clear vandalism. This isn't vandalism at all. Just pointing out the rules. You don't have to do it all yourself, you'll get help. Grsz 15:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Request

Grsz, could you please explain your reasons for reversion at Talk:Sarah Palin#Personal life section, so we can reach consensus on weighting of the Wasilla speech? Thanks. Kelly 18:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Done. Grsz 18:50, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

You know, I have to agree with Kelly here that that material is totally UNDUE. Moreover, and on a completely separate level (I do NOT come to wikipedia to be blindly partisan) I think you are hurting our cause. It is patently clear that the reason for including the section is to raise doubts that she is a fanatic (and as an atheist myself, I have such doubts). Anybody who is sympathetic to religion, however, will just see the section as an unwarranted and clumsy attack on religion. Like many attempts to add POV to wikipedia, that section will only backfire. Homunq (talk) 20:19, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama FAR

Barack Obama has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:43, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Sarah Palin

Trolling? looks like relevant discussion material to me.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 03:54, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Nope, wrong again. Article talk page is for talking about the article, not it's subject, like you're trying. Grsz 03:57, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The subject matter is being discussed in the context of its inclusion in the article after the material was removed. The edit you removed gave background context. I don't think the inclusion of the material on the talk page was turning the talk page into a forum (or a tabloid).--Cdogsimmons (talk) 04:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The manner you're presenting it in isn't to initiate a discussion on if the information should be in the article. Grsz 04:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Got it. Fixed that.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 04:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

RE: AAHA

Yeah I just found out a few mins ago, Who knows if they'll survive. Until low level hockey is more organized and affiliated (much like minor league baseball) we can expect big changes from year to year. It will be interesting to see what happens to the MWHL now that they're down to three teams. I suspect they might put the season on hold until they gain new frachises for next season or fold completely. Bhockey10 (talk) 00:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

2007-08 Pittsburgh Penguins season

Hello Grsz11. Wouldn't ya know it, the Penguins go and trade Malone (ironically, along with Roberts) to the Lightning. Remember, we were gonna wait to see if he'd get the A with the Pens in '08-'09? GoodDay (talk) 01:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Seeing as I can't stop the article from being declared a GA (with Malone & Sydor included)? I'm frustratingly on the loosing end. GoodDay (talk) 01:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I do remember, now it's back to Gonchar and Sydor. Grsz 01:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I've checked up on the 1985-86 Montreal Canadiens season article. You're correct about including Malone. However, I still suggest leaving out Sydor. GoodDay (talk) 14:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

re: AN/I discussion

You will be accused of inciting Kelly ("pushing her buttons"), so be careful. You are considered "involved" now, and therefore will not be considered to be unbiased and logical about this matter. Really sorry, but that's the way it works here.

Oh, and welcome to the IDCabal. :D Aunt Entropy (talk) 05:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh goodie, it's what I always wanted. Grsz 05:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

FAC withdrawn

I appreciate you're acting in good faith but it's best if featured articles are nominated by people who have worked closely on them. This way they can give reasoned replies to reviewers and be familiar with the sources to make any suggested improvements. Someone who hasn't worked on the article can't provide this input, so the FAC rumbles on until the opposes become so overwhelming that the article is failed, taking a lot of reviewers' time. While the University of Pittsburgh article is reasonable, it is not yet FAC quality, and principle contributors need to be consulted before nomination as required in the FAC instructions. I suggest you first work an article up through peer review and good article to prepare for WP:FAC. Gary King (talk) 04:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

So only involved editors can nominate their articles for FA. Seems stupid and own-y. Though I may not have been involved in editing the page, it's not as if I don't have any knowledge of the subject and would be clueless in responding to the review. Grsz 04:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Not quite, you can nominate the article, Grsz11, but FAC instructions require that you first consult significant contributors to see if they concur the article is ready. Otherwise, they might show up and oppose on comprehensive or some other grounds because they still had work to do on the article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Primary contributors usually want to nominate the article at FAC themselves at some point; in this case, User:Crazypaco has over 400 edits to the article; the user with the second-most edits to the article has only 30. Gary King (talk) 04:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

My Edits!

I happen to think my edits are really brilliant! I've noticed that the wikipedia entries are normally either incoherent or just really bad. I'm trying to ramp up the quality with rigor and determination! Just help us make it a nifty space for full real information.24.14.33.171 (talk) 05:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Please try harder then. Grsz 05:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm tryin' Grsz!! You know, however, some crazy dude blocked me!! It was really bad! We are just trying to make this the best Wiki we can! I mean come on! We should try to be friends, but there are a lot who don't want it! Anyway, if there are any entries that need editing, just let me know!!!! 24.14.33.171 (talk) 20:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

On Palin, read the source

I'm not sure what "consensus you're referring to, but there cannot be a wiki-consensus to make up a quote and attribute it to a source that doesn't support it. The source says what I said it did. Could you please read the source and undo your revert? Thanks! 06:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Read a source? Ah man...ha, yes, I'll look into it. Grsz 05:46, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Er, which source? Grsz 05:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Oops sorry, the spinmeister source. (http://www.gannettnewsservice.com/?p=2448) There's a reference on the talk page. Right now the reference doesn't back up what it says in the article. It mentions the "spinmeister" quote but not the "nowhere" insult.GreekParadise (talk) 06:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Frederick III

Thanks for the suggestions to the Frederick III, German Emperor article. I think I addressed your concerns, but I wasn't quite sure. I wrote a response on the review page, but basically I'm just asking if I did what you wanted for the article, because I wasn't sure. Thanks. --Banime (talk) 20:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for the quick reply, the intro is always the hardest part. I explained a bit more on the review page and I think I edited the intro adequately. Also, did I do the name change thing that you suggested properly? Thanks. --Banime (talk) 21:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thats what I meant for the names. Grsz 22:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

new proposal

Well put!--Buster7 (talk) 22:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Grsz 22:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Reply

I have replied to your question about access dates on my talk page. Pie is good 00:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Another reply on my talk page. Pie is good 00:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Pens roster

WP:HOCKEY decided to make all rosters one template so one update covers all of the pages it's on. Should make it simpler. Blackngold29 02:57, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

This is true, I was gone for awhile. But now how do we denote IR, as we need to for Gonchar and Whitney? Grsz 02:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. I didn't have your talk page on my watchlist, but it looks like you figured the IR thing out. The roster looks good, as well as the season article. I figured we could do a month-by-month recap kind of thing like the 2008 Philadelphia Phillies season did. Hopefully that'll give the article more of a narrative feel than last season's (not that it's bad, it's very good actually, still waitin' for that GA pass) but we can always try to get better. I'm chompin at the bit for the season to start; FSN just announced 49 HD games, I need a new TV! Blackngold29 22:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I've got a 18 inch LCD, so it's a good picture, just small. Also got tickets to Jan 6 Thrashers game. It's the best I could find, even though I tried when they went on sell. Grsz 22:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I go here...

I'm the one who created the article Alternative Learning Center and somebody redirected to edmonson county high school. I want an article only about the ALC, not for the whole edmonson county high school. How do you undirect a page? He is the teacher here, I go this place, and how do you know he isn't a teacher here, in which obviously he is. Happy editing!

HairyPerry 15:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't care if he's a teacher there or not. In order for a page to be on Misplaced Pages, the subject needs to be notable, see WP:BIO. I assume that the page was redirected because the Alternate Learning Center is not notable. Grsz 15:33, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmmm... why you getting an attitude, simple question...simple answer would be just fine instead of your rude sarcasm. Now if ALC would have not been notable wouldn't have just been deleted instead of redirecting to a notable page making ot less notable. Have patience while I try to learn policies man I'm kind of new you know! —Preceding unsigned comment added by HairyPerry (talk • contribs) 15:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm just trying to let you know that the biography of one individual teacher does not belong on that page. Grsz 15:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, well I'll pass that along to my teacher here then because he made us do it for him. Well it is much appreciated for the info. Thanks and Happy Editing!

HairyPerry 15:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

User:IReceivedDeathThreats

Hello, following your report at UAA, I would support a thread at AN/I, especially since his reasons appear to be suggesting that the admin User:Gator1 was the one that was sending him death-threats.— Dædαlus /_Improve 05:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I just did: Misplaced Pages:ANI#Questionable Username Grsz 21:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Why are you attacking me on UUA etc? You have a problem with my username? What is it? All you actually complained about (and then edited) is content on my user page.--IReceivedDeathThreats (talk) 22:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see, perhaps it started here: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/TronixCountry&action=history! --IReceivedDeathThreats (talk) 22:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC) I also see we both edited Sarah Palin recently.

Acknowledged...

I understand, and could easily read the "personal POV" in the post, I merely wanted to clarify that an uncivil edit on any page (be it a Talk page, an AN/I, etc) is still an edit, and is still uncivil. That's all I was saying :) BMW(drive) 13:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

victoria skating rink

I have worked on the article a bit, on the dates and some of the cites. Please take another look. Alaney2k (talk) 13:47, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Abuse

Why are you attacking me on UUA etc? You have a problem with my username? What is it? All you actually complained about (and then edited) is my user page.--IReceivedDeathThreats (talk) 22:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see, perhaps it started here: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/TronixCountry&action=history! --IReceivedDeathThreats (talk) 22:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC) I also see we both edited Sarah Palin recently.

No, you'll see that the deletion nomination was first. Then UAA, where the consensus was to take it to ANI. Nothing personal, it's just about your username. Grsz 22:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

You're asking that I be immediately blocked, but you say it's nothing personal. AFAICT, you are attacking me for political reasons. Though I don't get it. You say you're a libertarian. So I'd think you'd appreciate an informative, NPOV article about a controversial topic, not try to censor it! I ask AGAIN: You have a problem with my username? What is it? --IReceivedDeathThreats (talk) 23:24, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I never asked for you to be blocked, and I'm not sure how or why you think this is political. Grsz 00:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

WHAT ARE YOU DOING?

For ordinary violations of the username policy, do not use this page. Instead, warn the user and ask them to change their name, possibly using the uw-username template. -the UAA page.--IReceivedDeathThreats (talk) 23:24, 1 October 2008 (UTC)