Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:49, 2 September 2021

Older archive: page 1 page 2 page 3 is the history of page 4. page 4 page 5, more

Happy Earth day!

Happy Earth Day!

Hello! Wishing you a Happy Earth day on the behalf of WikiProject Environment and WikiProject Ecology.

What is this? Earth Day is an annual event celebrated around the world on April 22 to demonstrate support for environmental protection. First celebrated in 1970, it now includes events coordinated globally by the Earth Day Network in more than 193 countries. What you can do!! Actively participate in our Wikiprojects. Promote an awareness of the natural environment and world. Tag and assess articles under the scope of these projects. Patrol articles related to environmental protection. Maintain articles listed at Misplaced Pages:List of controversial issues#Environment, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Environment/Popular pages, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Ecology#Pages needing attention, etc. Participate in the delsort. and so on... Newly nominated content Energy in Turkey Energy policy of Turkey Electricity sector in Turkey Similar events Earth Hour International Day of Forests International Mother Earth Day World Environment Day World Soil Day World Water Day

• Discuss this newsletter
• Unsubscribe (Ecology)
• Unsubscribe (Environment)

• Wikiproject Holidays
• WikiProject Ecology

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:51, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

File:Piratey-bw.svg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Piratey-bw.svg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Hog Farm _Bacon 23:35, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Isolation (board game)

The article Isolation (board game) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Misplaced Pages:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Misplaced Pages:Notability (companies)'s section for products requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:38, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

"Consortium for the Bar Code of Life:" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Consortium for the Bar Code of Life:. The discussion will occur at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 24#Consortium for the Bar Code of Life: until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:21, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Asking for your comment about 2018 Trypophobia article RfC

Hi, Pengo. I saw that in the RfC on Trypophobia that you were the only user who argued in favor of removing the image which induces Trypophobia. I'm now trying to explore why users otherwise unanimously decided to keep the image. I was wondering if you had any opinions on your gauge of the situation when the RfC occurred in 2018. I'm not sure if your opinion on the issue has changed, but users in the talk page for that article are emphasizing the near-unanimity of that decision. I'm wondering what makes you different in your conclusion from the other 32 users. Thank you for any information. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 17:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@IronMaidenRocks: I know someone with serious trypophobia. I can tell you they and similar users were not commenting because they were not going to a page with a heap of images that make them throw up in their mouth. Why 32 other users think that's fine, you'll have to ask them. —Pengo 02:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@IronMaidenRocks: i.e. there's a huge selection bias as the page is inaccessible and actually hostile to people with more serious forms of the condition. It's like running a survey on a page that claims epilepsy doesn't exist, and asking whether we should "censor" flashing images, and the entire survey page flashes rapidly. What do you think will be the result? How much input do you expect from people with photosensitive seizures? I don't know what I said on the RfC—you didn't link it—and I don't know why you're asking, but I don't imagine my views have changed, no. —Pengo 02:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pengo: Thanks for the replies, they were helpful. I'll probably call a new RfC in a week or so, perhaps depending on how the project I asked for assistance/review replies. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 16:06, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@IronMaidenRocks: Best of luck. —Pengo 22:14, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Can I ask you both why you think all except for one of the users (you, Pengo) who participated were corrupt participants? Half voted to collapse the photo out of concern for sufferers, and some of them went up against those who didn't seem to care for sufferers or thought of the condition as probably false, but you describe everyone except for one as cruel and biased. What gives? I think it's a shame that so many wouldn't even vote to hide the photo, but I don't think most of them were intentionally being cruel. I don't think a new poll will change anything either, but it's okay to try. Acidsetback (talk) 22:28, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Acidsetback: I personally never questioned the other participants' motives, did not call them corrupt, nor assumed bad faith. I was unaware of any connection to 4chan trolling or brigading of votes.

All I said was the participants were necessarily a biased sample due to the design of the page. Both the discussion and the wikipedia pages leading to it were (and still are) inaccessible and literally hostile to those with the condition being discussed, especially those with more severe reactions, and no attempt was made to seek the opinions of those with the condition, so of course people with the condition, whose opinion should be valued in the decision, are going to be unable or unwilling to participate. I haven't looked back but I believe there were no voices of anyone with the condition, let alone anyone with a severe symptoms, nor any attempt to include their voices.

There's also a pile-on effect where once a view is established in a forum, dissenters mostly don't bother to respond, which would further discourage anyone from responding if they had got that far.

I did not call anyone intentionally cruel, although it's not difficult to see how such a conclusion could be reached. Honestly, it's such a stupidly obvious thing to not to show big spiders on Arachnophobia and not to make the background of the Photosensitive epilepsy page strobe different colours. So if someone repeatedly supports vomit-enducing images on Trypophobia, then I can absolutely see why that would could be seen as a deliberately cruel act, but that is not something I actually said. —Pengo 00:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I'll raise this concern sometime, unless you'd like to come to Talk:Trypophobia. I'm now of the opinion that you'll find cooperative users there. One thing I'd wonder is how to get in touch with people who have Trypophobia who might have varied opinions to share. No doubt taking just a few people's opinions would not represent everyone who suffers from the condition. I'm also unaware of Misplaced Pages's standards on polling a demographic for representation, especially considering this is a conversation dealing with style rather than content. Otherwise, I'm thinking of reaching out to researchers and psychologists who have studied the condition to get their take on the article as a whole, the location of the picture, and if some more appropriate and less shocking picture might be found. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 13:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Pengo, here's a link to the poll: here. There were a few people who participated in the poll who have trypophobia and who were very sympathetic toward sufferers. Some who don't have the condition were sympathetic toward sufferers. But IronMaidenRocks says most users voted to keep the photo in the lead "mostly because of concerns about censorship", that you "believe that the RfC decision was made out of bias and cruelty", and that they (IronMaidenRocks) agree with that. IronMaidenRocks says the argument that the photo should remain for its educational value is "downright barbaric." With the way they put it, it was a white male conspiracy theory to keep the photo. IronMaidenRocks also says an ableist bias occurred. That may be so, but it appears there was no such bias for most of the participants. Most didn't argue censorship, and most didn't come from 4chan. These were years-old users voting and the voting discussion appears to have been advertised on Misplaced Pages, and so that's why it had a large participation. IronMaidenRocks put words in your mouth. Thank you for illuminating your feelings. Acidsetback (talk) 21:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Acidsetback: Why did you break your quote, Acidsetback? Is that something I actually said? Did I say that Pengo "seems to believe" or did I say that Pengo "believes" as you quoted me? Because, if you read Pengo's first reply, they used what I see as rather strong language which I interpreted, and I distinctly clarified that the way I said it was my own interpretation. Furthermore, why are you on a user's talk page discussing the subject of Talk:Trypophobia about discussion taking place there? I came here to ask Pengo questions about the discussion and whether they'd like to participate again. There's little that you've said or asked here which couldn't have been posted in that discussion. Nor were you even part of the discussion in either thread before you came here, as far as I can tell. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 11:48, 2 September 2021 (UTC)