Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:34, 13 February 2023

Archives (index)

Index 1, 2

Old page Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present.

I tend to not look at my Talk page for long spans at a time. If you need to get a hold of me you can also email me if you need to discuss something or notify me.

Edit

Can you revert this please? https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_youngest_killers&type=revision&diff=1108276125&oldid=1108120899 2601:206:301:4A90:48E:3734:202B:39E4 (talk) 04:01, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

This IP is a sock of prolific sockmaster Cadeken. See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Cadeken/Archive, who has created dozens of accounts and used even more IPs. The editing pattern is identical. IPs in southern California always pop up when a registered sock is blocked. Cadeken's socks have been repeatedly warned to stop making meatpuppet requests to revert edits. Sundayclose (talk) 14:14, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

County information

I think of the economic consequences as being obvious (because I see this every day) however maybe it's not to others. Thank you for pointing this out. Invasive Spices (talk) 9 September 2022 (UTC)

I get what you are saying, similarly I work in history and historic preservation and I see the economics of Main Street preservation programs for small/medium cities. But while it might make some sense to mention it in a city's page (if the city is actively participating) it would only work as a small part of a larger more general overview of the city's economics. Myotus (talk) 17:40, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Minnesota State Capitol construction

Hello, Myotus. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Construction of the Minnesota State Capitol at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 04:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Myotus, I've done a lot of tidying on the (renamed) "Workers" section; I removed some irrelevant biographical details; the article should focus on the building's construction. I also wondered if that section could be merged into the rest of the article, and I think there are too many images; perhaps choose one or two that are most relevant there. Anyway, good luck with your ongoing GA nom. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 04:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Construction of the Minnesota State Capitol

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Construction of the Minnesota State Capitol you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Baffle gab1978 -- Baffle gab1978 (talk) 11:54, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Myotus -- this message is an error on the part of ChristieBot, but I'm leaving it here to give me a place to apologize for the unnecessary talk page notification. It's caused by the change in the name of the article from Minnesota State Capitol construction to Construction of the Minnesota State Capitol. Sorry about the pings; I am working on the fix now. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:01, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Request NPOV

You posted an invite on my talk page to the 2022 Greater Minnesota History Misplaced Pages Edit-a-Thons. I will belatedly thank you for that. I have no clue as to how you came to include me in the invitations as I am not a member of any Minnesota Project. I do belong to the Military History Project. I very much intended to to make Mankato, but life foiled that. Staff from a St Paul library met you and informed me that you feel too many want to edit the Dakota war which is what I am requesting your NPOV on. I received a request from the Minnesota History Project to review the Dakota War article. I did and responded it was in need of a complete rewrite. The existing article lacks balance, neutrality, content, and basic format. I did a rewrite that I posted only to have it reverted immediately. It was not reverted for pov, ci, accuracy, or vandalism. The revert was for "too much at one time". From that I learned the article has two primary editors. It is my opinion that both have NPOV issues and one has taken ownership of the article. The upside to that revert was I continued to work on the balance of the rewrite in my new sandbox. I have reached the point where I would like a outside input. It is large, however a review of other "war" articles shows that they all are way over the Wiki preferred standard. Thank you for your time and thoughts.Mcb133aco (talk) 18:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)mcb133acoMcb133aco (talk) 18:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

He was correct. In the Greater Minnesota History Misplaced Pages Edit-a-Thons, I did request that folks not take on the Dakota War. :-)

The people I was presenting were all new to Misplaced Pages. As I described it, "Stay in the shallow end of the pool." As your experience can testify to, some topics not only have enough editors wanting to contribute but the topic is very divisive. For the same reason I encouraged them to stay away from articles about live people as well - and to a lesser extent even dead ones. Doing local history on Misplaced Pages is incredibly tricky because of the "notability" issue and what constitutes reliable sources. For those reasons I strongly encouraged them to start editing existing articles on their communities, cities, townships, and counties. In most cases, most have no history section at all, and those who do have information that is not cited. There is so much to do, however, while not as sexy as a battle they are nonetheless important as well to get good complete histories on.

While is important to have a good article on the Dakota war, I think that type of article is the deep end of the pool and folks need to understand what they are getting themselves into and how to civilly handle themselves (even when others are not). Achieving an NPOV is a great goal and one that folks should always work towards, even if it is not possible in some cases. The Dakota War may be one of those. It may only be possible to represent perspectives.

Looking at the comments made on your talk page about the changes, they do have a point. A minor point, but a point. The changes are extensive and significate. Even if it is better and properly cited. Misplaced Pages's guidelines do put the pressure on you to prove and get consensus if challenged.

Doing such a large edit on a controversial page is very risk. It risks, as you discovered, the whole thing being removed if only if there is issues with some of the edits. No one wants sit and try to figure out all that is different then make corrections and arguments. You took a risk and it didn't work. thats okay. I would go back and suggest smaller chunks that can be worked on. Some of your edits will not make it in. Others will make it in. Be okay with that. From what I can see you have done some very good work but be okay if not everyone agrees with all of it or how it is phrased. Myotus (talk) 01:25, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and thoughts. I have this novel perspective that History is a set of facts and we have a dictionary that provides the proper terminology to describe them. For non-English terms or terms of a minority POV there are footnotes and Misplaced Pages provides the talk-page for balance. Editing based upon personal opinion and consensus is un-encyclopedic for documented history. The existing article has a poor lead for an Encyclopedia article. It fails to introduce a chronology that leads to a summation of the hostilities. The body lacks balance, substance, neutrality, and precision. Presentism is given undue weight that is not properly identified or discussed citing biased sources. Also thank you very much for the "very good work" comment.Mcb133aco (talk) 19:18, 10 February 2023 (UTC)mcb133acoMcb133aco (talk) 19:18, 10 February 2023 (UTC)