Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:43, 21 April 2010

You are an idiot. Don't ever contact me again acussing me of something I did not do! No. 1, I got my info first hand about Hillerman! No. 2, I AM NOT A SOCKPUSPPET! No. 3, who are you Jap, to sit around with your slant eyes on the other side of the world and tell me who knows his friends and family personally, that I am wrong?! Stay away from things you don't know, and from now on, you can only add/edit info about rice and Toyotas that kill people. BTW, we sure did wake you little yellows up back in ww2 huh?

Texas Oil Boom

I just wanted to say thanks for the monumental effort you are putting in to review Texas Oil Boom. I have made a few minor changes based on your comments but am holding off on any major changes until you are done.

Thanks again!

--Mcorazao (talk) 15:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

FYI, I responded to some of your questions and comments on the review page. Please do not feel obligated to spend any more time on this but feel free to respond if you are so inclined. Thanks again. --Mcorazao (talk) 15:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Yep, just posted those. —Mono·nomic 15:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Only warnings

Sigh... clearly I am doing something wrong with these warnings. I've successfully defended them before, but the fact that the issue keeps cropping up shows I need to address it in my behavior. I don't get it... one of the things I notice is that other people have issues with only warnings depending on the severity of the vandalism. I don't make exceptions as to the severity, I decide how to warn them based on whether the vandalism was obviously bad-faith and disruptive. Should I? ALI 16:34, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I understand your viewpoint, and it's a good sign that you're at least looking for help! (Now, how to keep this from sounding like an AA meeting... :P)

In my view, vandalism is by definition bad-faith and disruptive. (and WP:Vandalism agrees: Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Misplaced Pages.) Basically the whole reason I'm here is as a reformed vandal, so I think it helps me get into their heads. When you vandalize a page, no matter what you do (blanking, obscenities, purposefully changing factual information just for fun) the vandal does it to disrupt the beauty of the encyclopedia, to make it something that you wouldn't want to see when opening up your traditional World Book or Encyclopedia Britannica. From my personal experience, people vandalize Misplaced Pages because they don't know why they shouldn't. I, for instance, didn't think vandalism was a bad thing—in fact, it was a fun thing, until I started getting into the community enough to realize that people were here to make a difference about free knowledge for the world. It's kind of inspiring, when you think about it. Therefore, I think it's best to be firm yet polite when correcting vandalism. Revert/rollback/undo their edits as needed, and incrementally warn them. This page will show you how the warning levels move from 1 to 2 to 3 and finally 4, after which you can report them at WP:AIV. I always go in this same order, and I have to see those 4 templates on the page in order to report them to AIV. Given the incidents that have occurred with your different technique, I'd give a different method (such as mine) a try.

I hope this makes some sense. Let me know if you have any questions. And thank you for your continued service to Misplaced Pages. —Mono·nomic 16:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

That actually is inspiring. When I first joined and got into reverting, I tried to look at it from the point of view of the vandal I was warning, but eventually I came to the conclusion that vandalism was proof of their disrespect of the encyclopedia- their taking of the Wiki and its volunteers for granted. From that point I've been very strict about warning vandals, perhaps excessively so. It feels weird to AGF of a bad-faith contributor... but I'll see if I can stop thinking in terms of rigid encyclopedia preservation and try to be nice about it again.

Okay, this is really sounding like an AA meeting now... X) Anyways, I'll take your advice and try the four-tier system again. I stopped doing it because I didn't think it was efficient, but I'm beginning to see it in a new light. Thank you so much! ALI 17:28, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Hi Mononomic (where does the name come from btw?) I left a reply at ANI but thought I would come here also, having noticed my typo on Kinet's page and hoping you don't take it the wrong way. "Threat" was in fact a typo of "thread", not a comment on your ANI report, which was valid. :) SGGH 17:04, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Not a big deal, and thanks for letting me know. I've replied at ANI. (also, I just made up the username. It sounded cool to me, so I used it.) —Mono·nomic 17:21, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Critique of Ansel Adams

Hello! I've done an annotated critique of the Ansel Adams article, which I invite you to review at User:Cullen328/Sandbox Ansel Adams. My wife gave me a copy of the Alinder biography for my birthday, which I've just finished reading. I am now prepared to make a lot of edits to the article, but will start out with various factual "nuggets" rather than a major rewrite. I hope to hear your detailed thoughts on how the article can be improved, so that the process can be a collaboration among all interested editors. Cullen328 (talk) 21:50, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, Cullen328. I've been editing Misplaced Pages off and on, so my editing and improvements to the article may take place at an unbearably slow pace. Please feel free to do whatever you like to the article, and don't rely on me for any time-sensitive issues. I'll continue to do my best to keep improving the article. Thanks for your help. —Mono·nomic 23:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I know what you mean about available time, so no apologies needed. I want your input when you have the time. Check out the talk page for the critique I wrote. My plan is to make a series of what I assume will be non-controversial edits providing information that will add depth and color to the Ansel Adams story, all appropriately referenced. At some point, I intend to propose a reorganization of the article into smaller thematic "chunks" that will, I hope, make it easier for someone who knows little about Adams to develop a deeper understanding of the man. I am working on his childhood now, hoping to shed light on the quirky and unique influences that helped create a genius. Cullen328 (talk) 01:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

thinking

Hey, about the other week, I've been thinking. Misplaced Pages has been losing a lot of good editors, and I've seen friends go that shouldn't have. Whatever that was the other week, there really is no issue between you and I. You are a good contributor and I hope you will be here for a long while. Further I hope we will work positively together from here out. That's it, and I hope you have a good day. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 04:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I'm on Misplaced Pages sporadically, so that might explain why you thought I might have left. I hope we can continue to have a positive relationship. Best, —Mono·nomic 23:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Been a bad couple of months for me, I don't like to be bitey, it just happens sometimes the last four years. Thanks! --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 13:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)