| Revision as of 20:59, 1 May 2008 editScientizzle (talk | contribs)27,904 editsm →Just so you know...: fix← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:58, 4 May 2008 edit undoMartinphi (talk | contribs)12,452 edits →Just so you know...Next edit → | ||
| Line 235: | Line 235: | ||
| ], so you might consider reducing some of the coverage of that particular event in your ArbCom evidence, particularly if you're worried about the size of your statement. — ]'']'' 20:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | ], so you might consider reducing some of the coverage of that particular event in your ArbCom evidence, particularly if you're worried about the size of your statement. — ]'']'' 20:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
| ==Why== | |||
| Why didn't you ask ScienceApologist not to edit CIV? ——''']'''</span> ] Ψ ]<span style="color:#ffffff;">——</span> 04:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:58, 4 May 2008
Hello, Shoemaker's Holiday, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- How to edit a page
- Editing tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk or ask me on my talk page.
It is always wise to read the talk page of an existing article before making major changes on it, to see if your idea has already been discussed. Even then, it is often helpful to suggest a major change before making it, to see if anyone objects or wants to discuss it. Do not delete materials on other people's talk pages or on the talk
pages of articles.
When you contribute to a talk page, please sign your name using four tildes: ~ ~ ~ ~ but without the spaces.
Again, welcome! -- Ssilvers 20:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
The Moon nomination
Hi, Shoemaker's Holiday,
May I please ask you to take a look at this image and tell me, if it is what you had in mind 
? Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
The Masque at Kenilworth
Hello, Ms. Holiday. Can you figure out who were the original soloists and add them to the article? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/Gasshukoku suishi teitoku kōjōgaki (Oral statement by the American Navy admiral)
.png) |
Re Spoonbill
Ah, now I see what you're talking about. I hadn't noticed them before (well I had, but hadn't noticed them as an issue), but I can see where they could be offputting. The grey object in the background is just some bark/twigs/dirt on the nearby bank. I'm not entirely sure what the blobs are, I think they are just drops of water on the stuff at the water's edge that are reflecting light, as they pretty much follow the bank right along (not just at the grey stuff). They could be edited out, but I'm not sure whether I should do so now that the image has been promoted. --jjron (talk) 14:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- OK, no worries. Thanks for the feedback. --jjron (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/1863 Meeting of Settlers and Maoris at Hawke's Bay, New Zealand
 |
Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/Buzz Aldrin and the Apollo 11 Lunar Lander
 |
Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/NASA Apollo 17 Lunar Roving Vehicle
 |
Pisa
Hi. You recently posted a picture on the Graphics Lab for improving but then crossed out your request. Would you still like the item listed or can it be removed? Mangwanani (talk) 19:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Maps
I created an account at commons the other day with intent to upload my maps, I'll probably do it in the next 16 hours. I'm just confused if I will be able to use my transclusions that I currently use on the en wiki for the image info? Thanks for your support! Justin Morris 06:56, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- I uploaded them, Arches and Antelope. They should probably be deleted and relinked on Misplaced Pages? Not sure how to do that. Justin Morris 17:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Bunch of nonsense too. Convinced me not to contribute my 3-6 hrs per map to wikipedia anymore. Oh well. Justin Morris 05:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Kenilworth
If you think that Chorley's recollection in The Athenium is more reliable than Kate Field's description in the The Scribner, then that's fine. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for working on the article. I think it's a pretty respectable article now. You ought to sign up as a participant at WP:G&S. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Various featured picture candidacies
 |
 |
Please do not remove "neutrality disputed" tags
Hi Shoemaker's Holiday. With this edit you deleted the {{POV}} tag from Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Your action was contrary to WP:NPOVD's guidance, which says:
- "if you find yourself having an ongoing dispute about whether a dispute exists, there's a good chance one does, and you should therefore leave the NPOV tag up until there is a consensus that it should be removed."
Please restore the tag. Thanks. NCdave (talk) 15:53, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- More relevantly: "For example, ideologues, when presented with an article that has exemplary neutrality (as per our policy), will consider the article biased precisely because it does not reflect their own bias enough." Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 17:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Burma
Thanks for your help! Sometimes I don't watch when I copy licensing info from a similar image on a sililar topic, good catch! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 07:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Water memory
In answer to your question, because the CAM promoters have nothing else to support their stealing money from people who require real modern health care. So they cherry pick the one poorly written article to support their lies. It's kind of simple and very straightforward. I hope I was able to provide you with some accurate information. :) OrangeMarlin 00:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
reporting of incidents
LOL, man your version is *so* much better than mine :D --Enric Naval (talk) 17:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
- Jehochman chastized me for an unbased comment (that I stroke after reading his message), and because he thought that we were just socks of a sockpupeteer that he had blocked just the day before here: Misplaced Pages:Suspected_sock_puppets/NotThatJamesBrown. Unfortunately, after realizing his mistake he hasn't still asked Dana about all the evidence, and has decided to have patience with Dana.
- P.D.: So, Jehochman accepted at face value the statement that we were two more socks because DAna had been harassed by real socks. Then he noticed me statement, warned me for it, and then went to WP:CIVILITY to make some additions like "Trolls may employ polite provocation until the target of abuse loses composure." and "Baiting, pestering and other trolling tactics, no matter how politely phrased.". Well, doh. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- I wouldn't worry much, thought, since other editors have seen the evidence and have taken good note of it for the next times when Dana pushes a study, and Dana is *still* doing the same stuff *again*, like I comment on his talk page. Seriously, I don't know what to do to change his behaviour. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, whatever, I already adviced him, and so did Jenochman. If he keeps on his behaviour, he'll just make a bigger pile of evidence that will be used against him when the whole thing blows up on his face. Sad to see an user going down like this for his own actions --Enric Naval (talk) 22:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- When using the cquote template, you won't be able to add ectern links unless you use it like this "cquote|1=blablabla", the "1=" part helps the template to parse the argument --Enric Naval (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- Sweeeet. Lots of heavily rehearsed evidence backed with diffs. This is evidence for a RfC, if one gets finally done. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- Dana got blocked by edit warring after that edit warring that you described, so it will considered water under the bridge by the admins. I think that Dana has actually learned not to edit war, mind you. He needs to work on the good faith thing, thought. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, ok, I see what you mean. Lets see if Dana learns to actually show more AGF towards other users, instead of making a bad faith assumption, followed by "(of course, I don't want to break AGF)". Well, doh, you already did, Dana :P Admins don't usually consider this alone to be a reason to block. Next time, you can just point to him that saying that you assume AGF is not the same as saying that you are assuming it, and refuse to comment on the accussation, and then report him if he repeats the same accussations. After all, Jehochman says himself that "The best way to stop attacks made in bad faith is to not respond" :D --Enric Naval (talk) 13:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- See this for a simple explanation of why admins are not blocking users like Dana --Enric Naval (talk) 14:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- Is this correction right? It means that he is capable to learn to apply WP:FRINGE on the future, for example, right? --Enric Naval (talk) 15:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- Wow.....well.... I'm not sure that the admins will accept that evidence enough for a banning. Well, when you change it back, use a different wording since the one I corrected was ambiguous and gave the wrong idea --Enric Naval (talk) 16:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- lol, ok, you are right, your argument is sound. Still not enough to convince an admin for a ban to homeopathy pages IMHO, let alone for a block, but if he makes any other blatant policy violation, then this will be a sound argument for requesting a long block to see if he finally gets what is wrong with his actions --Enric Naval (talk) 17:33, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
<unindent>Shoemaker, there's something on Dana's complaint that is actually true, you need to use the edit summary more. You have a long string of edits with no edit summary at all. You should attempt to at least make a short note of the change, like "added more quote" or "moved ref". You are also hitting the "edit page" link at the top of the page instead of the "edit" button at the title of the section that you want to edit, so we can't even see what section the article is at. I suggest that you try more to use that "edit" button so the section title is automatically filled at the edit summary, and that you make an effort to labe "every" edit, since it's an article under probation, after all --Enric Naval (talk) 22:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
P.D.: lol, I just untentionally implied that all the other things on his comment are false :D --Enric Naval (talk) 22:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Orthomolecular medicine
Hi there, thanks for helping with this, to get an idea of what the article was like before I started to push for a more balanced view have a look at this version. Tim Vickers (talk) 14:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- "bad writing"? You created a run-on sentence with a very minor, POVish reference that is based on *zero* relevant experimental data. I suggest that we work on trial edits at the workpage--TheNautilus (talk) 16:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the advice about Portal:Warriors. I had actually built the portal in userspace, so I don't need to save it. Thanks for the concern. Shrewpelt (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
MfD for Talk:Homeopathy/Selection of studies
Hi there, I've tried to resolve this by copying the page to Peter's talkspace and deleting the original. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
4 adding the caption --Richard Bartz (talk) 23:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Billionaire lists
The following articles are also possible copyright violations:
- Canada
- China (PRC)
- Denmark
- France
- Germany
- India
- Indonesia
- Japan
- Korea
- Malaysia
- Netherlands
- Pakistan
- Russia
- Singapore
- Sweden
- Turkey
- South East Asia
- 2004
- 2005
- 2006 (* more)
- 2007 (* more)
- present
- Families
- Historical figures (* without inflation)
- Black
- Female
- Heads of state
- Countries by number of billionaires
- List of billionaires compiled from different sources
Gary King (talk) 01:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- Alright, just giving a heads up because I'm busy on other things. Gary King (talk) 02:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (Gilbert)
I added this article. Please take a look when you have a chance. Any additions, comments, etc. welcome. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Homeopathy
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Homeopathy/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Homeopathy/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 10:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Expelled
BOMojo was not my source, as someone else added that info; I just restored it after someone deleted it without an Edit Summary explanation. Thanks for pointing out to me that it only dates back to '99, but how then does it have Fahrenheit 9/11 info, given that that film came out later? As for those earlier documentaries, I have no knowledge of them, as they were before my time (I'm only 35). Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 04:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I thought you meant it was only updated until 1999. And, no, it wasn't obvious, but it's one reason why I'm positive that there's money to be made in creating a new emoticon for just that state. You should contact some computer geek and asser---er, I mean tell him to make one. :-) Nightscream (talk) 05:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
several newspapers
How come sveral news papers can get expelled labled as propaganda while several newpapers can't even get An Inconvienient Truth labled as controversial? Saksjn (talk) 19:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Speaking of which, if you agree with me that AIT is controversial I need your help there. If you don't think so I just screwed myself by bringing it up. Saksjn (talk) 19:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
The POINT-maker on the ID talkpage
Can one be in violation of the three revert rule on a talkpage? I'm not sure of the code on that... I would assume so, the same aggravations and sense of going nowhere comes into play. Aunt Entropy (talk) 22:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
...and he just erased my warnings to him. Aunt Entropy (talk) 22:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
And also vandalised Silly Rabbit's talkpage. To block, don't you have to be a mod? Aunt Entropy (talk) 23:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Explanation
Thanks. Though, as should be clear from the Fletcher quote I posted to the talk page and Lewis' summary, Abu Ishaq's essential appeal, directed at the mob, was to a concept of specifically Islamic import (dhimma -- according to which the Jews had no right to the perks they were enjoying, esp at Muslim expense -- something that would make no sense to anyone except Muslims). There is a historiographical perspective of some influence that downplays "religious" causes like this, mainly because the political element is thought to be sufficient explanation. And so it goes. rudra (talk) 16:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thanks for the offer!
Um, why the offer? :) Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 20:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Also, on the Japanese Scout image, you said "Also, the image is obviously not in copyright, either in America or Japan, so the information on the page should reflect this." I had just thrown on anything I could think of to keep the image-deletionists at bay, please help me correct the licensing. Thanks! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 00:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Evidence in Homeopathy
Hello,
I'm going to ask you to summarize your evidence on the case page, because it currently stands much over the 1000 word limit; unless you do so shortly, I'll have no choice but to summarize it myself. — Coren for the Arbitration Committee 23:24, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Just so you know...
I've added this, so you might consider reducing some of the coverage of that particular event in your ArbCom evidence, particularly if you're worried about the size of your statement. — Scientizzle 20:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Why
Why didn't you ask ScienceApologist not to edit CIV? ——Martin ☎ Ψ Φ—— 04:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC)