Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:18, 5 November 2010

The Misplaced Pages philosophy can be summed up thusly: "Experts are scum." For some reason people who spend 40 years learning everything they can about, say, the Peloponnesian War -- and indeed, advancing the body of human knowledge -- get all pissy when their contributions are edited away by Randy in Boise who heard somewhere that sword-wielding skeletons were involved. And they get downright irate when asked politely to engage in discourse with Randy until the sword-skeleton theory can be incorporated into the article without passing judgment.

—Lore Sjöberg, from "The Misplaced Pages FAQK"

This, the funniest thing I have seen on wikipedia, was stolen from DreamGuy

This editor will not be accepting the edit reviewer rights or having anything to do with "pending changes" - all that is changing are the rules and uses concerning them. Ultimately, it is going to lead to and immense amount of trouble and/or kill "The Encyclopedia any one can edit? and more recently

And in 5 years of Wikipediaring - this has been my favourite edit . The trouble is, I feel I may have spoilt the fun of someone similar to myself.

File:Animalibrí.gif

Old messages are at:

• User talk:Giano II/archive 1 (From Oct 2004)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 2 (From Jan 2005)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 3 (From July 2005)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 4 (From Jan 2006)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 5 (From July 2006)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 6 (From Jan 2007)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 7 (From July 2007)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 8 (From Jan 2008)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 9 (From July 2008)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 10 (From Jan 2009)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 11 (From July 2009)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 12 (From Jan 2010)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 13 (From July 2010)

Essays and thoughts:

• A few thoughts on writing Featured Articles
• A few thoughts on Misplaced Pages (unfinished)
• One of the reasons I seldom make proper edits these days. and it seems many others too

Pages that might be interesting to edit and improve - help yourself!

List of Dukes of Osuna

Please leave new messages below

Props

Good post. Ed  05:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it was particularly insightful. That's why I included it in my summary closing that thread. The Wordsmith 06:01, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you. I think we could be spared many of Misplaced Pages's woes and dramafests if guilt were to be established and proven before sentence was pronounced and executed, rather then left to the whim and mood of any passing Admin and a group of shrieking peanuts on ANI.  Giacomo  15:35, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Robespierre would have hated you, Excellency. Are you suggesting that ANI should repeal its Law of 22 Prairial? --RexxS (talk) 16:35, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

• Glad to hear it, Robespierre was a very unsavoury charactor. probably would have had CU and OS rights here.  Giacomo  22:12, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

As a member of the Committee of Public Safety, it would be automatic. --RexxS (talk) 00:46, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitttttttttttt

For the benefit of anyone remotley interested in Theresa, her comments pertain to these diffs:*herme andher again

"Balls" said the Queen, "if I had them I'd be King." Theresa Knott | Hasten to trek 16:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

In your case, I doubt it.  Giacomo  17:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Eh that makes no sense. I'm not the Queen, I'm the profanity fairy. You really need to do better with your comebacks. I give you a C- for effort only I'm afraid. Theresa Knott | Hasten to trek 17:10, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

and a drunken fairy at that, I suspect.  Giacomo  17:50, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Well you suspect wrong I'm afraid, No booze today no booooooooooooooooze. Oh well never mind. I give you a C+ this time. A little bit better but still not up to scratch. Theresa Knott | Hasten to trek 18:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

• I'm sure you are quite right.  Giacomo  19:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

• Methinks I tread on toes.--Scott Mac 01:14, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Treading on toes is too easily done here - especially if accolades and honours are being dealt out. I've always thought it a bit unfair that DYK is confined to brand new articles, rather than any interesting new fact to any article, but I am not that bothered about it. I have a few, but DYK is not an accolade I actively seek. In fact, I once created a new page, then a couple of days later (before I had had chance to finish it) saw it on the front page attributed to someone else - who had leapt in, added a "scintilating fact" and took the credit - so it's already is a moveable feast. Obviously, that's how some make their names and good luck to them, but I don't see much worthiness or respect in it. Improving what is already here, to a decent standard, is my chief interest here now.  Giacomo  09:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Observational skills

I think the answer is probably neither; I only recently noticed your contributions as well, after seeing you appear on ANI. It's likely we've just not crossed paths until now. GiftigerWunsch 20:18, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

How odd!  Giacomo  22:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

M Thatcher

Hi, if you have time and energy would you please comment about the Thatcher BLP and its state of NPOV, relating to the thread here and the linked discussion. Talk page stalkers also very welcome to input thoughts. Off2riorob (talk) 14:07, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• Sorry, I only involve myself in content and POV disputes when they concern a page with which I am closely involved and that does not happen very often. It would be very wrong of me to concern myself with Mrs Thatcher having never edited the page.  Giacomo  15:11, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• Fair enough , thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 15:22, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

"Stalker" having very specific and negative denotations, we lurkers prefer the term lurkers, familiar enough in Internet culture.--Wetman (talk) 18:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah, yes, excuse me I meant no slight. There is some critique presented on the talkpage today at the article and as there seems to be a consensus that the article basically needs rewriting for NPOV, lurkers that have time to perhaps work on a section would be greatly appreciated. This is a BLP that was viewed over a quarter of a million times last month and has had a NPOV template on the top of it for almost two years. Talk:Margaret Thatcher#Partial critique - Off2riorob (talk) 18:05, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Mick

As someone who has been on the receiving end of Mick's (you know which Mick I'm guessing) editing style from time to time, it might be useful for anyone who is taking his "side" in recent discussions, to let us know what good he actually does around here, in terms of article improvement.

He's good at turning up at AfDs apparently, and from edits on the Northern Ireland article talk page, he's good at supplying walls of text and slightly, slightly paranoid rants. Inbetween, he allegedly does some edits to articles.

If someone could weed out what good he does, and gets him to stick to that, that might be an improvement. Otherwise he's just proving to be offputting to anyone else editing articles. WikiuserNI (talk) 10:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

• How dare you come here talking about sides in such a manner. It's all this perenial talk and taking of sides which creates Misplaced Pages's problems. I have no idea what "good" he does, I have seen nothing proven either way. The point is that indeff bans should not be based on the opinions of who happens to be online and loudest at a certain time and shouting about on ANI. I have seen editors banned as a consequence of such actions deliberatly decided when it's known all their supporters and friends will be safely tucked up in bed. ANI has become a kangeroo court and it's is a far from just court. Misplaced Pages's editors are far too fond of passing sentence before proving a crime has been committed. I agree, there is a certain amusing irony that McNee is to be executed by the very sword he has used so often, but that does not make it correct, proper or a credit to the project. Those that want to see the back of him should take the matter to arbitration, which is the nearest thing Misplaced Pages has to a fair hearing.  Giacomo  12:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

• Just out of curiosity, why did you want Scott to go the extra mile? You said arbitration is "the nearest thing Misplaced Pages has to a fair hearing"; why shouldn't that process overturn the block? Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:55, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

No reason at all why it should not and no reason at all why it may not ban him for ever. However, there is every reason why he should not be blocked to satisfy a clamouirng lynch mob whipped up on ANI.  Giacomo  16:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I think ANI is a preferrable way to sanction tendentious WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT POV-pushing editors rather than prolong the agony of editors working in an area to have to present evidence, follow a case, and somehow remain sane for weeks. Even without the arbitration request, that sort of editing can put people off the article space forever, if not for a long time. But all of this is irrelevant to this case so I'm obviously digressing.

He's been unblocked by Scott. I think we need more people to go the extra mile (except in cases of vandalism and the problem I just described); in fact, I wish you were around to persuade more people in the way you did with Scott. A few admins get extremely territorial over certain blocks that they make; they refuse to amend/lift such blocks themselves, and they make the situation worse by refusing to let others absent an appeal to the Community or Committee. They also know that nobody wants to spend their time on-wiki with an arbitration request (so that becomes the unfortunate incentive for admins to not do anything in those situations - see also Mick's comments prior to being unblocked and this response to the unblock). Anyway, I appreciate the time you took in this case. Ncmvocalist (talk) 17:16, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

• I had not noticed that. Sandstein will just have to get over himself and realise he is not a one man Arbitartion committee, but an admin the same as all the others. If Scot Mac does not retract (and he's not the type to do that) then Sandstein can take McNee to arbitration and I will watch the case with interest, but at least he will have a fairer hearing than he did being lynched on ANI. I have lots of ideas for a fastrac Arb service, with more sort of elected junbior arbs sitting in 3s like magistates hearing this sort of thing, but with the "office" unreasonably demanding volunteers identify themselves - I doubt much will change in the current climate as there will be too few intelligent people wishing to identify themselves.  Giacomo  17:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

• but with the "office" unreasonably demanding volunteers identify themselves - I doubt much will change in the current climate as there will be too few intelligent people wishing to identify themselves. Indeed, I noticed that vexing issue pop up at Brad's talk; I'm still pondering on how that could be addressed. Ncmvocalist (talk) 18:52, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

It could be shelved rather than addressed, by having a legion of junior arbs (long term proven, but elected editors, without any magical CU and OS powers) who hear smaller case in 3s (perhaps a senior arb could chair them) and get through half the boring low grade stuff (people like Mr McNee for instance who are problematical rather than criminal) - similar to magistrates and circuit judges rather than Supreme Judges - this would speed the process up, stop the ANI lynchings and stupid RFCs and have some sort of ordered justice system, rather than the mayhem of pot-luck we have at present.  Giacomo  19:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I've always believed Misplaced Pages could do with a little more "transparently chosen" power-users, rather than relying on the arbitrary metric of the "who turns up". I mean we have absurd elections for ombudsmen, who constitute half a committee, that makes non-binding recommendations to another committee, and crats who have very limited powers. Ridiculous. And then we've got the choice between filing an arbitration that will take ten weeks to be resolved, or filing a report at ANI and hoping for the best (while ten hours are wasted in screeds of repetitive talk and politicking). Much better if we said, "admins shall not block any regular user for any more than 24 hours". If you think a block longer than that is required, then you block for 24 hours and file a report with the discipline committee, whose five duty members will pronounce within that same 24 hours. Not too hard really. --Scott Mac 00:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Too hard for the clowns in charge of this circus though. Malleus Fatuorum 01:02, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

The problem with this circus is that no one much is in charge. Getting consensus for any significant change is impossible, and any attempt to lead change by arbcom or Jimbo would lead to howls of anti-authoritarian protest. I wonder if those who tore down our leaders from their elated pedestals considered that there's one thing worse than bad leadership, and that's no leadership. They got what they wished for - arbitrary mob rule, lynch mob justice and anarchy. Maybe someone should re-invent a "godking".--Scott Mac 01:31, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

A benevolent dictatorship is of course the best of all worlds, but sadly ultimate power ultimately corrupts, so it never works. Malleus Fatuorum 01:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

No, a structured democracy with accountable authority figures is the least worst option, but we don't have that. The question is whether a possibly corrupt and not terribly competent dictator with attendant oligarchy might have been marginally preferable to anarchy, mob-rule and legislative stagnation.--Scott Mac 01:43, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I guess we'll never know, because nothing can be changed here now. Malleus Fatuorum 02:24, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

We could always recruit a "real academic" to take change . Hahaha.--Scott Mac 01:35, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

• Yes, I saw that on WR yesterday too. I thought it of the bright spots of the day. I think we do have leadership or at least the basis of a leadership, the problem is that (like in RL) the people who are elected are often found to be not quite what they claim. Scot says "I wonder if those who tore down our leaders from their elated pedestals considered that there's one thing worse than bad leadership.." I don't agree with that, the leadership here two or three years ago was based in nepotism and it was failing, it was no torn down it committed suicide. I think we need a committee of Super-Arbs completely elected not "sort of elected but ultimately chosen" and then below them a body of elected junior arbs (without CU, OS) hearing content and lesser cases with clearly defined limits and powers regarding their sentencing. The super arbs could then have more time for the really serious cases - that overflow into RL and perhaps be an ultimate court of appeal. If you like Junior Arbs deal with motoring offences and shoplifting and the senior Arbs the murderers and traitors. Whatever, these are all things that could be thrashed out. The important thing is to take Misplaced Pages's justice out of the hands of the mob-of-the-moment and place it into elected and trusted hands.  Giacomo  09:04, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I did have an idea when the WP:ACPD was going down in flames that it could have actually gone ahead with everyone as a "member" as long as we had a bunch of people clerking and making sure the pages were really structured. We could have a wiki-in-wiki conference where we try and thresh out issues over, say, two months. The critical issue would be to have the relevant discussion pages really well-structured and navigable, and a bunch of folks ready to move off-topic reams of text to the talk pages. Maybe some time in January or February when all the northern hemisphere folks are toasty warm inside their houses and all the Australians are fleeing the stinking heat into nice airconditioned rooms.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:35, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps, I have rather lost faith in Misplaced Pages's ability to decide anything logical and useful. We are about to have ten plus new arbs who on appointment will all become carbon copies of the existing arbs - because such people are the only ones who will survive a voting system that is designed to appease the majority and then the handpicking of the survivors by Jimbo. We have a project whose leader jump on a bandwagon to condemn editors who don't say "prety please" but collaborate to defend a plagiarist. Not really a lot of hope - is there?  Giacomo  09:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Computers

No problem. I agree with you on the computers front. Perhaps all Misplaced Pages's problems would be removed if we did away with computers and contributors had to submit articles and proposed alterations in handwritten drafts before posting them (Royal Mail, not email). We'd lose the teenage "LOL YOU SMELL" vandalism; we'd lose the "OMG, someone just this minute did something on a reality TV show, I must update the article now" nonsense; and someone who was tempted to borrow too heavily from previously published sources probably wouldn't bother, on the basis that writing out eight or nine sentences in over-close paraphrase was too much work compared to restating the essentials in two... It would, of course, also prevent accidentally editing whilst logged out, but that's beside the point! Bencherlite 19:28, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I was just delighted that when I logged out again and did a minor edit to see what my IP was to discover the IP had not been causing terrible vandalisms and obscenities since I was last logged out. I once switched on the computer to find myself indeffed, not that unusual for me, but on this occasion it seemed I had not been pointing out the inequacies of certain admins, but my IP had been on a vandalising spree while I was quietly sleeping. As my esteemed aunt would say: These things cannot be explained.  Giacomo  19:36, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Clearly your computer was acting out your fantasies of spree-vandalism whilst you weren't looking... Bencherlite 19:50, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

It is a mystery, rather like the dream where one is frolicking naked with beautiful handmaidens on a Carribean beach and wakes up to find oneself in Ischia, surrounded by German OAPs with sand in one's speedos.  Giacomo  20:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

So, when you have a choice between handy Caribbean Spree Vandal maidens and German old-age pensioners you prefer the latter? That's weird. No wonder you are being blocked all the time. Hans Adler 22:40, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

"The dichotomy between one's dreams and one's reality is a fundamental tragedy of the human psyche." --RexxS (talk) 00:36, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Belatedly

What a small place. Here I was a few days ago quietly enjoying your eloquent, and yes, elegant, arguments on behalf of Mick which you made to Scott and today, unexpectedly, I had to tell you personally. It was a high calibre and principled defence. Especially when undesirable editors are sometimes treated as almost disposable, replaceable and interchangeable. Almost like a commodity such as a burnt-out lightbulb. Thank you. Take care. Dr.K.  20:36, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Sadly, one can only defend the defensible. I'm sure if someone trawled through my edits they would find sentences and paragraphs with similarities to those in reference books - writing on narrow historical subjects with limited references that is inevitible. What is not inevitable and impossible to defend is manufacturing a huge volume of knowingly plagiarised "work" frequently submitted for awards and basking in the daily kudos. I shall make no comment on his behaviour when discovered. As you point out on Rlevse's page, I don't bear grudges, but neither will I ignore those who bring the project into huge disrepute - one has to be quite ruthless about that or Misplaced Pages is sunk. An Arb must surely know the difference between original own writing and plagiarising, if he doesn't then God help the project. I have not one jot of public sympathy or compassion for him - it's as black and white as that, this is not an area where one can afford a generosity of spirit. Arbs have to set an example, if they don't they must go.  Giacomo  21:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Giano, I didn't expect this response from you. My message had nothing to do with the Arb politics but since I replied on Rlevse's talk to you and I had mentioned Mick in my reply I thought it would be natural to express my thoughts regarding how you acted on Mick's behalf. But I guess the political temperature must be really high when coming to express my thanks for your defence of the underdog I get a lecture on Arb accountability. I also guess since you raised these points I have to reply, so I'll give it a shot. Naturally I agree that there are lessons to be learned from the latest debacle and that they have to be analysed and closely scrutinised for the good of the project. Political catharsis is a nasty process and it cannot be avoided. I understand your point regarding Mic vs Rlevse, as that of an underdog versus a privileged Arb who made some bad decisions and therefore must be criticised for reasons of transparency and accountability. I agree with this point too. Now, and ironically, in a belated fashion, I understand that my asking you to not turn my comment on perspective on Rlevse's talkpage into criticism of Rlevse could be seen as political interference on my part which in effect could be used to neutralise your criticism. At this stage I have to apologise to you. You see I am not a good politician. I thought that I could moderate a discussion on Rlevse's talkpage and keep the tones down due to what I perceived to be the tragic circumstances of a friend leaving the project. My eye was on the human element of the affair, as opposed to the political dimension. I was obviously wrong to reply to your comment because I did not mean to interfere in the exercise of political criticism. But I would not have needed to reply to your comment if I did not add my good wishes for Rlevse on his departure in the first place. Lesson learned. I should not have left a message on Rlevse's talkpage if I were not prepared to take political flack for it because by leaving a friendly message to a political figure it was taken as a political act. Talking about cynicism in politics. No room for human factors, or errors, there. Dr.K.  22:34, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

• Perhaps we all need to settle down and right a page. I may be looking for hidden meaning where there is none. What is that expression "when one has touched poison one should not touch one's friends" well it has probably lost something in translation, but I'm sure my meaning is clear.  Giacomo  22:52, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

• Coincidentally I was also thinking about writing a page. You are right. I should. Also thank you for the nice expression. It is very apt. I now came to realise what politics really entail. You have been enmeshed in this for such a long time your reaction is understandable. But I am sure that my respect for you as a friend and editor transcends all this. Politics be damned. Take care. Dr.K.  23:11, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi Giacomo (Giano?) - yes, I'm back :), thoughy not nearly as active as I used to be. It's been a pretty hard year, so i'm not spending as much time online as I did. Grutness...wha? 09:13, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I bet it was the link I added to the Robert Lawson article :) I've been extending the article on Princes Street, Dunedin, one of the city's main streets. Grutness...wha? 09:26, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it was there I saw you. Fun writing that wasn't it? - a long time ago. I have given up writing on NZ subjcts as there are far more NZ editors now better qualified in all respects, but they are still on my watch list. Sorry to hear about your health (I had a look at your user page after I posted) do what I do, deal with stress by drinking wine and shouting at the screen.  Giacomo  10:09, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Good advice :) Grutness...wha? 11:29, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm with you on the drinking wine bit, but I try to avoid shouting at the screen. The spittle leaves ugly marks which show up all too well against the white of the edit window.-gadfium 18:12, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Not if you wear a surgical mask with a small hole (to permit a straw for the wine) while editing. Lots of editors do, in no way does it look odd.  Giacomo  19:18, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

If only I could afford the luxury model with the blinkers. It's much easier to refrain from changing the formulations used in the source avoid original research when you wear one of these. Hans Adler 20:44, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Only Warning

Under no circumstances are you to edit someone's post as you did here. You know better than this. If it happens again, you will be taken to ANI. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:59, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Under no circumstances collaspe one of my edits again - or indeed assume control of another editor's talk page! If you have a problem go to ANI - it will be my pleasure.  Giacomo  16:05, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I can collapse any edit I find that is unnecessary, highly POINTy and just plain rude, which all your edits are. WP:RTV and WP:STICK are in effect on Rlevse's talk page and all related pages to Rlevse. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:14, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I will comment on RLevse as I see fit. What you find "rude" or not rude is neither here nor there and of no interest to anyone else. Now I suggest that you mind your own business and run along and find something useful to do. I'm sure there is something you can be getting on with that will occupy you usefully. Don't come back here because the adults in case start to get cross.  Giacomo  16:18, 5 November 2010 (UTC)