Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:45, 29 April 2007

Previous discussion: one two (Mar 21 2006-July 11 2006) three (July 20 2006-Sept 24 2006) four (Sept 30 2006-Oct 31 2006) five six

Some useful shortcuts

Wikiproject Classical Greece and Rome

Misplaced Pages footnotes

tables

citation templates

Misplaced Pages is not...

No original research...

Manual of Style

Disambiguation

Cases of suspected sockpuppetry

CheckUser

DNS stuff

Sorry

I realize my actions and I am very sorry. I have read the rules against sock puppetry, and have turned my ways against vandalism in wikipedia. Now I realize that it is against the rules and I wish to fight vandalism in wikipedia. Again, I am sorry for my actions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runningcupcake03 (talk • contribs) 14:12, April 5, 2007 (UTC)

Good Friday Shield

JUst to advise you that the Good Friday Shield page is not a hoax, I am staff in the school. I added most of the content to the mentioned school, Colaiste Eanna, Wiki. If you'd like to discuss please contact me

Gravitor/Carfiend/For Great Justice

Bless you, sir. I had forgotten about FGJ, whose pattern was also similar. I will also take a lesson from this extended (10 months, at least) episode and deal with this kind of problem-child editor better in the future... Specifically, to take it to an admin right away, and resist edit warring. Wahkeenah 01:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll second that. I think you did a very good job at analyzing the edits, etc. Bubba73 (talk), 04:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your followup note. There are at least two other things I've learned over the course of time: (1) confine the debate to the talk page, as repeatedly trying to revert a persistent vandal is futile; and (2) try to keep the debate on the subject rather than on the editor. The blocked editors in this case never learned this. The one even took personal shots in his request for reinstatement, and the admin rejected the request on that basis. It is hard for a leopard to change its spots. It is maybe worth pointing out that there was another editor, with similar attitude, called Axlalta. However, he doesn't show up very often, and may actually have other interests beside this topic. But we'll see. Wahkeenah 11:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

User award

I, Durova award Akhilleus the Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience for consistent hard work and calm sense over a year of interactions. Keep up the good work! Durova 03:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations

Template:Polytonic. Odysses (☜) 07:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Akhilleus, thank you very much for your support in my successful RfA. I am thankful and humbled by the trust that the community has placed in me, and I welcome any comments, questions or complaints that you may have. Again, thank you for your support, and happy editing! Hemlock Martinis 22:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

StudyAndBeWise

You wrote "All your edits have been reverted" on StudyAndBeWise's talk page. Why have you not reverted his edits?

uninvolved user asks for your reconsideration

I have volunteered to help in informal mediation for a editing dispute involving Missouri. One side has already agreed to participate. Recently, you blocked Enorton and Enorton08. Blocking is potentially very discouraging for a user, particularly since my cursory look shows that the user is not abusive, may have logical reasons for his edit dispute, and wasn't using both users to try to make it look like there was support from multiple users for an editing position (which is what improper SP do).

Please consider switching the punishment by lifting the indefinite block from Enorton08. If you must, convert it to a 24 hour block (what left of the original 48 hour block). If you must, convert the 48 hour block on Enorton to indefinite. This is because the Enorton08 account is much older and has been used much longer. Doing this may (or maybe not) help in calming down the situation so that it can be resolved.VK35 00:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Look here. ] As I understand it, Enorton wants to remain and Enorton08 closed, which is what is being done. Enorton admits dual accounts but says no subterfuge was intended. Do what you think is right. I have to study the Missouri issue tomorrow so that I can begin trying to get everyone to agree.VK35 02:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Archiving talk:global warming

Pleases do not archive talk pages in which you have no involvement, especially if discussion is still ongoing. This is very rude and only serves to endorse the strife through discouraging discussion. Please reconsider your actions. ~ UBeR 16:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Global warming

akhilleus is actually contributing to the reverting problem problem. dispite my appeal to stop censoring links akhilleaus in league with teadrinker and megapixie seem to be violating the three revert rules when i pointed out that megapixie was already almost doing it. you cannot violate the spirit of the three revert rule by working with three others to repeatedly censor a good link to globalboiling.com. i repectfully ask once AGAIN that people stop censoring this relevant informative link to data on global warming. 'nay logical person will clearly see globalboiling.com is a relevant and good link for the article on global warming.

Per this I would have expected admins to start taking notice of the slow escalation. Last night people got blocked on one good faith edit. Now reverts are starting without repercussion. Forcing reverters to work with other editors is probably a good thing. --Blue Tie 02:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright

Akhilleus, I have a question involving image copyright. There are some American Civil War photographs I found on copyrighted websites, but generally are these pictures' copyright already expired since they are too old? Wooyi 02:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The picture is here, the portrait of Lambdin P. Milligan, who was arrested in civil war and accused of reason, later Supreme Court saved him through Ex parte Milligan. So it's before 1923, I'll probably upload it either here or on commons for the article on him. Wooyi 02:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. Wooyi 02:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

close discussion

Hi,

The discussion on Talk:Al-Aqsa Intifada is still active, and new voices have joined the discussion, so I've reverted the closing of the discussion. Cheers, Tewfik 05:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For keeping Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets from its previous horrendous backlog. AnonEMouse 01:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Goa Inquisition

Yeah. I am fully acquainted with the 3RR . Have to! I have been blocked twice for 3RR vio in the past 45 days ! Thanks . I understand that you intend to help me keep out of trouble and i will keep your advice in mind. Both these chaps D-boy and Bakaman are experienced users and should know better : to discuss an issue on the talk page before making or reverting any changes. especially when someone else has started a discussion on the talk page. I even wrote a detailed edit summary and I am sure Bakaman has seen that before he clicked undo, yet he went ahead. That show how much these guys believe in collaboration. Anyway I will play it safe. Thanks again. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 06:07, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Gospel of John

Hello Akhilleus, I hope that you remember our discussion on the Rylands Papyrus article? Why was the very very specifically incorrectly worded line that I took out of the article then allowed to be put in the article on the Gospel of John? No where does any scholar state that the fragment does not whole to the form of the Gospel of John. LoveMonkey 17:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet question

You handled the block of a sockpuppet I had reported last week ] It went fine and all and you agreed with me. Thing is the guy seems to be nothing but persistant. I go back now and another account is making the SAME edits in the same articles as before, same style same edits. Do I open a whole new official inquire? And possibly another account which is not quite as similar but getting there but the first is mirror like in quality to the other. Ive got enough on the first it just takes quite a while to cut and paste and go back through I didn't know if I could just let you know and you take a look or what? Thanks for your time. Looking forward to your reply on my talk page. Thanks.--Xiahou 22:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I ran into some real obvious evidence tonight. Ends up I seemed right the same 2 accounts you got for me earlier the guy made 2 more. I submitted it as a sockpuppet. Both new accounts have made similar and even identical edits as the old 2. Its on the open case page now. Thanks again. --Xiahou 00:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I got a ton of evidence added. Linking all 4 accounts. Today though one of his got blocked for vandalism (his current one) so suddenly another account is doing the same edits (some textually identical). I tried adding it to the open case ] and its not formatting right. Can you give me a hand on it. I added links to more practically and identical edits to the same articles. I don't know why this guy has it out for dead and some living celebrities. I don't think he gets NPOV and citing of articles at all. He's chalk full of controversial heresay but nothing citied its all "i read" or "I heard".

Anyway If you could give me a hand in formatting the newest sock account near the top Gibsonism. I would appreciate it. Thanks for your time. --Xiahou 18:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks for resolving this. I just noticed it. So per say this comes up again how did you modify it so it showed up with the original name with (2nd) after or is that what you need to do. When putting the name in just add (Number) after the name? Thanks for your time. --Xiahou 02:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

He's baaack. I finished up a 3rd case against him. Started a new account. Made some of the same edits already. Even with same comments. Not as many yet (still new account) all the scary similar in same articles. Thanks for your time --Xiahou 22:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

email

Hi - I have sent you an email with the evidence. Apart from you, Aksi great and DaGizza have seen the evidence - Nishkid64 is claiming to have seen it, but I don't know as I haven't spoken to him about this issue. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 01:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

NPOV: Pederasty in ancient Greece

I'm not certain how to move forward with this but I wanted to inform you, as a significant contributed to several articles I've come upon recently, to read the message I posted on the talk page of Homosexuality in the militaries of ancient Greece. I will be rewriting sections several articles that I see as NPOV (see comment on talk page of linked article) in regards to the topic of pederasty.

In regards to your message I'd refer you to the article I mentioned above for a greater description of how I see that article in particular as NPOV. I'd also refer you to articles on the Sacred Band of Thebes and Homosexuality in ancient Greece - both which contain unsupported hypotheses on the role of pederasty in military institutions of ancient Greece. My comments on the talk page of the Sacred Band of Thebes should be useful in clarifying my argument.

Hello again, Akhilleus. This is not an 'original research' instance. In the Sacred Band article I sourced Xenophon for a definition on pederasty and I will provide the rest of my sourcing material shortly. But the problem with these articles, as I have described, is that they take information out of context and use it to support a hypothesis that fails to distinguish between pederastic and homosexual relationships. A majority of the information about pederasty is inferred, but I will make an effort to illuminate my argument in regard to that article in a few days, when I have finished writing a paper. In the meantime, if you could likewise source the information works on the Sacred Band that describe the pederastic relationship between members (as opposed to homosexual), I would appreciate it. Regards.

Nudas veritas 23:13, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Removal of speedy deletion tag

That speedy deletion tag was on Alecia McKenzie because no sources were provided as to why this person is notable and without this an article is a candidate for speedy deletion, and I noticed there was still no sources added, so why was the tag removed, without the sources it still fails notability. Xtreme racer 03:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

2 separate issues, informal mediation and SSP

Progress report: Regarding the edit dispute about Missouri, I think we may have a concensus though I'll wait a few weeks to make sure that it holds up. One of the editors was listed in a SSP case and you intervened.

Separate issue: ]. Would you close this matter? Harebag is my adoptee. Harebag was disappointed that so many of his new articles were tagged for possible deletion so he created a SP to delete the tags. He admitted it and said he wouldn't do it again. Being blocked is very discouraging and can make people very mad (some of whom then create more SP in retaliation...that's human nature). Harebag's case isn't so abusive like many on the SSP board. The rules say "In less severe cases, administrators may quietly monitor the account's activities". Please consider closing the matter without blocking Harebag. If you need a suggestion as far as language, consider "Case closed. Extent of problem not severe. User expressed remorse and will be working with adopter to improve articles". In the mean time, I will be re-writing one of Harebag's articles as an example of how to improve articles so that they are less likely to be marked for deletion.VK35 19:24, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

When does disruptive editing become vandalism?

The problem is that Miaers wants to delete that dab page entirely. Since he is not getting any support, he is instead editing it in ways which seem to me to be blatant and shameless violations of the guidelines for and purposes of a disambiguation page; is this not a species of vandalism? I am getting tired of dealing with his mischief and his little nastygrams sent to everyone who challenges his take on reality. --Orange Mike 23:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid you are right; but I don't want to do something like that if I'm the only one who feels that way. --Orange Mike 00:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Please see my re: on Orange Mike's page about this. Madmaxmarchhare 00:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you help me with the process, Peleides? I've never done this before. --Orange Mike 00:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Block evasion?

As you were the one who bagged User:WebmasterSD as a Lee Nysted sock/meat, I was wondering about whether User:67.186.123.21 continuing to edit would be considered block evasion? That IP has, in the past, signed its comments with WebmasterSD, as in this edit]. Not sure whether that's something to follow up on or not, but I appreciate you taking a look if you have the time. Cheers. Tony Fox (arf!) 05:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for forgiving me of my stupidity. If I had known using another account like I did was against the rules I would not have created it in the first place.Harebag 18:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Suspected_sock_puppets/Vml132f

Hi, I'm confused, I thought meatpuppets would be treated in the same way as sockpuppets when it comes to blocking policy? Vfml132f has probably already migrated to a different account, but I fear that User:DDRG will continue his edit warring/vandalizing unless he's blocked for his disruptive behaviour/meatpuppetry & external canvassing. Also, what about the fact that Vmfl132f used a meatpuppet to go around his 3rr block?Mackan 20:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

This user is Inconclusive　I do not support the personal attack.　You should discontinue the personal attack, and return to the discussion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Azukimonaka (talk • contribs) 20:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC).

Re:Miaers

Hi Akhilleus, I stumbled upon your conversations with Orangemike re:User:Miaers a few minutes ago. I'm offering what little experience I have in dealing with complex/longterm disruption and vandalism. I'm opening a neutral report page (in line with WP:AGF) in my userspace and in order to help stop further disruption by Miaers.--Cailil 23:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Lame

I find administrators here are pretty lame. What's wrong for someone to make a wrong request? You are supposed to waste your time doing nonsense administrator's job.Miaers 00:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)