Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:18, 20 October 2010

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Misplaced Pages:How to archive a talk page.

Whitefish Mountain Resort

If this is not for travelers, why was the material you insist on removing on the page for so long? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.160.62.91 (talk) 16:20, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

...because nobody who knew better saw it? There's millions of articles, so little time... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:58, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'm still frosted that I was slandered on the discussion page after helping to promote the place. No more time wasted here. Thanks for helping. Ted Tedpatten (talk) 19:18, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Slandered? Show me ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

HERE IT IS:

But if we do that, then I would like to see this section read something like, "Ted Patten, a vocal critic of resort management, claimed the resort changed lift operating hours to differ from those posted..." to better reflect the newspaper article, and in fact the actual source of all this controversy.

iT'S ON:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Whitefish_Mountain_Resort/Archive_1

Since the hostile takeover of the resort there has been considerable vandalism to resort property. For the public relations manager (a single purpose Wiki account) to write that I am "and in fact the actual source of all this controversy" is probably libelous and is certainly considered slander.Tedpatten (talk) 14:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Perhaps I am misreading the statement, but it seems you are taking it out of context (or didnt provide enough to show the context you came up with). That section states: "to better reflect the newspaper article, and in fact the actual source of all this controversy." - regardless of how I read the statement, it seems it is claiming the newspaper article is the claimed source of controversy. Are you the article's author, editor or publisher? Perhaps if so, I could make a connection. ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 16:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I was the person interviewed at the reporter's request.Tedpatten (talk) 15:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Then I see no slander on Misplaced Pages. Someone is merely taking your comments as printed in a newspaper, that you gave voluntarily. Are you the only person who, in print, made the comments? It appears so. You had best get a better definition of slander, and beware of WP:NLT. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

of course you see no slander, this site is fake filled with self appointed experts ready to exert their power through rudeness.

I'm telling you that if your words were twisted by a single purpose account, you'd be pissed off too.

Don't bother helping anyone here, it just is a waste of time and effort.

Have funTedpatten (talk) 14:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for answering the questions so that I could actually try to help. Very useful. Of course, if you were wise, you would followed a link and would have known that I am a journalist by trade ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Right, a journalist by trade. Just more of Me, Myself & I. That's exactly the problem with this site. Of course, if you were wise, you would have read the discussion page b4 deleting. Maybe it was vulcansarah or whatever she calls herself. The anonominity of this effort really undermines it's credibility and just makes it resemble the blogs on a bad rural newspaper website. Thanks for the help, cheers. TedTedpatten (talk) 17:45, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: using twinkle is pure evil as such, thus you are trouted hard and firm

3RR warning

Read WP:3rr again BLPs does not apply to the rule. Tbhotch 20:38, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but it also says not to rely on that exemption. As I pointed out, other people are watching that article, too, so you don't need to risk a block. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:42, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

EW (re GAO report)

Alas, my "EW" is with an IP user who does not have a talk page. Otherwise I'd be happy to talk with IP to discuss. Still, I did add discussion to each of the pages involved, citing the basis for reverting the edits. (E.g., WP:SYNTHESIS) Your EW warning is fully understood and appreciated -- I'll behave. (But can I offer a

as a bribe to let me off the hook?)  ;-) -- --S. Rich (talk) 21:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

RFC/U (or RFCC... or whatever)

Hi Serek... please swing by User_talk:Blueboar#RfCU ... your name has come up. Blueboar (talk) 21:13, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Immediation

Hi SoV, I've just been checking over the WP:Mediation page again, and noticed the two forms/methods indicated. To act as a mediator between User:Blueboar and User:Doncram, do I need to join the mediation cabal? Do I need to rescind my offer until I'm approved for that? I know this is kinda barn door, lock, cows already gone at this point; but I've just noted the details on that page more thoroughly. Your guidance would be appreciated. Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 00:13, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Was kinda confused by this part: "Any neutral editor may mediate a dispute" as it related to the two methods that precede it as "Parties may request mediation from one of two specific bodies... Mediation Committee... (or) Mediation Cabal" Best, ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 00:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Started and opened a case here, so I *think* all is good. Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 00:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Paul Gerhard Vogel

Could you userfy this article for me please? There is material that can be recycled into a wider article, as was discussed in the AFD. Thanks. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 16:21, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Done. The talkpage only had templates on it, so I didn't bother restoring it. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:29, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 16:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:34, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

That was a good thing to do. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:42, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

That was nothing to be thanked for. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I understand why you feel that way, but it did reduce the drama potential. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually, there is something to be thankful of you for. Specifically, that you have the guts to make hard calls that a lot of us, myself prominently included, don't; yeah, I said I wouldn't involve myself in that area when I sought adminship, but that's at least in part because I knew even then that I'm a bit of a spineless bastard. Maybe, once in a while, there might be a mistake or less-than-perfect call or two, but that's true of everybody, and would probably be more true of me if I did engage in it more frequently, and would get doubtless even more questioning if I did. So thanks for being willing to be one of our thankless policemen. John Carter (talk) 20:38, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

It would be better if you "policemen" had an independent review body to look at it when you don't get it right, which is far too often. Malleus Fatuorum 21:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

We do. It's called "the rest of Misplaced Pages". --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

No, it's called your mates at the drama boards. Try to wake up Sarek. Malleus Fatuorum 21:42, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

• Sarek: Why did you block Malleus Fatuorum? I did not see an explanation, other than the generic block template. I am also confused as to why you blocked him, then unblocked with a surly message and withdrew from the situation. My first thought was that your block was a mistake, but I did not see an apology, so I suspect not. Could you not be bothered with the howling complaints? If not, know that they are to be expected, and if you can't tolerate them, then it would be best to avoid blocking in future (or make greater use of the +canteditowntalk function until the blockee calms down enough to hold a rational conversation—though I prefer to just remove any comments that prefer vulgarities, shouting, or other drivel). Anyhow, I'll stop guessing and give you a chance to answer. AGK 00:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The answer was embedded in the "generic" block template. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:07, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed that. If the block was sound then why lift it? AGK 21:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I was fairly sure that someone else was going to lift it regardless of whether it was sound or not, and I wasn't in the mood to have my judgment overruled that day, so I decided to beat them to it. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Hi, I sure could use your help. I sent an email to explain, thanks, --CrohnieGal 19:18, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks really appreciated, --CrohnieGal 22:28, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

And I thank you for saving me the trouble of the SPI I was preparing! Those edit summaries and "article onslaughts" were too obvious. Cheers :> Doc talk 22:31, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

I'd prefer to save the SPI checks for the ones I'm _not_ sure about. This case was sufficiently obvious.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:39, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Yea it was yet she tried to make it look like she was all so innocent and the bullies were getting her. She was driving me nuts because of the errors she was putting into the articles. She makes so many mistakes it really hard to take when she tries to rewrite a whole article with tid bits here and there. Thanks again Sarek, --CrohnieGal 22:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

TYTYTY, you are awesome as usual! Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 00:15, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

that talk page has been dead for a while now, and I've seen things added and deleted with no rhyme or reason a a while now —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ears4life (talk • contribs) 04:44, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Eniskink

I assume you're keeping an eye on this editor as a possible SRQ sock? Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:32, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

BTW, since she's been consistently socking, does the clock on her 1 year ban reset each time a new sock is discovered and blocked? Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:36, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I think it's high time to start a permanent site ban discussion at AN or AN/I. She's even socking at Misplaced Pages Review as "anklet with the pom-pom" when she's got "NotASpamBot" already: and she's of course stalking and trashing editors (and WP) left and right. As far as her ever editing here again, she claims (as "awtp-p"), "The only way for Misplaced Pages to ever been "clean" again is for it to be obliterated in its current form and "reborn". It's current nature is corrupted and unredeemable. No amount of ethnic cleansing is going to change it back to where it (may have) started." I guess WP:AGF has gone completely out the window. I can't imagine why the year ban should have to be reset since the last time: she should be permanently banned for the continuing socking, and a new community discussion would most likely lead to this, IMO. Jus' sayin'. Doc talk 08:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

edit conflict My finely honed sense is saying "it is time to block" sigh. Your humble fan ;-) DocOfSoc (talk) 08:57, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Question

May I e-mail you about a problem I'm having, about which I need advice? Thanks in advance. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, you can ask... :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Lidz

But please remove the slanderous comments from the Franz Lidz page BEFORE you block the page. Dromeaz (talk) 19:45, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

See WP:WRONGVERSION. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

• News and notes: Misplaced Pages fundraiser event, Frankfurt book fair, news in brief

• WikiProject report: Show Me the Money: WikiProject Numismatics

• Features and admins: A week for marine creatures

• Dispatches: Common issues seen in Peer review

• Arbitration report: Climate change case closes after 4 months

• Technology report: Video subtitling tool, staff vs. volunteer developers, brief news

It is time to block/ban AJona1992

From AJona1992, a threat and a refusal for mentorship by myself or anyone else (in violation of the terms of his AN/I) (via Facebook). Reposted with his permission (as noted in the text).

I am done with being "friends" to those ppl on wikipedia. I don't need back-up cheerleaders in my life. I am done talking to you and this will be the last time that I do as you can tell i began ignoring you last night after what you said to me. I can care less if you show this message to Misplaced Pages and use it against me IDC. I don't leave peacefully and I will block you from ever contacting me and will report you to facebook lolz I will think of something HAHA! The adopt-a-user, DYK, and the copy-edit bullshit can all kiss my ass becuz its useless and stupid. I was sincere to you but after all this IDC anymore I am leaving forever and I dont want any of you people to bother me after this, life goes on and I dont care what any of you guys think "oh hes hurting my feelings" plz man up already I am not the "baddest" guy and it makes me laugh to see all of you just talk shit hahaha. Anyways good bye forever I dont need any more stress from all of you anyways. PEACE OUT

Best, ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 16:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

That does it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Support infinite ban, note wording. Not indefinite, and not block. I think he's exhausted the community's patience. Block and note at ANI, imo. Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 17:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Support infinite ban ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 17:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not going to act on the grounds of something posted elsewhere. I got banned from RedState because I trash-talked them on DailyKos, even though I continued to be civil on RS. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:07, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, then I suspect the numerous incidents of incivility, and such here are more than sufficient:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:AJona1992&oldid=389018621
• http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Jeffro77
• http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:AJona1992#October_2010
• http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors#Worst_ever_Wiki_project
• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Template_talk:Did_you_know&oldid=389027566

Need more? ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 17:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

No, I don't. However, as the mantra goes, "Preventive, not punitive". If he comes back and continues the behavior, there's more than enough grounds to block. However, if he has really left, there's no need to block.

If you're looking for a community ban, which I admit looks like a good idea at this point, you'll need to take it to WP:AN to make it formal.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree there's no need for a block if he has really gone. But he's out of last chances, so if he comes back and puts another foot wrong then I'd say it would be indef block time. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's fine too... or (per the AN/I requirement) imposing the rest of his unmentored 3 months as a block, so he cannot come back during that time frame (assuming he decides to). (added: 17:41, 19 October 2010 (UTC) --->) Otherwise, the alternative is to block him the moment he comes back per the terms of the AN/I? ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 17:40, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah, good point. Blanking his talkpage after you told him not to remove the mentorship notice is an on-wiki declaration that he's no longer bound by the previous agreement, so reinstating.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually, he was never blocked, so there's nothing to reinstate. Reviewing the discussion, it seems like civility blocks would start at 48 hours, but with all the warnings he's gotten recently, it would be fair to start at a week.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:00, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I only blanked it because he took me off but then again IDC and good job to you for blocking me lolz. AJona1992 (talk) 17:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Support ban, I would take it to WP:AN but I been involved with this editor too much, me revert warring with him a month back caused my RFA to sink (I knew a crat would discount the spelling and dramamongor votes but not the revert warring thus I blanked the page before it became a dramafest I couldn't handle). I knew that mentorship wouldn't work out. Secret 18:03, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

AJona, so, did you change your mind and want to be mentored and can remain civil? "I only blanked it because" doesnt coincide with your Facebook messages (plural) or with the edit summary I left you when I re-added the mentor userbox. Please clarify. I'm willing to work with you, but you have to understand, as I stated at the beginning, I do not tolerate incivility for any reason. ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 19:44, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Look Robert I am sorry for what I said I didn't mean any of it at all, my life is just way too stressful and I think its time for me to leave Misplaced Pages. I only came here to say sorry but not to come back. I see there's an AN/I so do what you have to do, don't save me because I just can't deal with being here anymore. I just didn't want to hurt Rob's feelings because we bonded and I felt I could trust him but Misplaced Pages is too much for me right now, I rather leave then for others to think wrong of me because of what I did to them. AJona1992 (talk) 20:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Jona. I'm unblocking you in chat and such... though I wont contact you (you can take the initiative and contact me if you so desire). And my talk page will be open to you. Hope things improve for you. -Robert ROBERTMFROMLI /_CNTRB 20:33, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

ANI

No sense waiting, I've started a thread.

And that's supposed to reduce drama? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Geting the bad block undone quickly will minimize the drama that already began when you unwisely used the button.--Cube lurker (talk) 20:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah, so the longer I leave it be, the more drama you plan to cause. Got it. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:12, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Well we're clear, you think I'm a drama monger and I think you're an abusive admin. Looks like we've exhausted this forum.--Cube lurker (talk) 20:15, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:16, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

On the Census, the term is "Asian", not "Asian American".

On the Census, the term is "Asian", not "Asian American".

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-qr_name=ACS_2009_1YR_G00_DP5&-context=adp&-ds_name=&-tree_id=309&-_lang=en&-redoLog=false&-format= —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Universe Is Cool (talk • contribs) 20:06, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

User_talk:147.144.44.209

Hi Sarek, this is Factocop. Obviously I can not log in and write this message as I am blocked from editing and I am still waiting to receive a verdict from the ArbCom but will this user be added to The_Maiden_City sockpuppet investigation? Obviously this user is neither me, Factocop nor The_Maiden_City but I guarantee you that if you were to request a CU, this user would probably be found guilty of sockpuppetry. I was blocked from editing and even contributing to the investigation as the case was opened and closed over a weekend so I am assuming that this innocent user will also be blocked from editing, accused of sockpuppetry and then blocked indefinitely?