| Revision as of 00:05, 29 April 2011 editTracyMcClark (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers15,852 edits →WP:ANI discussion: proposal at ANI← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:18, 30 April 2011 edit undoCodyJoeBibby (talk | contribs)528 edits ←Blanked the pageNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == Welcome! == | |||
| <!-- Template from Template:Welcomeg --> | |||
| {| style="background-color:#F5FFFA; padding:0;" cellpadding="0" | |||
| |style="border:1px solid #084080; background-color:#F5FFFA; vertical-align:top; color:#000000;"| | |||
| {| width="100%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background-color:#F5FFFA; padding:0;" | |||
| | <div style="margin:0; background-color:#CEF2E0; border:1px solid #084080; text-align:left; padding-left:0.4em; padding-top:0.2em; padding-bottom:0.2em;">Hello, CodyJoeBibby! ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for ] to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out ''Getting Help'' below, ask me on ], or place '''{{tl|helpme}}''' on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to ] on talk pages by using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) or by clicking ] if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the ] field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! ] (]) 15:22, 1 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| {{Welcomeg/links}} | |||
| |} | |||
| |}<!--Template:Welcomeg--> | |||
| == April 2011 == | |||
| ] Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you are reminded not to ] other editors, as you did on ]. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the ] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-npa1 --> ] (]) 15:23, 1 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your recent edits== | |||
| ] Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to ] and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should ] by typing four ] ]s ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button ] located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-tilde --> --] (]) 16:52, 1 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your recent edits== | |||
| ] Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to ] and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should ] by typing four ] ]s ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button ] located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-tilde --> --] (]) 15:22, 5 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Formatting on the talk pages - please indent your posts == | |||
| CodyJoeBibby, first, keep challenging people on talk pages when you disagree with them. That's usually how articles improve. People (me in this recent case) will hopefully respond and discuss, and eventually the article gets better from it. The discussions can get pretty long and invovled though, and some conventions have developed to help keep talk pages a bit more organized. The big one is indenting posts. Prefixing each paragraph with a colon (<nowiki>:</nowiki>) will indent the post. | |||
| : Like this | |||
| If you use multiple colons, the paragraph gets indented more. | |||
| :: Two colons | |||
| ::: Three colons | |||
| The convention is that when you respond to someone, you should indent your post one more than they did. This helps identify who you are responding to. If others responded to the same comment, put yours at the end of that "thread", like this. | |||
| : Post you want to respond to | |||
| :: but someone else did first | |||
| ::: then someone responded to that person | |||
| :::: and still more | |||
| :: You would respond here | |||
| The idea is that the indentations help identify who you are responding to and give some order to the thread. If the indentations get too long and push posts too far to the right for you to read easily, you can outdent your comment, to bring the thread all the way back to the left. I usually use the {{tl|od}} outdent template, putting <nowiki>{{od}}</nowiki> at the start of my post. This is what it looks like</br> | |||
| {{od}} With my comment here | |||
| Let me know if this is confusing, and I'll be glad to help more. Hope you find this helpful! <b><font color="darkred">]</font></b> <font color="black">(])</font> 17:06, 6 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :I was just going to make this same comment. Thank you ravensfire. The lack of indenting is making following the conversations very difficult to follow.] (]) 18:33, 6 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks Ravensfire. As you know I'm a n00b. I'll start doing that. | |||
| == Please be careful about this == | |||
| Cody, please be very careful using language like this: "If anyone wants to call him a liar on Misplaced Pages or anywhere else I'm sure his lawyers will be very interested. " There's a ] policy that is absolutely, 100% enforced. It doesn't say don't make legal threats, but that if an editor does, they will be blocked from editing. This is because you cannot edit with someone who uses threats of such action to intimidate other editors. If you wouldn't mind, please strike out that part of your comment. <b><font color="darkred">]</font></b> <font color="black">(])</font> 16:23, 7 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :I have already read the policy and i believe my comments did not breach it since I myself did not threaten to do anything. I merely referred to hypothetical actions which third parties unconnected with myself might or might not take. You can't pin anything on me for that. However i have removed them entirely of my own volition. ] (]) 18:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::That was a smart thing to do. --] (]) 18:31, 7 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::Would you mind not posting irrelevant comments to my talk page please John. If you have something to say then say it or don't post at all. ] (]) 18:36, 7 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Sorry if I wasn't clear. What I intended you to understand was that you mustn't make legal threats like this again in the future. It will lead to an indefinite block, though not from me but from another admin. So removing them was a smart thing to do. Hope that is clearer. --] (]) 19:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :: Cody, to be blunt, my perception is that you're trying to use the threat of possible legal action to pressure other editors. That's pushing NLT - see the perceived legal threats section. Especially doing it on the article talk. If you think someone is pushing limits, you can leave a polite comment on their talk page. I do appreciate you removing the comments, even though you think they were acceptable. I think you've got good promise as an editor, and there is such a hard-line taken on NLT that not even coming near it is the best option. Thanks. <b><font color="darkred">]</font></b> <font color="black">(])</font> 19:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::It's not clear at all John, since no threats were made. It seems like you're the one making threats. However no such references will be made in future by me. ] (]) 20:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Talk page edits == | |||
| ] Please do not ] legitimate talk page comments. Such edits are disruptive. If you would like to experiment, please use the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-tpv2 --> ] (]) 14:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :That was an occurrence of a page edit conflict and not an intentional act on Cody's part. I have seen this repeatedly in ] threads where admins appear to overstamp admins...it is a software glitch. Such threads are simply restored and we move on.<br/><span style="text-shadow:#294 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em; class=texhtml">] (])</span> 14:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| if any further false accusations are made against me by this user i will take the matter up with administrators. ] (]) 14:51, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :Per your denial on my talk page and here - is you deleting my comments and replacing it with yours, if by accident or on purpose. ] (]) 14:51, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::(edit conflict) Hipocrite is correct that your action took out his comment. I would suggest to both of you to calm down. Please read ] (Cody read this essay, please).<br/><span style="text-shadow:#294 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em; class=texhtml">] (])</span> 14:56, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ] Please ] other editors, as you did on ]. If you continue, you may be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. <!-- Template:uw-npa3 --> ''']]]''' 21:43, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :Agreed. Cody, you are way out of line. Someone may just as well ask you not to edit there again...and then ask you to go edit Spice Girls or something else designed to denigrate your editing abilities. Your career here on Misplaced Pages will be short-lived if you keep that up. You are beginning to exhaust the patience of those who are trying to help you.<br/><span style="text-shadow:#294 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em; class=texhtml">] (])</span> 21:56, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::And . Seriously, now - this is getting tiresome. Do '''not''' leave further attacks or insults. Thanks. ''']]]''' 22:00, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::Do not threaten me, SuperMarioMan, and do not claim that i have insulted anyone or attacked anyone when i have not. Do not post on my talk page again. ] (]) 22:15, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| Cody, these guys are right. You need to start editing more constructively and less aggressively. You are only doing your own arguments a disservice by engaging these other editors with personal attacks. Of course, I would like to see SuperMario warn some of the other instigators, instead of praising them, but that is how WP works. Some editors will instigate (or push your buttons), and when you react, others will block or ban you. The difference for you is, you don't even need the prodding or instigation sometimes. I promise you, your views will be better received when given civilly. The way you are heading, you will be rightfully blocked in a short time. The article will suffer for this.] (]) 22:22, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :Thank you for your input LedRush. Perhaps the Star Trek comment was out of line but it was hardly abusive or rude. It wasn't serious, I mean good grief. However I respect your opinion and will act accordingly. I assume similar warnings are being issued to the people who have been threatening or insulting to me today. ] (]) 22:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::I have warned Hipocrite, FormerIP and TMCk in the past, but because they see me as a biased editor, further formal warnings on their talk pages are unlikely to produce good results, and I intend to warn them in that regard only in response to egregious or continued attacks. It wouldn't be a bad idea for other editors, perceived to be more neutral than you or me, to make such warnings, especially to Hipocrite, which appears to be an SPA devoted almost entirely to personal attacks. ] (]) 23:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::I used to love referring to this site for information about anything from dinosaurs to golf balls, but it seems that some topics are controlled by nutters. God knows what the Holocaust or Israel/Palestine talk pages are like. Not to mention 9/11. ] (]) 23:10, 8 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Notice of intent to take article to WP:ANI == | |||
| Because of continued resistance to expanding the details in the Kercher article, and numerous users being frustrated, I am planning to take the article to the ] noticeboard to see what can be done. Your username will probably be mentioned, so I thought to ask, now, if you had time for this soon. Without revealing any of your personal plans, is there a "best time" for such a discussion, such as starting on a Thursday (for 7 days), but not on a Monday or such (or would you prefer to not enter the discussion)? At WP:ANI, shocking levels of personal attacks are permitted, so beware that people might be allowed to insult you there, but also, you can claim someone is purposely trying to derail progress, without that being considered a violation ] (such claims are only allowed within ] discussions and such). In my experience, talking with some people does no good, because they see discussions as weak resistance to be pushed aside by empty promises of better behavior. Kindness is ''always'' taken for weakness, and hence, stronger actions must be used with them. There is an essay of ], which can be used to merely show a person is unable to function, at a productive level (repeating the same off-topic policies) with other users, while not being "proven" to have evil behavior, but rather as causing ] (a ]) among the other editors trying to improve an article. This message is just a friendly notice, and if you wish to ignore the proposed WP:ANI discussion, then feel free to let this pass. -] 00:11, 21 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Personal attacks. == | |||
| ] Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people{{#if:| as you did at ]}}, you will be ] for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. <!-- Template:Npa3 --> ] (]) 14:22, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| Do not post on my talk page again. ] (]) 14:30, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| * Hey, Wikid77 here. I think many of the difficult people are acting on misinformation from ]s, or other British publications, which are repeating false claims (sin: bearing ]) and causes other editors to get angry. I am not sure how widespread the acceptance of false claims is allowed in British culture, and perhaps only some people gravitate to ] (]) which was stopped in the U.S. by objective ] during the 20th century. Kercher herself, being British, was reported by many witnesses to have made several derogatory remarks about Knox (behind her back), although they seemed to remain friends and, together, they attended a classical music concert at ''Stranieri'' just 1 week before her death. Perhaps Amanda did not realize Kercher was saying things against her (Amanda didn't know the British girls), but Guede liked Amanda (as well as other American girls), and if Kercher continued insulting Amanda as a "junkie" then perhaps he snapped, Kercher then went ]-British karate, and Guede defended himself with a knife. Some Americans thought the whole MoMK talk-page climate was anti-American, after the BP ], with British people claiming the oil spill was not bad, and gops of tar eventually washed up on pristine American ], and tourism cratered to record lows, as hotels lost business and BP was considered a huge liar: $billions of dollars of lost tourism along the U.S. Gulf of Mexico (and BP has been very slow to pay documented claims), while off-shore surveys have found tar-mats with gops of tar still washing ashore in past weeks. You are too intelligent to get blocked by haters on the MoMK article, so you might want to work on other articles, to avoid confrontations. Meanwhile, the appeals trial hearing for DNA is expected on 21 May 2011, and you might return to the article then, to check on the status. Be careful, and beware the Wackopedia. -] 15:04, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :I didn't attack Hipocrite, I merely made a mild observation. However, I do not wish to risk the Misplaced Pages banhammer. ] (]) 15:13, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :: Cody, what you've just said is that if someone has a problem with a comment you've made, to not bother talking to you about it, but take it straight to ]. Yes, the admins there will look at the behavior of everyone, but you will not come off well if that happens. You consistently have a fairly aggressive and hostile tone in your comments that is NOT conducive to others working with you. You comment a lot on editors, not on their edits. You need to change that. | |||
| ::It doesn't matter if someone thinks Knox is a murderer, a saint, or anything in between. On Misplaced Pages, you have to work with them. Period. I have seen precious few people without a POV on that page. Personally, I'd ban any mention or link on the talk page to ANY advocacy site and push even harder for good, solid sourced information. Advocacy sites are just bad things to bring into WP. <b><font color="darkred">]</font></b> <font color="black">(])</font> 15:23, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::I'm not linking to or otherwise bringing any advocacy sites into the discussion. I'm not sure where you get the idea that i was. ] (]) 15:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Didn't say you were. <b><font color="darkred">]</font></b> <font color="black">(])</font> 15:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == 3rr == | |||
| While I understand you don't want me posting here, I am required to inform you of the 3rr rule, which states that no user can make more than three reverts on the same article in any given 24 hour period. You can read about this rule at ]. Best wishes. ] (]) 15:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| I'm fully aware of the rule. Do not post here again. ] (]) 15:49, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == ] discussion == | |||
| Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. | |||
| <br> | |||
| :The discussion can be found ]. ''']]]''' 17:56, 26 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::Cody. Please take a look at my last comment/proposal at ANI here .] (]) 00:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Fruit juice == | |||
| CodyJoeBibby, May I ask why the fruit juice is so important to you? I know it is a true detail in Rudy Guede's story but I don't understand why it is important or relevant? Could you explain? There are MANY true details and we could never include them all. Why not just let it go? I think this might be a case of picking your fights. Is the fruit juice that important to cause this much discussion? Especially when there are so many other larger problems with the article? ] (]) 20:43, 27 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
| Rudy Guede's explanation of what happened in the cottage that night is the key to the murder. He mentions the juice, and comes up with a fabricated story of going round the cottage with Meredith opening people's drawers looking for her stolen money. He also references leaning out of the window broken during the real/staged burglary and catching a glimpse of the 'mysterious stranger' who he says really killed Meredith. | |||
| Basically he includes all the places where he may have left DNA during the burglary and tries to give a legitimate explanation for it. It's painfully obvious. I don't see why his own words about things like the juice can't be in the article. ] (]) 05:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC) | |||