Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:30, 25 March 2012

This is DangerousPanda's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15Auto-archiving period: 15 days

Request for undeletion of "Andrew Weinreich"

My name is Courtney Boyd Meyers and I'm the feature editor for The Next Web (http://thenextweb.com/author/courtneybmyers/). I've written two articles on Andrew Weinreich (http://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2011/07/30/where-are-they-now-new-york-citys-dot-com-entrepreneurs-part-one/5/ and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/courtney-boyd-myers/meetmoi-wants-to-pay-for-_b_768820.html ). I've been in touch with InsideSiliconAlley and validated all the links and historical accuracy of this article as well as would like to add two new links of articles that came out in the past month referencing Weinreich as the founder of social networking (http://technology.plidd.com/facebooks-ipo-marks-the-end-of-the-web-2-0-era-the-social-web-is-the-new-king/ http://www.usatoday.com/video/facebook-vs-google/1427765045001 ). Because of the historical significance of social networking particularly in light of the impending Facebook IPO, I would like to assume authorship of this piece and see it undeleted. This is with the permission of InsideSiliconAlley.

CBMWiki (talk) 16:18, 8 March 2012 (UTC)CBMWiki

Same response as at WP:REFUND. Please do not WP:FORUMSHOP. Also, if you have any business or personal relationship with the subject, do not write about them (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:46, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

What I have described is neither a business nor personal relationship with the subject.

The only thing I've described is subject matter expertise.

Please take the time to read what I wrote and review my writings. I'd like to be writing in accordance with the rules but fear you misunderstand what I have proposed. Please advise.

108.60.141.179 (talk) 20:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)CBMWiki

I'm proposing you write a WP:USERSPACEDRAFT, and have some "senior" editors have a look before it gets moved into articlespace, but gave mere warnings just in case. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:25, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Serbia100

Has revert user page twice now since you added welcome and explained about usepage. Mo ainm~Talk 22:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I've had to take action to get their attention. Bah. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:04, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Editor seems to have some knowledge which could be of benefit to the project, hopefully they will come back and use that on articles. Mo ainm~Talk 11:12, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

• Above user has restored their page since returning from their block.Mo ainm~Talk 12:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Drift Chambers

I noticed you commented on Chamber's blocked yesterday, He seems to be unblocked and back at it again: . IRWolfie- (talk) 23:54, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

You are being discussed at . . .

Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship#Suggestion_for_new_crats.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 521,637,157) 00:40, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Htc-logo.gif

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 00:47, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

RfB

You should go for an RfB. I believe you are qualified to be one. You definitely would have my support.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 521,719,140) 11:58, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Vandalizing Syria Page

Hi, could you please help me to stop vandalizing the page Syria. Some users tried so many times to remove reliable sources, since it doesn't match with their personal point of views, even though its a current fact and happening. Your help is really needed since its doesn't seem that they are willing to stop removing this fact. The abusers are Kudzu1, nableezy, Sean.hoyland and TaalVerbeteraar. Thank you. Ahmad2099 (talk) 13:54, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure you're totally understanding the concept of WP:CONSENSUS yet ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:11, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Highstakes00

Before you unblock this guy I would like him to respond to the questions I had put to him regarding his behavior. He removed this one with the unblock request These are valid questions to his excuses for creating the socks. As I believe was this a valid question why would his very first edit be an unblock request? Darkness Shines (talk) 03:53, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

TopGun once again

I have reported User:TopGun for edit-warring over Folland Gnat. FYI he also faces a topic ban. It is hard for me to correct his defective edits (imho) without falling into his edit-warring trap. AshLin (talk) 10:02, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee 3

I am writing you a heads up before hitting save: I don't know if you are aware of the current RfC on the Arbitration committee, Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee 3 (specifically here).

However, the case is about some, to the public, minimal checkuser evidence (at least, the part that we are shown) that is used in order to block an account as a sock of a banned account. The presented evidence is that both users use 'rply' and '--' in edit summaries (there may be more, but it is kept away from us - it should be noted that the banned account is gone for a long time). I now pressed Recent changes in the toolbar, and saw your account as one editor using 'rply' - and digging further, also '--'. I am here to inform you that I will be presenting diffs from you to the RfC - I am in no way suggesting that you are a sock of either (or both) accounts in the RfC, and I apologize for this suggestion. --Dirk Beetstra 10:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

As long as people read clearly and realize it was rhetoric, all should be well. However, if someone files an SPI ... LOL (talk→ BWilkins ←track)

Thanks for the understanding. SPI? That would be useless - you must be a sock of both accounts - and in case you don't live in the New York area .. you obviously are either editing through a proxy to appear somewhere else, or recently moved out of the area. The use of '--' and 'rply' (not to mention the obvious 'qck qck') makes it a clear case.  ;-) --Dirk Beetstra 12:04, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Wiqi55 and 1RR, now at ANI

Hello Bwilkins. I have asked for opinions at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Next steps for User:Wiqi55 — advice needed. Diffs of him exceeding his 1RR are given at User talk:Wiqi55#Your unblock condition from December. You might possibly want to comment since you issued some previous blocks of this editor. EdJohnston (talk) 17:18, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Question RE: WP:PERM

Just curious for my own judgement system, this request was one I would of granted if I were an Admin, actually I had posted a "nudge" on an other Admin's page to take a look at it fearing that my comment was causing Admin's to overlook it. What did I miss ? Mlpearc (powwow) 22:37, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

defacto and his sock

Thanks for spotting the ridiculous duck. Feel like closing that sock bait on ANI? Toddst1 (talk) 14:12, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Am I reading this right? It appears Miszabot ate two sections of the ANI discussion including the one where you duck-blocked DaftEco and never archived them. Toddst1 (talk) 16:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Meh, no need to mark as complete (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Apology

Hi Bwilkins. I just wanted to apologise for my comments at WP:REFUND. I could have expressed my opinion without resorting to an inflammatory tone. Hopefully next time we chat will be on a more positive note. Best, Jenks24 (talk) 09:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Preventing further appeals by Treasury Tag until 2013

There are 14 comments in favour vs 7 against (excluding Fastily, who voted), and with a strong solid opening statement and with three of the oppose comments challenged against none of the support comments. How did that not pass? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:23, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:NOTAVOTE. Something as serious as preventing appeals has a much higher threshold, and POLICY must be valued (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I supported the six months ban on a further appeal (mainly to show that more effort is needed next time). However I agree with your above comment and close at AN. Sorry to drag this out, but I wonder if it would be worth refactoring the "contrition and assurance" comment in your unblock decline. I (and I suspect several others who opposed an unblock) am not looking for a statement of contrition or assurance. What is needed is a brief but plausible plan about how future editing would be changed to avoid past problems. Johnuniq (talk) 01:38, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

That sounds like "assurance" to me (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:32, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Posting a photo

Thank you for your reply. I do not look forward to change any information on the page I mentioned since I represent that celebrity. What I want to contribute is a legal photo from the celebrity which we want to have on wikipedia page instead of a public photo from some news website. Please let me know how to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thefinalmiracle (talk • contribs) 09:57, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Have you read the image use policy? Are you sure you want to licence the photo under CCbySA? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes I dont mind licensing the photo. The license will be limited to "Usage on Misplaced Pages only" . I did try to submit that form . I could go through all process but yet the submit button was not getting enabled despite of filling all the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thefinalmiracle (talk • contribs) 12:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Copyright status ECOSY

Well - the logotype is made for ECOSY - Young Europeans Socialists by me. I have permission to upload it, but they are not sure they want it to be 100% free. In politics you don't want the opposition to use your logo in the wrong way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glanzelius (talk • contribs) 11:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Make that reply on the original thread in Requests for Permissions - we try and keep conversations together around here, as someone else may action it (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:55, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Kidculver

Bit confused about your last unblock decline on the above, his comments on your decline are different to his request , did you mean to post that on a different page?--Jac16888 11:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

He made a legal threat, and claims to have contacted OTRS, and is making his threat because of the OTRS delays ... they match perfectly (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:51, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood what I meant. His request was

"JohnCD no legal threats were made. obviously you haven't read through my threads. if you had, then you would have realized that i did email the appointed wiki reps according to http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Contact_us/Article_problem/Factual_error_(from_subject). I simply want to know how long i have to wait for someone to respond to my email so that the matters on Camryn's page can get corrected. How is the wiki volunteers team can respond to me almost instantly, but when i send an email to someone who can get something done there is no response? BEST, steven tamez"

and yet in the decline you posted it was a response to

"I was waiting a long time for unblock my account. I hope and patient to be free but even though,I have repeated ;I dont think that limitation isn’t fair for copyrighting.I won’t repeat my mistakes. I want you to unblock my account for my additives.There is no wrong I have doing to expand Vikipedia titles ,although if there was any mistakes, it is about to my inexperinced.I beg you to unblock my account and provide to my additive. I believe you’ll take into account for this and I am waiting your reply."

--Jac16888 12:01, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, see the problem now, and fixed (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:08, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Well - I don't understand how to reply there.

Well - I don't understand how to reply there. It's not the most user friendly system in the world. I just want to upload a new logotype i have created on Misplaced Pages. I have permission to upload it, but they are not sure they want it to be 100% free. In politics you don't want the opposition to use your logo in the wrong way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glanzelius (talk • contribs) 12:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Fabish Boaitey

He's back disrupting hip hop articles, adding random unsourced artists to associated acts, removing warnings and the like. Can you deal with him? Thanks Secret 16:45, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

The photo will be invovled in the pyroptosis will be my own drawing based on the journal paper. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aiyaya (talk • contribs) 06:56, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Rita Ora

Hello Bwilkins. Thank you for the action you have taken in both raising the protection level of Rita Ora and blocking the user for the edit war. I am aware that editing sanctions may be imposed at any time and do not necessarily endorse the frozen version but this is why I need to speak to you. It may appear that I was the other party in the edit war but my edits have all been in good faith and I'd like to explain why. Once I've done this, I would be most grateful if you made one minor edit on that page for reasons I shall explain. But first, to sound you out. The question of "origin" was down to two locations and both had sources (ie. Shkodër vs Pristina). The editor who first mentioned Shkodër is User:Olsi and he in turn provided an Albanian language link from Top Channel. I read it and can make out that this is what it says about the family. Olsi and I discussed it briefly here. But prior to that, before it was clear to me what is what, I tried to resolve the matter with the Pristina argument here, and I tried demonstrate good faith with User:Durresary|1 here and here. Put simply, I am not party to either argument, and the dispute is between Olsi and Durresary. However, I and not Olsi have been more instrumental in the edit war with Durresary because his edit goes one step further than simply restoring Pristina. Look at this, two minutes after my restoration of his preferred source and content. THAT is what it's all about, and why the article was protected in the first place. Durresary's reasoning for leaving out the sovereign state reflecting historical accuracy? Here! Commentary in the wrong place is not so much the issue, it is the snide remark. The overwhelming consensus is to observe historical accuracy and his statement offered no reason to remove the section. To that end, I need to ask you to do either one of the following things (as you have the power to edit):

• 1) Amend Pristina, Kosovo for Shkodër, Albania because that is the source being used. Durresary shows signs of amateurism and never amends the source each time he restores his version.
  

OR

• 2) Restore the correct source for Pristina. Restoring this would be easiest to save messing about - no new material has been added since that edit so there is no fear of any blanking.

As things stand, we have the statement alongside a source which supports the opposing entry! But even if you decide to do nothing on that note, please could you restore "then Yugoslavia" or something to that effect because it really is futile for any editor to think he can spread culture-fascism by rewriting the history book. All editors worth their salt support historical accuracy and the only opponents are opportunist IPs or short-lived editors who come and go to make one point. There has never been a serious call for consensus to reverse this feature and those who like to remove Yugoslavia or Soviet Union etc. always end up losing. This is why I ask you please to change that part if nothing else. Many thanks Bwilkins. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 18:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

As I have no business trying to come to WP:CONSENSUS on that article, what you propose MUST be discussed on the talkpage of the article itself. This will generate appropriate consensus, and will be beneficial once the blocked party is no longer blocked. I cannot take a side either way - so please, discuss the edits, and once consensus is made (remember: it's not a vote) make the protected edit request (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:55, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/ronjohn

The instructions do not state I have to listen to "counsel" in addtion to that the guidelines make no mention into the amount of edits one must have before applying. Please refrain from adding your biased opinions regarding my application or telling me that it will be torpedoed unless you plan on purposely doing so. --Ron John (talk) 00:30, 25 March 2012 (UTC)