Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:49, 11 June 2012

Welcome!

Hello, HiLo48, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Longhair\ 07:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

You are invited to participate in WikiProject Scouting, a project dedicated to developing and improving articles about Scouting and Guiding. You may sign up at the project members page, or sign up for our newsletter. More information General information Main project page Main project talk Scope Announcements Deletions Merges and renames New articles Requests Todo list Article showcase Country and region articles Portal Style Scouting-related articles Processes Article incubator Article maintenance Non-English article names Using images Media rationales Using references Indexes Resources Categories Templates Userboxes Project organization Coordinators Members Member recognitions Assessment V1.0 Scouting project statistics V1.0 Scouting quality lists V1.0 Scouting daily logs V1.0 Index Peer review Adopt-an-article Task forces Girl Guiding and Scouting Philmont Scout Ranch v t e

--Bduke (Discussion) 09:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Characterise

So I thought it was weird that you changed "characterize" to "characterise" in the St. Patrick's Day article, since it seemed so wrong to me. I looked it up and it turns out "characterise" is the British spelling and "characterize" is the American spelling, so they are both correct. Who woulda thunk? Anyway, I don't really care whether it's spelled British or American, so I left it as "characterise" but I just thought I'd tell you about my adventure in spelling differences. Have fun! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maurajbo (talk • contribs) 13:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Further

Further to my response at my talk page I note that both Longhair and Brian have come to your page to welcome you. Both are great participants here and you have some fundamental links to get you started in terms of understanding. If you need more help please ask at any time.--VirtualSteve 07:31, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

David Hodgett

Well, the disambiguation page does say that "registrar" is a keeper of records, and that's about as much as I know. The page was created as part of a sweep to have articles for all current Australian politicians, and my source was the Victorian Parliament's member bio. It says that he worked as a registrar for various immigration authorities, and when I created the article I was unsure as to which would best suit, so I left it as the link to the disambig. I agree this isn't ideal, but it's the best I could come up with, not being overly familiar with immigration procedures. Frickeg (talk) 22:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Reviewer and rollback

Hi, I've added a couple of flags to your account: reviewer and rollback. I hope you find them useful. Let me know if you have any questions. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

For keeping the baddies at bay...

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for keeping an eye out for damaging edits. bodnotbod (talk) 10:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to move this barnstar to wherever in your user space you'd prefer to have it. bodnotbod (talk) 10:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Humor at Protected Pages

As someone who lives on an island (granted its a VERY large island) perhaps you are unaware of what the rules are on the Mainland (thats what we call it) for articles that may be considered political in nature;

1. Any cross-party hugfest can only be initiated by the right,
2. Any internal hugfest (or support of one another) within the right should NOT be constued as anything more than friendliness and cheerful banter,
3. Any internal hugfest (or support of one another) within the left could, should and will result in immediate blocks and bans to the active participants and severe reprimands to any editors that were seen smiling in the general vicinity.

These are just some basic guidelines to assure the safety and sanity of your fellow editors. A good rule of thumb to follow is that if the right is obviously humorous 3 times in a row, some humor from the left will be tolerated since the conversation will be ended via "shrink wrap" at any moment. BTW, sorry about the spelling of humour. Buster Seven Talk 20:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for information

Compliments on your sang froid

I can't help but admire your reaction the other day to the namecalling you were subjected to by Encyclopedia91. You must have the patience and forbearance of a saint! I know I would have reacted quite differently. You are a model for us all. Sincerely, --Kenatipo 21:59, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Nice Koekjes

Buster7 has given you a Nice Koekjes which promote fellowship, goodwill and WikiLove. Hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the good flavor of Nice Koekjes around Wiki World by giving someone else one. Maybe to a friend or, better yet, to someone you have had disagreements with in the past. Nice Biscuits are very tasty and have been known to calm even the most savage beast. Enjoy! Buster Seven Talk

I just gave a koekje to an Aussie friend, User:Alastair Haines and I thought of you. It's fresh. I made it last night. Buster Seven Talk 14:27, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Some words I'm working on

Been thinking about this criticism issue for a while. Probably not the ideal place to say this, but I want to try putting the words together. I think criticism sections are almost always going to be inappropriate in Misplaced Pages. Just about everyone has somebody who disagrees with them about something. Some, like outspoken atheists, will have more than many from conservative religious parts of society who disagree. That's a given. We cannot possibly list all the criticism, so what's the point of listing any? We should just describe what's significant about someone (i.e. why they have an article here) and let others decide on the merits of their actions and views. The same goes for people significant for their strong religious views. List those views, and let it stand. Going any further will inevitably create the debate of "how much further?" So, no criticism. OK?

I agree with you 90+%. Criticism sections are lazy writing, often places for sneaking in their point-of-view. They are often a way of taking an obscure critic and giving them promotion by adding their opinions. I often get the impression that some editors start with a point of view and then web search until they find some obscure opinion piece and add it to the article. In these cases, only reliable sources and notable ones will do. Instead of putting criticism in its own ghetto, if legit it belongs next to the ideas being presented. Thank you for bringing up an important issue. --Javaweb (talk) 00:10, 15 July 2011 (UTC)Javaweb

You two might want to check out Misplaced Pages:Criticism, an essay that discourages the existence of criticism sections and goes over the main points against them.AerobicFox (talk) 22:20, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

I support you

You were right in the Pregnancy talk page. The image you wanted in the lead has a much more "medical", serious and informative tone than the one that the scores of probably American nipple-o-phobic prudes finally forced there. Actually, even from a purely aesthetic point of view the bare breasted image is superior because of the more "charming" expression of the woman in the picture, rather than the a bit like "whatcha lookin' at" expression of the Asian woman. --Cerlomin (talk) 22:01, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Australian National Flag Day

I think all the Flag of Australia article needs now is one more additional reference that 3 September has been proclaimed Australian National Flag Day or two. Then it will be just right.

58.164.34.60 (talk) 12:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC) —moved from your userpage. Jenks24 (talk) 12:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

For your sport work. :)

LauraHale (talk) 01:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much

Thanks for catching and reverting the Wobbly edit on the mother Teresa talkpage. I need to be more vigilant, actually I need more time to be more vigilant, oh stuff it, I need more time for RL! hehe, but in the meantime I need to be more careful of what I am doing with my browser windows. THANK YOU HiLo48 !!! Penyulap _talk 01:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Happy Australia Day! Thank you for contributing to Australian content!

	Australian Wikimedian Recognition (AWR)
	Thank you for your contributions on English Misplaced Pages that have helped improve Australian related content. :D It is very much appreciated. :D Enjoy your Australia Day and please continue your good work! LauraHale (talk) 02:46, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Scouting sex abuse cases?

Might I ask you (with all your badges!) to perhaps take another look at Scouting sex abuse cases? I can't seem to interest responsible editors in the issue of parity across abuse articles: the example I use, as it seems so egregious, is that any Catholic abuse case gets detailed coverage (often in more than one article), whereas a number of pro-scout editors systematically do what they can to play down any abuse case related to the scouts. This seems prima facie wrong.

I started the scouting abuse page - and was immediately called a WP:Troll for doing so. This was rapidly followed by several (perhaps organised, perhaps not) calls for the page to be deleted. The article has survived, but only barely: any old editing (so long as it is pro scout) passes. Another bunch of minimising edits have just been applied: their equivalents would be attacked by editors around the world if they were tried on, e.g., one of the Catholic abuse pages.

This is a disgrace but from past experience, I know I don't have the energy to take on the dib dib dob fraternity (indeed their behaviour drove me away from editing for a long time). I am writing in the hope you might know a forum for drawing attention to these asymmetries. Cordially. Testbed (talk) 17:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for your interest (and apologies for any grumpiness on my part - if you read through the is-it-really-five-years history, you'll see why I am rather jaded - as I said before I have no line on scouting as such, it's parity across comparable articles which is the issue for me)

Most of those willing to edit this article seem to be actively involved in scouting (and indeed a lot of them give one another awards for great editing) - that is also a POV issue, if you'll allow me the comment. Again a comparison with the edit history of (just as one example ) Catholic sex abuse cases is instructive.

Testbed (talk) 11:44, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello sport loving Aussie ;)

I've nominated a few articles about members of the Australia women's national water polo team for Good Article. :) If you get a chance, can you do a grammar/spelling/general check on the articles? My prose can sometimes be… well… meh. Articles needing an edit so far include Bronwen Knox, Glencora Ralph, Victoria Brown (water polo), Zoe Arancini, Ashleigh Southern, Kelsey Wakefield. I'm thinking of possibly a good topic around this set. I'm working on a the rest of them. They all have information boxes. They include most of their important matches that have received significant press coverage, include their major water polo awards, and the important biographical background information. They also all have formatted information boxes and pictures. I think this would be harder to do AFTER the Olympics, so now is the best chance. :) (Conversely, if you would rather review any of these articles, that would be okay too. ) --LauraHale (talk) 11:54, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Metrication in the United Kingdom

Hi HiLo48

Would you please look at my page User:Martinvl/MitUK and review my comments in preparation for posting at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Assistance. Also, once posted, would you be good enough to certify DeFcto's behaviour.

Regards Martinvl (talk) 06:41, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Notification of DRN submission

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Metrication in the United Kingdom". Thank you. -- de Facto (talk). 19:43, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

ANI

There is a discussion on ANI about a topic you have been involved in relating to DeFacto. You are welcome to bring your experience to that discussion. Toddst1 (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Les Murray

Please see my entry on the talk page.Watermelon mang (talk) 03:13, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Watermelon mang (talk) 04:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Wonthaggi desalination plant

Thanks for the comments. I plan to do more in the future in the article to present a more neutral tone. There seems to be a lot of innovative technical information about the plant and how it is being designed to fit in with the local ecology. I've spent some time in Australia: 2 months in the Brisbane area and a week in Perth. It's a beautiful country.

As for use of the term "international units", I agree that the metric system is more prevalent than the English system. However, there is still a large portion of our Misplaced Pages readers who don't understand them, and, since the goal of Misplaced Pages is to inform our readers, using both units is preferred. The term "international" simply means units that everyone can understand. I personally prefer the metric system, and really don't understand why the United States (my country) hasn't fully adopted it. It's a somewhat-unknown piece of trivia (my apologies to WP:TRIV) that the United States actually formally adopted (via law) the metric system about 40 years ago. It's taught in schools, some portions of highways are marked in km, drinks (except for milk) are sold in ml and liters ... it's just not universally used.

Best wishes. Truthanado (talk) 14:01, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Your comments

I can see that you're vocal and passionate about the issue, but your ad hominem rhetoric isn't helping, even if the other side is POV-pushing. (In fact, I think letting the argument be unless it actually gains traction would probably be more effective.) Please tone it down. Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 04:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree. HiLo, I've noted this before. Make a succinct comment, leave. Far more effective and easier to close. CMD (talk) 05:36, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Just a note to say I've sent you an email. Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 06:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Guys, the problem was that an accusation was made about me that was both untrue and illogical. Maybe I should have paid more attention to the illogical part, and just regarded that editor as incompetent. Trouble was he was already severely disrupting discussion, and has continued to do so, and nothing was being done about it. Misplaced Pages doesn't handle incompetent editors well. HiLo48 (talk) 06:06, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

You're right that it doesn't deal with them well, and the user did have issues (editing archives). My main point is that sometimes it's best to let them have the last word, for the sanity of the closer, and indeed, for yourself (or maybe that's just me). I'm not saying there was anything actionable against you there. CMD (talk) 06:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Springfield

I've requested semi-protection, but I doubt we'll get it. We're fighting a losing battle because EW and all the other blogs and news services are reporting it as him saying it is located in Oregon. So that's what Twitter thinks is true. Gran 22:51, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

All over the radio too, everywhere. Never seen so much buzz over something like this. I just visited Springfield, Oregon and reverted the most recent edit from an IP adding Homer to the Notable people section. --RacerX Talk to e 01:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

11-12

The articles in the footer template. English cricket team in Sri Lanka in 2011–12, South African cricket team in New Zealand in 2011–12, etc. Lugnuts (talk) 09:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)

By chance (it came up on top of my watchlist), I noticed this edit which reverted your comment at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy). While your comment did not seem to warrant removal to me, rather than take the time to work out what is going on, I thought I would just alert you. This is FYI; no need for reply. Johnuniq (talk) 11:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

ITNR for elections

As someone who regularly contributes to election articles: Due to recurrent discussions that lead nowhere, an open-ended discussion and proposals are invited Misplaced Pages talk:In the news/Recurring items/Elections for ITN on the main page as to what should be recurrent without ITNC discussionsLihaas (talk) 07:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Principal Line-up parameter for defunct bands

There is a discussion taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 03:57, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

• FYI, you hit the nail on the head with your comments on Talk:The Beatles. Hot Stop 04:53, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

You've made some helpful comments, but I hope you'll stop personalizing the issue as you do when you direct derogatory comments at editors. It does nothing to help your arguments and, in fact, probably diminishes their effectiveness. As I'm sure you already know, comment on the issues and not the editors. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 17:25, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Two recent comments by you are and . Now, you may be tempted, like some editors, to state that you are addressing the comment rather than the editor, but I really think that's Wikilawyering. That fine line is almost nonexistent. If I wrote that editor X "writes like a stupid idiot", I think it can generally be assumed that I'm calling editor X a stupid idiot. And it's not just the words; it's the general tone. But in any event, I don't need to belabor this point. I just hope that your good ideas are not destroyed by their tone. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 00:10, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

2nd Straw Poll

There is a Straw Poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:55, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• I think I found a good solution to the template issue, take a look at the proposal now, it might satisfy everyone's concerns. — GabeMc (talk) 05:48, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Labor 71 seats

Though your revert was correct as it is not yet set in concrete, I thought i'd let you know (if you aren't aware), of this. I think it's a pretty smart move myself :) Timeshift (talk) 01:24, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Seamus (dog)

Seamus (dog), an article which is part of WikiProject presidential elections has been proposed for deletion. Feel free to join the discussion. Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Seamus (dog) (2nd nomination) HHIAdm (talk) 23:50, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

User name HiLo

Greetings from another sports-mad country.

Any idea where your HiLo came from? I use it on an on-line auction site in S.A. Maybe I can sell u my user rights ha-ha!

Aliwal2012 (talk) 08:17, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Xavier

I'm both amused and impressed by your perseverence and restraint wrt this page. It certainly seems to provide an above-average number of "challenges", and I like the way you are addressing them. Well done. Please keep up the good work, because if you don't, probably no-one else will, and I shudder to imagine what state the page will degenerate into. Best wishes Pdfpdf (talk) 12:21, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you,

HiLo,

I am not very familiar with the editing process on Misplaced Pages and I have often believed it to be very non-politically motivated, however recently I have been looking to the talk sections and the history sections and have come to believe that it can be very partisan. I would like to thank you for your voice of reason in the recent discussions concerning both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. As I do not edit much and do not have an account I am glad there are people like you editing and looking out for what many are not and that is neutrality.

Thank you, opps see I am not very good --72.186.126.17 (talk) 21:47, 14 May 2012 (UTC) forgot to sign

Global etc.

Hey there, sorry if I came off badly earlier, but I am actually curious regarding your comments about "Global encyclopedia" that I've seen. I agree with the concept, but haven't been able to tie it to your objections. If you are willing to flesh that out for me, I'd appreciate it greatly. Arkon (talk) 04:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Watchlist survey

You're saying what I've been saying too, introduce the change correctly and there won't be a problem. Too many geeks/techies going "Let's just do this, it's been decided so no-one can complain". NtheP (talk) 21:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. It's a real issue for me. I've worked professionally in IT and now teach aspects of it. Too many nerds have no idea how other people think and how they will react to change. Let's keep reminding them HiLo48 (talk) 22:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Same here, I am an IT project manager. One paragraph in a watchlist notice was all that was needed. If it said

• it's coming in on date x
• you can find the original discussion about introducing the change here (so you understand the why the change is coming in)
• if you want something different look here or ask here for help

Instead it goes in, creates a lot of fury, gets reverted and the techies (well one) keeps trying to introduce variations without notice or discussion and develops a tortoise, this is going to happen come hell or high water attitude. I'll admit my original reaction was this should be opt-in, I'm now of the opinion that if the change was agreed then opt-out is the way to go as long as it's eased in and the alternatives are presented/help on alternatives offered. NtheP (talk) 22:44, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Accidental revert ?

I'm guessing that this was an accident ? StuRat (talk) 03:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Xavier (still!)

What a thankless task! Therefore, I thank you for your efforts!!
Despite your diligent efforts in the "Associated schools" section, the varying factions don't seem to be able to make up their collective minds as to what the facts are. So, until they can come up with a consistent set of facts, and support them with some reliable references, I suggest we take the type of approach. What do you think?
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Good. Thanks for the reply. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:46, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Climate of Australia

Hello HiLo:

I saw your mention of the climate of Australia. I understand it varies a lot from north to south. (That is probably self-evident but, never having been there, I'm seeking confirmation.)

What part of the year would be good for a visit to Sydney and Melbourne? I'm told that between times when it is too hot or too cold, or dust storms blowing up, or school breaks when prices are high, there is no good time. I think they were joking but is there some truth to that?

Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 11:13, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Taiwan

Constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the article Talk:Taiwan has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. Ibicdlcod (talk) 07:11, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

LOL HiLo48 (talk) 07:24, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikiquette

• Template:Http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Taiwan

http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Taiwan#Admins.27_closing_comments

Throughout the talk page, HiLo48 repeats the same thing again and again without actually contributing to the conversation.

Hilo48 disagrees with me on the topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=495659581&oldid=495659219

Instead of discussing the issue with me, HiLo48 has chosen to harass me by repeating again and again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=495718356&oldid=495718281 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=495718904&oldid=495718356 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=495719040&oldid=495718904

I ask HiLo48 to stop: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=495936709&oldid=495935875

My second request to HiLo48 to please stop: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=495937839&oldid=495937584

Improper use of language here: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=495967396&oldid=495962095

He contributes but with continued harassment: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=496049127&oldid=496035141

No contribution, just harassment: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=496049358&oldid=496049127

My third request to HiLo48 to please stop: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=496056630&oldid=496049358

I inform HiLo48 that I think what he/she is doing is harassment: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=496056992&oldid=496056771

Continued repetitious harassment while contributing nothing to the conversation: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=496057566&oldid=496057072 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=496061465&oldid=496060216 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Taiwan&diff=496061649&oldid=496061465 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midcent (talk • contribs)

LOL HiLo48 (talk) 22:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Third party chiming in - AFAICT from those links, this "harassment" consists of asking you to sign your talk-page posts. That is not harassment, it's a standard expectation on Misplaced Pages that people will sign such posts. See Misplaced Pages:Signatures for explanation. --GenericBob (talk) 21:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Bob. HiLo48 (talk) 22:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Bob, Misplaced Pages says that we should sign, not that we have to. I informed HiLo48 of this and asked him/her to stop.

What does "should" mean to you? Do what you bloody well like and think that everyone else will be delighted? Idiotic. HiLo48 (talk) 08:01, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Idiotic? You just can't stop making personal attacks, can you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midcent (talk • contribs) 15:39, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Now, was that post made by the same person who made the post to which I was responding, two lines above? I can't tell, because IT WASN'T FUCKING SIGNED!!!!!! Idiotic. HiLo48 (talk) 21:15, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello Midcent: Why do you not want to include your user name in your posts? -- There is a very good reason for doing so. Conversations in which the speakers are not identified are very difficult to follow. Even as great a writer as William Shakespeare included the names of the speakers in his scripts. Wanderer57 (talk) 01:28, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

@HiLo48. Stay calm, my friend. Don't let this ridiculous situation cause you to blow a gasket and put yourself in harms way. You must know how these things go: the "ed-iot" gets a pass and the quality editor gets his peepee slapped.```Buster Seven Talk 02:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry. Gaskets are secure here. I just find it irksome that ignorant editors like the above can go so far down stupid pathways with no consequences. HiLo48 (talk) 03:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

From an editor you would like...."There is no issue too small for a diva; disputes are more about getting their way than getting it right". ```Buster Seven Talk 06:07, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

From Talk:Taiwan

Someone closed the discussion at Talk:Taiwan, rightly so I suppose since it had little to do with Taiwan, but I think the discussion was not over so I've copied part of it here. Readin (talk) 20:15, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I can stop now, and will, so long as the silliness from Midcent stops. But please note that the silliness is not just here. He (or some other anonymous editor - I obviously cannot be sure due to the absence of sigs) chose to post a mass of garbage on my Talk page. So, who is being provocative? I will say that I know that what I'm doing is provocative, and quite deliberate at times. I don't believe in niceness for the sake of it when absolute (but terribly nice) bullshit is being posted. That usually achieves nothing. The problem with Midcent (or those other? anonymous editors) is that he is an incompetent editor. He doesn't understand normal Misplaced Pages practices, ignores advice, and thus disrupts in ignorance. It's the ignoring advice bit that probably irks me the most. HiLo48 (talk) 02:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Midcent is not signing - but unfortunately he seems to be right that there is no rule saying he has to. Midcent does make arguments that I disagree with, but even if you are correct that his arguments are silly or moronic, Misplaced Pages doesn't have rules against silly moronic arguments either. I find him annoying, but as far as I can tell his actions are in bounds based on Misplaced Pages rules. But HiLo48, your actions are not. Quoting WP:CIVIL, "Incivility consists of one of more of the following behaviors: personal attacks, rudeness, disrespectful comments, and aggressive behaviours---when such behavior disrupts the project and leads to unproductive stressors and conflict. Editors make mistakes, so a few minor incidents of incivility are not in themselves a major concern. However, an unfolding pattern of incivility is disruptive and unacceptable. If incivility becomes harassment or egregious personal attacks, then it may result in blocks." Calling a person "fool", "moron", and "idiot" is clearly a personal attack. I don't think I need to detail other ways you've been incivil. I will, however, violate one of the civility rules and tell you to grow up! Dealing with annoying people is part of life and overreacting just gets you into trouble. In real life when someone says you're stupid you can ignore them - making that person look stupid - or you can punch the person out and get dragged away by the police - making yourself look stupid. Let me quote WP:CIVIL again: "In general, be understanding and non-retaliatory in dealing with incivility. If others are uncivil, be understanding (people do say things when they get upset) rather than judgmental, and do not respond in kind. If necessary, point out gently that you think the comment might be considered uncivil, and make it clear that you want to move on and focus on the content issue." Now you and I and Berlinsquare have pointed out to Midcent that we think his behavior is annoying. I've pointed out to you that I think you're behavior is uncivil. Let's all try to move on. "Only take things to dispute resolution (see below) if there is an ongoing problem you can't resolve." I'm hoping it doesn't come to that. One more point, Berlinsquare hints that Midcent may be baiting ("(a) taunting or baiting: deliberately pushing others to the point of breaching civility even if not seeming to commit such a breach themselves. "). He may be right, but still, "All editors are responsible for their own behavior in cases of baiting; a user who is baited is not excused by that if they attack in response".Readin (talk) 03:03, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

With all due respect, I call that post pointless bullshit. It's as if you haven't read my post immediately above at all.

I read your post before I wrote my response. I wrote the response because you wrote, "I can stop now, and will, so long as the silliness from Midcent stops". The point is, as I notice Buster Seven is also trying to explain to you, you have to remain civil even when the other guy doesn't. If you remain civil, and Midcent continues to be annoying, then perhaps you can lead a civil discussion of how we can deal with his behavior. But so long as you continue to overreact it is your behavior, not his, that will be the focus negative attention. Readin (talk) 20:15, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

You claim your lack of civility worked because the other user was banned. However it wasn't your lack of civility, it was your taking the dispute to a resolution method and presenting one side before the other did the same to you. Had Midcent (or someone else) brought up your behavior it is not at all unlikely that you would have been banned as well, or perhaps instead. Regarding your comment about the language you're using being typical where you live and work, I'm not saying it is atypical, nor am I complaining about seeing certain words in print. I'm saying that whether the names are amoung the "seven words you can't say on television" or whether they are as childish as "nanny nanny boo boo", they are uncivil when used for the purpose of name-calling. Contradict the argument with logic and reason. Don't attack the arguer or even the argument with name-calling. Readin (talk) 03:14, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Midcent did bring up HiLo, at WP:WQA. It just boomeranged. CMD (talk) 10:22, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Craig Thomson affair

Instead of making mass reverts when I'm trying to improve the flow of the article, could you make small ones, so we don't lose any material? Happy to discuss the specific points, especially about using Bolt as a source. --Pete (talk) 02:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I haven't even looked at edits you're referring to, but Bolt isnt a reliable source and you're aware of that. I would hope you're not using Bolt as a way to display a false illusion of compromising when you agree to remove them. Timeshift (talk) 02:20, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

You are wrong there. Could you discuss this on the talk page, please. I don't think that there any Bolt-opinion statements included in the article, but feel free to look at it with your own eyes. --Pete (talk) 02:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I've put considerable effort into explaining the problems with using Bolt. That you don't understand gives me cause to have severe doubts about your comprehension or intelligence. Or maybe it's just irrational bias on your part. HiLo48 (talk) 02:44, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

User:HiLo48, thank you for your reasonableness and ensuring that poorly sourced and biased material is removed. 121.216.230.139 (talk) 22:37, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

WTF?

I mean, WTF? Your behaviour last night was out of character and worrying. After some thought, I wonder if you weren't pursuing some other activity at the time, romantic movie, football, dinner with inlaws, intimate congress, driving... Or some combination. If so, could you just say so - Busy now. Hands full. Mouth full. Typing with nose. OMG green light! L8r - and I'll cool it. I'm no caveman. Sorry if I was interrupting anything important. Not my intention. --Pete (talk) 16:44, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

At Home with Julia

Hi - wasn't looking to create havoc. Many millions of english speaking Wiki readers will not readily know who the PM of Australia really is, nor who her boyfriend is. Like other political comedies, it would be easy to assume that Ms. Bishop is portraying a person who is the "current PM" only in the universe of the show - rather than the real-life honest-to-goodness PM. (the "politicians" in the television comedy Yes Minister are not the real British Cabinet The fact that PM's name appears as a wikilink does not suggest that she is real - MP Jim Hacker appears as a wikilink on the Yes Minister page, and he's not real).

There may be better wording/grammar than I used in the edits, and I welcome your improvements to those words.. Reading the episode summaries, as well as other articles online, it also appears that the action does not take place at the Lodge 100% of the time - so it seems a little strong to say in the opening that the show is about the PM and her partner "in the Lodge" - implying that this is the overwhelmingly only location for the action of the show. That's why I had removed that item from the opening (episode 2 synopsis talks about being in a school, while an online article talks about them 'doing it' in the PM's office - but I don't know if that means her office in the Lodge or in the Parliament House offices.).

Finally, as in "who is the PM", many will not know what the Lodge is. That's why I added a few words when the Lodge is mentioned in the heart of the article.

I know that the wiki links provide more detail, but the main article should have enough in it that folks do not have to jump to the link just to get a clue what the reference is. (links give more detail rather than the first ever clue). Yes, Wiki links do take you down a trail of learning - which is how I stumbled upon this article (rather than having previous knowledge about the Australian PM or even that the show "At Home with Julia" existed... it was all a lucky link-to-link-to-link that brought me here). But the links should expand knowledge, not be the only source. Please re-consider adding a few words - just a word or two will make a difference - to enlighten the non-Australian (or non-Commonwealth?) reader. Thanks. Jmg38 (talk) 14:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Barking dogs

Regarding your edit here, may I direct your attention to WP:RUC? It would help if you were seen to promote civil discussion, through your own polite example and the criticism of poor behaviour by other editors. Following the established policies and guidelines is generally the best course here. --Pete (talk) 18:56, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

It may have been a less than ideal post, but you need to remember that you don't own this place. Unilaterally deleting others' posts without explanation is never a wise approach. You really need to think more before you act. Oh, and as for civil discussion, discussion involves more than just YOUR opinion. Do await others. HiLo48 (talk) 19:11, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I was following WP:RUC in removing the material. You are quite correct, I don't own WP. We all do, and we should all help in making it a pleasant and co-operative workplace. We are all volunteers. Look, I don't mind if you disagree with me, lord knows I'm often wrong about things, but could you please do it in a polite and reasonable fashion. Accusing me of not waiting for discussion when a subject has been discussed for a day or so already is not helpful. Did you even look at WP:RSN? --Pete (talk) 19:22, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I despair at your lack of comprehension. This is not a matter of me disagreeing with you. I may well agree with most of what you want to post (apart from using Bolt as a source - that's simply stupid), but I cannot agree with your haste. One day ISN'T very long. That is never going to give most interested parties a chance to respond, especially over a long weekend. I've already pointed out that Misplaced Pages is not a breaking news service. We don't have to reflect every, possibly irrelevant and trivial, snippet of news thrown at us by the media. Their goals are very different from ours. Maybe you've been too close to that world of journalism you speak of. Start to think more in terms of the cycles of the monthly review type publications, or even more relevant, the traditional yearly cycles of the big encyclopaedias. THAT'S the style we should be aiming for. Rushing things, as you do, inevitably suggests some motive different from being a great encyclopaedia, despite your repeated please to the contrary. HiLo48 (talk) 23:53, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

While I thank you for your advice, could I ask that instead you review wikiprocedure, as I have repeatedly requested with links, and respond to the specific points raised? Using the existing methods which have produced an excellent encyclopaedia from a diverse group of contributors is, to my mind at least, a superior process to making up new procedures on the fly. I also remind you of the policy on personal attacks. --Pete (talk) 00:00, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

You deserved to hear some firmer language with your tendentious, defiant editing. It got your attention, didn't it? You were ignoring me before that. HiLo48 (talk) 00:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Not at all. I read your every word, but found your comments about me laughably incorrect and unhelpful to the situation. As for using rude and abusive language, yes, it got my attention, for the simple reason that when I see such tactics employed in debate or discussion it is an excellent marker as to the strength of the argument. The argument ad hominem is generally not regarded as a good debating strategy. --Pete (talk) 00:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

You were ignoring me before that. Ever noticed the fouls committed deliberately near the end of a tight basketball match? Deliberate pushing of the boundaries has its place. HiLo48 (talk) 00:24, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Your perceptions are wrong. I may not have responded, but I considered what you had to say. Now, I'm going to give you a couple of hours to have a chat with the anon editor - he seems to be keen on establishing a rapport with you - and we'll see how things go, but I've got a trigger and I'm going to pull it after giving everyone due time for consideration. --Pete (talk) 01:59, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

How the hell can I know that you've considered what I had to say, when you don't respond, and continue to behave in what I've said to you I perceive to be an unacceptable manner? I'm not a magical mindreader. Seriously, you must have rocks in your head. As for a trigger, I reckon the Edit warring, in which you display a faster trigger finger than anybody else, is a pretty effective one. Just ease off a little. What difference will it make if what you want doesn't appear in the article until tomorrow, or even later? (Unless, of course, you're trying to influence public opinion....)

I'm sorry you consider my behaviour hard to follow. I think I've made myself more than clear - the CTA article is sensitive and important and we need to keep things on track by following established procedures. I know you've said that using heated or offensive language gets attention, and while this is true, it is not something that adds to your gravitas, nor is it a good example to set for other users. Besides it's, well, offensive. I've been hoping that you'd be able to serve as a better role model than you have. You're an experienced editor, you know the subject, you can help improve the article. I really don't care about slanting the article one way or another, that sort of thing is counterproductive in my experience, but what matters is balance. We have to be objective, and I again remind you that this is an article about a living person in a situation similar to those where politicians have taken their own lives or attempted to do so. The Nick Sherry case comes to mind here. It may seem like fun to play some sort of partisan political game, but it is one where a life could be at stake, and it is incumbent on all editors to react responsibly. Not that I see Misplaced Pages as influencing anybody's opinion more than the massive media coverage we've already seen, but still, we must play by the rules, and if we can work together, it's going to go a lot better than if everyone is calling each other names. --Pete (talk) 03:38, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, cut the bullshit about niceness. You still haven't explained any of your rudeness and impatient editing. Fucking DISCUSS things properly. WAIT for others to comment. It's NEVER that urgent. Unless, of course, you're trying to influence public opinion.... You can plead that you're not as often as you like, but your behaviour says otherwise. HiLo48 (talk) 03:42, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I disagree with your opinion, but you are welcome to it. If you have any specific complaints, please raise them. I'm by no means perfect, and i welcome correction. Where there is something to correct. --Pete (talk) 03:47, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

That's a moronic question. Please don't post here again. I'll ignore you. You have no fucking idea. HiLo48 (talk) 03:49, 11 June 2012 (UTC)