Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Xenophrenic (talk | contribs) at 19:55, 5 July 2011 (+request). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Carefree, Arizona

TO: The Gnome

Regarding your concerns requesting data supporting my comments about Carefree, the following quotes from the Nov./Dec. 2006 issue of PERSONAL REAL ESTATE INVESTOR MAGAZINE may help provide a better understanding of the communtity:

"Natural beauty and exclusive custom homes help make Carefree the second most expensive area in metro Phoenix, surpassed only by Paradise Valley".

"Carefree is about quiet and wealthy desert living, without Scottsdale's frenzy and traffic. Carefree's culture is more golf and gallery than Cave Creek's saloon and cowboy".

"Who lives there? About 3300 people live there. Most residents are retired and some well-to-do snowbirds who show up for the winter months. Californians and Easterners outnumber the Midwesterners who used to make up most of the population. Lucile Ball used to vacation at the Carefree Resort. Television star Dick Van Dyke lived in Carefree for a while. Think slow-moving late-model Cadillac sedans with the wives in the back seat".

"Homes: Three, four, five, even $6 million dollar homes are common in Carefree. There's hardly anything available in mid-range single family homes in Carefree".

Photo remarks: "Many beautiful homes are built into the flanks of Black Mountain. The southern side of the mountain is the most prized location. Views of faraway, undeveloped desert and mountains are part of Carefree's prestige".

"Investing in Carefree will always be solid because of the area's status. Nothing here will ever depreciate".

As the above magazine quotes clearly state, Carefree is indeed an upscale enclave and has been known as such to those in-the-know for decades. My family has maintained several properties in town for many years as Carefree is our preferred retreat from our cold Connecticut winters. If you've never been to Carefree I urge you to visit. If the above doesn't clearly illustrate what Carefree is all about, one drive through town certainly will.

Happy New Year, Seanbagleyus (talk) 16:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I added the magazine reference as #7 to the list for Carefree, however my addition did not match the format of the previous 6 references-- not sure how to accomplish this so it matches.Thank you for your assistance regarding the addition of the proper reference format, as well as the guidelines/recommendations for Misplaced Pages's regulations. I completely agree that objectivity and facts must always be the focus of all entries. However I do still beleive that everything I added to describe the town of Carefree was accurate and did not resort to any peacock terminology. Since I referenced a specific publication that corroborated what I've added, I was wondering why you believe it's necessary to drastically edit what I've written.

Blackjack Hall of Fame

Wong worked for a casino. That does not constitute being a pro. His dust-cover jacket claims he was a pro and that has been copied by others. But in Campione v Adamar he testified under oath that he was not. Max was a card-counter catcher at Barona and consults for casinos. He also invests in teams. He runs a nice party - but that does not a pro make. BTW Arnold wasn't really a pro while publishing BJF - but I let it go. The hype isn't really needed. regards Objective3000 (talk) 16:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

You said let’s work together. I agree. So let me try to explain the situation clearly. The Blackjack Hall of Fame article has three sources. One, BJFO, is in fact one of the originators of this advertising idea. The second is Blackjack Heros. This is a guy that set up an affiliate site, copied stuff from other sites and stuck his links all over WP to get traffic to make money from problem gamblers. He has no credibility whatever and is certainly not a separate source. I’m amazed that WP continues to fall for affiliate site SPAM. The third is a LV Sun article by Jeff Haney. Jeff is a nice guy. But this is a fluff article – not investigative journalism. He copied the ad. This is what he does. I know because I have fed him info and sources in the past and one of the articles in which I did that has also been used as a reference. Nothing wrong with what he is doing. It’s a resort newspaper and they run lots of fluff articles about gambling winners. But, all three of your sources are really one source. And that one source is a promotional article. An ad. Now WP is being used to run an ad in the guise of an encyclopedic article. Now if WP wants to keep this ad alive, that’s its business. But please let us keep the hype adjectives out. The article does not require claims that these particular people actually made a living at gambling – a patently false statement that can harm problem gamblers. Yes there do exist pro gamblers (depending on how you define the term.) But let us not add to an encyclopedia as fact self-made and copied claims that specific people in the business of selling systems are among those people with no source that didn’t originate from their own self-serving claims. Regards, Objective3000 (talk) 02:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Wong stated under oath that he never made more than a couple thousand dollars in his life at BJ. How can he possibly be a professional? The only "evidence" that he was a pro is he claims it in his ads and people have copied the ads. But under oath he said otherwise. As for BJHOF; a few guys got together at an annual party and said let's create a hall of fame, nominate ourselves and our friends and a few pioneers to make it look legit. All 21 members, current and forever in the future, were selected before the BJHOF was announced. The "vote" is meaningless since all 21 "nominees" will win. Show me ANYTHING that proves there is any actual, legimizing organization. There is no real controversy over "qualifications" since only a handful of people in the World care. I never responded to my ballot year before last and there was no ballot this year because Max and Arnold selected the "winners" themselves. If you want this kind of nonsense in an "encyclopedia" that's your business. But keep the advertising hype out. Max a pro-gambler? He's a casino card-counter catcher. Objective3000 (talk) 23:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

If you insist on adding characterizations like "professional gambler" to some of these people; shouldn't you add "card-cheat" to Keith Taft's description? He is not an advantage player according to WPs definition of AP. WP says AP is "legal methods." Taft got his family convicted of felonies and imprisoned. That's not opinion - it's a matter of record. Personally, I don't think any characterizations belong in the article. Objective3000 (talk) 14:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't think you understand. Taft was a "professional card-cheat." This was not something unrelated in his life. It is what got him into the BJHOF. He tried and failed to make money at counting; then turned to illegal methods to win. He enlisted his family to cheat for him and they went to prison as a result. If you add "professional gambler" to some members; why wouldn't you add "professional card-cheat?" Particularly since pro gambler is just a self-serving claim not backed by any 1099s or any other evidence - but card-cheat is backed by guilty verdicts and upheld by the NV Appeals Court. I think the latter withstands WP standards. I don't see how the former gets close. Objective3000 (talk) 11:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

If Taft got into the BJHoF on account of activities which you say were illegal (on the basis of court decisions which support that characterization), then the description should be expanded accordingly. It should read, for example, "Keith Taft, 2004, inventor who manufactured hidden computerized devices to aid with play" "(Note: According to law XYZ, this activity was, at the time, and still is, illegal".) A major rule for WP is that the reader must be allowed to form opinions on his/her own, i.e. instead of stating "XYZ is a crook" it's preferable to state "XYZ was convicted in ... for fraud". -The Gnome (talk) 14:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. Characterizations like Taft is a card-cheat don't belong in WP any more than characterizations like Wong is a pro gambler. Even though separate court records show that Taft was indeed a card-cheat and Wong was NOT a pro gambler. I don't think the article needs either characterization - even though the law that Taft broke is in fact called the cheating law (NRS 465.083 Cheating.) Objective3000 (talk) 18:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, "card-cheat" is a characterization, while "pro gambler" is not; it's a term stating a person's line of work. There is no moral judgement in describing someone as a pro gambler. I would think calling someone in Misplaced Pages a "crook" or a "cheat" should only be acceptable if that someone has been convicted in a court of law, e.g. "G. Gordon Liddy is a convicted felon". (But O. J. Simpson is not a murderer.) I'll look this up in WP. -The Gnome (talk) 11:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. There were convictions. They were upheld by the Nevada Appeals Court. He was a "professional card cheat." That was his line of work. OTOH, Wong's line of work was NOT professional gambler. Objective3000 (talk) 12:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: McDermott

The deletion template you had on the page was a prod. With prods, if one disagrees with the prod, one is allowed to remove the prod with a reason in the talk page or the edit summary. The next step, if an editor disagrees with a prod, it to take it to AfD. I disagree it should be deleted because disambigs are cheap and the McDermott disambig is already extremely cluttered. It serves a purpose for those who are looking only for James McDermott. Redfarmer (talk) 13:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Conel Hugh O'Donel Alexander

Your "changed wording" to Conel Hugh O'Donel Alexander was a word-for-word copy of a sentence from The Oxford Companion to Chess. We need to be careful about copyright violation. Quale (talk) 08:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. And thanks for making the appropriate changes to the text. -The Gnome (talk) 09:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Warnings

Hi Gnome!

You're complaining about me having deleted some significant news item on the Foxy Brown (rapper) article.
I don't know what you're talking about, take a look at the revision history :
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Foxy_Brown_%28rapper%29&diff=prev&oldid=203856111

You'll see I only deleted a sentence that did appear twice :
On July 22, 2007, MTV News reported that there are plans for Brooklyn Don Diva, a "mixtape", to be released before Black Roses. (...) Brown's next album, tentatively titled Brooklyn's Don Diva is to be released around early 2008.
I deleted the second, redundant sentence.

You probably wanted to warn someone else.
Bye!
Wikizen (talk) 22:08, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Orlando Bosch

Just FYI, this edit was likely in good faith. Although not cited and OK to revert, the edit does not appear to be vandalism. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 08:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

My mistake....I mis-interpreted what I saw and thought you had removed the other two quotes rather than having restored them. Thanks. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 16:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

A minor FYI on “Dan Rowan”

After that unsourced claim was posted and then (appropriately) knocked-out by you, I got curious. In looking for what had been the disposition of the body, I discovered that the anon had pretty much cut-and-pasted from Find a grave.com, which is certainly not a “reliable source”. —SlamDiego_←T 09:13, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Jose Mourinho

You're right! I took a look at the history and I saw I made almost twenty edits in two days! I normally use a few edits but never that many, God knows what I was doing. I'll try to be more concise when I get round to editing the Porto and Chelsea sections. Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

re: Klaus Kinski

This history log also records all my edit summaries, which show mainly dab edits in the filmography section. Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 13:27, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Georgia

Okay, I understand your complaint a bit better now. I was confused by your edit summary because there are many additional meanings for "Georgia," such as the USS Georgia, that follow the line in question.

I don't know if you're familiar with the MOS for disambiguation pages. It says that when there is a primary topic for a disambiguated term, the disambiguation page should begin, "Blahblah is X. Blahblah may also refer to:" The Georgia page deviates from that first line because nobody can agree on whether the state or the country or neither should be designated as a primary topic. But I don't think that justifies deviating from the second line of the standard intro, without checking whether there's a consensus to ignore that part of the MOS.

Here are the two options that I would be happy with:

1. Bring the question up on the Talk page and see if anybody objects to removing the "also" or if there's a consensus one way or another. If nobody else cares, go ahead and take it out.
2. Below the intro line, change the links to the country and state article to be just text, perhaps "The country of Georgia, formerly known as:" and likewise for the state. I agree there's no reason for the second pair of links. But I wouldn't be surprised if someone else disagrees and then it should probably go back to the Talk page. Propaniac (talk) 21:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Milo Minderbinder

Hello, I agree with your complaint on the talk page. So I started to work a bit on the article - I owe my namesake that much. I am not very current on the article politics here in en:WP, so I did not remove any of the flags (Original research and Unreferenced). Maybe you can have a look. How to go about referencing the charcater/plot description? Would only secondary lit. crit. suffice, or can simple facts be referenced from the novel Catch 22? And if so, which edition? --Minderbinder-de (talk) 10:08, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:RFPP, Karrine Steffans

Hi! I applied pending changes protection to this article, as it's a WP:BLP and I think it would be a good fit for PC-protection. This kind of protection relies on reviewers checking IP and non-authconfirmed edits, and reverting them if the edits are vandalism or WP:BLP-violations. Regular readers won't see edits until the edits are reviewed and approved.

With that in mind, I've added you to the "reviewers" group. If you'd prefer not to be a reviewer, let me know and I can "un-add" you. Likewise, if you feel that pending changes protection isn't appropriate at Karrine Steffans post again at WP:RFPP and we can consider changing the protection to semi.

TFOWR 12:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Tom of Finland

Hi there, just a note that I've reverted your recent edit to the above restoring the link to the Tom of Finland Foundation web page - this link is active and pertinent to the content of the article, I'm not sure why you'd removed it, but it seemed to be in error. Splateagle (talk) 11:30, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

That's strange. I tried it and again it comes up empty. ("Oops! Internet Explorer could not connect to www.tomoffinlandfoundation.org. Additional suggestions: Access a cached copy of www.­tomoffinlandfoun­dation.­org".) Probably something wrong with my browser.-The Gnome (talk) 11:40, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries - might be a hosting issue, some ISPs probably consider the site inappropriate... I just noticed I hit rv Vandal instead of rv when reverting the edit, inadvertently slandering you - please accept my apologies - I can't fix that on the page but will go on record here that I intended it as a revert in good faith. Sorry about that. Splateagle (talk) 11:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies 19:42, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Get a life.

You actually are the saddest little man I've ever had the misfortune to witness. You sit on your little computer screen all day editing and quite obviously annoying people on wikipedia.

What is it to you if I put another link to a video of a football chant? Chelsea fans are going to be searching for it so let them enjoy as many videos as they want.

What possible brain cell in that head of yours decided that "NOPE I WILL DELETE THIS LINK BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY GOT ONE AND IF WE HAVE 2 ITS THE END OF THE WORLD". My God you seriously are something else.

Stop being such a low life and get a life mate.

Good luck & king regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.221.135.250 (talk) 19:41, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not YouTube. Per Misplaced Pages policy, "Links in the 'External links' section should be kept to a minimum". As to the name-calling in your post, I find it funny when people who "sit it in front of computers" belittle other people for "sitting in front of computers"! But no worries, mate. None of us is a "little" man. It's all life. -The Gnome (talk) 07:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

That diplomat with the funny name

There was a prod there for no sources, not an AfD nn. Rich Farmbrough, 15:29, 19 October 2010 (UTC).

A response

Here's an explanation. Disappointing, but blacklisting them both was the only real solution. DS (talk) 17:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help but, even after checking out the links, I must confess I fail to understand the problem. There must be something seriously wrong with this website, since it's been blacklisted for more than a couple of years now and, despite the many requests to "white-list" it, it remains out of bounds! What exactly is the problem, can it be described in a few words? (If it's a "neo-Nazi" or "holocaust-denying" website, I would not place it out of bounds entirely: When such a website provides, for example, historical evidence for Nazi atrocities, it provides corroborating evidence, which can be added to the rest of the cites, in a historical article.) But it may be an entirely different problem. I cannot tell.-The Gnome (talk) 18:20, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, that's out of date (oops). We no longer have to worry about the owner of the .net site coming through and changing all the .org references to .net, or the owner of the .org site coming through and changing all the .net references to .org (both of which happened, repeatedly), because one of the two sites closed down (these were the same two schmucks who owned deathcamps dot org and death-camps dot org, I think). The listing's not necessary any more, so I'll see what I can do to get it removed. DS (talk) 18:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks in advance. If anything, I'm learning about Misplaced Pages policies (and past flame wars!)...-The Gnome (talk) 18:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Joan Muysken

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Joan Muysken, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.merit.unu.edu/about/profile.php?id=41&stage=2.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 09:21, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Elementary CV information, e.g. list of previously held jobs, cannot be copyrighted by anyone. But, just to make sure, permission to include information about Joan Muysken from the UNU Maastricht web page has been granted by the UNU-MERIT webmaster.-The Gnome (talk) 07:16, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback: Nils von Barth – WikiProj Chartalism proposal

Karrine Steffans