Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 64.231.242.202 (talk) at 01:44, 10 April 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives
31 October 2005 – 7 April 2006

Read BEFORE Posting:

• Vandalism and other offensive commentary/trolling will be deleted expeditiously.
• If you want me to respond/take your comments seriously, sign them with ~~~~. I will respond on your talk page, but I will not return to your talk page after that unless you've responded on my talk page. Sounds convoluted, but I'd rather be editing articles than reading your talk page.
• Add your comments to the bottom of the page.
• If you don't agree with a change that I've made to an article, please let me know nicely and I will address the issue.

Decent

I think it was very decent of you to apologize to ED209. I'm sure the whole Eyeonvaughan thing has been very frustrating. Hopefully you can find a way to work productively with the other editors on those pages (EoV and VW excepted). Thatcher131 03:06, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Talk Page Archiving

• So, my talk page is ginormous and I've been wanting to archive it for a while, but figured with the ongoing RfC, I should probably wait... What do you think (since you seem to know these things better)? Can I just go for it, or should I hang on? And btw, how long do RfC's usually last? Thanks -- pm_shef 17:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I think you could just go ahead, it is getting pretty long. I'd say, break it off at April 1, so you can put a date on the archive. As long as there's a link at the top of your talk page to the archive, it's all good. RfCs usually last a couple of weeks at least, but I'm not really sure. Mangojuice 17:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest

Pm_shef: This is an attempt to resolve the NPOV concerns that relate to your conduct on Misplaced Pages and the editing of articles that you are personally involved in.

As you know, the official policy of Misplaced Pages, according to WP:NOT, is that Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox, and that editors should avoid contributing to articles that they are personally involved in. That doesn't mean that your edits have not been neutral; rather, it means that any editing at all of Vaughan Council-related articles is inappropriate, no matter what is written.

Here is the fulltext, from WP:NOT:

Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox

Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. Therefore, Misplaced Pages articles are not:

1. Propaganda or advocacy of any kind. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views. You can also use Wikinfo which promotes a "sympathetic point of view" for every article.
2. Self-promotion. The arbitration committee ruled on February 17, 2006 that: "Editors should avoid contributing to articles about themselves or subjects in which they are personally involved, as it is difficult to maintain NPOV while doing so." Creating overly abundant links and references to autobiographical articles, or to articles in which you have a personal stake, is similarly unacceptable. See Misplaced Pages:Autobiography and Misplaced Pages:Notability.
3. Advertising. Articles about companies and products are fine if they are written in an objective and unbiased style. Furthermore, all article topics must be third-party verifiable, so articles about very small "garage" companies are not likely to be acceptable. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic (see finishing school for an example). Please note Misplaced Pages does not endorse any businesses and it does not set up affiliate programs. See also WP:CORP for a proposal on corporate notability.

---

I understand that you've written to a user that you will not be involved anymore in Vaughan-related articles. That's a commendable position. I'm sure there are many subjects and articles of interest to you on Misplaced Pages that do not relate to your father or his opponents. Do I understand your position correctly? And is this approach of abstention one that you permanently take? If so, I again commend that position. I trust, as I'm sure you do, that the administrators and the contributors to Misplaced Pages will maintain quality articles about worthy and reputable subjects. VaughanWatch 11:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Like Father, Like Son

pm_shef and his politcally motivated slanderous personal attacks against me, eyeonvaughan and other faithful editors just goes to prove how corrupt his father must be, like father like son. My sons friend goes to McGill and knows all about how you were elected as arts representative, why don't you tell everyone about the election scandal and bribery that you were directly involved in pm_shef, again like father like son. I looked through all of pm_shefs edits to see how many were personal attacks and unfaithfull edits. I stopped counting once I hit triple digits which was very quickly. How dare he accuse me of personal attacks. But if I am being accused of personal attacks I might as well make some. The only differnece is what I said about pm_shef is the truth. I really can't blame bearcat and some other administartors here as they are missing the big picture. I edit an article it gets reverted within seconds by pm_shef even if I provide a citation. If I write an article it gets delected unless I provide a citation from almost every word of the article.--Eyeonvaughan 06:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)