Misplaced Pages

Messages

Archives Archived at every 50 discussions.
December 11, 2005 – August 27, 2006 August 27, 2006 – December 24, 2006 December 24, 2006 – May 9, 2007 May 14, 2007 – July 6, 2007 July 9, 2007 – January 2, 2008 January 2, 2008 – March 15, 2008

Archives Archived at every 50 discussions.
December 11, 2005 – August 27, 2006 August 27, 2006 – December 24, 2006 December 24, 2006 – May 9, 2007 May 14, 2007 – July 6, 2007 July 9, 2007 – January 2, 2008 January 2, 2008 – March 15, 2008

In reply

It could be stated that the content is controversial, however the same could be said for any of the listings under the Love Interests heading. This doesn't mean that it should be deleted, but should instead be marked as such and invited to be discussed on the Discussion page. Because this is a user edited encyclopedia, there is always information based entirely on speculation, or controversial information. When it's known that it is controversial, it should be marked as such, and not simply removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Triaxx2 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

Image:The All-American Rejects.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:The All-American Rejects.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShadowHalo 09:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstars!!

Hi Jumping cheese!
Thanks a lot for the barnstars, glad you liked my userpage! I only wish wikipedia allowed flash file uploads - then I'd really make a good userpage! But nah, your page isn't that bad! Btw - did you like the talk page archive thingy? Only just recently added it --Fir0002 22:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Thanks for the encouraging words. If you have a growing suspicion, which is obvious since the user's edit pattern and behaviors are so similar, please file a checkuser. I just don't have the time myself. A good place to start is Bruce Lee where all 4 users are extremely zealous in editing and had gotten into numberous content disputes in that particular article. One of the socks User:RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH is ban indefinitely so these new socks are without a doubt ban-evading sockpuppets and should be blocked on sight. Some other common and disrupting pattern this users and his socks do is constantly adding wikiproject: china tag to every single article, stalking my contributions and revert everything I edited, sometimes out of his usual scope (which is making hostile edits about Taiwan and Japan related articles and spreading communist propaganda) ], ] and lots more. If you're interested, feel free to contact me.--Certified.Gangsta 18:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no evidence of policy violation here, so no rationale for a check other than a hunch. Certified.Gangsta has a history of filing false checkusers as shown in his contributions. Certified.Gangsta (talk · contribs) is now resorting to censoring and deleting all my comments from his talk page. Guardian Tiger 19:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Jumping cheese. I saw this discussion just recently, and thought I'll just add my two cents. If you think I'm meddling where I shouldn't be, feel free to ignore it. =D

In the past, User:Certified.Gangsta has frequently and routinely accused others of sockpuppetry in content disputes. At one time or another, he has alleged that two or more of myself, User:RevolverOcelotX, User:Jiang, User:Nic tan33, User:Enochlau are the same person, usually without any evidence. He also frequently uses wild accusations of nationalistic conspiracies to attack those who differ with him on content issues.

In one instance, he successfully obtained the blocking of a likely sockpuppet of User:RevolverOcelotX, even though it was a legitimate sockpuppet was not violating policy as per WP:SOCK; in that instance, User:RevolverocelotX explained that the alternative account was created because the main account was, at the time, inaccessible, and there was no evidence to cast any doubt on that argument.

Across a number of articles, User:Certified.Gangsta has adopted aggressive tactics which violate the spirit of policies such as WP:3RR but always remain within the limits of the formal policy, making administrative discipline difficult. However, the result of such actions is often the provocation of other editors into edit wars. In the case of those with relatively low self-discipline, such actions often provokes other editors into illegitimate activities, such as the alleged "stalking".

He has also used discretionary conventions, such as the relaxed attitude with which user page edits are viewed, to make questionable edits which are quasi-legal, in the sense of violating the spirit of Misplaced Pages policies without actually violating the words as such. Evidence of such edits include a long-standing dispute, of which you are no doubt aware, with a number of editors over a blatantly racist section on the user page; blanking of his user talk page, arbitrary removal of discussions, and warning removals. Again, I reiterate that I understand that such moves are usually not viewed as subject to disciplinary action because of the leniency accorded to user pages; nonetheless, I feel that they are not conducive for productive editing.

What's the point of this long essay? I guess that as someone who has gotten into conflict with User:Certified.Gangsta before, I feel that those involved in the present dispute should be aware of both sides of the story. --Sumple (Talk) 11:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

For Heaven's Sake, Taiwan is governed as Taiwan Province, Republic of China

That is true no matter what you want to think. I am just trying to state the facts. This is neutral point of view, because it is what exists. I am not fantasizing about some Taiwan republic as you and some other people may be trying to push that point of view. -Nationalist 04:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

In fact, it is not controversial to label Taiwan as a province. Because it legitimately and currently is. Taiwan Province does not mean that it is governed by the Communists on Mainland China. It is a province of the Republic of China which once controlled all of China. Then the ROC government retreated to Taiwan, but Taiwan is still administratively a province, whether you like it or not. The license plates in Taiwan say Taiwan Province (台灣省) (on their place of issue). Saying Taiwan Province is fine. As long as it is followed by Republic of China. -Nationalist 05:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)