This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | ← | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | → | Archive 30 |
BK:
The following is a note I received from Thomas Brunk. I have not done anything with it, but we need to make some changes in the article to reflect this information.
Sat, 19 Jan 2008 08:50:41 -0500
From: "Thomas W. Brunk, Ph.D." <Brunk+CBW@SpamCop.Net> To: E-mail address deleted Subject: Wikipedia Pewabic
Dear Mr. [Name deleted]
At the request of Anne Crane I reviewed the Pewabic article at
Wikipedia.
I realize that the map on the Pewabic web page has some inaccuracies;
however, the Belle Isle Aquarium is not one of them. The aquarium was built before Pewabic was producing tile. I believe that you will discover the tile to have been made by Grueby Faience Co., Boston.
The founders were Mary Chase Perry (later Mrs. William B. Stratton) and
Horace James Caulkins.
Pewabic Pottery was deeded to Michigan State University December 21,
1965 by Horace J. Caulkins'son Henry L. Caulkins to be operated as a school. The pottery closed on February 28, 1969, and all Pewabic production stopped. It was then operated as a continuing education department of MSU.
The Pewabic Society, Inc. (501(c)3) was formed January 25, 1979,to find
a means to operate the facility as an educational entity based on the philosophy of the Arts and Crafts Movmement as expressed in the spirit of Pewabic Pottery. I was among the founding members at that time. I began working at MSU/Pewabic in 1974 as curator and archivist. Later I served as president of The Pewabic Society, Inc.
The MSU Trustees affirmed that the university could no longer continue
ownership and management of Pewabic Pottery on April 4, 1981.
The Pewabic Society, Inc. agreed to take over the pottery and the deed
was formally transferred on September 26, 1981. Pottery and tile production was reintroduced about three years later. However, todays production uses neither the same glazes nor firing techniques as the original Pewabic. Original molds are used to create reproduction tiles and some molded vessels.
This distinction must be made not only between the reproduced
individual tile but the commission executed under the guise of The Pewabic Society, Inc.
The Wikipedia list of architectural commissions has several
inacuracies.
Anne Crane's daughter did a yeoman's task in preparing and presenting
the map for our use. We are grateful for her efforts and I am sure Anne is please by your recognition.
I am happy to help you in any way to make the article the best
possible, and, I belive, the others on our Museum Committe feel the same.
Sincerely,
Dr. Thomas W. Brunk
BCC: Anne Crane,
I thought I'd send this on to you and to Carptrash, so that we can make some changes. I note that the article on the Belle Isle Aquarium has the same wrong information.
Best. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 22:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)Stan
The comment "not a title when used as a disambiguating phrase" is not true. Just as "Hush (Buffy episode)" includes a title, or "0 (Star Trek)" include titles. Titles make good dab phrases and parts of dab phrases. -- JHunterJ (talk) 02:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Burdock (disambiguation). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for looking after Michigan trunkline articles, but your move earlier wasn't proper. According to USRD naming guidelines, there is the articles List of Interstate Highways in X, Lists of US Highways in X, etc. In both other cases, the "H" in highway is capitalized as shorthand for the Interstate Highway System or the US Numbered Highway System. In Michigan it is officially the Michigan State Trunkline Highway System as they are defined, so the list should stay at List of Michigan Trunklines since Trunkline is part of a proper name. It was moved once while I was creating the table, and yes it's very disorienting to have an article moved out from under you while creating/expanding it. I'd welcome any comments or questions you have.Imzadi1979 (talk) 05:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Moving this discussion over to Talk:List of Michigan trunklines Imzadi1979 (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Patrick McNamara, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Patrick McNamara seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Patrick McNamara, please affix the template ((hangon)) to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 15:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I dont know by the summaries like "nest" you want to take away the pink tag. Why? This is duplicate template, and is not use. they should be delete by now. Or I suppose to use ((rfd)) one and start the debate.--Freewayguy (Webmail) 19:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm being wikistalked by Barek and HU12. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 23:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Stan
yea dont delete bill finneran as mentioned he actually is a big deal he does exist its not a legend or a joke and bill fest is a real concert in which many local bands play in it is a big deal for the town and please do not delete our customs i am from watertown trust me he belongs on the page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.187.202 (talk) 03:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Dear BK:
Thank you.
However, this has soured me, and I will cure myself of my wikiaholic behavior. I quit. They've achieved their victory, and Wiki will lose my modest contributions.
That being said, I think you should look close at what they edited, and come to your own conclusion. They gutted whole articles. This was WIKISTALKING and they went FAR beyond what they complained about. This was search and destroy, pure, simple and unvarnished. It was a clear abuse of power. I will not abide an abuse of power, and will not let this rest without their being brought to justice -- they are bullies, and this was wrong.
I for one would not stand silently and idly by while the Wehrmacht makes the Jews disappear into the railroad cars.
Moreover, their actions showed an intent (and attempt) to bully me into silence about their misconduct. It was a cover up.
Accountability in this system is important. Those who abuse their powers do not deserve to be trusted to hold the reins. They deserve the severest sanctions, and should be stripped of administrative privileges.
What they did here was very destructive of the goals of an organization that depends on the good will and volunteer efforts of contributors.
7&6=thirteen (talk) 10:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Stan
I have been wikistalked by an administrator Hu12 and his coconspirator, Barek. The dispute arose because I had put in a link to a Central Michigan University timeline on lighthouses in Michigan in an article on Marquette, Michigan the link was perfectly appropriate, and was not a commercial site or spam. I received a note from Barek saying he had deleted the link on the Discussion page. I told him it was a perfectly fine link and that his action was ill-advised. The next thing I knew, Hu12 intervened. The two of them started Wikistalking me together, removing not just the link, but removing the link from every page where I had put it. Additionally, they started doing blind "Undos" and obliterating large portions of articles that I had contributed. There was no reason for any of this. When I protested their course of action, they suspended my editing privileges. This was done precipitously. BK Conrad has investigated this matter, and deems the blind edits to be 'unfortunate.'
I complained to BK Conrad, an administrator. He undid the suspension, but did not deal with my substantive complaint about this administrator. He suggested that I could contact you.
I would also add that Hu12 deleted my complaints to him from his talk page (I put them back), and has now (conveniently) archived the pages.
Additionally, one of my correspondents, Asher196, had noted in the history section of an article that the deletion was unwarranted. I contacted him and reported the Wikistalking.
Indeed, what you will uncover, should you choose to look, is that Hu12 and Barker were engaged in wholesale eradication of my contribution from articles, sometimes to the point where the article virtually disappeared. There was no excuse for this. It is the very definition of Wikistalking.
As I said, when I protested this, I was suspended.
I have done a whole lot of editing here. -- Many thousands of edits. I have never before been accused of spamming the system. I wasn't doing this here, either.
While I agree with BK that it would be best if I could just avoid these bullies, the matter is not so easily resolved. They sought me out. They attacked me. They abused their administrative privileges.
While I could turn a blind eye to this, it will only encourage this untoward behavior. When Czeckoslovakia falls, Poland can't be far behind. Someone needs to report this and stop this untoward and unspeakable behavior. Based on my reading of Hu12's talk page (before it disappeared), the man has attitude problems that have surfaced before.
Wikistalking by administrators will frustrate the contributors, and cause them to quit Wikipedia. They've already done that to me. Let there not be a repetition. The very lifeblood of your organization is at stake.
I have attacked copies of my correspondence to and from BK Conrad and Asher196.
If you need further information, please advise.
I will send this to Asher196 and BKConrad, so they are informed of my complaint. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 17:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Stan
BK: Thank you.
However, this has soured me, and I will cure myself of my wikiaholic behavior. I quit. They've achieved their victory, and Wiki will lose my modest contributions.
That being said, I think you should look close at what they edited, and come to your own conclusion. They gutted whole articles. This was WIKISTALKING and they went FAR beyond what they complained about. This was search and destroy, pure, simple and unvarnished. It was a clear abuse of power. I will not abide an abuse of power, and will not let this rest without their being brought to justice -- they are bullies, and this was wrong.
I for one would not stand silently and idly by while the Wehrmacht makes the Jews disappear into the railroad cars.
Moreover, their actions showed an intent (and attempt) to bully me into silence about their misconduct. It was a cover up.
Accountability in this system is important. Those who abuse their powers do not deserve to be trusted to hold the reins. They deserve the severest sanctions, and should be stripped of administrative privileges.
What they did here was very destructive of the goals of an organization that depends on the good will and volunteer efforts of contributors.
7&6=thirteen (talk) 10:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Stan
Coincidentally, Hu12 chose this interregnum of completely delete (archive) his user talk. This is after he was unmaking history and deleting my accusations of misconduct, which I put back on his page This is a Watergate style cover up. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Stan
I would just like to make a stand with 7&6=thirteen. I can't believe these "admins" treated him this way. He is a dedicated and prolific Wikipedia editor, and has done tremendous work on many articles. Trying to add a link which provides valuable information, he is labeled a spammer. Trying to defend his actions, he is blocked. What are we doing here if this is how the good guys are treated?----Asher196 (talk) 11:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sorry about the situation. If you'd like to file a complaint about Hu12, the place to do that is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Hu12's block of you was precipitous and the blind reverts unwarranted. However you did accuse him of being a sock puppet and make what could be interpreted as a vague threat. I might note that Hu12 consistently archives talk page messages -- although this is an annoying practice, it is not prohibited and it is not necessarily evidence that the user was trying to cover up anything. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, including editors with limited social skills. Unless their behavior clearly crosses the line and becomes disruptive, it is best to simply avoid engaging with such persons. older ≠ wiser 12:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
BK:
I note you've gone over a bunch of my former territory.
As you clean up the links, you might want to keep in mind that they are useful to readers (a lot of these are real sparse articles to begin with) and that they might be of use to future editors, who might use them as a basis for more article, and then line citations.
As to Mr. Killmaster, I am good friends with his granddaughter, and he is buried in a private cemetery on the top of the hill to the west of the Harrisville Airport. Trying to find a "source" for that is difficuilt. at best. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Stan
I have quoted you here, I hope you don't mind. if you disagree with the way I have used your remark or if you have any other comments, I am sure you will say so. Apologies if this is not the correct way to do business. :)Abtract (talk) 12:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing the Baraga County template; I occasionally commit this error, forgetting to change the county seat when I copy code for a new template.
Since you've been adamant in defending your position on Michigan's county templates, would you be willing to create and apply more of them? I believe that there are 65 counties with no templates, and it would be quite helpful if you'd be willing to help reduce that number. Nyttend (talk) 12:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Why would the Huron County Template be inapropriate for Tip of The Thumb Heritage Water Trail? It tells the reader the towns located in Huron County and would allow him to plan his trip better.
Thanks --HB Edit (talk) 19:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Bkonrad,
I see you reverted my move of Oracle to Oracle(Person) with the message that it has not been discussed prior to making the change, which i have to admit was indeed a bit uncalled for. The main reason i did not discuss the move was because i generally only move my own user subpages, or pages with typo's in its title around. I think you can imagine those don't actually need a great deal of discussion :).
Now to do things right, i opened a discussion on the oracle talk page. Since you were involved in my previous move, you might be interested in commenting there (Or perhaps not). Either way, Happy editing, and a good day to you! Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 18:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Bkonrad,
I apologize for my clumsy undo. I will be more careful next time. Thank you very much for cleaning up my mess. Long night in front of the keyboard is my only, and lame, excuse...
Thanks again,
Global777 (talk) 12:02, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
There is a dispute developing as to whether the scandal involving Debbie Stabenow's husband Tom Athans should be including in the Debbie Stabenow article. I say no. What do you think? Steelbeard1 (talk) 00:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm back. My friend Barek and I have been working on this. Needs a better infobox. Thanks if you can find the time. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 7&6=thirteen (talk) 17:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Stan
Hey, Bkonrad, thank you for taking time to comment on the primary topic thread I started on the talk page of MOS:DAB. I am truly bothered by this gap. Do you have any suggestions on how to address this in a way that folks would be happy with? I'd appreciate your thoughts. Gwguffey (talk) 19:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
just because you can't substantiate something doesn't mean it isn't true. get off of your high horse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.229.190.231 (talk) 00:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
BK: I've extensively rewritten this article. I'm sure you could clean it up nicely. Also, I do think that it would be good to find a more up to date icture that had "Huron" on the side. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 11:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC) Stan
How can a move putting a world power which is mentioned in the bible, at its correct location be "controversial"? This is a most simple and obvious move. - Gennarous (talk) 17:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. erc talk/contribs 18:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I had a need to write my congressman on a issue. I had a little trouble finding the address of them. I thought it would be usefull to readers to have this information.--HB Edit (talk) 12:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC) --HB Edit (talk) 12:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there! Just curious if you are still interested in continuing to participate in this discussion? There's been a few interesting developments (and I've just noticed that I fed you a wrong link when answering your question—now corrected). Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
My apologies; this was my first time processing one, and I had followed the cue of another editor who added it to the HP dab page. I have since found out he was wrong toadd it, and I was wrong to select the miscellany for deletion. I apologize if my mistake harshed your calm. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 19:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I know that you often create redirects to townships for small communities in Michigan that aren't likely to get decent-sized articles anytime soon. I've gotten a copy of the deleted List of ZIP Codes in Michigan, cut out the communities with articles, and posted the rest on this user subpage. Would you be willing to go through it and create at least some of them as redirects? Nyttend (talk) 16:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Two users are insisting that the lead of Alexander Hamilton must say that he was all of first Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, lawyer, Founding Father, American politician, leading statesman, political economist, financier, and political theorist because someone, somewhere has called him each of them. A lot of these seem to me WP:PEACOCK, and political economist and financier both appear to refer to his actions as Secretary of the Treasury. (Either might be justified, but both?)
Am I going too far? Would you comment, at Talk:Alexander Hamilton? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
BK: Please take a look at the talk page, discussion about gangs. The April 10 revert of the main article that I am concerned about is: XLinkBot (Talk | contribs) (16,570 bytes) (BOT--Reverting edits by 68.62.59.23 to revision 202239188 (\bmyspace\.com)) 7&6=thirteen (talk) 09:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC) Stan
New Michigan Museum to add to your beat. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC) Stan
Hi, I notice you removed the "In"s from Baykal headings, an action I heartily applaud but one which is against mos:dab as I read it. Is my reading wrong? ... or will you propose a change to guidlines? I would certainly support the latter. Abtract (talk) 00:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Putnam (surname), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Putnam. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and 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 and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 14:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Was wondering if you could help. See, this dab is much too small to have a page so I'm pondering whether it should be outright deleted, or redirected to Soulreaper and tagged with ((db-disambig)). Thoughts? Please reply on your talk page, which I've watchlisted. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I'm sending this to you because you participated in the Centralized discussion on image placeholders that ended on 23 April.
That discussion must produce a conclusion.
We originally asked "Should the addition of this box [example right] be allowed? Does the placeholder system and graphic image need to be improved to satisfy policies and guidelines for inclusion? Is it appropriate to some kinds of biographies, but not to others?" (See introduction).
Conclusions to centralized discussions are either marked as 'policy', 'guideline', 'endorsed', 'rejected', 'no consensus', or 'no change' etc. We should now decide for this discussion.
Please read and approve or disapprove the section here: Conclusion --Kleinzach (talk) 11:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Please note this message conforms to WP:CANVASSING and has not been sent to anyone has not already participated in the centralized discussion.