Jump to content

User talk:Drmies/Archive 101

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 95←Archive 99Archive 100Archive 101Archive 102Archive 103→Archive 105

Sports administrator

Who's a good admin who is knowledgeable about sports article notability? The only one I know is Giantsnowman, and he's away. Trying to figure out whether to nominate Patrick Doherty (coach) for deletion. I tagged it as an A7 as I couldn't imagine how a university coach that isn't even the main coach could be notable, but an editor (who has a terrible record of removing speedy tags from articles that are later deleted) removed it. So, before embarrassing myself, I figured I'd ask someone.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:28, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

(TPS) I'd AfD it. Doesn't pass the eye test (even an NFL quality control coach is borderline at best), and the references either aren't from news sources or don't mention him. Wizardman 00:39, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Doherty (coach).--Bbb23 (talk) 01:12, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Thx Wizardman. Roll Tide Bbb. Next time consider User:Tide rolls. His name already is golden. 50.75.67.210 (talk) 02:27, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Tide rolls and Drmies are already way too cozy. They discuss weird topics like football. Isn't Tide rolls the one who likes professional football as opposed to college football, which appears to be the only sport for Drmies, other than badminton of course, the only sport he actually plays. I mean if I were going to ask Tide rolls, I might as well have asked Drmies. After all, this is supposedly his Talk page, although reasonable minds can differ as to who really owns this page. And forget Wikipedia. We all know that we own our Talk pages. Small recompense for all the hard work we supposedly do. I forget where I was going with this. Not the first time.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:52, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Well apparently Offensive Quality Control Coach is a thing. So there's that. Softlavender (talk) 14:10, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
User:Tide rolls and I don't discuss things--we always agree. Give the ball to Henry. Give the ball to Richardson. Give the ball to Ingram. Give the ball to Shaun. On occasion, pass the ball to O. J. Howard. Rarely but impressively, give the ball to Mount Cody. See a pattern here? Two more things: don't give up points, don't make stupid mistakes, and always play four quarters. Drmies (talk) 18:50, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Pure poetry....almost lyrical. Tiderolls 05:16, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Not here?

Hello Drmies (or any other administrator),

I hate to "bite the newbies" but I really doubt that User:Official Dungeonmaster for Donald Trump's Totalitarian Death Camps is on a path to becoming a productive NPOV editor. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:40, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

  • Cullen328, can I ask you a(nother) favor? Cut all of this talk page up until this message and copy it to a new archive page? I'm mobile and this talk page is a bit too long. Preciate it! Drmies (talk) 16:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Sure. Did you see the name of the editor I just blocked? And that someone made me think about that Reddit thread again? And the patronizing BS? What are we doing here? Drmies (talk) 00:23, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Wow, classy. Whenever I see Reddit mentioned, I zone out like listening to the teacher in the Charlie Brown cartoons. As for what are we doing here, well you are fighting the good fight I suppose, while I am going to Magic Kingdom tomorrow. --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:28, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I set up autoarchiving for you. Give it a try, for the sake of those of us that navigate your page via mobile phone, or in countries with dodgy internet. At least for a couple months. It's set to archive messages after 14 days. That can be modified. --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I don't like it at all, K-stick; please don't be offended if I turn it off before it ever starts. I like to archive when the page is full, and sometimes there's stuff I want to keep for a bit. Well, we'll see. Hey! Have fun tomorrow! Drmies (talk) 01:36, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
  • While you like to archive when the page is full, the page is always full, except for when it's empty, which is not very often. Ah well, I won't be offended if you turn it off. But there are ways around that (increasing the time between archiving and using one click archiver to do individual threads, adding a comment before the thread is archived, I am sure there is another way, but I don't think you will be convinced). Should be fun tomorrow, the boy has decided that his favourite ride is Space Mountain, and that it is too scary for Mrs. K to go on, so I will have to take him on it (for the remaining two days that we are going). --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:51, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wickles pickles selection.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wickles pickles selection.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:37, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

No longer orphaned, the image was replaced on the Wickles article by one which will shortly be deleted as a derivative work on Commons, so I have restored the original. EdChem (talk) 15:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

most welcome feast of joy

Höchsterwünschtes Freudenfest, BWV 194, most welcome feast of joy, don't ignoar, - I completed the annual cycle of at least one Bach cantata to GA for all occasions of the liturgical year (well, only one for Easter, not three as in Bach's time ...), with the valuable help of many others, namely Thoughtfortheday and Nikkimaria, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

  • That is wonderful, Gerda--well done. Yes, Nikkimaria, i mentioned her in my presentation this morning at a writing conference as a fantastic copyeditor. Congratulations! Drmies (talk) 15:13, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/The Man in the Moone, like utopia --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is We need an adult. Thank you. v/r - TP 05:30, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Second pair of eyes on H S Ranka

Might want to take a look at this article again. Your semi-protection has expired and the same user or users is/are inserting the same disruptive material. I warned the registered user, but I don't know if it warrants protection again. MisterRandomized (talk) 06:44, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Drmies

The following post has been copied from my talk. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 18:40, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

It's not about crats giving something weight--it's about a nonsensical oppose being counted. The easiest solution is to not engage in edit warring. Drmies (talk) 14:23, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: Not sure why you showed up on my talk but it doesn't seem to be an attempt at de-escalation (which would be far too late anyway). I don't think your intention is to apologize but that would make a lot more sense because what you were doing was obviously wrong... If you want to talk about this then we can talk about your behaviour first, right here. Did you post on my talkpage in an attempt to create more drama? If not, what was your intention?
  • My intentions was to make it clear that your petty edit warring was entirely inappropriate, and your patronizing manner of talking to people is even worse. Someone who reverts multiple times, against multiple editors and administrators, is the last person who should lecture someone about manners. Now kindly step outside, take a deep breath, and explain to the evening sky what was so terribly wrong about my short note there; maybe it will understand you. Drmies (talk) 22:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Something went wrong it seems, you deleted most of my comment, including my signature, then responded to part of it. Please fix that. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 22:18, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Drmies intentionally did that. As for why, perhaps taking a glance at this essay might help explain things. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Writ Keeper, you know exactly what's going on. Nice to see you again, by the way. I'm glad I haven't been needing to call you on you very much. Drmies (talk) 22:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Quixotic Potato, any time you can explain to me in a reasonable and calm manner why you think edit warring in an RfA is correct, and why you think you can violate someone's talk page without resorting to personal insult, you are more than welcome. Maybe in a day or two? Please don't exert yourself before then. Toodles, Drmies (talk) 22:41, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Not just edit warring, but a severe case of WP:POINT. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:08, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Per your post-close comment at ANI regarding the RfA strike/unstrike

I do agree with you that it may have been blockable. I think it was maximum trolling, edit warring, disrupton, etc. I was hoping that by letting a lone dissent, with no rationale, stand for a 'crat to strike it would end it. If it had been left unstruck, it may have ended but there are a few dim bulbs that think quixotic attempts to strike/unstrike is productive. In fact, there are so many that they rise up like potatoes when the ground is tilled. Alas my attempt to end it with a lone unsupportable "Oppose" left for 'crats to strike has been stricken only to be replaced with more determined and more daft opposes. Such is the nature of Wikipedia. Here [1] is your opportunity to block for disruption as you stated at ANI. I can only conclude it's AgitProp with the intent to troll those that have stricken previous opposes (though had they left the single opposes it likely would not have happened). I was hoping to end it as T/P suggested but obviously others had different intent. --DHeyward (talk) 08:41, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

You should at least read my response on my talkpage. And Drmies is WP:INVOLVED, just like you are. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 09:20, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Hey Potato, you write better than you read. Go away. I'm not involved just because you come by here to try and piss me off time and again. You've spent almost 100 edits on this nonsensical oppose, so NOTHERE is starting to loom in the near distance; I do suggest you start using preview so you're less prominent in page histories. DHeyward, there are so many eyes on this potato that it doesn't need mine; I'll just say thanks for keeping me posted: I had no idea they took trolling to this level. So we have this RfA candidate who racks up over 100 supports and has it marred by trolling--oh yeah, you were that candidate where some fool opposed and some other fool edit-warred to make it stand. What a shame. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:57, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
The original fool took a 1 month block yesterday for colorful allusions in response to a serious question by NYB. They were lining up to block him for that. "First admin in" had to up the block in a fierce bidding war with others. You're probably unneeded. :)--DHeyward (talk) 01:21, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes; it was rather tawdry, wasn't it? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 05:08, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Are you referring to my block, DHeyward? If you're going to make unsubstantiated allegations about my motivations or have problems with admin actions I've taken, please do so to me directly rather than saddling someone else with them. Thanks! In actuality, I blocked before realizing that he had a) been warned and b) been blocked several times for personal attacks in the past. The current block length is the minimum I would have imposed. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:23, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
@The ed17: I think you misread what I wrote or I stated it poorly. I'm not sure what you are referring to. I didn't have any problem with the block and didn't pay much attention to who made it, only that there "were so many eyes on it" in response to Drmies comment/observation above. That within moments, multiple admins had responded only validated Drmies observation that he didn't need to be involved. Sorry if that was worded poorly. It certainly wasn't criticism. It's hockey playoffs and my quoted bit was reference to a "third man in" penalty related to fights in the NHL. I didn't even think to notify you because there was no issue related to you or the block at all. I don't even recall the other admin but it's not relevant. --DHeyward (talk) 22:35, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
I apologize if I misread your intent! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
There are a whole lot of editors around here who need to learn how to make one cogent observation and then walk away from an obvious train wreck. But most of them won't, because it seems they enjoy wallowing in the muck. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:48, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Cullen, that's a good observation. I have made it more and more of a habit to walk away, though in part that's because of indolence (and I need the steps). Not watching one's watchlist helps too. Have a nice day y'all, Drmies (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Drmies, I've been considering writing an essay on this topic for awhile, but what do you think about collaborating on Involvement bait? Unless you know of another essay which covers this.--v/r - TP 23:35, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
"Admin A is a moron": who did you have in mind...?! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 07:22, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
We'll have moron this later. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
  • TParis, I do not know of any other text on Wikipedia that addresses this, but I think it's a great idea. I'll have a look--thanks. I don't know if I can be of much use for the next couple of days, though. But I can come up with a few names of editors who have played that game on administrators, yes. Drmies (talk) 13:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Ankit Love for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ankit Love is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ankit Love (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. N4 (talk) 00:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Bugging man (that's me!)

Hey there wikimate, all well?

Can you please lend a hand in Regi Blinker? His ref #9 (and I hope I did a good job in all the others I added, but you'll be the judge).

Thanks in advance, keep it up! --Be Quiet AL (talk) 04:37, 25 May 2016 (UTC) ‎

  • There is a wonderful joke that involves him, as well as John de Wolf, Louis van Gaal, and Willem van Hanegem, but it takes forever. Drmies (talk) 00:38, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Cheers. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:24, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

And some taquitos...

Taquitos ¡Salud! Geoff | Who, me? 20:01, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Sung-hee

Hey Drmies, if you get a chance, could you take a look at this? I had no idea it would be so controversial and I'd appreciate your opinion. It never occurred to me that one group member shouldn't be deleted if all the others have articles. Random86 (talk) 09:45, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. If someone could close the merge discussion for Irene (singer) that would be great. I think there is consensus to merge, but don't want to close it myself. Random86 (talk) 18:53, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft advice?

Hey, Doc, I have actually attempted to write an article (who knew?). It's about a fairly recent book, and I'm pretty much entirely ignorant of the policy nuances about books, so I kinda just winged it; I looked briefly at NBOOKS, which makes me think it's probably notable, but I could use an outside opinion (especially of someone who, y'know, actually does content). I trimmed the plot summary way donw from what it initially was, but it still might be a little bit long, so let me know. It unfortunately takes up most of the article, which itself might be a sign that the book isn't notable yet (not much else to talk about, I guess), but let me know what you think. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:40, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Oh, I think you make a pretty good case for notability in the "Reception" section. 45 weeks on an NPR list and 20 weeks on a NYT list, that's impressive enough, I think (though the books I read, and write up, typically don't ever show up on such lists). See MOS:PLOT: for films we suggest between 400 and 700 and that's fine; you're at 542. It's a bit long compared to the reception, but not overly long. Plus, it's a book by a notable author. No, you're just fine, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your valuable work on Sülde Tngri and associated articles has not been forgotten. Drmies (talk) 17:08, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Yeah, there's not a tremendous amount left to talk about, but I just found a Seattle Times piece that actually names the Belgian woman who inspired the novel--Andrée de Jongh--so I bet there will be some stuff I can add about that. Thanks, as always! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:32, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Well, I added another section, and it's in mainspace now. Probably not gonna bother with DYK or anything; too lazy to think of a decent hook. Still, chalk one more up for the good guys. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 06:12, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Writ Keeper: DYK that the 2015 historical fiction novel The Nightingale borrows from the experiences of Belgian WWII resistance fighter Andrée de Jongh? I'd take care of it, but today I've been a faggot, played favorites twice, and been inept at least once--that's enough. Go nominate it; it's good. Drmies (talk) 21:47, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC) =

  • Don't let Drmies treat you like that PEarley. Your message here did serve a purpose. I was notified and dutifully filled out the survey.--v/r - TP 03:04, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps we should first have a committee to decide who should be on the board of trustees... problem is, what comes first , the chicken or the egg? Or in this case, the WMF or the volunteers who give them (and the Trustees) their raison d'être? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:44, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Sparkk tv AfD

I know you voted in the AfD for this, but I need some tech help. The 70.187.77.178 IP pulled the AfD listing out of the log here and removed the AfD notice from the page here. The latter was fixed, the former was not. Could you sort that out somehow? MSJapan (talk) 01:45, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Admin The Wordsmith's comments re: "...the ineptness of many current Arbs..." is certainly casting aspersions

Given the seriousness of this Rfc at User talk:The Wordsmith/GMORFC the ongoing threats to sanction participating editors seem to ring hollow in light of supervising admin The Wordsmith's astonishing comments regarding ArbCom members. The comment, which by any definition "casts aspersions," raises a number of questions that call for immediate answers, given the self-created deadline for comments.

The questions, which I hereby put directly to The Wordsmith, are as follows:

  • Exactly which ArbCom members are you referring to, when you describe them as "inept?"
  • In what way are these current community-elected ArbCom members, as you term them, "inept?"
  • Do you have diffs to support this sweeping claim, and can you produce them? If not, why not?
  • Since the thrust of this extraordinary Rfc seems to be to prevent "casting aspersions," in the Talk pages of GMO articles (as well as precedent-establishing proposed "locked in" multiple article wording regarding GMO safety) is this not exactly what you are doing in the past 24 hours towards members of the Arbitration Committee? Does this not disqualify you immediately from further participation?

To all concerned: I will post the above subsection on the Talk pages of current ArbCom members, per The Wordsmith's declaration, despite substantial objections, that they will be locking down the page a few hours from this posting, making further timely discussion on this page impossible. Jusdafax 11:19, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Ah, the Wordsmith...interesting... Well, they can't be talking about me since I wasn't on that ArbCom. It's all the others who are inept and don't have a clue. Oh, wait, "current arbs". That's real nice, Wordsmith, and that's all I'll say--except that if you're so clever, why don't you run next time and change everything for the better. Seriously, I'm probably the most inept member on the entire ArbCom, but I tell you what, the others are pretty sharp. Drmies (talk) 14:11, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Funny though. One admin calls me and my colleagues "inept", and another admin calls me dishonest, all in the same day. I need a job in the WMF, so I can at least get paid decently for having to eat the shit my colleagues provide me with every day. Drmies (talk) 14:13, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
my, what a shit-eating grin you have, my dear Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:50, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
"I joined the WMF and all I got was a (very small) shirt..." Muffled Pocketed 15:52, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
I thank you for my best laugh today! Yeah I could use 300 k a year as well. Jusdafax 14:18, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Usually I need family for that kind of abuse. --DHeyward (talk) 22:54, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Drmies, I'm not commenting on you specifically; aside from observing the Gamaliel case and occasional comments at ACN/ARCA I don't know you individually well enough to have a strong opinion. However, I'm sure you can agree that there is plenty of room for improvement on the Committee. As for running myself, I'd considered it but even if elected, my one voice wouldn't be able to change anything. I've watched others try and fail for a decade now. Anyway, please don't take my statement as anything against you as a person or an editor; criticism of Arbcom has been routine ever since there was an Arbcom to criticise. The WordsmithTalk to me 15:45, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
      • And I was called a fag and an extreme Muslim on the same day earlier this week. Doug Weller talk 15:48, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
        • Now that's multi-tasking Muffled Pocketed 16:18, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
        • User:The Wordsmith, there is a big difference between criticizing ArbCom and calling out "the ineptness of many current Arbs". I knew many of these editors long before I ever got into this cabal. Doug Weller is not inept; in fact, he is very ept, despite what you may hear about him on some talk pages. Kelapstick is also ept. As are Keilana and GorillaWarfare and Opabinia regalis (OK, I did not know OR beforehand, but her eptness is, as far as I am concerned, established). Courcelles is pretty ept, though he may have a temper. DGG is incredibly ept. Oh, Casliber, very ept, to an FA degree. Callanecc is so ept we made him take a break because all that eptness was getting a bit too much. I am happy to repeat that among my peers I am the least ept. There's a few things I think I can do pretty good, but when it comes to ArbComming these people leave me in the dust, and I'm not embarrassed to say so. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:12, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
          • Oh come on now, surely everyone on the committee was aware that the decision to strictly limit the Gamaliel evidence to a few days (completely unprecedented, on behalf of a colleague) then voting against a desysop remedy because the evidence didn't show a pattern of issues was going to draw an extra load of criticism compared to the usual fare you get during any other case, no? I have a lot of sympathy for finding out after getting hired that the job involves eating bees, but when you actively grow a lot more bees, getting the extra bees served too shouldn't really be a surprise. MLauba (Talk) 18:25, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
            • MLauba, "completely unprecedented", I already question that--cases can have limited scopes. But "on behalf of a colleague", that's BS. If you are anyone else wanted to bring a case arguing that Gamaliel was unfit to be an administrator, you could have. It is within our purview to define the scope based on the initial case and the evidence that was presented and our own judgment. We did not all have the same opinion, but a majority decided on a narrow scope (not to mention that three of my colleagues voted to desysop). (And is this even what The Wordsmith was thinking?) I get that a lot of people are unhappy with the outcome of the case--well, it's always that way, I think. "Be careful what you wish for" applies here; anyone could have brought a case for a desysop based on GG involvement or whatever, and they've had that opportunity for a long time. This kind of criticism sounds like trying to get Capone on tax evasion, which is fine if you actually get him on tax evasion. But if you bring him up on tax evasion you shouldn't be surprised if he doesn't get the death sentence. Still, your charge is of favoritism, which is the second time today, and I really don't know how to respond to that politely. Drmies (talk) 21:38, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
              • I think it would be best if we let this thread die. I have no intention of making further comments here. The RfC is proceeding as planned, despite one admin having been bullied and threatened with doxxing. This sideshow is benefiting nobody, and I don't want more bad blood. I'm withdrawing from this discussion, and I hope everyone has a pleasant evening. The WordsmithTalk to me 22:13, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
              • Drmies, how many cases involving administrators have had the scope of a case brought about them limited in a similar fashion in the past 5 years, exactly? I'm not charging favoritism, I'm telling you what it looks like to many people. Others have already explained at length on the PD talk page what the way this has been handled is perceived like, and it's not just the scope limitation, it's everything else added on top of it that paints that picture. And it doesn't even matter whether some arbs actually did try to stack the deck in his favour or everyone genuinely thought the limitation was the only way to prevent the case into devolving into an unmanageable circus of grudges. The perception it gave off shapes reality, and you collectively have done more damage to Gamaliel by the way this was dealt with than if you had gone all Judge Dredd on him. Because if he ever returns, this will always be thrown back into his face whenever he does something that someone objects to. I'm sorry if this looks like this is yet another bystander casting stones that he isn't really entitled to throw, but I would just hope that there is among you all an aha moment that lets you rethink how you balance the perception the proceedings give versus how you look at them from the inside. Not for your own sake - how much you will be vilified for deciding should not be a factor - but for the sake of those brought before you. But I can understand your feelings on the matter. I was a Volleyball ref for a couple of years, and once found myself named as the head ref in a game where one of the teams in my club was playing. I have a fairly good idea how shitty this case must have been to deal with. MLauba (Talk) 22:26, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
                • When I used to play rugby, it was a custom of the union to have a player from each side be a side judge. I was forced to do this once, and I tend to be a bad judge of distance, so needless to say, there was a point in the game where the other team got *very* angry about where I judged the ball to have gone off the pitch once. I did my honest best to judge it; I could've been wrong, but if so, it was an honest mistake--not that the opposing coach accepted that. It was not a great experience. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:33, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Personally, I think that by referring to you all as "inept", The Wordsmith was guilty of a BLP violation. After all, many of you are easily identifiable living people, and he provided no supporting reliable secondary sources to attest to your ineptness. As we were all reminded incessantly by the peanut gallery in the recent ArbCom case, WP:BLP applies in all namespaces, and any "violation" must be treated with maximum severity and without regard for common sense or proportionality. I would suggest, in the interest of fairness and consistency, that NE Ent file an ArbCom case against The Wordsmith, that TParis, Arkon, and DHeyward demand severe sanctions and desysopping, and that ArbCom admonish him. That would seem to follow precedent, at least. MastCell Talk 21:22, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi, MastCell. I was 3/4 of the way through posting a reply to you about how The Wordsmith does not deserve to be admonished, when it suddenly got through my thick fishy skull that you meant something else entirely. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:43, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Just pretend it's The Three Amigos] and you are the "infamous" El Guapo. That of course means "more than famous." "Inept" then becomes "more than ept" and you have a plethora of eptness. It will turn your whole day around if you just expand your vocabulary to "more than" what it was before :). --DHeyward (talk) 23:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Special

[2]Well, I think you're special but don't see Arbcom '16 as specially inept; all arbcoms produce bad solutions, because if there had been be good solution to a problem it wouldn't have been arbcom case in the first place, now would it? NE Ent 01:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Help needed to uphold NPOV

Dear Drmies, You deleted me edit and pointed out it's because of NPOV. I respect NPOV and understand it's why wiki is valuable to everyone. I'd like to add information but need help to keep it NPOV. To be specific, do you think "1990.12.26, Suning was founded in Nanjing, the very first air-conditioner retail store of Suning." is neutral or not? What if I cut off the word "very"? What if I cut off the phrase "the very first air-conditioner retail store of Suning"? Thank you. Linglin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linglin Niu (talk • contribs) 18:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Discuss on talk page, please. Adding a list of services and products is rarely considered neutral/useful in an encyclopedic article. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 21:22, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Unhelpful

Your edits are unhelpful, and I removed your comments from my talk page, and will do so again without reading them if you dare post there again. So don't waste your time, Twinklebot. I see your name, it's gone. Unread. You could have added sources yourself, since I referenced my source material in the edit history. But instead, because you obviously exercised favoritism and like to pursue personal vendettas, you chose the least helpful route.

But I have some good news for you. I will not be return to this site again, for any reason at all. I will request the removal of my talk page. I will thank you to leave it alone until such time as I can have it removed. 173.169.144.174 (talk) 19:03, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

  • As a matter of fact, it can't. I just now found that out. But you err if you think this person whose talk page we're posting on is about "good deeds." He isn't. At least not in my case. Instead of trying to do helpful things, he decided to remove helpful additions. 173.169.144.174 (talk) 20:23, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I think you were looking for Wikia, which is great for people who live in animated worlds and feel the need to share that with the world. Also, please don't "he" me automatically. As for favoritism, yeah, any parent with more than one child has struggled with that, but please don't judge me until you walked half a mile in my pink wooden shoes. Toodles, Drmies (talk) 21:21, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Modifying your closure

Hi. I have just modified a thread you recently closed at ANI User:Ihardlythinkso and user:Epipelagic being uncivil in talk:Fish and user talk:Epipelagic. Of course the closure should not be modified, but my clumsy editing could be mis-interpreted as indicating that a pattern of incivility by an editor exists. This was not my intention. I have no idea if the editor has exhibited this type of behaviour or not and I have not looked into their editing history. I hope you will let my change stand, but if you revert it, I will understand. DrChrissy (talk) 19:38, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Need help.

So an editor made a rather racist comment on an article talk page, so I posted the derogatory tag to their own talk page, but now I'm being criticized by other editors on the original talk page due to an admittedly hostile reaction I had, and the racist language remains.

What kind of recourse do I have here?142.105.159.60 (talk) 00:58, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Hmm. Well, I don't know. I had a hard time figuring out what you were talking about. I found it, but I don't think it's a racist comment. It could be wrong, or stupid, or not, I don't know--I'm no expert on the matter, but I do not consider it a racist statement. Either way, that comment does not make the editor a racist. Your recourse? Well, you can remove/redact the comment; look at WP:TPO. But don't be surprised if you get reverted immediately. Finally, you can go to ANI, of course. Experience tells me, however, that you're not likely to win the argument, if that's the argument, that the other editor used racist language and that the quote should be removed from the talk page. Sorry, Drmies (talk) 02:43, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

WTF

WTF has this project come to? After all of the events of the last 2 years, the WMF is still up to the same ol' hands to the ears routine. I'm tired of seeing the WMF put special interest groups above their core editors. It seems like they treat consistent editors like an expendable resource.</rant> Thanks, I feel better already. Carry on.--v/r - TP 02:20, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Sure thing, TParis--anytime. I had no idea we paid so well. Did you read this? That line, "Mr Blatter's compensation payments were proper, fair and in line with the heads of major professional sports leagues around the world", I hear that everywhere: here, among the administrators of universities, everywhere. But maybe you were talking about something else--maybe there's another Visual Editor or whatever coming. I sure hope not. Drmies (talk) 02:28, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
    • I don't want to draw attention to the thing I am ranting about, but blowing off some steam felt good. But, yes, your story also makes me bang my head against a wall. I don't understand why we pay PR any mind. Their job isn't to tell the truth, but to spin it as positively as possible.--v/r - TP 02:34, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

User 184.153.18.12

Hi, in February 2016 you banned user 184.153.18.12 for 3 months due to vandalism. The 3 months have expired, and they're back at it again, adding irrelevant, unsourced, and inaccurate information to the "Do the Bartman" article. I have revered 3 of their 4 recent edits, but won't revert the 4th one to avoid the 3RR. I see that this user has also changed the year of release to the singles released from the "Wish" album. It appears that this user exists solely to vandalise articles by adding inaccurate and irrelevant information. Could you please take a look at this? (or refer it on to another administrator who can help) Thank you.Nqr9 (talk) 02:52, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Revdel request

I believe this edit is worthy of removal, if you could oblige us all in wanting it eliminated. RGloucester — ☎ 15:21, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

It sounds like wot you just revdel'd... Muffled Pocketed 16:09, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks again, Zzuuzz. RGloucester — ☎ 17:56, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry to step in once again. No point keeping this stuff hanging around. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:59, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Do us a favour

Could you semi Operation Barbarossa for a couple of days? We have a well known sock currently assailing (not used that word for ages) the page. Cheers Drmies! Irondome (talk) 18:20, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

  • I see that Dennis Brown has already done so: thanks Dennis. And thanks also to whoever brought that up to GA status. As far as I'm concerned the WMF should pay money to anyone who brings one of the core articles up to GA or FA status. No money for Meghan Trainor, because that's the kind of elitist fascist I am. Drmies (talk) 23:31, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Soothing balm

Reading some of the discussions here at Articles for Creation can be depressing at times. I think that you need something content related and non-arbitrated to cheer you up.

Did you know … that this is a concept in U.S. tax law? Wikipedia hasn't known for 7 years.

  • Hopkins, Bruce R. (2015). "Association of chirches". Hopkins' Nonprofit Law Dictionary. Wiley Nonprofit Law, Finance and Management Series. John Wiley & Sons. p. 35. ISBN 9781118996089. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • Hopkins, Bruce R. (2015). The Law of Tax-Exempt Organizations (11 ed.). John Wiley & Sons. pp. 319–320. ISBN 9781118874226. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • "Senate Report 107–211" (PDF). Committee Reports 107th Congress (2001–2002). United States Government Publishing Office: 51–52. 2002-06-16. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Uncle G (talk) 10:53, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

  • My dear uncle: I was looking at this in the "view changes" mode. It's like the Matrix: I recognized it was you after your second sentence. I may need to unplug--but thanks for the suggestions! Drmies (talk) 13:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I suppose next time I should look at the rest of the message; you did the searching already. Ah well, at least we'll always have Hopkins in common. Drmies (talk) 13:42, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Drmies, I would like to say that you are not inept despite what others say. In fact, I find that you are very good. 108.162.157.141 (talk) 21:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Drmies dear, I do wish that people would use more meaningful section headers on this page, so that one might have an idea what the issue of the day might be, before coming here in haste lest there be a crisis. MPS1992 (talk) 21:23, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

One of my page watchers has escaped. There were all present at morning roll call but now one is missing. I suspect a tunnel was used. Red Cross parcels have been withheld from the remainder for a fortnight. Surrounding areas are being searched.

I will keep you up to date. Irondome (talk) 22:31, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I look forward to film at 11. BMK (talk) 23:45, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Loosely based on Stalag 17. Irondome (talk) 23:55, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Or, perhaps, Chicken Run? Geoff | Who, me? 17:40, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Issue of the moment: Crusty old recalcitrant editor says "Hello" to Bigwig Drmies - Editor, Admin, Arbitrator, Adjudicator of Truth, Justice and the American Way

Hello Drmies. BMK (talk) 22:02, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

That's more like it. Clarity. Clarity is good. Irondome (talk) 22:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Now that's what I call a crisis. A proper crisis! MPS1992 (talk) 22:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Help notirious Byond My Ken editor reverted my edit ?
You mean notorious, surely?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Drmies is pretty gangsta, so more likely: The Notorious B.I.G.. My spell check actually accepted "gangsta"! --Tryptofish (talk) 23:30, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Although reliable sources report that Drmies could use a big wig, there is no known evidence of his donning one. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:44, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the microagression Cullen. Drmies (talk) 13:04, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
I am quite worried about microaggression. Some of my previous edits have been described as "similar to" microaggression. Is microaggression common on Wikipedia? MPS1992 (talk) 20:35, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Microagression.Irondome (talk) 20:40, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Was that a microaggression? OMG! MPS1992 (talk) 21:51, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Cullen, who still waves his freak flag all over the Golden State, likes to remind me of the fact that my headhairy days are long gone. It's really a macroagression. Drmies (talk) 00:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Aggression? If you say so, boss. Truth be told, my affection for you is as large as it can possibly be for two old guys who have interacted online as encyclopedia editors for half a dozen years or so, and who once shot the breeze for a while face to face in Boston. If it is any consolation to you, my dad had "thinning hair" and openly envied my mop. Not administratorship, 'cause I ain't one, but my hair. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:40, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hi Drmies, you recently blocked User:Jaypeeboyadizas22 after I reported him to ANI. However, it seems he is still going as User:121.1.41.56, who has a significant editing overlap (Roman Jacinto and Philippine articles), and continues to remove the AfD template at Swinging the Kundiman. (Apologies if this isn't the right place to report this; do let me know if there is a more appropriate venue) Opencooper (talk) 06:30, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Haha, yes, where should this be reported? AIV maybe. I'll have a look--after morning workout and breakfast. I need to be muscled and well-fed before I take on evildoers. Drmies (talk) 13:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
  • You work out? Seriously? Well fed I understand. I need to be well fed even when I grapple with gooddoers and neither-good-nor-evil-doers, but the only muscles I have are in my brain, and they don't function as well as they used to. I do try, though, to do 10 reps of thumb twiddling at least once a day.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:31, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Gotta exercise the arm muscles too... Muffled Pocketed 13:37, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Haha thanks. The workouts actually look pretty fun, hope they went well. Opencooper (talk) 02:56, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, as you are an oversight, can you please delete https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=next&oldid=724096171 ? It is a personal attack and casting aspersions. Thanks. OldTraffordLover (talk) 03:43, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Pistols at dawn is always fun. Softlavender (talk) 04:23, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Pissheads at dawn have a bumbling charm I find. Irondome (talk) 04:36, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
@OldTraffordLover: "you are an oversight" might be misconstrued by some. "You are an oversighter" may work better. Also, please see above for excellent examples of section titles better describing their contents. Just to mention, I have no opinion on the merits of Mancunian football teams -- I only happen to live here. But I am sure Old Trafford is very nice. MPS1992 (talk) 19:40, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Your edits on List of new wave of British heavy metal bands

I found out that you decided to edit a list that I created, deleting content without any previous discussion. I am frankly annoyed by your behaviour and by your use of Wikipedia as a private social club. From a discussion above, it appears that a few editors decided that the List of new wave of British heavy metal bands is somewhat wrong, but you didn't have the decency of informing the main editor and creator about your concerns and to discuss your blunt modifications. That's what talk pages were made for. Good-bye to etiquette!

Like any other list, this one has a purpose, which is to put some order in a matter often discussed and argued about by music critics and fans. It was designed as a companion to the article about the new wave of British heavy metal, which was recently upgraded to FA status. It's true that most of the bands listed don't have an article, but this is not an index of articles on Wikipedia. Other lists on WP simply provide information in a listed format, like lists of TV series episodes or of band members. To blindly delete the content, would undermine the completeness of information the article wants to communicate. I found nowhere in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists the words "must include ONLY links to articles", so I don't think to be in violation of anything on that side. All of the listed bands have at least a reliable source (the Macmillan book) attached to their name. We can argue about notability, but not about the wrong use of sources, unless you don't think the published books cited as sources are all crap. But that would be another issue that we, as editors on WP, cannot face lightheartedly.

By the way, Chemical Ace is described by Macmillan as a band on the thin line between prog and hard rock. It was forcibly inserted in the NWOBHM, just as many other bands whose music genres bordered metal, but by modern standards would be classified in another way. Lewismaster (talk) 20:17, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

  • The only one who seems to treat anything as a private club is you, writing down a list explicitly copied from one single source, with complete disregard to convention. As for decency--don't come barging in here insulting me and then maybe expecting me to play nice and apologetic with you. How about this: I am sorry if your feelings got hurt by the regular editing process in this collaborative environment. Drmies (talk) 22:14, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Softlavender, I believe this is all your fault. Blackmetalbaz, perhaps you can help out a fellow metalhead. Drmies (talk) 22:17, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
  • (from a webpage created in 2007) "101 rules of NWOBHM (New Wave of British Heavy Metal) 1. The more obscure the better [...] 6. When someone asks you what NWOBHM stands for, tell them something like "the best genre of music, ever." Make sure they still don't understand what it means." I've never heard of it, and I know someone who plays in a post-techno grunge Krautpop band just returned from a tour of Kosovo. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:31, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
That's right, blame the messenger. Softlavender (talk) 06:37, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Green Flash Brewing Company

Hello good Dr, it's 99, dropping an article that you edited briefly in 2013. It's a press release tended by a few COI accounts. I've done some modest trimming, but wanted to give you a shot at this, and perhaps have a look at its main contributor. Hope you're well and enjoying a fine springtime, and a languorous summer break. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:6D65:E16:58E2:F07C (talk) 20:39, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

99, I'll work on it too. I started a "History" section in the article. I wonder if it needs such a complete listing of all the beers. Geoff | Who, me? 22:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you both. Very best, 2601:188:1:AEA0:6D65:E16:58E2:F07C (talk) 23:58, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Geoff, if you look at my contributions on the Dutch wiki, you'll see a seasoned editor there reverting all my edits on this beer company's article--every individual beer there had an article, with nothing more than a Beeradvocate link, if that. The answer is, in my opinion, no: we don't do listings. We should clean up Brasserie d'Achouffe as well--aargh, Duvel bought that one as well! I also removed the list of awards. We need to get this together with a guideline. There are so many of these awards, for all the different kinds of beer, all throughout the year and all over the year--nothing means anything anymore. They need to go. 99, cheers: I'm having a very affordable and good American tripel: Victory Golden Monkey, a good deal at six for $12.99. I wish they paid me to say that. Drmies (talk) 00:51, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Way more discerning, or esoteric, than I am. I was just happy to find a single remaining bottle of Leinenkugel Summer Shandy in the back of the fridge tonight. 2601:188:1:AEA0:6D65:E16:58E2:F07C (talk) 01:15, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
And feeling hoppy, I broke out one of my last examples of Kalona (Iowa) Brewing Company's Sucha Mucha IPA last night. Not much distribution outside Iowa, but nice if you're in the area of U of I and in an IPA frame of mind. (I didn't get anything for this ad placement, either. It's just the thing to do around here where "no one knows your name.") Geoff | Who, me? 14:53, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
This user has publicly declared that they have a conflict of interest regarding the Wikipedia article Error: No article specified.
Muffled Pocketed 14:59, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Facepalm, or, Oy vey

This article – List of new wave of British heavy metal bands – violates MOS:LISTS to the max. Most every band listed has no Wikipedia article. Can someone figure out what to do with it or how to TNT it? Softlavender (talk) 07:48, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wow.. Have you checked if they have articles which just haven't been wikilinked? For example, Toad the Wet Sprocket (ew) was unlinked, but Toad the Wet Sprocket does exist -- samtar talk or stalk 07:52, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
No, that's not my yob, as the Mexicans say. Perhaps the solution is to tell the article creator (it was created only 10 months ago, from a single source) that that is his yob, and that he needs to either remove or link each of the listings, and that each listing must be an actual Wikipedia article. That would save the headache of an AfD or other TNT effort. Softlavender (talk) 09:28, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Comin' over here, takin' our yobs -- samtar talk or stalk 09:32, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
As the Mexicans say??? Wow... Muffled Pocketed 09:55, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Yet another entry that needs to bite the dust. Apparently all of the non-blue-linked items have no wiki articles. We could just make a clean sweep, or instruct the article creator to do so, or AfD the article. Softlavender (talk) 11:06, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Just a minor microaggression. That reminds me of the time I flew Mexicana and couldn't get a moment's rest. Apparently the flight attendant made an announcement that if someone is sick, they can get an air sickness bag from the seat pocket in front of Jew. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:44, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Apparently you guys are not familiar with Freddie Prinze or Chico and the Man. If you'd like a little education in Spanish, may I recommend ¿Que Hora Es?: Part 1, Part 2. Softlavender (talk) 06:35, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

(watching, surprised:) So far I understood that while some people would argue that navboxes may only contain items that can be navigated to, items with articles that is, lists can have red links or items without any hope. See Max Reger works: many compositions that will never get an article. (see also move request, I am the only one who wants a short title for a new thing). List of composers by name has only people with an article (in any language), but this restriction is only because it would otherwise be endless. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:26, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

You are confusing an article on the complete works of an extremely notable (and dead) composer with a List article, such as the second article you mentioned. List articles are subject to spam and are therefore restricted to Wikipedia articles only. Softlavender (talk) 07:36, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Gerda, your Max Reger is an eminently notable composer, and one can assume that his compositions are therefore notable also. With lists like the one we're talking about, no such assumption can be made about the individual entry--and thus the list can be just as endless as List of composers by name. The spam argument doesn't necessarily apply to all such articles, but it does for lists of business, hospitals, schools, vacuum cleaners, etc. Drmies (talk) 16:05, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Excrement

Drmies can you block this [3] piece of shit? Irondome (talk) 01:18, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Sure! I block Nazis for free. I was watching the news, thinking how long it would be before we have an article on this. Meanwhile, recent suicide bombings in Turkey and Iraq do not get this instant coverage--on Wikipedia, and on three networks at the same time. Drmies (talk) 01:44, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • One place Turkey and Iraq were both mentioned, and highlighted in pink and red, was in a leaflet that I just received telling me to vote for the UK to leave the European Union. This is strange because neither have much to do with it. Turkey is a prospective EU member -- but not going to happen while Erdogan is in charge I think -- but Iraq is mostly a place for EU states' military intervention and arms sales, not potential membership. MPS1992 (talk) 17:49, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Enoch was right. I 'ad that Dalai Lama in the back of the cab last week..Irondome (talk) 22:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Ahem. I think you'll find that UK llamas are covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 of 22 December 2004 on the protection of animals during transport and related operations and amending Directives 64/432/EEC and 93/119/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1255/97. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
See what I mean? They won't even let you live. I blame that Uber an'all, I mean its ruining the trade. Irondome (talk) 22:34, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Martinevans - I'm trying hard to keep WP up-to-date on animal welfare legislation and that is one I think I have missed. If you had a Push-me-pull-you llama, how would you know how to transport it head first and what would the EU do about it if you got it wrong? Bring on the next 2 weeks! DrChrissy (talk) 22:44, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I gave the descriptions better citations. In the section regarding the John Oliver segment, I replaced Huffington Post, Daily Beast, and Washington Post with New York Times, Times Magazine, and Wall Street Journal. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 11:05, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Sounds like the Post has gone downhll then! Muffled Pocketed 11:11, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

The Who

A contribution to rock 'n' roll of Pete Townshend as a member of The Who is a contribution to rock 'n' roll of The Who. By your logic, no rock bands have contributed anything to rock 'n' roll, only individuals have. 72.43.153.30 (talk) 15:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Whooooo are you? Whoo-whoo! Whoo whoo! Muffled Pocketed 15:54, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Perhaps it is Tommy DrChrissy (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Didn't stop them from edit-warring it back in *sigh* [4] Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:56, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Anyway, Anyhow, Anywhere... Muffled Pocketed 14:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jazz Erotica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill Holman. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry, Doc Mice, I've fixed your embarrassing faux pas. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:21, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Only softcore sax though! Muffled Pocketed 11:24, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Martin. Which reminds me: one of my friends has this album ($250 on Ebay), which is why I wrote it up. On the back someone wrote "Bill Holman Octet"--clearly someone with an ax(e) to grind. Drmies (talk) 14:31, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Eight seems a bit many, but that's swing for you, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:41, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Who knew! Martinevans123 (talk) 15:20, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
I wonder if the folks who hired Vince Guaraldi to score A Charlie Brown Christmas knew he had played on this? Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:18, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

The only documentation that I could find for Voodoo Trombone Quartet (AfD discussion) said that it wasn't a quartet. Uncle G (talk) 08:46, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Wow Doc, you is so darn hottttt! "tsssss"!! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:38, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Jacomijne Costers

On 11 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jacomijne Costers, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Augustinian nun Jacomijne Costers survived the plague in 1489 and wrote Visioen en exempel, recounting her vision of being led through hell and purgatory? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jacomijne Costers. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jacomijne Costers), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Tense of "survived by"

Hi Doc

Happy Summer. This stupid edit skirmish could use the input of a professional writer such as yourself. My survey of precedent sources (which is not exhaustive) indicates that (as suggested in the forum page that the antagonist linked to in the edit summary) "is" is used when the article is current reporting, and "was" is used when it's historical--and that the distinction of whether the survivors continue to survive is not relevant to the tense of the verb. Rather, it simply indicates whether the reporting is contemporaneous—NOTNEWS— or retrospective / for posterity (see my summary on talk page). Do you have a view? Wasn't able to find anything in Chicago Style (but I'm not a subscriber so can't be definitive).

Thoughts?

Thanks Bongomatic 08:19, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Since Wikipedia is neither a newspaper nor an obituary repository, "is [or was] survived by" has no place in it. If the relatives are to be mentioned, the mention should be in another paragraph: a paragraph about his family (and since they are non-notable, it is immaterial whether any of them are alive or will be whenever the article may be read). If the information is lengthy enough, it can be in a separate "Personal Life" section. If the information is not even lengthy or notable enough to mention (or if the subject and/or article itself is not notable enough or lengthy enough for such information), just omit the part about the relatives completely. Softlavender (talk) 08:57, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Well, Softlavender has a point, but in some cases (or many cases, I don't know) it may be too fine a point. I don't mind it here. The business of tense--I could look it up, but hey, I just don't know. The FA and GA writers will know--folks like Casliber and Ritchie333. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Bongo is right that "is" should be used when the surviving relatives are still living, or "was" if they are all deceased, but Softlavender is also right that it's generally something we should not need to use. A well-written and comprehensive biography will have family details and cause of death in some detail, making a simple "survived by" clause that joins the two things together unnecessary. I've updated the article to make this argument superfluous. PS: It's nice to be called an "FA" writer despite having a 100% failure rate at FAC (the last attempt, The Beatles (album) didn't make it out of PR before I got bored) :-) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:16, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually @Ritchie333:, I was arguing the opposite. I was suggesting that "was" is to be used when an article written retrospectively and for posterity, without any concern whatsoever as to the status of the survivors at the time of writing. An encyclopedia article about someone who died a year ago should read the same (other than new facts) as about someone who died fifty years ago. It's only news articles that are explicitly contemporaneous with the death of the subject (I argue) that should use "is". Bongomatic 05:27, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm with Softlavender here. The phrase invariable indicate a copy from an obit or an attempt to write like an obit., and that's why we have the fundamental policy NOT OBITUARY. Normally the people include at least the spouse and children & parents is still living, and our practice is to list them under personal life if the person is more than borderline notable. If they include further relatives, normally they are not relevant to the article at all, unless the person is very famous. (Of course there are exceptions--two brothers who form a company) . I cannot immediately think of any example where the terms would be appropriately used. DGG ( talk ) 02:00, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Protection on Woody Paige

Back in August 2015, you indefinitely fully protected Woody Paige because of the severe sock puppetry by Jaredgk2008. There was an SPI open yesterday involving him vandalizing Hank Goldberg. I wondered if the protection on Hank Goldberg could be increased from semi protection to 30/500 protection because the protection policy for 30/500 protection says:

Extended confirmed protection may only be applied where authorized by the arbitration committee or in response to persistent sockpuppetry or continued use of new, disruptive accounts where other methods (such as semi protection) have not controlled the disruption.

JamesBWatson agreed with me and raised protection on Hank Goldberg from semi to 30/500. Do you want to try lowering protection on Woody Paige from full to 30/500 because of what the protection policy says? —MRD2014 T C 14:59, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Hahahaha. I asked you because you protected it. —MRD2014 T C 01:01, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you should tell MRD2014 to ask me, Drmies, since you protected the article, and I had nothing to do with it. I don't see the fact that I did something similar to a completely different article as somehow making me involved. However, since you have referred MRD2014 to me, I've looked at the history of the article. It is clear that semi-protection and block-a-mole totally failed to deal with the problem, and as far as I can see full protection and 30/500 protection are the only other options. Since 30/500 protection stands to cause less collateral damage, it seems to me that we ought to try that, and return to full protection only if it doesn't work. I'll go ahead and change the protection.
On a different issue, why do you assume that Jared is heterosexual? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:00, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
JamesBWatson, you are correct: that is just an assumption and the less said about this person, the better. Listen, I didn't ask/ping you because of involvement--I asked you because of your expertise. I've been feeling a bit out of touch; in part it's ArbCom, maybe, but another part is this summer, with a different schedule and all that. I feel like my Wikipedia editing is more disjointed than it's ever been, so I'm finding myself relying more and more on others. Thanks, and take care, Drmies (talk) 16:34, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Your Wikipedia editing is excellent, as always. The only problem is that you are distracted by your wonderful children, appealing swimming pools, and the elegant Dutch metrosexual jackets that you fancy. Otherwise, all is well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:44, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Our father in heaven...

...and our friend on Talk:Knanaya is back (Psthomas, in case you've forgotten). The article protection expired this past week (I've now reset it for another year), rangeblocks are out of the question so it'll be one long time sink. —SpacemanSpiff 02:44, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Yeah. Ignore them on the talk page--RBI. Cuchullain, if you want to try and guide this editor along, as your talk page comment suggested, you have my blessing. If so, feel free to roll back my rollback. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:22, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Drmies. I'm not going to un-rollback their comments. I think right now our best bet is not to engage with them until/unless they give an indication they'll participate in a non-disruptive manner. Their last comments have just been more of the same.--Cúchullain t/c 03:40, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Muur van Mussert

Hello! Your submission of Muur van Mussert at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Maile (talk) 15:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Need your help with image source information at Commons. — Maile (talk) 15:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

The British Screen Advisory Council

Hello, Dr. Could you keep half on eye on this? For years it's been tended by a paid contributor; this morning I removed long lists of council members, as well as promotional content with copyright issues. In short, the article has been functioning as a public relations page for the council. By the way, I enjoyed the above discussion, wherein there was some confusion as to whether you live in Alabama or Albania. As if there's a difference. Cheers from avatar of 99, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 12:35, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

  • The article needs a hatnote- "Not to be confused with the British Sub Aqua Club". The council provides "thought leadership" to HM Government- they must think they're the bleedin' Illuminati. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 16:48, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

AfD discussion

Hey Dermies, SteveMcQueen36 made some pretty strong accusations over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blackjack (cannabis) regarding your nom. Just to let you know. -- LuK3 (Talk) 19:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

See WP:STONED.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
It's a vehement rant over there, but the fact is there aren't sources because cannabis has been illegal in the United States since the 1930s. Among the blogs and grower sites, you can find the occasional reference for the proposition that claims about strains are meaningless. Now Doc, coming from a civilized country that houses Amsterdam, maybe there are some Dutch reliable sources for double-blind research? <heh - if they imbibed enough, it would be double-blind>. But there's no call for insults! Geoff | Who, me? 20:02, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
That's not quite right. Marijuana is illegal under U.S. federal law, but various states permit its use to various degrees and with limitations. But even if it were illegal, that wouldn't preclude there being sources for assertions. I don't even see a relationship between reliable sources and the legality of a substance. Unless of course you mean something else by the word "sources". --Bbb23 (talk) 21:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23, I meant that the U.S. federal status has hindered research, limiting (or eliminating for now) creation of reliable sources such as double-blind scientific studies, etc. The L A Weekly article I cited above refers to a preliminary study on the efficacy of one specific strain. That suggests that time will give us sources, but nothing emerges yet. The conflict of laws between the state statutes permitting use and the still extant federal ban means that banking is a problem for purveyors, not to mention DEA raids on state-approved (or tolerated) grows and dispensaries. Geoff | Who, me? 21:43, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Bbb, my only source is someone who's lucky enough to have a job where they don't get tested--but that stuff they smoke here, and they way they smoke it, it's too heavy for my delicate frame. But then, apparently I belong to the anti-marijuana lobby, quite a change from my file in high school, which placed me in my hometown's drug scene. Drmies (talk) 21:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Speaking of lobbies, when I was in college, I was in a dormitory for a while. The officials who monitored our necessarily rambunctious college behavior were convinced that everyone was on drugs all the time. So, one afternoon, some friends and I smoked tea (real tea) in the lobby, which tends to smell like marijuana but of course is not illegal. The dorm officials pounced on us, at which point we showed them the substance we were smoking and genteelly offered them a nice drag of piping hot tea. Geoff, double-blind studies aren't necesary to demonstrate the notability of a substance. But even if they were, if an article at Wikipedia can't be backed up by reliable sources, it gets deleted. Too bad if they're "hard to find". Over and far out.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:12, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Speaking of lobbies?? Time for a night cap, anyone? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Hadith of najd

Why do you keep reinserting material from http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?55352-The-Hadith-of-Najd. The wiki article was created in 2006 whereas the blog that it is copying from was created in 2005. Clearly the wiki article is copying the blog. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.198.141 (talk) 21:09, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Clearly...well, let me not finish the sentence. You've been trying this foolishness for long enough now; I've semi-protected the article. Drmies (talk) 21:47, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Are you blind as well as stupid? If you had bothered to go to the link I provided you would have seen that the blog is from 2005 and the article is from 2006. You foolish prick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.251.100 (talk) 14:41, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alijt Bake, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Imitatio Christi. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

NPP / AfC

Hi. Just a reminder that in just over a week at Wikimania there's going to be a cross-Wiki discussion about the systems of control of new pages. This is a round-table rather than a presentation or a lecture. On the agenda are reforms to the new article reviewing systems and ways to help new users better understand our content policies. If you are going to Italy and would like to take part, please check out the conference schedule, and I look forward to seeing you there. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Green Flash again

Hi, 99. Looks like User:Carrite|Carrite put the awards list back in. It's not unusual for craft brewery articles to list awards, viz.: Gordon Biersch, Ballast Point and Stone, if we're looking at other California brewers of that ilk. Probably notable, no? But needs sourcing. Geoff | Who, me? 15:06, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps you're right, though I was inclined to buy Drmies' interpretation. At any rate, I'm guessing that all awards are not equal, and that adding them in prose format looks a lot less promotional than list, which ends up taking most of the article space. And yes to sourcing--I was surprised that an experienced editor restored without addressing that. Thanks, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Without looking at this case, but speaking in generalities as someone who works a lot with beer articles, here is my take: Awards from the two major national/international beer festivals, namely Great American Beer Festival and the World Beer Cup, are considered notable and are commonly listed in articles - usually in prose format. Most other beer festivals and awards are not listed unless there was something unusual or notable about the particular award. --MelanieN (talk) 15:37, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, and after looking at it I deleted everything but the GABF and World Beer Cup. Things like state fairs and regional competitions (even if they are "international") are not generally listed. The items are still unsourced, but sourcing from the festivals themselves should be easy to find. --MelanieN (talk) 15:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Found the references for the remaining awards and added to the article. Much better now. Geoff | Who, me? 16:36, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks all. MelanieN, I appreciate it. Does the beer project have any guidelines? Can you add this? I'll support. Drmies (talk) 16:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I could not find any guideline, so I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer. --MelanieN (talk) 17:24, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Nice work--thank you. I'd propose a high bar (no pun intended) that may accord with our general guidelines--an award is worth listing if its bestowal has earned mention from reliable sources. Oh my, I can hear the hissing already. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 19:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Hiss, hiss--you mean a mention in the local paper that beer X won award Y? :) Drmies (talk) 22:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Talk page removal?

Hi Drmies, a recent IP you blocked may need their talk page access revoked for a little while - what do you think? -- samtar talk or stalk 15:26, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)"Have a good news"!! :) Muffled Pocketed 15:31, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)..It is done, Master...2 wishes left ;). Lectonar (talk) 16:17, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I think this was the right thing to do. Lectonar, I'm quickly running out of wishes. How do I get a new set if these are done? Drmies (talk) 17:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Don't you usually have to rub one out to get three more wishes? Sir Joseph (talk) 17:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Sir Joseph...that only works with the older generation. Wikijinn ho!. Lectonar (talk) 19:02, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Lectonar, I've been playing Achtung Baby in the car; that always makes me think of Germany. I salute you and your fellow German speakers. I understand that some Germans are interested in a certain sport that's being played as we speak, and I wish you the best in it. Personally, I have no interest in that sport, of course. Take care, Drmies (talk) 17:46, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
  • You'll find it funny....I am absolutely not interested in the sport you might be talking about :), as I used to play Rugby. I was rather downtrodden that Belgium lost last night against Germany's nemesis, though, as I was all made up with Belgian colours and had the Vuvuzela ready. Anyway, Achtung Baby is of course wonderful. If you want some real high class German Music, try Spliff (band), especially a song called Déjà vu; it's almost Dada if you can make non-sense of the text. Lectonar (talk) 18:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Checkuser request

Please do a checkuser check on user:Vegasceltics55 and user:Lakerlover6969 for they were both vandalizing DodgeBall: A True Underdog Story at the same time. Please block the IP address where they originate from. 2602:306:3357:BA0:4021:617C:E657:19B8 (talk) 02:25, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

A concern

I noticed the article, Battle of Marj Dabiq, has massive sections plagiarized from The Mameluke; Or, Slave Dynasty of Egypt, 1260–1517, A. D., William Muir, 1896 [5]. I tagged the article and posted my concern on the talk page. User:Ibadibam, removes said tag, stating, "plagiarized source is public domain..". I was unaware that a source in "public domain" is allowed to be plagiarized.

Would you, or anyone else, be able to give some insight into this? --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:52, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Well, see Wikipedia:Plagiarism. Plagiarism is not the same as copyright violation, of course; it's about proper attribution. Articles with much copied text are typically poor articles and need to be rewritten. Nothing is allowed to be plagiarized, but material in the free domain can be used if properly cited. That's not much of an answer, maybe, but that's what it is. If you pinpoint the passages, maybe there's more I can say but, and I admit I'm ignorant here, I don't understand how we have entire articles copied from the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica. Drmies (talk) 02:33, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Because people wanted to grow the encyclopaedia quickly way back when. Those 1911 things have come back to bite us - they are an absolute nightmare, especially if other stuff has been added since. - Sitush (talk) 05:20, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Spill on aisle 3

Looks like you're around. Could you grab your mop and tidy up this mess? I've offered a NAC but maybe that's not the best idea in such a sprawling case. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 02:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Both of those guys are capable of so much better, but I have this sinking feeling that things may not end well for either of them. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 03:57, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I'm surprised that DrCrissy hasn't been topic banned from everything yet, and that jps hasn't been blocked indefinitely yet. I kinda like both of them; they know stuff, and they certainly add that little je ne sais quoi. Drmies (talk) 12:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
...the cabaret...? Muffled Pocketed

No good deed, etc

'Don't let the door hit you on the way out,' as they say: [6]. 2601:188:1:AEA0:F9CF:CD1C:4CEC:AC6F (talk) 03:09, 15 June 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk)

Can someone hide a copyvio please

This edit introduces a massive copyright violation to the Asansol article. I deleted the block of text a few minutes ago but it probably needs to be hidden also. Can you or one of your watchers oblige please? - Sitush (talk) 05:18, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

That's about 400 revisions to delete for that one edit. Are there more copyvios or is that the only one? I see a lot more edits from that IP and possibly refreshed versions of that IP. —SpacemanSpiff 06:27, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
I suspect there are/were others but I trimmed the thing so drastically that they'll likely not be there now. We've had repeated problems with copy/pastes at that article over a prolonged period but I'm afraid I took my eye off the ball. - Sitush (talk) 07:57, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
eg: the stuff in the education section and the places of interest both may have included copy/pastes. - Sitush (talk) 07:58, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Tricky. It's likely that the IP is associated with various places there (this is a copyvio too, I think, in an associated article). In cases like this, where there are so many things to delete but we can't delete the entire article, I usually call on Moonriddengirl, who has good judgment and the backing of legal experts and a team of enthusiastic go-getters. Drmies (talk) 15:55, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
FYI, Moonriddengirl last edited on May 9. EdChem (talk) 15:58, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
The other go-to person is Diannaa but she's headed off to vacation. I usually just handle the simple stuff and I'm not really sure if hiding 400 revisions for this edit is worth it. Maybe one of them will opine when they get back. I'll add Asansol to my watchlist now and will protect long-term if this resumes. —SpacemanSpiff 16:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
This may be the link to a named account. —SpacemanSpiff 16:07, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that is very likely (I checked the intersection tool). Can you leave them a note? And a copyvio warning? (They were already warned about an image in 2012...) On a side note, Spiffy, it's so nice to see you active. Wikipedia should put you on payroll. Wait, I'll ping Jimbo Wales--he'll get right on it. Drmies (talk) 16:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
I've taken care of that one but Asansol probably needs a better look-in. My eyes hurt from all the copyvios we've been finding after they've been in articles for years. For those interested, Arjuna and Karna have enough to keep one occupied for a few days. —SpacemanSpiff 16:18, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Probably not worth it, IMO. Policy doesn't actually require that copyvios be revdeleted; it's only necessary if the copyvios are getting constantly reverted to. As long as the copyvios are out of the current version of the article, that's enough. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone for their input above. I'll leave it in the capable hands of the (non-existent) admin cabal. - Sitush (talk) 19:56, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Muur van Mussert

On 16 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Muur van Mussert, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Muur van Mussert, an overgrown brick wall, is all that remains of the Nazi-inspired rally grounds planned by the Dutch National Socialist Movement? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Muur van Mussert. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Muur van Mussert), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:01, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 17

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 17, April-May 2016
by The Interior, Ocaasi, UY Scuti, Sadads, and Nikkimaria

  • New donations this month - a German-language legal resource
  • Wikipedia referals to academic citations - news from CrossRef and WikiCite2016
  • New library stats, WikiCon news, a bot to reveal Open Access versions of citations, and more!

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Recent edits

Is there a reason you've been targeting articles that I've been involved with editing? I thought it was a coincidence, but I saw that you corrected Margaret, and I was curious. I feel as though you could've just placed a [citation needed] where it would've been necessary instead of deleting entire chunks of text, as well. In addition, most of those articles are still a work in progress. I don't understand the scrutinization. — snoɯʎuoɥʇuɐ 03:01, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

  • You may feel however you like, Anthonymous, but you can't build encyclopedic articles on Facebook and Kickstarter. You seem to have a serious problem with WP:RS, and if those articles, where sometimes you made dozens, even hundreds of edits, are still a work in progress, then it's really time for you to figure out what are and what are not reliable sources, and what is and what is not encyclopedic information--and what is nothing but fan trivia. BTW, why is this here? Why do you remove all commentary from your own talk page, but you post it on someone else's? We could have had this conversation yesterday already, but you chose to continue this addition of trivia sourced to unacceptable things. Drmies (talk) 11:58, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Pitching in

My kind fellow user, if you can, can you please translate the reference #7 in Oleguer Presas's article? Again, Google T was of no use, and I was not going to take any chances, WP deserves better.

Tomorrow, GO ICELAND (yes, you heard me correctly, I-C-E-L-A-N-D!), you keep it up --Be Quiet AL (talk) 18:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Lost in translation: if you're not watching, you're not missing anything, 22 guys running after a football and people (trying to) kill(ing) each other over a goddamn sport!! About the translation bit: please don't say (not to me at least) "all the best", I don't care what happens to Portugal, matter of fact I hope they LOSE all the games, time to have that patriotic fervour (i.e. numbskullness) toned down a notch. --Be Quiet AL (talk) 22:59, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Do you know of any other Dutch-speaking users, so that I may ask them please? --Be Quiet AL (talk) 12:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I know man, please bear with this old fool (or is it the opposite, as in "don't fool this old bear"). Just finished extensively improving Mr. Presas (Ajax man!)' article, very very interesting (if not for lending his support to that ETA terrorist, I'd say "my kind of guy" without flinching one second). Of course, footballers like the princess mentioned above by you and the tattoos and the tweets and the whatnots are much more "valuable", what's a man to do? --Be Quiet AL (talk) 16:21, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Decent one, was fortunate to have his heyday playing alongside this chap. People often say "oh he renounced the Spanish football team because he was crap", but that's just - pardon the redundancy - crap! --Be Quiet AL (talk) 18:11, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

You're from Norway, right?

Can you figure out if this article – Iselilja (given name) – should exist or not? A name that less than 20 Norwegians sport [7]? The name is actually the cryptic title, Iselilja, of a 2004 album by the band Gåte. My thinking is the article should possibly be merged into that (or possibly outright deleted). Softlavender (talk) 05:18, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Err I always thought Netherlands? Only 600 miles apart... Leerdammer rather than Lutefisk :) but you're probably correct in casting a doubtful eye on it- can the name really have been 'made up' a year ago, and yet have no meaning?!Muffled Pocketed 08:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
How silly of me to forget. Drmies is Danish, of course. Softlavender (talk) 08:52, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure Drmies is from Öland, he's written articles about Öländska lighthouses and stuff. Or Iceland — did anybody see Rams? Stark landscapes, silent men, made me think of Drmies. I've prodded Iselilja (given name). Bishonen | talk 11:17, 12 June 2016 (UTC).
They all look alike, Bish. Or perhaps I should say, you all look alike. Softlavender (talk) 11:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Albanian? Who knew? Yes, then, I guess so. Softlavender (talk) 02:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
No, no, no, Alabamian. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 03:06, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Please all stop discussing Doktoro mi estas' cover identity. Probe too deeply, and xyr Chameleon Arch will shut down and xyr memory will be restored. See /Archive 43#What's in a name?. Uncle G (talk) 08:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Association of churches

On 15 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Association of churches, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that under US tax law, an association of churches can have churches of different denominations and still be tax-exempt? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Association of churches. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Association of churches), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Someone erroneously arranged for me to get the blame for this, too. Clearly, I have zero edits to the article. I only made an AFC nomination. Uncle G (talk) 09:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Jacob Wohl deletion

Hey there,

This is my first time 'talk'ing about a person's wiki page but figure I would add my 2 cents. The kid is a predicate fraud, with zero real experience, and a true danger to potential investors who do not do thorough due diligence. The kid at 17 claimed to have 10 years trading experience and 5 years coding experience. Does he think everyone is stupid? It's insulting. As an individual working in the asset management and financial services industry, I can confidently say he has zero clue what he is doing.

I know that to be successful in the hedge fund world / trading arena, like any other skilled trade or profession, you get what you put in. When I first heard of a "teen prodigy", I was incredibly skeptical. Being privy to information that's not publicly available, I can confirm young Jacob Wohl since he "rose to popularity" has done nothing but light money on fire. I can also offer as fact that Jacob Wohl and his entities are under inquiry from the SRO's that govern the industry; specifically the NFA and the SEC. For example, Jacob has purchased & promoted the catchy domain riskfreereturns.com that forwards visitors to his new company's website. If you manage any class of assets, you cannot claim anything to 'risk free'.

What may have began as an elaborate charade to have a kid stand out in college applications has become a true threat to potential investors. If you'd want to know any more of what I know, please feel free to reach out to me directly at gilfoylesaidso at gmail dot com. (FYI, that email is one I regularly use, use an alias I registrations so I have no problem putting it out there in the open). Hope his page gets removed.

P.S., blatantly evident the kid wrote it himself- the gaul. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:E88A:7500:10F5:EAFA:69B1:7A89 (talk) 20:20, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your note. But let me just say that PLEASE be mindful of our policy on living people, WP:BLP. That means that you cannot say anything you want about living people: this is not a free speech zone. You can add your opinion to the deletion discussion, but again, do not go too far in making accusations; what you said here is already quite iffy. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:45, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
The Gaul? -- Softlavender (talk) 02:39, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I heart Asterix. Looky Luke and TinTin are dim shadows by comparison. Softlavender (talk) 02:48, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I think I want to have a gun because of Lucky Luke. You know, the kind that always hits the other person's gun so it falls out of their hand, where the bullet leaves a dotted line. Drmies (talk) 02:49, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
For hardcore lovers of le 9ème art: Corto Maltese. And of course there is Valérian and Laureline...she is so cute ;). Lectonar (talk) 09:19, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Nipponese Dog Cavelera

Or whatever the sock farm is called, is back on Peter Nguyen Van Hung, if you could do the honours. ta, Muffled Pocketed 16:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Spoil sport. Cheers! Muffled Pocketed 16:50, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks... Drmies (talk) 16:52, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Given the amount of time you continue to spend at the various noticeboards, I thought you deserved this for being what may well be the most "hands-on" member of ArbCom I've ever seen. John Carter (talk) 19:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Hmm, is that good or bad? I think we're supposed to stay away, and I haven't spent that much time on ANI etc, I thought. Maybe I'm just too addicted, haha. Thanks--and, by the way, it's a million degrees here, so this is nice. Drmies (talk) 21:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Charming edit summary

You just know they're up to no good when they leave edit summaries like this. - Sitush (talk) 17:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Hm, I think it will need to be semi-protected. Another IP has turned up. I've no idea if it is the same person or a concerted campaign - they're quite keen to be recognised under their "new" chosen name and to obscure their past, as the article itself makes clear. It's all part of the usual jostling for social status/invention of tradition etc. - Sitush (talk) 18:14, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Sorted by Spiffy. - Sitush (talk) 18:54, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

you got fan mail

I look on Twitter every now and then for Wikipedia keywords. Having looked at the deletion log, I think you might find this amusing. (Thanks for all the work you do on here, seriously.) Blythwood (talk) 22:05, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Oh, yeah, that article. Shit, someone found out I was white. I tried to be nice... If you'd seen the article, you'd know it was eminently deletable--it could easily have been read as an attack page. Well, too bad. I guess she'll have to get a career the old-fashioned way, like, make a record and sell many copies of it. Drmies (talk) 22:49, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Civil volunteer movement helping Ukrainian forces in the war in Donbass

Hello. Why do you "believe this is synthetic"? There are numerous reliable sources which examine the subject as a whole. Stas (talk) 00:07, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Archive of My Failed Anti-Censorship User Page Request

Hi, you said you'd archive the User Page Protection request. I can't find the archive here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Rolling_archive . I'd really appreciate it because I archive everything here: http://2016-dem-primary-fraud.wikia.com/wiki/User_Page_Vandalism_and_Lockout . So I need your last comment - made almost in conjunction with the thread's removal - so I can archive it for my personal records on this matter. Thanks again. Michael Sheflin (talk) 21:12, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

  • You can archive everything you want by clicking on "history". This particular archiving operation went by way of the deletion of content. You will have noticed by now that I just deleted your user page, which seems to have been used only a. to retain inappropriate content; b. to attack other Wikipedia users; c. to serve as some kind of political forum. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 21:17, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Another Victorian novel?

Hello again - I'm the person who suggested that you read Vanity Fair a few months ago, and I thought it would be courteous to refrain from suggesting anything else after that long read. But have you read Elizabeth Gaskell's Cranford? It's a very short Victorian novel by one of my favorites from that era (I'm now rereading one of her darker ones, North and South) and one of the most appealing short novels I've ever read. (Elizabeth Gaskell's life of Charlotte Brontë is another marvel, but a bit longer.) Meanwhile, you've certainly got more pressing things to worry about, but if you've have another suggestion of something medieval that's as intriguing as the Lais of Marie de France, which you suggested last time. The Laiswere memorably strange and wonderful (and, it occurs to me, sometimes a bit like some of the stories in the Decameron), and if you've got more in the same general line, please do let me know. All best wishes, as before. - Macspaunday (talk) 22:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Ha, I'm ankle-deep in The Blithedale Romance, just having read The Scarlet Letter and The House of the Seven Gables. So it'll have to wait, and I have to tell you that I'm rereading Hawthorne because I'm reading Beneath the American Renaissance. In other words, I got a bunch of secondary and primary material to read: all of Dickinson, Melville, Whitman. I'm skipping Emerson, of course. But I'll see if I can pick up a copy of Cranford, and maybe it will tempt me enough. To return the favor...well...let me think on that a little bit. I assume you've read all your Chaucer, but you may not have read his Troilus which is, as far as I'm concerned, the greatest ME poem. Oh, wait, I got a weird one! Guillaume de Dole! It's weird, it's wacky, it's gender-bending, it has a certain Robin-Hood-in-Tights appeal, it's got sword fights and clever women...and poems! Drmies (talk) 23:41, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
    • I've always had mixed feelings about Hawthorne; too many cheerful words hiding the dark vision underneath, but probably that's the point. But Guillaume du Dole - that sounds very intriguing. I read the "other" Roman de la Rose a few years ago and was marvelously startled by it - especially that ending, which means an awful lot that it doesn't quite say. I'm about to order that 1990s translation now. Thank you! - Macspaunday (talk) 11:06, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
      • Guillaume de Dole just arrived from a bookseller in South Carolina. Will get started on it very soon. It's short! - Macspaunday (talk) 16:47, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
        • Well, thank you, Drmies! A terrifically exciting story - things were getting really worrisome there toward the end - and also some of the weirdest social conventions I've ever seen outside of a meeting of tenured faculty in my department. Also, the decision to marry someone more or less sight unseen is just like academic hiring. I especially liked the self-promoting opening. - Let me know how you like Cranford if you get a chance to try it. And thanks again! - Macspaunday (talk) 23:57, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

wiki android app

You left a note. That I should login when editing. Sorry didn't realize I wasn't loge in.

The wiki app has some problems due to recent wiki app updates or Android updates. Previously I didn't get loged out or it auto loged me in what ever.

A note on the human varifacition dialog would help. Not relizing I wasn't loged in I just thought it was something new in the update.

The recent wiki app update is not displaying edit changes after saving. Edits are there in edit mode and in preview. They eventually show up some number of hours later.

Another problem. When editing and I switch to another app. The wiki app is locked up. A had to kill it and restart the edit.

This is the case with both versions of the app. I am using a Samsung Note 4.

Can you see that the app's developers are made aware of these problems.

ThinksSteamerandy (talk) 18:04, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

  • I have my own set of problems with the app, and with the mobile version; I'm not sure if I understand all your problems, but I do know that I have no answers to any queries. Cullen328, maybe you know some answers? Drmies (talk) 20:41, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Checkuser permission.
Message added 08:42, 21 June 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

MediaKill13 (talk) 08:42, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

It didn't come? You know I've tried sending mail to myself, but it hasn't arrived either. What could be the problem? MediaKill13 (talk) 12:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC) (edit: I recently changed my email address; can this cause problems in email delivery?)
Probably got intercepted by the CIA. Drmies (talk) 14:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Can checkusers determine if an email was sent? And if you can, could you check if it actually sent? MediaKill13 (talk) 14:37, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
No. Read your email. Drmies (talk) 14:38, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
It didn't appear. Would this be an appropriate issue to take to the village pump? Forgive all the questions, I'm a relative newbie. Thanks for putting up with me MediaKill13 (talk) 14:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)...either you changed your email adress, but did not change it in your preferences here in wikipedia...or you could have a look in the spam folder... Lectonar (talk) 14:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, I sent you two of em. Maybe they're rerouted through the NSA server in outer space; I'm sure they'll show up shortly. Take care, Drmies (talk) 14:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Brazilian Army

Thanks for your help. Please, would you edit the first two paragraphs with neutral point of view preserving the information? I would be grateful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.105.226.24 (talk) 00:54, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Reggae Boyz

"Reggae Boyz" is the most ignorant nick name I have ever heard. The Jamaican National Team is from Jamaica, yes. This does not mean that they are in any way affiliated with the genre of music entitled "Reggae". It is just flat out unintelligent and ignorant to refer to this football team as the "Reggae Boyz", not to mention incredibly annoying to hear anyone say. By the way, these are fully grown men. I'm sure they appreciate being called "Boyz", especially with the dumbass way to spell it. I am not "vandalizing" your stupid citations and references, I am simply correcting this nick name for the sake of everyone. Jamaicans in particular, whom I imagine sure love being constantly labeled and treated as if they are all Rastafarians who listen to Reggae music. Stop. They are not the "Reggae Boyz". They are the Jamaican National Football Team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.18.156 (talk) 16:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Yeah, what Xanthomelanoussprog says. Personally I think it's an outrage that anyone buys Meghan Traynor's music and I'd remove her articles, but reliable sources disagree with me. Drmies (talk) 20:42, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm rooting for the Golden Lilies--that's a cool name. I remove some tripe but there's plenty there. Weltmeister der Freundschaftsspiele is obviously a sneer; there's two reliable sources for it on the entire Internet: that makes it very doubtful, but I've never been a big fan of Honey so I'll add the sources and leave it. Drmies (talk) 21:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
* Clearly none of y'all went to Virginia women's colleges. Reggae Girlz would destroy any of us on name cred alone. Julietdeltalima (talk) 22:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • One of my high-school classmates said she applied there on precisely that rationale alone. Me, I'm part of the alumnae mafia of their sister school that remains the only NCAA institution without an actual mascot. "What do you yell out at... um...?! ... swim meets?!" people ask me; college name, and colors! There was actually a referendum about this in '88 when I was an undergrad and a capital campaign was underway, and the overwhelming vote was to remain mascot-less. But "Golden Lilies" is delightful and if this ever comes up again I am really chuffed to be able to bring this up! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 22:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC) (whose signature color isn't accidental)
  • (note as well that there is an obvious reason we're named after our first big-time donor and not the person who actually founded the school...)


Hiya!

Do you do self-requested blocks? If so, please block my useraccount (not the IP) for a month with the blockreason: "self-requested block: enjoy your wikibreak!". I have some stuff to do. Thanks in advance, (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 00:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed. You can leave TPA and email open. A deep-tissue massage sounds nice actually! I've never had one of those. As you may or may not be aware we potatoes don't have hands. If you promise to make three terrible potato-related puns (or improve the Shetland Black-article, whatever you prefer) this month I will donate an extra 25 euro to a charity. My clients set my deadlines so I'll have a busy month; I don't wanna be distracted by people who are wrong on the internet. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
You got it. Drmies (talk) 16:40, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Can we get the deep-tissue massage à la carte, or does it only come with a block? :/ ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 16:43, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Checkuser permission.
Message added 05:58, 23 June 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

I'm almost sure it's sent now MediaKill13 (talk) 05:58, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK

Hello! Your submission of Adriaan van Hees at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Philafrenzy (talk) 19:30, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I probably shouldn't have

But, well..... asking "where did you read the source" just sounded like he was calling me a liar [8]. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Gun Control topic ban

I think your template for PrivateThoughts was in error; it says that the sanction was enacted under the India-Pakistan decision. I know what you meant, obviously, but you know how strict DS is with their template requirements, and I can't correct it myself because that would be interfering with a DS without consensus. The WordsmithTalk to me 15:26, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

  • The Wordsmith, you're absolutely right. But the user has removed the warning already; what do you suggest I do? I'll leave a message, but I don't want to replace something they removed because I made an error. Drmies (talk) 01:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I think a quick note indicating the typo on their talkpage, and a link to that diff noted in the log, would probably satisfy the record-keeping requirements. If they choose to appeal, there's no reason to give them an argument based on a technicality. The WordsmithTalk to me 01:51, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I think this DS is in error altogether. I've never seen someone topic banned under a DS over a few comments questioning a source's validity with strong reasoning why the source is misinformed. And PrivateThoughts actual article edits have been entirely constructive and have not been reverted for the most part. I saw a single reversion when they removed "rifle" from the name and they didn't fight it. None of their other edits have been contentious and they've made significant improvements to the article. I don't see how their behavior has impeded article progress and I think their talk page edits rise to the level of disruption. They are certainly heated and need to be reminded to tone it down, but they aren't disrupting anything.--v/r - TP 20:17, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Oh, I disagree, and the personal accusations didn't help either. But you will have noted that the topic ban was very limited in both time and scope. The AR business is all over the news, of course, and this is not the kind of disruption we need. The user was given a template that at least correctly indicated how to appeal the topic ban; you are more than welcome to assist them. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:22, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
      • What disruption, though? Review his article edits, there is nothing political or disruptive in them and 95% of his edits have stuck without controversy. And one of the methods of appeal is to discuss it with the imposing administrator - which I am doing.--v/r - TP 01:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
        • Talk page disruption. Come on--you saw it; I think in general we let things fester too long on such controversial topics where truthers are given too much slack. They're the one who should discuss it with the imposing admin, of course, and while I appreciate your advocacy (you know I do), I should hear this from them. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
          • There was minor IDHT behavior by PT about sources for something everyone, including PT, already agreed upon. Everyone, including PT, agreed to use Armalite. The only thing PT argued for was better sourcing than what existed because he didn't want POV pushers to return in 3 months and restore "Assault Rifle". That's not disruption - even if other participants, including you, can't pick out the particulars of his argument. The IDHT behavior came into play when other editors said that Rolling Stones was a good enough source for which PT disputed because of some misunderstandings about caliber by the article author.--v/r - TP 08:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind comments, TParis. It is not much fun editing an article that's this political when you're trying to be objective. I have enough people hating me, and I'm tired of being trolled on the talk page. DRmies, as he points out, you have not read my contributions, nor have you read the talk page carefully. The protestations are about my accurate comments about the consistency of the "reliable sources". I can't help it that so many people have political agendas. I'll also note that I did not engage in edit wars, and merely pointed out the inconsistencies without changing the article. If you don't have the time or inclination to read what I've written or the talk page itself, go away.PrivateThoughts (talk) 02:42, 24 June 2016 (UTC) Does Wikipedia have a way of getting someone more objective or capable to look at what I've done. Drmies has crossed a number of lines. He's just encouraging trolls at this point. PrivateThoughts (talk) 02:46, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

That article has a terrible lead that fails to clearly describe the topic and uses self referential language, namely "This article discusses . . . " It may be the worst lead of an important article that I have read in some time, and I have seen some bad ones. Would someone get topic banned if they set out to write a clear and concise description of the topic in the lead? I certainly won't try. Is clarity and objectivity about firearms a blockable offense these days? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:44, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
I think you've probably answered your own question there ;) Muffled Pocketed 08:37, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Maybe editing articles on guns should be restricted to Inselaffen, since we've got no experience with them and hence no POV. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 11:04, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Grammar again

Hi, me bothering you about grammar crap again. I previously asked about some phrasing for film article leads, and you mentioned that there were problems with a phrase like:

Loham: The Yellow Metal is a 2015 Indian Malayalam-language thriller film...

I'm curious how you would incorporate information about the film's language in the lead sentence, if you were to do so. I encountered someone recently who swapped the language and the nation, claiming it is grammatically correct, but I don't see how it is more linguistically correct to say

Loham: The Yellow Metal is a 2015 Malayalam-language Indian thriller film...

Seems lateral to me. Thoughts? Recommendations? Improvements? I've proposed some additions to WP:FILMLEAD at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film so I think it's worth getting the phrasing correct, or finding an alternative. Thanks much, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:00, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I hope you don't mind my intrusion, Cyphoidbomb and Drmies, but this kind of thing intrigues me. There is a general order to adjectives in English. My general feeling about the two examples above is that the second one sounds more correct than the first one. The first one places slightly more emphasis on "Indian" while the second one places slightly more emphasis on "Malayalam-language". However, if you look at the order of adjective types in [9]], you will see that nationality comes before type, and if you consider that "Malayalam-language" is a type (and notice that several of the examples of type are hyphenated words), then your first example would be correct: "a 2015 Indian Malayalam-language thriller film". I also think, though, that there are too many adjectives in this sentence – four, counting "2015". I have copy-edited several articles about Indian films, and I remember that very often the film is produced first in one Indian language and then soon, or simultaneously, released in another Indian language (probably with another title). If this is the case with this film, you could include the information about the other main version in the lead sentence, something like this:
  • The Yellow Metal is a 2015 Indian thriller film produced in Malayalam and released a month later in Tamil as Other title.
Just a thought.  – Corinne (talk) 00:22, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Corinne, I absolutely do not mind one iota that you are contributing! There's a bunch of information that typically gets conveyed in a film article as you know, (Year, nation, genre, medium, and yeah, it's a real pain to try to wedge more content into introductory sentences. Frustrating this, Indian languages are tied to Indian ethnicities, and there's a ton of warring over which ethnicity's film industry owns the bragging rights to a movie. What seems to make sense from a disruption-management point of view, is codifying a delivery mechanism for this information so that it's clear we're interested in language, not ethnic industry. Anyhow, I'm starting to ramble. I'm also concerned that our global readership understands we're talking about a language. "Produced in Gujarati" or "...produced in Marathi" that phrasing might sound like states or studios to someone unfamiliar with the trillion Indian languages. ? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:37, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
  • In your OP, the problem with Option 1 is that there are two consecutive but unlinked nationalities in the sentence, which is always at least somewhat confusing. Option 2 removes that problem but is still clear, concise, and accurate. Although it could be argued that the article wikilinks Malayalam language (but, again incorrectly, currently does not hyphenate Malayalam-language as it should since that phrase is adjectival), the wikilink doesn't show up on Google or on Wikipedia mirrors and so forth. So personally I'd go with Option 2. Softlavender (talk) 05:53, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
If you do go with one of the two, I have to agree with Softlavender that Option 2 is the best one. When I looked at them last night, I hadn't pinpointed what bothered me about the first one, but Softlavender's comment about the two nationalities in a row made me realize something. Saying "Indian Malayalam-language thriller film" might suggest that there are other versions of the Malayalam language from other nations, and of course, there aren't. Putting "Indian" after "Malayalam-language" avoids that possible interpretation. I'm also wondering why you need to say "film". Wouldn't it be sufficient to say "Malayalam-language Indian thriller" (and link "thriller")? Or, alternatively, leave out "thriller" and just say "Malayalam-language Indian film", and explain in a subsequent sentence that it's a thriller.  – Corinne (talk) 14:44, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Thriller (genre) covers literature too, so "Malayalam-language Indian thriller", even if wikilinked, is less clear for the reader. MPS1992 (talk) 18:18, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

RE: Your block of User_talk:202.77.57.124

Drmies,

I noticed you block the above I.P, looks like he's back, see this post it's a different I.P, same article, same issue, likely the same person. The I.P itself is a proxy server. KoshVorlon 17:37, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Concerns about vandalism that undid your edits

Hello, I wanted to reach out because there are numerous and repeated attempts at what seems to be vandalism by unregistered users on the If Americans Knew page, the most recent of which undid your edits. Given that anonymous IP addresses aren't supposed to edit articles on Israel & Palestine, I think the article should be reverted to the last edit before the latest apparent vandalism by 14.139.213.179. Your thoughts? Thank you.SM-Mara (talk) 19:02, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Spelproject

Thanks ever so much, Michel, not only for your interactive and extremely useful keynote but for your generosity of spirit. I would not have ever considered a wikipedia page for myself so you have propelled me into another world, one I hope I can negotiate. This addition to your talk page is to initiate on-going discussion about the Spelman workshop and to inquire about two things. The first is how to identify a Wiki administrator. Are you and Aleta administrators? The second is to find out how to get an administrator to remove the image from my page. It's not a great photograph, but that is not the real issue since I have had many such likenesses over the years. But I have perused the pages of a few people, mostly educators, that I know and posting photographs does not seem to be the practice. So I would like to delete the image on my page but have read enough to know that only administrators can delete. After the deletion, my next goal will be to figure out the best way to communicate with both you and Aleta and learn more about images on Wikipedia in general. Alexandria "helped" me to change the photograph of Toni Morrison on two wiki sites/pages yesterday afternoon. And I actually edited a reference on one of the articles she assigned. I can see potential here. Thanks again for bringing that potential to my attention. Katme17 (talk) 15:49, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, yes we (this is Aleta) are both administrators. Many, but not all, will have that fact indicated on our user pages. To jump in on your photo question, I would say that is is lack of having pictures that is why so many articles on academics don't have them, not a desire not to have such photos. However, it is not true that only administrators can remove them from the articles. (Only an administrator can truly delete the photo, but anyone can remove it from the article.) I would encourage you to leave it, though. LadyofShalott 15:54, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Hi Katme17, and thanks for the note. The Lady is right: anyone can remove that image, including you. No one needs special powers to do that. She's also right in that most such articles don't have photos because we don't have photos, and if we do we're lucky. For Wayne Greenhaw, for instance, I was lucky to find one on Flickr. The Lady wrote up Mildred Lewis Rutherford a while back, and someone was lucky to find an image of her, out of copyright.

    In general, the best place to look for images is Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page; all those images there are fair game. You may also find that people get attached to the images; it is possible that someone prefers the older image of Toni Morrison. This then probably becomes a matter to discuss on the article talk page, where the pros and cons of each can be discussed. For Hallie Quinn Brown, you added a reference to an article; the only problem is it's a footnoted reference so it needs to footnote something. I can pull it up through JSTOR--I just did--and moved it to the end of the first sentence.

    I'm so happy to have met you, and that you're here on Wikipedia, playing around and making helpful additions. I hope your colleagues are having good experiences as well. Regards, Drmies (talk) 18:01, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Jebamalai Vinanchiarachi

Hi Dr; I tried on this one (as did other editors), and solicited assistance at the BLP noticeboard, but COI accounts are determined to make a press release/resume of this. Any assistance from you or your talk page pals would be welcome. Very best from 99 and his many incarnations, 2601:188:1:AEA0:68C6:2CD6:BBB7:7FB2 (talk) 11:48, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I did a little organizing and cleanup. Softlavender (talk) 12:45, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Edited to add: Seems to be a self-created vanity/self-promotional article. Softlavender (talk) 12:58, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes. Thank you very much, Softlavender. 2601:188:1:AEA0:68C6:2CD6:BBB7:7FB2 (talk) 20:21, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Is "involvedness" a word?

Seriously dude, you're a professor of what? -- Softlavender (talk) 05:25, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

I knew it sounded wrong. Softlavender (talk) 12:43, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Involvitude sounds moist. Drmies (talk) 12:48, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
I had a Volvo until the clutch failed. Now I've joined the ranks of the involvituded. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 12:53, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Wouldn't that be devolvolution, though? Lectonar (talk) 13:03, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

...And now we have "trivialer". Drmies, I think you are just teasing us with this college-professor stuff. You are actually a machine. A neologism generator. --MelanieN (talk) 02:35, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

TFA

Precious again, your Man in the Moone: "that together ... we've produced one of the best, if not the best, encyclopedic accounts of this rather short but surprisingly influential book you're likely to find anywhere". I agree.

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Three heads are better than one

Six heads are better than three.
Softlavender (talk) 15:22, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Atlanta guy,

Sometimes, folks ask for help with articles here. I have written a new article, Grace Quan, and think that it is halfway decent, but would really appreciate feedback and improvements from other editors. As the italics hint, it is not a biography but rather an article about a Chinese-American shrimp fishing junk. Please feel free to tear it apart, and I do appreciate feedback. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:25, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Am I too far off base on this?

If you (or a talk page stalker) have a second, take a peek at this discussion [10] and tell me if you think I'm too far off base on this? Niteshift36 (talk) 18:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Flip or Flip edits

I do not understand your edits. The article is about the show. If both kids are shown on the show why not put the kids names? Its not different than including any other kids name. Because its a a reality TV show rather than a sitcom it shouldn't impact the mentioning of the names. Also why do you seem to think People wouldn't be considered a WP:RS? - GalatzTalk 13:31, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

  • The article is not about them; they are not notable. That they're mentioned on the show (BTW, I've watched a few episodes and didn't hear about them) doesn't really matter--why should it? And People may be reliable in some aspects, but that doesn't mean that the news it reports isn't chatty and gossipy. Not everything that's sourced is of encyclopedic value. Drmies (talk) 13:47, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Here is my thinking about People: If a Nobel Prize winner marries a movie star (stranger things have happened), then People is a reliable source for the wedding date, but not for a description of the Nobel Prize winning research. And intricate wedding cake details referenced to People do not belong in an encyclopedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:18, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Rucoy Online

Are mobile apps web content? More like software to me. Adam9007 (talk) 00:07, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Adriaan van Hees

On 2 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Adriaan van Hees, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dutch Nazi, actor, and theater critic Adriaan van Hees became depressed when he discovered he was part Jewish, but still volunteered for the SS—and was denied? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Adriaan van Hees. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Adriaan van Hees), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:04, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Best wishes for the 4th

Drmies, have a happy and safe holiday. Cheers, from 99, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 14:10, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi protect request

Would you be able to please semi protect Jeff Teague (basketball) and George Hill (basketball) on the same grounds as your semi protection of Solomon Hill (basketball)? Both are involved in a reported trade that is not official yet, and lots of anons are making premature, poorly sourced edits. Cheers. DaHuzyBru (talk) 16:19, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Much appreciated! DaHuzyBru (talk) 18:55, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

FYI

On 15 June 2016 you expressed dismay when an article you created was deleted without notifying you. As someone who occupies the ivory towers you may not be aware that that not all editors, including admins and admin-wannabes believe that page creators should always be notified when pages they created are nominated for deletion. See: Answer to question 14.in this RFA. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:23, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Donald Trump

Under the talk page restrictions at Donald Trump, you could have been blocked without warning for this edit - the addition should not have been made in the first place (as a potentially controversial edit), and after it was challenged, you should have waited until there was a consensus to restore it. StAnselm (talk) 02:03, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Why on earth would that highly verified/verifiable note be "potentially controversial"? It's rather your removal that is potentially controversial. But go ahead and look at the talk page. See, StAnselm, it's stuff like that, when there is nothing seriously controversial going on, that makes for an unpleasant editing atmosphere. Then you go ahead and warn Midnightblueowl after you reverted their edit, saying that their edit was reverted and thus controversial, producing the circumstances that allow you to reprimand them. CFredkin and I disagreed over something, and now we're laying out evidence on the talk page, all in good spirits. Isn't that better? Drmies (talk) 02:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Well, I'm not an admin, so I don't have power to block you, but this was certainly a blockable action. Yes, the evidence is laid out on the talk page, but the addition has been disputed as not being in the source provided, and as it stands it's a BLP violation. StAnselm (talk) 07:00, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Good luck with that, StAnselm. Drmies (talk) 14:22, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Makeandtoss topic ban

Hi Drmies. I am just letting you know that the user Makeandtoss has been in the IRC help channel to discuss the terms of his topic ban, and specifically how he could go about getting an error in an article corrected, and if he could comment on its talk page. I explained that this would not be possible per the terms of the ban, and that it would need to be lifted for him to have any involvement around the topic area at all. From what I gather he has already appealed the ban twice, including just last month, and I also note that it appears to expire in August anyway. I therefore recommended he wait out the ban due to the recent review by yourself, and that he should raise it with you or the noticeboard if he wants to appeal again. I have told him I am leaving you this note as a courtesy, and he is keen to note he is not going to break the ban or appeal again. KaisaL (talk) 12:56, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

I have interest in knowing if I am allowed to discuss something happening in the article that I was topic banned from, in its talk page or on other users talk page? Makeandtoss (talk) 13:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Makeandtoss, you are not allowed to discuss the topic at all on Wikipedia, that's the point of the ban. KaisaL, I assume you saw User_talk:Makeandtoss/Archive_1#January_2016. But I tell you what, if you have faith in this editor, we might cut this short--who knows, the world might come to an end before August, and we'll all be dead with that error still in the article. So if you want, go ahead and undo the topic ban (by which I mean make a note in the log)--I still need to do my exercises and I haven't had coffee yet. Makeandtoss, no more accusations please, and happy Wikipediaing. Drmies (talk) 14:29, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
@Drmies: I don't really know enough about the block and the situation to feel confident in making any decision on repealing it. On one hand, it only has a short time left, so lifting it now may not be especially controversial. On the other hand, because there's only a short time left, it's also reasonable to simply ask Makeandtoss to wait the final few weeks. I'm not going to over rule you, I only handled his help channel request. KaisaL (talk) 14:35, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
@KaisaL: Makeandtoss would appreciate not waiting for the final few weeks, the context of the ban was because I was making sockpuppetry accusations against users and I unfortunately made another one while Drmies was warning me. 5 months were quite long enough for my (I like to get things done) mentality. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:44, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Well, he's went and returned to the controversy immediately, it would seem. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Comment from JordanianExpert. KaisaL (talk) 00:50, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for your input. It was footnote #4 in the article. I merely restored the old, vague Google result; you're right that I should have filled out the details more. However things were getting a bit hot and bothered. Have a good day.HappyValleyEditor (talk) 16:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Gerd Neggo

Drmies, I was wondering whether the issues you raised in your DYK review have been addressed by the most recent edits. If not, are what remain factual issues (misinterpretation of source material), grammar-related issues, or both? Thanks for anything you can do to help this nomination proceed. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:14, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

  • You're welcome, Drmies. Thanks for the quick action. Ping has always seemed a bit unreliable, especially from Template space, and some people have their accounts set up so that pings don't get to them from certain namespaces. Plus, it's dependent on a sig posted at the time the ping is, I believe. I tend to copy the user wikilinks instead of pinging; I've had generally good luck with them. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
  • No, I'm having different issues--I look at the messages, the colored number goes off, and five minutes later it's colored again. Then on foreign wikis I also get notifications of pings here, and sometimes I get a real weird-looking screen that looks like a dashboard. And sometimes the notifications aren't a pop-up kind of screen, but a full, new page. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to it. Drmies (talk) 02:26, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Bring on the Ajacciers!

Poor old Filipe Santos Oliveira: in his reference #3, do you think it's enough the way I have translated, or we definitely need to have "gelederen" translated (I got "ranks" in the Google T thingy, makes zero sense)?

All the best as always, thanks in advance --Be Quiet AL (talk) 23:41, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

  • "Ajax has three trial players in its ranks"? I don't know; it's old-fashioned language. But it doesn't say "offers trials"--it says three players who are on trial are playing for them. Drmies (talk) 02:19, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Old-fashioned but accurate, i'll have your suggestion any day of the week, consider it retrieved to article! --Be Quiet AL (talk) 02:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

A bio for your attention

Hi Dr and talk page stalkers, I happened across John Bruce Wallace, and have requested assistance at the BLP board. I've begun the process of removing much unsourced and self-promotional content and anecdotal personal history. If anyone's in the mood to have a look, please jump in. There's even the standard 'what the critics said' section, replete with blurbs. Cheers from 99, 2601:188:1:AEA0:194D:F97C:7B39:6E83 (talk) 14:38, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Cheers 99, thanks for the heads-up; I commented here and have trimmed the crap from it- so far so good. But the COI probably needs addressing sooner rather than later! (I know you have been, btw), cheers, Muffled Pocketed 14:59, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Given long term direction, the account and article bear watching. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:194D:F97C:7B39:6E83 (talk) 15:03, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Time to arm the bears. Geoff | Who, me? 15:16, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Or at least provide them with timepieces. 2601:188:1:AEA0:194D:F97C:7B39:6E83 (talk) 15:20, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Classic! Never miss an opportunity to poke VH in the eye, eh Muffled Pocketed 15:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Oh, hell, I got nothing against VH (though when I was young I couldn't stand that sort of playing, but that's neither there nor here), but it was too good a quote to resist, and must reside safely in Mr. Wallace's scrapbook. 2601:188:1:AEA0:194D:F97C:7B39:6E83 (talk) 15:26, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Right on. Drmies (talk) 15:28, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

And another, at which I'd appreciate extra eyes, Darren Hanlon. Nothing egregious here, but a new WP:SPA started out by adding unsourced and promotional content. Thanks, 2601:188:1:AEA0:194D:F97C:7B39:6E83 (talk) 21:43, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Children's books about death

That, or similar, might need to become blue. New potential member: The Dead Bird (book). LadyofShalott 01:48, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Richard Magnus Franz Morris

Whew; responding to your ping on this, Dr. There's nothing there I can corroborate with reliable sources. In fact, I can't find anything about him online, other than the obit, which isn't itself reliable. I hate to suggest AfD, but can anybody dig up anything? Thanks. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 12:02, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

And by the way, that commemorative months business? Cheezus, they don't pay you enough here. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 12:48, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I know! We should have a special session devoted to "we don't get paid enough around here" at the next Wikimania. You and me. And Crisco. And Bbb. And a host of others. Drmies (talk) 14:41, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies/Archive_101&oldid=1184422453"