Jump to content

User talk:Drmies/Archive 56

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mauro Carbone

[edit]
  • I pulled up a review, real quick, with JSTOR. That's easy enough: his books have generated enough of them at least to establish notability and to say something useful about his work. What I think you should do, and what I tried to do in one little edit, is to say more in layman's terms what his work is about and what it does. Remember, you're writing for a much more general audience, and this is a biography, not a study. So I was able to make a quick note on that one book and verify it with a review published in a scholarly journal; the reference will do away with the BLP PROD note, plus it establishes the validity of at least this item (this book) being mentioned in the article (listing everything makes an article look like a resume). The name of the game is secondary sources: one may summarize a book, for instance, but it shouldn't be too technical nor should it evaluate--we can only report on evaluations if they are published in reliable sources. Does that help? Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you very much, Drmies, for your the useful job you did. Now I've understand what I have to do to improve this article, and what Wikipedia means for verifiability. Next days, I'll try to put other references like you suggested. Thanks again for the help, Jacopo Bodini —Preceding undated comment added 08:26, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sure thing Jacopo. I'll be glad to help out more, but it's not really my field--to be honest with you, the phenomenologists always gave me a headache, they're too smart for me. Let me know what I can do; if you don't have access to JSTOR or some such database I can help, and you can always drop someone a line at Wikipedia:Help desk. Drmies (talk) 14:05, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Dear Drmies, phenomenologists may give you headache, but you did a very useful job, so thanks again. I tried to do something, I put another reference to an english review of another Mauro Carbone's book, which is the best since it's an english article. I tried also to clean up the grammar and the syntax, especially by paragraphing, as the template suggests. Do you think is it possible now to remove the template, or do I have to make further improvements? Thanks again, Jacopo Bodini —Preceding undated comment added 10:22, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of massacres in Turkey

[edit]

I don't know who the 216.125 IP is, but I know the 94.55 IP is a sock of the indef topic-banned DragonTiger23 (talk · contribs). Would you consider semi-protection? Athenean (talk) 19:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I can't, cause I'm about to get out of here and don't have time to look into it. I did see the sock accusation, but it seemed not directly related to 216's edits. Perhaps one of the talk page visitors can have a look, or consider RFPP. It does seem like there's a little too much activity there. Sorry I can't be of more help right now. Drmies (talk) 19:43, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Going to the Dogs

[edit]

Drmies, the hook you've suggested clocks in at 271 characters even after all but the first bold article name are eliminated from the count. This means that you need to reduce the length, and probably the best way is to remove the three non-bolded articles. A possible version of such a shortened hook, which also eliminates the "who" from "who wrote" (and thus the expectation that something else would be said about him ... and never was):

You might want to reword "Dutch television maker", because (at least to me) "television maker" means someone who builds television sets, not someone who creates programming. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:42, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I can live with that hook, BlueMoonset, thanks. "Television maker" is literally from the Dutch--I've thought about it some and used it because he conceived, wrote, directed, produced, and acted in those shows, and "maker", at least in Dutch, covers that. I don't know of anything in US English, but I've asked the experts. (Note that to make your version work you have to add the word "set"...) Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:52, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion points

[edit]
Mandarax modeling his tent

Not writing implies not reading. — Discuss.

The plural of Mandarax is Mandaraxen. — Discuss.

Uncle G (talk) 06:10, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not Mandaraxerna :)? Hafspajen (talk) 07:13, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, Hafspajen, not with that -r in there. Uncle, which plural? If you're going to talk OE you have to indicate case, and besides, your '-en' supposes that leveling has already taken place. You can find this, of course, in Algeo and Pyles (139-40) and Lass (70). In other words, I'm not sure what time period you're putting is in, since you know as well as I do that all weak nouns ended up following the strong paradigm, with the exception of "oxen". Are you saying Mandarax is linguistically bovine? Them's fighting words. Also, it is lovely to see you again. Drmies (talk) 14:14, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remember that I'm published now, Drmies, so I'm a walking secondary source. But Mandarax has given away the ghost: he self-identifies as a super computer from the Land of Nod. What I wouldn't give to be corporate right about now.  davidiad { t } 22:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • True dat, though you'll have even fewer readers than me. I just sent out (like literally just now) a review on a pretty good book. Both book and review are very well-written, I might add, and the publication even has a Wikipedia article. Drmies (talk) 04:40, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Print. I haven't received a notification that they even got it, haha. Typical. There's another long, long review I'm waiting to see on-screen; it would be nice if editors didn't leave one dangling. BTW, did you read the front page? Seamus Heaney died. But then, you're a classicist--you only read living people if they write you love letters. Drmies (talk) 23:56, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's the way it goes. I have a solid, brief note that's been with the readers since before I move to this awful place and haven't heard squat. Re Heaney, yeah, I saw this morning. Not to be callous in the face of a man's death, but my first thought was that my usual 30-second phone conversation with my father will be a solid 5 minutes this weekend because of this. The old man is mad for him, and rightly so. By old man I mean my father, not my scrotum, as I usually use the phrase. My scrotum is indifferent when it comes to poetry. And, for the record, I only read love letters from living people if they take the form of an elaborate priamel that culminates in praise of my old man.  davidiad { t } 00:51, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although I'm not Greek, I must admit that I've heard the term "Greek god" applied to me. But I'd like to reiterate that the prospect of multiple Mandaraxim is not something I'd like to contemplate.

    BTW, Drmies, your "{{U|Mandarax}}" did not generate a Notification for me. I wonder if it was just a fluke, or if they've changed it so you have to directly link in square brackets.... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:19, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'd say you need the converse of that first one, Uncle G. Not reading implies not writing, but not writing doesn't imply not reading. Well, I supposed it's possible that there's no simple logical relationship between writing and reading: I read the discussion points without writing, and I'm writing this without having read the rest of the thread, so who can tell? (That is, if by "not reading" and "not writing" you mean "not being able to read" and "not being able to write", then the converse of your statement is true (imo); if you mean it literally NOT figuratively, then there's no connection, as is proved every day on Wikipedia.) Writ Keeper (WK to move) ⚇♔ 18:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]
  • Algeo, John; Pyles, Thomas (2005). The Origins and Development of the English Language. Thomson Wadsworth. ISBN 9780155070554.
  • Lass, Roger (2006). "Phonology and Morphology". In Richard Hogg, David Dennison (ed.). A History of the English Language. Cambridge UP. pp. 43–108. ISBN 9781139451291.

NAC

[edit]

If you or one of your talk page stalkers have a moment, I'm curious what others think of a deletion discussion closure by a non-admin. As a starting point: me asking the editor to undo the closure. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:22, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request

[edit]

I'm afraid that unless that latest RfC has already been closed "no incorporation", reviewing those would violate my staying out of DYK :-( I can't sign off without at least making a cursory check of the articles themselves. I'm sorry; as you know, I really liked helping out at DYK. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I re-read parts of Wikipedia talk:Did you know and missed any categorical pronouncement. Did you get topic-banned? Drmies (talk) 03:11, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, it's me - the second RfC on including GAs is still running, and the first was closed "yes" and is technically still in effect, although I don't know whether they did anything about it; I left after trying to get the close re-examined. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, I remember that now--and it wasn't even that long ago. My memory is going fast. Your then-opponent has ceased to be very active on the project, I note, and I remember having kept an eye on them for a little while. Anyway, I'm looking at the current discussion and I'm actually thinking about closing it--and I think I can do this objectively since I honestly don't know myself what I prefer, haha. Now, I've seen the discussion on the previous RfC, courtesy of your links, but where's the old RfC? Sorry if I'm rubbing salt in anything. Drmies (talk) 16:00, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Here; related section in blue box surrounding it, plus the discussions that were archived separately, all I believe in the same archive. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:51, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Right. Thanks. Don't know how I missed it, but the lack of a proper title doesn't help. You're spot-on about the close; if it's an RfC, it's malformed and the close does not reflect the discussion and the votes cast. Strange, but not bad I suppose, is that it doesn't seem to have been translated into the DYK guidelines. Drmies (talk) 17:12, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request to protect Duan Yingying

[edit]

Users from tennisforum.com have been adding their nickname for this player (which isn't even her official nickname) which was then cited by a commentator during a tennis telecast who used Wikipedia as her reference.

http://www.insidetennis.com/2013/08/11946/ (under the section "FLOWER POWER")
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=587737
post it at WP:RPP -- Aunva6talk - contribs 04:30, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just semi-protected it, while you were typing this message. Don't worry, it's not the end of the world. Let me know if you find this childish trolling in other places and I or any of the friendly talk page watchers will take care of it. Thanks, and thanks Aunva6, Drmies (talk) 04:31, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
still trolling on usertalk page.... -- Aunva6talk - contribs 04:43, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
and a probable ip sock: 100.2.173.96 -- Aunva6talk - contribs 04:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest revoking talk page access, but the responses are just too amusing... perhaps it's just my trollish side... -- Aunva6talk - contribs 05:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's been fun. Drmies (talk) 14:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rose Lambert DYK

[edit]

Thanks for the review. The ticker is not written properly. Plus, the massacres happened in Adana, Turkey not "in Armenia". Proudbolsahye (talk) 17:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citation style help

[edit]

Hey Drmies, I've yet to learn to do refs in that way you know that is better when you are repeatedly using the same work but different pages. I have already cited one work twice like that in my Rosenbaum draft, and I can tell I'm likely to get a lot out of the Harper book (of which I've checked out a physical, hard copy - know you, one of them old-fashioned books). I really need to learn that other style, but meantime, would you please fix it so there are notes and then works cited? LadyofShalott 01:59, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is interesting (not that I can use it in the article, but):

    While much has rightly been made of the parallels between jazz and Abstract Expressionism, roots-music researcher John Cohen sensed in the 1950s a correlation between the abstract art of the New York School and the vernacular music of the South--a shared rawness and sincerity in their forms of expression." (Harper, 2006)

    Perhaps this topic will be of some interest to Mandarax as well. LadyofShalott 02:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Look, the simplest way to do it is the system I used in Hoepla (careful: naked woman alert). If you ask Mandarax, he'll try to sell you on that Latter Day Reference system, and that in itself does not solve your problem. Eric Corbett and just about every other FA writer (including Crisco, Wehwalt, etc) use that sfn system which offers the official advantage of being "clickable"; obviously my ludditish nuts-and-bolts MLA-inspired has nothing of the sort. BTW, Eric typically has books in a separate bibliography, and articles and web sites in the notes; I like having everything in a bibliography section, with notes just as references to that bibliography (see my GABattle of Brunanburh (poem)). I'll be glad to help, in a while. Drmies (talk) 03:51, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research and violation of NPOV in Balkan related article

[edit]

Hello Drmies. Can you look at this Balkan issues article, Great Fire of Smyrna? Apparently, there is an ARBCOM resolution about such articles [1].

Dr.K. and Athenean insist on adding Original Research. Fleming does not provide exact percentages, or statistics for others; so the pie chart they are adding is made up (relevant discussion Talk:Izmir#Pie_Chart_on_Great_Fire_of_Smyrna_and_Izmir_Pages). They are also deleting official statistics for some reason. Cavann (talk) 03:34, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • First things first: I could be wrong, but placing Izmir in the Balkan (even "broadly construed") is a kind of a stretch. But really what I think should be done, since none of the present parties were involved in that discussion, and since it's almost a year old, and since I don't really see a conclusion there, is to have a proper WP:RFC, with all the past and present parties invited, and a well-formed proposition for adoption or rejection. If Fleming does not give exact numbers (from which percentages can legitimately be derived), then maybe there's a case. But, mind you, Athenean gave an explanation for the numbers elsewhere, and they can simply copy that information. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Drmies. Since he got an ARBMAC warning from Athenean this user has taken upon himself to try to falsely implicate me in ARBMAC-related issues. He already gave me a tit-for-tat warning on my talk and is making patently false statements about me: Please stop being disruptive to yet another Balkan-issues article, however without giving details because his accusations are fictitious. Perhaps you can advise this editor to stop these misrepresentations. He could also do well to concentrate on his own longterm conflicts with multiple editors at many Balkan-related articles where he also showers his opponents with frequent and severe personal attacks. Also at the article of Istanbul he has been especially disruptive for a very long time. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 05:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • He also added another pie-chart based on Ottoman sources which was not for Smyrna, but rather for the whole region where Smyrna belonged, completely unrelated to the Smyrna demographics just as to minimise the Greek population percentages. As far as his claim that I was "disruptive" to yet another Balkan-issues article that's an outright invention, and I use the term "invention" because I always try to avoid using the term "lie". Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 15:41, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will deny recognition to Dr. K. again. About the pie chart, again, Athenian made it up, assigning random numbers (49 to Greeks for example, and not 45), and adding "others," even though Fleming did not mention it [2]. He even said "Whether we use 49 G, 24 T and 27 other, or 48G, 24T, and 28 other, or whatever, the presise percentages don't matter." [3]. It's clearly OR.
It's amazing these people are edit warring to include what is clearly Original Research in the article. Cavann (talk) 17:11, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies. The WP:BATTLE tactics and impulsive, predictable and repetitive insults (I will deny recognition to Dr. K. again) of this person are used as smokescreen to try to avoid answering the question I posed to him regarding his deliberate falsehoods. Drmies, this rampant incivility and personal attacks, on your talk of all places, have to stop. Ironically the only recognition he is denying is to himself constantly serving his inventions for my alleged "disruption" for which he cannot find a single example. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:42, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cavann, in my judgment, 49-24-27 or 48-24-28, that doesn't matter, and Athenean presented some proof for the numbers; they can't be random. But that is not for here: start that RfC. Also, you can't deny recognition by saying you deny recognition, since you have to recognize before you deny. In other words, that's silly, and if you wish to present yourself as a participant in a discussion on equal footing with others, you'd do well to simply recognize, or you'll be not on a peninsula but an island.
Drmies, I do not want to clog your talk page, answering to bunch of nonsensical accusations. Cavann (talk) 18:11, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes they are nonsensical and also baseless. They also happen to be your own. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 20:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]

It's a sandwich! With four non-free images out of something like 40 total in the article. And, naturally, I get reverted twice when removing these. See, this is why I hate administrative duties. You have a job to do, but often aren't allowed to use the tools. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:06, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bacon!

[edit]

In San Jose. This weekend. With marching bands. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:16, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Risker, you've never even met me and you take me for a bacon freak. People post bacon crap on my Facebook page. Again I got a bar of bacon soap for my birthday (it stinks). This bacon thing, it's by accretion: other people are accreting it onto me. I'm down to less than a pound of bacon per month, and that's for the whole family (yes, Liam likes bacon too). Drmies (talk) 15:00, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Buzzards? Needs a better transition, Crisco

[edit]

Bacon to buzzards? Easier transition than Wikipedia to Academia

[edit]

You have been mentioned in an AN/I posting

[edit]

specifically, I mentioned you here in reference to your comments in an RfC/U from January -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 09:07, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shekinah Ministries Suriname

[edit]

Hello Drmies, can you please have a look at this page? Unless there is any explicit claim of significance I think we can nominate it for CSD A7. De728631 (talk) 18:00, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremiah Hamilton DYK: possible to postpone?

[edit]

Thanks for commenting on the Jeremiah Hamilton DYK nomination. Would it be possible to postpone that DYK? I've asked for a photo of Hamilton's gravestone at Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Takes_Brooklyn, which is happening next week. It'd be great if the DYK had that photo, which I'm pretty sure doesn't yet exist anywhere else. Emw (talk) 18:29, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It occurred to me that Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know might be a better venue for this question. I've also posted it there. Emw (talk) 18:37, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Defacto what? Don't make me laugh like that: I almost snarfed all over my laptop keyboard. As it happens, I had already added my thoughts at Emw's WT:DYK request. Opinion seems to be in favor of the postponement, although I was hoping for more response. I suspect people are in shock, having suddenly realized that it's already September... BlueMoonset (talk) 02:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delirium Tremens (beer)

[edit]

This beer uses three kinds of yeast- I assume two are the standard brewer's yeast and Brettanomyces bruxellensis (citation needed)- what's the third? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:40, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Haha, beats me! I'm totally ignorant on yeasts and hops and malts and barleys and techniques, and if I learn it today I will have forgotten it tomorrow. Have you had it? And isn't it just impossible to beat? Just the right freshness, depth, wealth of flavor and aroma... Does not go well with spicy food, though, unless you don't mind blowing ten bucks on a beer you can't taste anymore. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tell you what, twice I shelled out six bucks for a bottle of Orval, and both times I just couldn't get to loving it. I don't know why; I love all the other Trappist beers. Drmies (talk) 14:07, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Thank you Lancastrian12345 (talk) 14:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, sure--but please ask your questions here on the talk page, not via email. This page is watched by people who are much smarter than me and they may be able to help you out as well. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 16:05, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23

[edit]

Nice words by you on Bbb23's talk page. Unfortunate incident, made all the worse by Jimbo being perpetually more clueless and detached from the community. PumpkinSky talk 15:05, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the first part, but you know I don't subscribe to the latter part. I have no beef with Jimbo (though he still hasn't sent me that admin t-shirt) and while I disagreed with his words about Bbb (strongly disagreed), I won't draw general conclusions from them. Which reminds me, I should try to have another look at your FA nomination today, which may be difficult: on the weekends it is very difficult to concentrate on anything that takes more than a few minutes. Can't let a one-year old in the pool by himself... Drmies (talk) 16:04, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
yes, thank care of the young one! As for the FA, we do have a question pending for you there, when you have a chance to look at it. PumpkinSky talk 17:06, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zimmermanh...again

[edit]

Zimmermanh is back using the IP 24.170.254.249, that you blocked back on August 17th. Same annoying edits, same incorrect information, same sockpuppetry. All yours :)...Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:52, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bramshill images

[edit]

For the good doctor, who doesn't watchlist things, and anyone else involved with the Bramshill cooperative effort who won't see it pop up there but does keep tabs on this page: Talk:Bramshill House#William Henry Cope, Bramshill: its history & architecture. We now have a full version of the book in pdf on Commons, at least a partial one on Wikisource, and Kobnach and I have made a dog's dinner of uploading the images here - files listed there at the talkpage. Apologies for being almost totally incompetent, and I will gladly delete any or all of them, but right now I have to go to bed; I don't get tonight off. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

James E. Dull DYK nomination

[edit]

Thanks for reviewing James E. Dull DYK nomination and resolving remaining issues within that article. I appreciate the time you spent on this DYK nomination. I will be more careful with the close paraphrase issue and reference placement issue in the future. I am OK with the alternate hook that you proposed. However, based on your feedback, we need another reviewer to approve the proposed alternate hook so we can close this one out. I have left two messages for User:Shirt58 regarding this issue but he has not been responsive. Please let me know if I need to do anything else to help close this one out? Thanks again - Mistercontributer (talk) 21:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) And here's me, the nicest Wikipedian in world [dubious – discuss] who just left a message on a new user's talk-page asking them to be more communicative, and has completely ignored requests for help with the DYK. I am a bad person. :-( --Shirt58 (talk) 12:39, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's all good in the long run. Hey, with "what Drmies said", did you also mean and all that? :) Drmies (talk) 02:37, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

[edit]

You object to one phrase by a contributor to the entry for Denise Rutkowski, then delete several well-sourced facts as a result? That's not keeping with the Wiki guidelines. It looks like vandalism to me. Is your name Goebbels? I'm reporting you to the other editors for a second opinion. You are hurting the readers of Wiki, who learn less due to your Nazi like censorship. Shameful. WikiStephen4 (talk) 04:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, my name is not Goebbels. It's late here and Burn Notice is on; can't miss even a rerun. I'll leave it to the next admin to block you indefinitely if you re-insert that tripe with suggestions of gender changes and whatnot. So yeah, feel free to report me, and swing by Godwin's law on your way out. Drmies (talk) 04:46, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of conflicts in Egypt

[edit]

There are various wars and battles listed in the article List of conflicts in Egypt that did not actually occur within Egypt. For example, the Angolan Civil War happened nowhere near Egypt. Similarly, there are various other wars and battles that occurred in Libya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Israel, Syria, etc. that are listed in this article. I am carefully removing the wars and battles that may have involved Egypt, but did not occur in Egypt. 76.170.227.242 (talk) 05:13, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch TV first female nudity

[edit]

Now that I have your attention and that of your talk page stalkers -;) ..... in De Stille Kracht (TV series) it says "Pleuni Touw became the first actress to have a nude scene on Dutch television" and "The first female nudity on Dutch TV was when Phil Bloom flashed the cameras on Hoepla in 1967." In Hoepla it says "the first time that female nudity was shown on Dutch television" and "the appearance of Phil Bloom, naked except for a strategically placed garland of plastic flowers". Is the difference that Bloom's appearance was only a few seconds and not a full scene? It's quite clear that Bloom was totally naked (full nudity) so I can where some may say the wording in De Stille Kracht is contradictory to what occurred. It could also be clarified that both scenes were full nudity vice only upper body nudity, begging the question: Was there upper female body nudity on Dutch TV prior to Bloom's appearance? I've notified Crisco since he is a major contributor to the De Stille Kracht article. BTW, Pleuni Touw looks like this one Dutch woman I knew when I lived in Utrecht. PumpkinSky talk 11:09, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Previous discussion. The sources were quite adamant that the two were different (I'm thinking scripted nudity versus happens to be nude, but I'm not quite sure as I wasn't there). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first thing to consider is that my Alzheimer's may be getting worse. Drmies (talk) 17:49, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, one of the sources confirms the distinction without a difference that I suspected might underlie this: "De scène uit de serie [De stille kracht] is niet het eerste televisienaakt. In de eerste aflevering van het VPRO-programma Hoepla uit 1967 was het fotomodel Phil Bloom naakt te zien." Or, "the scene from the show is not the first 'television nudity'. In the first episode of...the model Phil Bloom was seen naked". So, it's the difference between a scene and a shot. Crisco, you're close, but both cases were scripted; perhaps it's size that matters (appropriately), as in length of shot and whether the actress actually did anything. Phil Bloom did nothing but lower a newspaper and read a few lines in a skit; Pleuni Touw acted out a character in a scene. Perhaps we should phrase this more clearly in one or both? And cross-reference? I might take care of this--after nap time. Drmies (talk) 17:54, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Crisco, what happened with that? I remember we talked about it, and I thought we had decided on betel--but I'm sure you have a record of our conversation somewhere. The Tros Kompas says "blood" and puts it in quotation marks. De Telegraaf says blood, but hey, it's De Telegraaf, not exactly a quality paper, and the Prive section is even worse (Henk van der Meyden, pfff.). I remember looking very hard for solid sources and having little luck--I had the same problem with all the Wim T. Schippers articles... Drmies (talk) 02:07, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

[edit]

Why did you block me for disruptive editing when I didn't disrupt anything? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittylover0000000000 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple warnings on your talk page from before your block - all saying why your editing was problematic. LadyofShalott 14:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The warnings did not make since or explain anything, why would it be called "disruptive", and "vandalisiam"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittylover0000000000 (talk —Preceding undated comment added 23:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC) [reply]

  • Well, you kept adding stuff about a book by a not apparently notable author, "There is a book called claws, by Micheal Grinti", for instance, in the article Claw. Even if such a book exists, and even if the author and the book were worthwhile mentioning one way or another, why on earth would that matter to an encyclopedic article on the claw? (I assume you're talking about this book--doesn't seem worth mentioning in an article.) Now, you got blocked for doing that a half dozen times, even after being reverted and warned. Drmies (talk) 04:16, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LevinEPS block

[edit]

In the block log, you indicated this was an AE block, rather than a community sanctions block. Might you want to reblock with a better summary? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:39, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary reference

[edit]

Was it really necessary to invoke off2riorob's name in a disparaging manner to make a rhetorical point? [7]. NE Ent 19:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not particularly, it's common knowledge how dogs generally treat trees. Given that you're generally a decent kind of guy, and off2rio is currently officially not bothering anyone and on one of WP's bad lists, it seems uncharitable to be kicking a dog when they're down. Besides, it's only the drama hounds who will get the reference anyway -- do you really want to be catering to folks like me, or the general reader? NE Ent 22:05, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • For everyone else's benefit then, since you might succeed in making me look like an ass here, we all know that Off2riorob got hisself blocked for taking the defense of BLP a bit too far. We also know that Bbb23 did not do that. And in case you forgot, I have come to Rob's defense more than once. I don't know if you have, but I know that I have (feel free to check the record, on AN and his talk page). I hope one day Rob will be back here. At any rate, I think it is a useful comparison in this case, and if Rob were reading it I am sure he'd take it in the right way. Rob, if you're reading this, take care. Drmies (talk) 23:43, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm going to reserve comment on Bbb23 but concur that Wales was over the top with the 'you should resign the bit' stuff. Concur 100% about Rob. Thanks for the clarification. NE Ent 00:30, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is why I still love Wikipedia

[edit]

A man. His leg. Any questions? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:53, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rose Lambert

[edit]

Template:Did you know nominations/Rose Lambert

I have finished my amendments to this article, any chance you could complete the review now? The nominator has been waiting a long time. Gatoclass (talk) 10:39, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I know who they've been waiting for - sorry if my post above appeared to imply otherwise :p
I replied to your comments about the alts, if you'd like to respond to that. Gatoclass (talk) 14:46, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I proposed a new alt. Gatoclass (talk) 14:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For fun

[edit]
The Church Covered by Sand , possible interior
The Church Covered by Sand is named after Saint Lawrence, in Danish Sct. Laurentii Kirke

This [8]. Looking into Vissefjärda. What kind of external link is this on René Lalique , second-to-last , -> Drmies/Archive 56 at Find a Grave ( Warrington (talk) 12:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • That is fun, and it has more than the Danish article--for instance, that churchgoers had to dig every Sunday to make it to church. Also, when I click on the Danish link I go to the Danish abuse filter??
  • Looks like it will go on automatically. The abuse filter. Or are you abusing the poor Danish :)? My idea was to ask you about this. Would you like to make an English version of it (The Church under the Sand)? ( Warrington (talk) 12:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Funny how "tilsanded" doesn't translate. "Oversanded"? No, you write it and I'll help. Problem with Dutch articles is that they're typically poorly verified--all there is is two links, one mostly on the dune "plantation", and the other (I just updated it) to a tourism site. It's from the latter that the Dutch wiki gets its information. So, question is, can you find better sources? We can write a stub with those two, but it's not much. Drmies (talk) 14:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, it's the kind of link you find often in the not-so-good articles. I'm sure there's been discussion on it at the External link or Reliable sources noticeboards: it's certainly not a reliable source, as far as I'm concerned. I don't think many FAs or GAs have them, and I don't see the point of such links: if someone is really interested in finding where a grave is, and if it's not relevant enough to be included in the article, they can go directly to the website and type in the name. Drmies (talk) 14:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, bad source is bad source.
  • Oh my. Do you really think that I am better than you at this????????????? I don't think so. Covered by sand... maybe. Is this OK? [9] [10]. Oh, well. Looks like it is the same thing, sorry. Some sandy vocabulary : Sand dunes can have a negative impact on humans when they encroach on human habitats. Sand dunes move via a few different means, all of them helped along by wind, in a process known as creep. With slightly stronger winds, particles collide in mid-air, causing sheet flows. In a major dust storm, dunes may move tens of metres through such sheet flows. Sand threatens buildings and crops in Africa, the Middle East, and China. Preventing sand dunes from overwhelming towns, villages, and agricultural areas has become a priority for the United Nations Environment Programme. Planting dunes with vegetation also helps to stabilise them.

Warrington (talk) 12:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC

  • I started something at The Sand-Covered Church. Drmies (talk) 15:31, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • LOvely, but half of it is still Dutch. OK, not any more, looks kind of nice, don't you think? Did you called that a stub for warrington? Holly Molly ... Warrington (talk) 12:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC) juni 1795[reply]
    • Of course, it's for you. Hej, I found a few more things, this and this. A brief note on the klitplantage (clitoris plantation? haha) would be helpful, but doing that through Google translate is a bit of a drag. Besides, it's almost nap time and I have a sick little baby here at home. So consider adding that relevant content--and maybe Google Books has more to give us? Later Hafspajen, and drop me a line if you can do something for Vissefjarda, the place where I first ate Pyttipanna, maybe in 1985 or so, pickled beets and all. It was delicious and I've never forgotten it. Drmies (talk) 17:50, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lovely memories, the place where I first ate Pyttipanna... Am I a Paj For YOU to, nowadays? Disapointed. Nothing about Vissefjarda yet, I eas at the library, they had nothing. Ev. could take home some info later. Hope the baby is al rigt, we are missing you. ( Warrington (talk) 12:56, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When you approach this on your cykel, it doesn't have a "characteristic hump" so much as what looks like a skyscraper.
  • Oh, it was delicious. I think, but it's been a long time, that I had a late lunch there, and then rode on (it was a bicycle vacation, solo) to a "vildniscamping"? Can't remember--it had something "natural" in the name, and it was kind of primitive, but I can't find it on Google Maps. It must have been no more than a few hours, say 50km or so, from Vissefjarda. The next day I went in one long haul to the Viksjo on Oland, where my family lives, listening to the Claw Boys Claw on my Walkman while riding an endorphine-high through the beautiful countryside toward Borgholm and then further north. (My aunt was married to a Swede at the time, and his cousin still lives on the old family farm where I stayed: type in "Viksjölund 10, 387 73 Löttorp, Kalmar län, Sweden" in Google maps.) The Öland Bridge was spectacular, of course--I think it's closed to bicycles now. Drmies (talk) 14:22, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very courageous of you to go solocamping among all those Swedes. If you liked the Ölands bridge, that's nothing compaired with Öresunds bridge. Have you been on it? Now wait a minute, family you said? And your family lives still in Öland? We hawe a 'stuga' around that area. And are you intending to call me paj=Pie from now one, you too? ( Warrington (talk) 12:56, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not calling anyone pie. Or pi. Or paj. Will you bring me some Olandsbrot next time you go? Courageous--I doubt that, haha. The Swedes were always very nice and courteous, just like the Danes, BTW. An old lady near Copenhagen took me in and fed me lunch when I asked for some water. The Wikesjos have a little stuga on their own land. If you look on Google Maps, just before Sven's house is another house, with a big barn; that's where my, hold on, aunt's former husband's father's brother lived. He's probably dead now, but I stayed in their house for a couple of days, and then a few days at Boda Hamns camping. They all drove Volvos (244) with shotguns and rifles in the trunk, and they ate moose and blood soup, and Kroppkakor of course. They fished the Kalmar Sund. No, the Oresund bridge wasn't built last time I was in Sweden, or at least it wasn't open; I took the ferry to Limhamn a few times, and once the sv:HH-leden to get back to Denmark. Where's the stuga? Drmies (talk) 14:58, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Absolutely fascinating. Much impressed. You really have traveled a bit in Sweden, don't you? Nice old lady, can you give me the address... :) Do they make Volvos (244) with shotguns? I would like to have one... a car with a shotgun, like a miniature tank. :) Arrr. Really I don't know.: I mean I don't know where is the stuga. In the woods, near Karlskrona. First to the left, than to the right, than left again and left, rightish than leftish. There.
    • Ha, yes, I camped near Karlskrona one night--it was a cold, rocky, and rainy day in Blekinge; I remember it well, and I think I spent the night on some huge awful family camping with nothing but caravans. Haha, you know what question I had to answer quite often? "Ar du Tysk?" NO! But I can find your stuga, I'm sure--how about we meet there at the end of September, when the leaves change? Oh, you wouldn't happen to live in Goteborg, would you? I have a cousin who just moved there for a semester at the Chalmers University of Technology. Her name is Malouk, and she's tall and blonde, so she should stick out like a sore thumb among the tall, blonde Swedish women. :) Drmies (talk) 17:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All right, you meet me there! No, I live in Lund, and HHHHHHHEEELLP: I can't fix this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/The_Sand-Covered_Church. What is {{fullurl:  ????? ( Warrington (talk) 12:56, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Right, you mentioned that earlier. Sorry. Hey, I think I fixed it, but the article is not yet up to DYK standard: it's less than 1000 characters and needs at least 1500. Also, and you tell me since it's your language, does this verify all the info in the article? If not, can you go through those external links and insert those as references at the appropriate places? So we need more words: see what you can add in the following days, and I'll do cleanup as necessary. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 18:11, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Øresund Bridge - Øresund

Matthew Bryden

[edit]

Hi Drmies and Talk page stalkers. I was just looking for someone random who might have an interest in this article. User:Middayexpress and I seem to have gotten to the point of editing past each other. I believe it has some BLP violations, editorializing and uses a lot of op-eds and POV sources. PR rep shows up and offers a bunch of primary sources that we don't want either.

Essentially a version like this is roundabout what I think is neutral, while the current is more in-line with Midday's version of events. However, even changes I've made in paragraph structure and trimming are being reverted, so best to get more editors involved to avoid edit-wars. CorporateM (Talk) 16:37, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:CANVASS, appropriate notification on the talk pages of concerned editors must be presented neutrally. The post above is not, nor is it an accurate assessment of the situation. I could easily retort as well how "even changes I've made in paragraph structure and trimming are being reverted", but that solves nothing. Please discuss on the appropriate article talk page as before. Thanks, Middayexpress (talk) 16:46, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Don't get too excited, Middayexpress. Thanks for the useful link, which tells me, for instance, "The audience must not be selected on the basis of their opinions". There is no way CorporateM, with whom I have worked in the past and always agreeably so since we both go to sleep with the five pillars under our pillow, could guess what I or the various visitors here (not all of them friends of mine) might think of this article. I haven't even seen it. CorporateM, thanks--it's not like I got nothing else to do, like eating lunch or digging up churches from under the sand. Drmies (talk) 17:14, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not entirely sure what you two are fighting about. Comparing the first half-dozen or so paragraphs of this version to this version, I don't see substantial differences except for the "early" position, which seems valid content to me, and even the "reportedly" (in the meddling thing) could be taken out: his own wording, if that's cited correctly, is clear enough. His job for the ICG seems worth mentioning (even if sourced the way it was); whether the "poster boy" comment should be there depends on whether Hiiraan online is considered a reliable enough source (I can't judge that right now). The same applies to the commentary given on the Somaliland report. The 60 Minutes threat is sourced reliably enough and is worthwhile including. Now, I think, but I'm not quite sure since I get bored with scrolling up and down to see whose version I'm looking at all the time, that I might agree more with Middayexpress--but all of that is in the current version of the article.

    Can I make a general note, one full of personal bias and whatnot? I know CorporateM as a diligent and conscientious editor. I know Middayexpress vaguely as a more confrontational editor, and the tone of the comments on the talk page seem to bear that out. However, if I'm indeed coming down on the side of Middayexpress on the issues I just mentioned (and there's one or more diffs I could look at, I suppose, but I have no quarrel with this trimming on CorporateM's part, none at all), then I must be totally objective, but I understand it if CorporateM feels a bit miffed at being (reportedly, according to the talk page) reverted so frequently. I have little interest in plowing through the entire history to see if he's justified in feeling so--let me just say that editing in contentious areas also benefits from a cooperative tone on the talk page. I don't feel the need to be more precise right now. Good luck to both of you in the article, and better luck to the actual people of the entire region; they deserve more stability, more international attention, and better leadership than they've had in the last three or four decades. Drmies (talk) 17:46, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • And thanks for the "reported" copyedit, Middayexpress. Drmies (talk) 17:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No prob, Drmies. You and I may have had differences in the past, but it's nothing personal. Thanks for the even-handed assessment. Cheers, Middayexpress (talk) 18:13, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies has such a disarming charm about him. Yes, I mentioned at COIN I would give it a "once-over" and started removing large amounts of material sourced to primary sources. The promotional stuff stayed off, but when I got to the controversial material I started hitting edit-conflicts and couldn't finish a session - stuff I deleted kept popping back up seconds later. I guess I am used to editing articles that are mostly abandoned and getting my way ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 23:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
CorporateM, you know I'd put you on payroll if I could afford you. Plus, I don't disapprove of your methods. Drmies (talk) 23:33, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I got one for you, and maybe Middayexpress is interested as well: David Choe. Drmies (talk) 23:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That was easy. BTW, I put together a proposed draft of the Bryden article here. I'm going to ping a couple more editors to see if we can reach some kind of consensus. CorporateM (Talk) 17:33, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting Luigi1090 And A Question

[edit]

Hi Drmies, You Report Users Here Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism Right? If Not Were Can I Report Them, Because On An Other Account I Reported A IP User From Last Year And I'm Reporting Luigi1090 He Been Warn A lot Seance He Started Wikipedia And Had No Warn Sign Yet Or Anything He Add Unreliable Source On Cartoon Network And Cartoon Network Studios And I Did Warn Him That There No Reliable Source And So As Other Users - Aozz101x

  • You can report vandals at AIV. I have no idea if this person is a vandal or not. Hey, please don't use initial capitals for every word; it's giving me a headache. Also, you don't seem to have a proper signature--see Wikipedia:Signatures please. Drmies (talk) 01:12, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, you can't report them like this. I can't even figure out which particular article they're supposed to have vandalized, and in which way. Besides, vandalism requires a deliberate attempt to compromise Wikipedia. Some messing around with some fan site or whatever (hard to tell from "Add Unreliable Sources From Cartoon Network Added Fan Cartoon Network Studios Logo, Editing Neo Geo Stuff (No Idea, Seance I Never Used Neo Geo)" is not vandalism. Drmies (talk) 01:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bird

[edit]

I thought Der Busant is about poem. Plus it doesn't appear to fall into the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds. OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:24, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm a bit saddened any time I see one of those compartments of knowledge closed off from the rest. The study of culture is scientific as well--the Bird project should also embrace such topics as birds of prey in the middle ages, a topic that affects both birds and people. Drmies (talk) 01:41, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Der Busant again

[edit]

Well, you wanted to go to GA. Looks like we may be on our way. Just need the lede to be polished out. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey, don't nominate it yet. It needs a lot more source work, and I'll have to get some of it through ILL. At some point I'm going to split up the sections you combined, if only because a. it's traditional and b. the one is before and the other is after. Drmies (talk) 03:58, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait--more plot? M & M give very little in the way of commentary (really, nothing at all--very disappointing); there's a bit more in that Linden article, but I don't really see what expanding on the plot could do. It's a romance after all, not an allegory... I'm going to get some of the stuff in Linden's footnotes. For now I'm really done; I'm tired. Drmies (talk) 04:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • YGM. Drmies (talk) 04:37, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LinkSpam?

[edit]

Are the links found here linkspam? They were previously in the external links section which I removed, was reverted twice by different anons saying they aren't. I can't see how a link to an external website with a jpg file of a previous logo or a site with audio files isn't linkspam. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:31, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm. The link to the 2005 article should be brought into the article as a reference, if it's not already there. The "general" radiotapes link could be called useful, I suppose, but the other two, I don't see the point of them--and they're probably linked from the general site, so you'd be perfectly justified in removing them; I'll do so right now. I don't know what those FCC links are supposed to add to the article (that's the only reason to include external links, really); I suppose that's a matter for the radio project. If you're thinking of spam for radiotapes, that's a possibility, but for now I'd just call it overdoing the EL bit. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • The {{AM station data}} and {{FM station data}} templates are standard on all radio station pages. It links to the FCC page, the Radio-Locator page (easier to read information) and the Arbitron information page for that specific page. We typically put them in the External Links section under the station's website. For the other stuff, I was pretty sure that those other links were linkspam, good to know I was right. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 15:27, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Caveat

[edit]

Saw your comments over at ANI due to the weird transclusion– thanks for taking care of that, BTW. I had something to say about that note on my userpage about your comments about guardianship, RfA requirements, and otherwise-- I think it's incredibly thoughtful advice and it's made me reconsider how I think about the community. It's also motivated me to help close RfCs. I just don't think that behavior is restricted to the young, eager types. Of course, I have a lot of growing up left to do (like everybody else), so my attitude toward young vs. old editors certainly may change in time. I, JethroBT drop me a line 18:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Tell you what, it was weird--I couldn't figure out what was going on at ANI but by the time I was fixing it (my connection is incredibly slow today) AndytheGrump already had. That they were here for no good reason was obvious, and I speedily closed all their AfDs as well. You're probably right, that it's not so restricted, but I guess I was painting with a broad brush.

    If you really want to know how bad it gets, get an alternate account or simply log out, and do the things you normally do--vandal reverts, tags, external link removal, uncited contentious info removal, etc., and see how the regulars treat you. You'll separate the wheat from the chaff soon enough, and almost inevitably it's those with one of those I FIGHT VANDALISM WITH AN AK-47 badges on their user page that are the worst. But there's plenty of experienced editors, I suppose, who take stuff for granted and shoot from the hip. No doubt I've done it myself. At any rate, it was nice to see myself quoted, haha. I'm not always that jaded, mind you--writing articles instead of "patrolling" does wonders for the spirit. But I haven't yet gotten back to the RfC business: it poses problems all of its own, and requires a thick skin and a lot of time. I may have the former, but the latter has been in short supply recently. Thanks, though, for helping out there: there's plenty more listed on AN... And thanks for your note. Drmies (talk) 18:53, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rose Lambert

[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Editing Help, Re: Twin Lakes Library System

[edit]

Hi Drmies! I got your message regarding the conflict of interest with editing the Twin Lakes Library System's Wikipedia page. I am a full time employee at the library and my supervisor wants me to update the information on the page to reflect some of the changes that are happening at the library (new hours, locations, etc.). She also wants me to include more information about our collections, services, and programs. All of the information is listed on our website--could we use that as a source? This is my first time editing an article so I'm a little confused about how to proceed. Can I send you the proposed edits in order to get them approved? Dckinser (talk) 16:53, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your note, and welcome. Here's the thing: such information is typically not deemed of encyclopedic importance. Some collections are, of course--I suppose the Priebsch-Closs collection in London might be--but that typically doesn't apply to collections in US public libraries. Same with opening hours and all: that's the kind of directory information that we usually don't include; readers can get that through the link to the library's website in the article. I'll ping LadyofShalott here, who has worked on the article with me and who's a librarian herself. BTW, a conflict of interest in itself isn't so bad as long as it's above the table, so to speak, but normally one can expect some extra scrutiny--and I think there were more than one accounts that seemed to be associated with the library system. So it's of prime importance that neutrality is observed, but you seem to know that well enough or you wouldn't have contacted me. (I'm just saying this for the sake of redundancy, I suppose.) Thanks for your message, and let's wait and see if the Lady has anything to add. Drmies (talk) 17:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not much, I think Drmies covered it pretty well. Since the website is (appropriately) linked, people can go there for the general directory info. We just don't put those sorts of things here, except, as Drmies says, for particularly notable collections which most public US libraries don't hold. :) LadyofShalott 15:35, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Sand-Covered Church

[edit]

I an doing my best. This is good. http://www.kirkehistorie.dk/hjor/sogn1198.htm especially this part It was dedicated to St. Laurentius and belonged until 1459 crown, which then handed it over to the Holy Ghost in Aalborg. Hafspajen (talk) 19:00, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Try this for the ref about the tree planting [11] - sorry for butting in! SagaciousPhil - Chat 19:45, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://aalborgstift.dk/kirker/frederikshavn/skagen-kirke/den-tilsandede-kirke/, and http://www.kirkehistorie.dk/hjor/sogn1198.htm try to translate it in English. Whit a button, you know. Hafspajen (talk) 20:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I find some of the coolest topics via {{tps}} to get me out of my own vandalism-watchlist and real-life-research fields. Although I admit I was disappointed that it's not actually still present and buried by dunes (cf. the "By Great Prayer Day 1775, the congregation had to dig their way into the church to attend services." note) as the name suggested. DMacks (talk) 20:21, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Size matters to my old eyes, Dmacks! :) Yes, that's what Andersen liked as well, apparently: "taler stærkt til fantasien, og mange, for eksempel H. C. Andersen, har forestillet sig, at der under sandet gemmer sig en hel kirkebygning, en ”stensarkofag”". And that's why the opening sentence (not to mention the proposed DYK hook) is more than a bit tortured. See, I'm lucky: people actually bring me weird stuff. Hafspajen with his sand, Crisco brings buzzards... Drmies (talk) 20:28, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! :) I chopped up the lede sentence to make it easier to understand. I think for DYK hooks, a complicated single sentence that has all the interesting ideas tied together is a good way to pull in readers. But then once actually to the point of reading the article, better to have it be simplified prose. I don't do much DYK though, so I might be speaking heresy and feel free to undo it. DMacks (talk) 20:34, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You did well, thanks. Drmies (talk) 21:23, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disappointment

[edit]

Oh, gee, I read your topnote at first as "Drmies, what a nude dancer". Bishonen | talk 20:52, 6 September 2013 (UTC).[reply]

  • Bishonen's alternate e-mail address automatically forwards any e-mail it receives to every Wikipedian with an e-mail address. I'll let you know my expert opinion of the pictures once I have them. I wonder if I can get anything for them on e-Bay.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:25, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/De Friese Meren

[edit]

Drmies, I was wondering whether you could stop by and do a final review of the latest ALT hook on this one (plus any other checks that seem appropriate). It would be great it you could. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tillsandede kirke

[edit]

Good edit. Kind of does go without saying, doesn't it? How remarkable it would be if travel agencies didn't puff it! (P.S. I've been there.) Bishonen | talk 13:45, 7 September 2013 (UTC).[reply]

  • How was it? Hey, I just got to pull out Mass Rollback from my arsenal of secret weapons. Remind me to do that in a separate browser window next time. Drmies (talk) 13:52, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • It was a quirky, unreal sight, as approached from the outside. Just imagine what it would be like if one came upon it innocently, without previous knowledge (of course in practice impossible for tourists and locals alike). A Planet of the Apes moment, you know, when they come across bits of the Statue of Liberty? Well, sort of. I don't have any real visual memory of the interior, except that it was dominated, possibly entirely filled by, a souvenir franchise. A bit of a "Ye have made it a den of thieves" moment for a heathen such as me, since it does look like a church, although of course is not. And also since, well, I don't (for some reason) expect Danes to be quite so crass about their "heritage" and stuff. Not like some other nationalities I could name <subliminally>americans</subliminally>. What's wrong with having a souvenir stall outside, anyway? But I expect the sight of that would do worse: desecrate the postcards and tourist snapshots. Anyway, the best of Skagen for my money was the art. Bishonen | talk 16:35, 7 September 2013 (UTC).[reply]
      • Hadn't heard of that school, but I just proved myself not to be a complete barbarian--I started reading the article and three words into the second sentence I started thinking of Barbizon, and lo and behold, there it is. I used to spend a few days every year near Fontainebleau, and our campground was around the corner from Barbizon. Two things: I remember drinking Pernod, and the sunglasses I bought there in 1988 or so are right here in front of me; I use them in the pool.

        When I was in Scandinavia I found very little of that crassness. But there can't be that much of a tourism industry in that area, so I suppose they gotta make the most out of what they have. Hey, let's have a Wiki meetup in Copenhagen next summer. We'll meet in Fontainebleau in the spring, and...Crisco? Bougainville at Christmas? Drmies (talk) 18:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • A Planet of the Apes moment, indeed, Bishonen. Your robot is fast at archiving everything, no? Hafspajen (talk) 18:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Really? I thougt it was a robot, like SagaciousPhil 's. That one is fast. Hafspajen (talk) 19:47, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not a fast robot, just a fairly mundane talk page (except when Hafspajen posts beautiful pics!). It's archived every 14 days, so very much in the slow lane with very little going on. All very unexciting; I usually even manage to avoid getting bot messages telling me how naughty I've been! With apologies to Drmies for intruding on their talk page! SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
SPHil, will you please stop fucking apologizing! The more the merrier, that's what I say. My bot, BTW, is activated when either Mandarax or the Lady get on my case. Or Crisco. Or Bbb. Drmies (talk) 03:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sagaciousphil, you don't get it! Doktor Mies is operating a kind of Village pump and combined Teahouse here. As he said, the more the merrier. And I haven't noticed you being naughty. Dr Mies, you were talking to a lady, even if her name is Phil, no bad language, please. And Bishy, if you treat me like this, I am not going to marry you. Are you comming to have a Wiki meetup in Copenhagen next summer? Warrington (talk) 19:36, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Really?

[edit]

Damn. Sorry. I figured it counted as "fair use". If I'd known I would've just said "To quote Michael Caine...". Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 16:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just so I know for the future: I've been linking to videos uploaded Yale University's official YouTube channel as sources -- is that allowed? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 16:39, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (talk page stalker) - Iff they are the copyright owners, shouldn't be a problem. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:01, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, what Crisco says. For that particular link, that couldn't have been the case, at least from what I could tell (YouTube should take it down too). If it looks to be an "official" upload then you can link to it. As for ELNEVER, well, I don't know. I think the community has agreed that it can't agree on it. So we have some practical things: no copyvios, obviously. And one could apply the ELNO arguments--if something is linked from an already-linked website, then don't link it. In general, ELs should certifiably add something to the article. For instance, an IMDB link typically provides more information than our articles do. That doesn't apply, often, to for instance Allmusic or Discogs, but you can't argue that point with the fans. As for damn and sorry, don't worry. :) Drmies (talk) 00:34, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • And, naturally, I had to look up Podunk. Don't be using all that fancy schmancy American English, Drmies. You're making me confused. :p I think a lot of Ritchie's stuff was pretty good (not earth-shaking, but decent), but I prefer his stuff with the Commodores. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:02, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • OTRS got a complaint cause I said something bad about a certain town, so I need to be more careful. So I don't want to say anything bad about any of the Podunks, nor do I wish to identify the township/community/locale in question, for fear of more hate mail. Let's just say it's mostly evenly segregated, still. Drmies (talk) 14:44, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wordography

[edit]

Not too long ago, you decried the use of the term "filmography" in response to another user similarly concerned about "discography". Well, the assault on the English language continues. I just encountered a video game designer's "gameography". Maybe that's now standard terminology, but I'd certainly never seen it before. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:43, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to butt in, but I'd hate to think I'm responsible for assaulting the language. Feel free to change the term if you don't like it. Perhaps something along the lines of "Ludic œuvre" would sound appropriately grand? Kidding. WP:VG/MOS offers no advice on this question, but a review of Wikipedia's video game articles shows you that the term is not particularly widespread here. Far more common is the simple "Games" subsection (as at eg. Michel Ancel, and John D. Carmack, Sid Meier, and Roberta Williams). Another option is the slightly more pretentious "Works" subsection (as illustrated at Hideo Kojima or Goichi Suda). In case the idea of the complete corpus of video games isn't adequately expressed in these single-word subsections, there are lengthier possibilities as well including the "Games designed by X" subsection as used within Frédérick Raynal. Any of these would be fine alternatives to "gameography". Surprise me. -Thibbs (talk) 22:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No apology necessary. That's a pretty bad word. Sorry, but I don't really see what's wrong with "Games" or "Works". That I use "bibliography" in articles on writers and "discography" in articles on musicians, we have a couple of centuries/decades of precedence for it. I find "filmography" to be unattractive (though it has 50 years of history now), and "gameography" even worse, because of the two vowels. It's taste, no doubt: I have no objection to "videography", which has three vowels. Maybe it's that "game" is too Anglo-Saxon to be married to the Greek 'γραφία'. But please don't challenge Mandarax to boldness: he is personally acquainted with artists, and those are typically bad-mannered. Drmies (talk) 01:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK I'm confused. I wasn't trying to challenge anybody. I was suggesting that if User:Mandarax didn't like the word then he could make an edit and change it. I suggested a variety of alternatives with "Games" being the most common. The term "gameography" is in fact commonly used outside of Wikipedia but I don't care one way or the other about its use inside Wikipedia. Since you are both opposed to the term, though, I entreat you to change it to something you're more comfortable with. Again, this isn't a challenge, but an invitation. Why this discussion is taking place here at an administrator's talkpage instead of at the article talk page is also a bit of a mystery to me. There's no conflict here. I also don't really see what's wrong with "Games" or "Works" so that makes three of us. The two of you don't like the term and I'm happy to see it replaced with a better one. Please go ahead. -Thibbs (talk) 03:21, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why you'd be confused. This is a talk page; not everything on it is administrative matter. We're chatting; we're not discussing article improvement. You like the term--fine. You wrote the article, you get to pick. I have no quarrel with your use of the word in that article, and it's hardly something for anyone to get excited about; in fact, and I think I can speak for Mandarax here, we're perfectly happy with you keeping it as it is. If you wish to change it into something we all like, that's even better. But we're just chatting here. Social network and all. Drmies (talk) 03:27, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This feels like a content-related discussion but maybe I'm wrong on that. Anyway I'm pretty clear on which term you two dislike but I have no idea what your preferred term is. If either of you feel like changing it then please feel free. I'm completely indifferent to the current word so I'll leave it up to you. -Thibbs (talk) 03:46, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This was definitely not intended as a content-related discussion. I didn't expect or desire, or even care about, a change. I merely mentioned it as an addendum to that previous chat. I must point out that you do Drmies' place an injustice by referring to it merely as an administrator's talk page, for this is really the Wikipedia Algonquin Round Table (WART). Yes, Drmies, please feel free to speak for me any time. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:10, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, speaking for you then, I think Drmies is not just a brilliant editor and a fine specimen of humanity, especially given his advanced age, but also a prime candidate for a nice sabbatical and a pay raise. Speaking for me, then, thanks! Drmies (talk) 14:39, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Y'all got WARTs? Can I join, or do I have to act in the Scottish play first? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • My apologies if I misunderstood you, Mandarax, but I interpreted your post as criticism of the word choice at that article and I couldn't understand why you wouldn't simply fix the problem or contact me. This was compounded by the impression I got from Drmies that I was being obstructionist in my alleged preference for this term and that I had a problem with the alternatives I had suggested. I'm afraid the chatty tone of the conversation was lost on me. Again I'm sorry that I spoke up. -Thibbs (talk) 14:27, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wolf House merge

[edit]

Howdy Drmies,

We have a two-item disambiguation page Wolf House that mentions two Northern California structures, both designed by notable architects. Neither has a dedicated article though both are described in broader articles. I believe that the burned Jack London house is the primary topic and I have written a draft article about it, which is located at User:Cullen328/sandbox/Wolf House. I want to merge that draft to Wolf House, and deal with the Berkeley student housing structure as a hat note at the top of the new article. I could boldly try it myself but am worried I might screw things up because the target is a dab page rather than an article. Is this uncontroversial or does it need a discussion? Can you help, or offer advice? Thanks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:13, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Wing Inn

The Blue Wing Inn in Sonoma, California was one of the first hotels, reputedly the first hotel, built in California north of San Francisco.[1][2] The original hotel, constructed by order of General Vallejo in 1836, a was simple one-storey building.[3] However, in 1848 during the California Gold Rush it was purchased by seafarer James Cooper and ship's carpenter Thomas Spriggs, who together expanded the hotel to incorporate a saloon.[4][5] They added a first floor and expanded the ground floor from one room to three; further expansion in 1852 included balconies and two more rooms on the first floor.[5] Up to that point, the hotel had been known as Sonoma House.[5] It was Spriggs who gave it its name the Blue Wing, in July 1853.[5]

The Blue Wing didn't stay a hotel, or gambling hall, past 1880.[5] First it became a stagecoach depot.[5] Later it was to become a grocery store.[5][6] It was bought in 1900 by Agostino Pinelli, who converted it into a winery.[5] Some histories record that the Blue Wing figured in Pinelli's famous use of the contents of his 1000-gallon wine tank to help put out the Sonoma Fire of September 23, 1911.[5] In fact, the tank was held in a cellar of a building adjacent to the Blue Wing, which in 2004 had become a florist's shop.[7]

In 1939 a writer for the Federal Writers' Project described the building as "shabby".[1] By then, it was in part used as a museum that contained various memorabilia, including a music box that "still tinkles when fed coins" and a fire engine, Sonoma's first, whose painted decorations were described as "faded birds and flowers".[1]

After restorative work, the Blue Wing became mainly a retail centre.[6]

References

  1. ^ a b c FWP 1939, p. 363.
  2. ^ Hellmann 2004, p. 119.
  3. ^ Dwyer 2008, pp. 120–121.
  4. ^ Mathes & Smith 2004, p. 97.
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h i Dwyer 2008, pp. 121.
  6. ^ a b Hoover & Kyle 2002, p. 507.
  7. ^ Mathes & Smith 2004, p. 27.
Reference bibliography
  • California A Guide to the Golden State. American guide series (reprinted US History Publishers, 1967 ed.). Federal Writers' Project. 1939. ISBN 9781603540056.
  • Hellmann, Paul T. (2004). Historical Gazetteer of the United States. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9780203997000. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • Dwyer, Jeff (2008). Ghost Hunter's Guide to California's Wine Country. Pelican Publishing. ISBN 9781455604913. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • Hoover, Mildred Brooke; Kyle, Douglas E., eds. (2002). "Sonoma County". Historic Spots in California. Stanford University Press. ISBN 9780804778176. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • Mathes, Valerie Sherer; Smith, Diane Moll (2004). Sonoma Valley. Images of America. Arcadia Publishing. ISBN 9780738529431. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Further reading

Doctor Who This article is a substub; you can help Wikipedia by putting all articles for creation on Drmies' user talk page.

Re:

[edit]

I checked it out and saw a copyvio/promo within 30 seconds of listening to the soothing tunes. Wow. Tiderolls 16:59, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Really? Does a copyvio have a specific sound? I can't wait to sit upstairs, in my office, and hear those sounds through a proper power amp. Hey, the SEC is 0-2 against the ACC. What's going on? Drmies (talk) 18:16, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nudge, nudge

[edit]

Since you're not a watchlist watcher, you may be unaware that Template:Did you know nominations/Going to the Dogs has been awaiting your response for a week. Also, Template:Did you know nominations/Ellen Jens wants your approval of a shortened hook. And, yes, I have no problem with the anthropomorphism of templates. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Editor's Barnstar
For your work & edits at Razer Inc ///EuroCarGT 03:08, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! To be honest I did not find the vandal templete until now. ///EuroCarGT 03:19, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sheila Carter Article

[edit]

Thx for helping me out with the Sheila Carter article. What's going on is user Beaconboof [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Beaconboof ] doesn't seem to accept the fact the fictional character of Sheila Carter DID have plastic surgery to look like the character of Phyllis Summers Newman. It's exactly what played out onscreen and you can see it all here: http://www.soapcentral.com/yr/whoswho/sheila.php . The links says: "Paul Williams managed to track Sheila to Argentina in October 2006 and discovered that she had undergone plastic surgery to look like Phyllis Summers, then had killed the plastic surgeon."

Also, former head writer & executive producer of 'The Young & the Restless' Maria Arena Bell decided to expand Sheila Carter's family and created the characters of Sarah Smythe, Sheila's sister, and Daisy Carter & Ryder Callahan, Sheila's twins with Tom Fisher. You can see it all here: http://www.soapcentral.com/yr/whoswho/daisy.php . The link says: "Sarah turned out to be Sheila Carter's sister who had plastic surgery to impersonate Lauren and Daisy and Ryder turned out to be Sheila's twin children."

But user Beaconboof keeps editing the article so it says that Sheila was "believed or presumed" to have surgery to look like Phyllis. They also keep implying Sarah was not truly her sister and that Daisy & Ryder are not truly Sheila's children. Any time I revert such edits they revert it over and over again... This is exactly why I added in the 'Critical Reception' section so I can address the fact that several viewers have a big problems with storylines from 2006 and onward and disbelieve the fact Sheila was made to look like Phyllis, Sarah was ever her sister and Daisy & Ryder were ever her twins but they keep saying those things elsewhere in the article.

I have added two more sources to the article in the '2010-2012'. It directly concerns the character of Sheila Carter and the possibility she might still be alive. Israell (talk) 04:55, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is really a matter for the talk page, where Beaconboof also need to take this up. I don't have sufficient interest in the subject matter to get involved any further, certainly not in detailed questions about the things you mention above. If that article is much more condensed I can maybe make sense of it, but this is too complicated for my simple brain. Now, I just saw that Beaconboof dropped their manifesto on your talk page and I've responded there as well; if you are indeed here to improve the project (I have no reason to think otherwise) you will take the substantive matters up on the talk page, maybe achieve consensus on what the article needs to have and say, and use that as a bargaining tool to ward off future disruptions--something that can help simple-minded admins like myself to make a decision on behavior (not on content). BTW, keep in mind we're talking about a fictional character in a soap opera; it's not exactly a pressing matter considering all the other issues we have on Wikipedia with content and user behavior. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 14:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Razer Inc Sections removed: mouse & keyboards devices comparison

[edit]

If it is unverified how should I go about it, I believe it is needed. If it isn't then why would phones, GPUs, CPUs, and fans have this on their articles. Just because there was a lot of things unneeded on the wiki article does not make these tables pointless, I would like you to remove all of the other devices I mentioned if you still differ. Cky2250 (talk) 12:38, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's not just the the information was unverified, it was also decidedly unencyclopedic. We're not a catalog, or a directory, of detailed product information. I don't see what the point is of a list of details about the mice the company has produced, and that some other articles may have it is not really very relevant. Especially if relevant secondary sourcing is missing, there isn't an argument for inclusion besides "let's list everything we can", and that's just not valid. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 14:03, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

[edit]

List of rape victims from history and mythology has been tagged as unreferenced. LadyofShalott 14:31, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • What do you make of that? I think it's silly to do that on a list. Drmies (talk) 14:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have mixed feelings. They are all subjects with their own articles, and the scope clearly disallows any BLPs. On the other hand, refs are good in general. <shrug> LadyofShalott 14:38, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thus sayeth the MOS: "Stand-alone lists are subject to Wikipedia's content policies and guidelines for articles, including verifiability and citing sources. This means statements should be sourced where they appear, they must provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations...It is generally expected that obviously appropriate material, such as the inclusion of Apple in the List of fruits, will not be supported by any type of reference." I'd say talk to the guy who put the tag on (User:Simon Burchell) and see if he has any specific concerns; if not, then I'd personally say that these all fall under the "obviously appropriate" clause. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:41, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

De Friese Meren

[edit]

It "will have a population of 51,447". It will? No babies will be born before January 1st; nobody will die? (Or those will happen in equal numbers?) LadyofShalott 15:42, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Ray Butts Page]

[edit]

You Wrote "I have reverted the move by Cruzado (talk · contribs): you can see from his history that he has an interest here, and unfortunately he has more love for his family than knowledge of Wikipedia. First of all, if such a page is to be moved it's polite to ask if that's OK, esp. since this is obviously the creation of one editor, me. Second, the move was a bit boneheaded since the article remained on the amplifier, thought the title (Joseph Raymond Butts) suggested biography. Their edits are problematic in other ways: they keep insisting on inserting some patent dispute sourced to a primary reference; that won't do of course in an encyclopedia. Part of this seems to come from the AfC Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ray Butts being declined, I can't tell. Perhaps the recent IP edits are from the same source. At any rate, this is an article about an amplifier, and it should stay that way. Cruzado is more than welcome to write a biography (in fact, I tried to help them), but this is not the way to do it. Drmies (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2013 (UTC)"

First of all, you obviously did not read the comments on the change before reverting, and especially before making your comments here. Which can be construed as a bit boneheaded. This is not about some family thing. It is about deserved credit and historical accuracy. Just because I know a lot about the subject, even some stuff from having meet people involved, does not diminish my objectivity.

The comment left on change in the page clearly state that the goal here IS to get a biography page on the inventor that in a documented and historical manner invented more than just the Echosonic. There is the notable work with the Gretsch FilterTron as well too be most easily referenced at the least. More to anyone that would take the time to dig since Wiki values references so much.

Looking a little closer you can see that the revised version (by YOU) of the biography page with these TWO referenced accomplishments was rejected because your article on the echosonic, which has the inventor's name in the title and links, and also tries to go into the some of the background of the inventor. Rejected stating an article with the subject matter already exists. That editor seemed to think your amplifier article was also about the inventor and his work with pickups too, not just the amplifier.

I don't understand why you claim the bio page that replaced it was still only about the amp. It is clearly about the inventor and the two primary inventions. And, it could be expand with research into A LOT more Butts did in music history, with some work.

Honestly, though your move and comments come off as a defensive and somewhat offensive move to protect your amp article, I can understand if you did not see the comments made about the change, the rejection because of conflicts with this other article. It seems the problem here is your echosonic article is too much about the inventor to avoid conflicts with policy on similar subject matter...with creating a bio page. So the idea was to replace the echosonic article with the bio page, which also has the info on the echosonic. You having links referencing the inventors name pointing to your AMPLIFIER article, having his name in the title, starting off with his background. According to some other wiki editor, your amp article is too much on him. So when a bio article is submitted which is on him and the amp, and the pickups. It is has two-thirds of what you supposed amp only article contains. Why you claim the one that replaced it is still just on the amplifier. The bottom line is... since there are more than one historical invention it makes much more sense in an organizational manner to have a bio page. Especially when consider there was more than two if more references could be found. Not even considering his work with the labels, if again, referenced. There is no question he deserves the bio page. It is just, your page is blocking that from happening, because it is also so much on him.

So it asks the question (which you do not have to literally answer). Is this about who wrote what, or how to provide the historical information to those subject deserved in and clean, accurate, and easy to reference manner. I'm not a full time user here, and after this mess I would not want to be. I just have a personal interest in music history and after a trip to Nashville learned about this. I'll try to resubmit your revised bio page again. See if the NEXT editor rejects it because it conflicts with your page... again.

Lastly, I have no idea what you are talking about regarding patent disputes, or disputed patent information. There has never been any disputes involving this stuff. The only thing that I can think of is a reference to a book where an author was mistaken in claiming there was no patent on the echo unit when Butts met with the creator of the Echoplex. That was changed because it is not true, plain and simple. Comes down to just because you read doesn't mean it is true. Referencing the United States Patent and Trademark Office under the inventors full name "Joseph Raymond Butts" will pull the patent that proves that authors claim false. That is a inaccurate publication, not a dispute. Otherwise I have no idea what you refer, maybe it is someone else adding things. Cruzado (talk) 21:30, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Burning Man

[edit]

Normally, I'd post this on Mandarax's page, but these are some amazing photos of this year's Burning Man and it needs a wider audience. Link to the photos. There are about 200 photos. These are some of my favorites. If you don't know what Burning Man is, think Road Warrior cosplay, but with bikes and bunnies. Then there is the Gathering of the Juggalos, which is meth addict cosplay (NSFW or for anyone anywhere) with clown paint. Bgwhite (talk) 05:19, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And i thought I was being bizarre by attending Maker Faire, which has a WMF booth. Yeah, one of my old buddies from a third of a century ago has been attending Burning Man in recent years, and many of the images are beautiful. There is some true art created. As for the Juggalos, my advice is "steer clear". Far clear. Way clear. And don't mention Tila Tequila within 500 yards of those clowns. And I use the term "clowns" advisedly. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:47, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the links. I haven't looked through all of the photos yet, but many, if not most, of the ones I've seen are actually not from this year. I recognize things from 2008 through 2011, and even the spectacular ape/snake zoetrope Homouroboros from 2007 when I didn't go, but which was also at the Decompression I went to. Yes, I know, it seems wrong to go to a Decompression for an event at which one hasn't been compressed.... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:06, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Der Busant

[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

University of Michigan Men's Glee Club

[edit]

I saw this at AfD and started to rescue it. I don't suppose you or anyone would like to help me get this in shape for GAN? I can probably retrospectively cite everything in it via a good Google Newspapers search and fill the rest in from their official site, but somebody with "dead trees" access may be able to do better. Any takers? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:33, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Advice needed on Ansari

[edit]
Sitush? Sitush?

Do you know anybody better suited for dealing with Ansari (nisbat) and Ansari (sindhi tribe). I guess the last one is a poorly performed split off of the first, but I don't know much about that. But with the appearance of Jews and Muslims in one article I suddenly get extremely cautious and want to leave it to an expert... The Banner talk 20:03, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need to drink stuff "inspired by" when I can have the real thing on my doorstep ;-P Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:58, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lucky dog--though I'd rather live on a Belgian doorstep. Drmies (talk) 14:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll stick my sconce in to agree about Belgian doorsteps. I was in a wet county this afternoon, and took the opportunity to pick up this Goose Island Honker's Ale and some Double Agent IPL (which for some reason I haven't divined yet I'd drink until I turned yellow and my next of kin were notified). The Honker's Island is good: I think better than most of the American "British ales".  davidiad { t } 01:30, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fellowship of the Andes

[edit]

I really cannot at this time pay for the archived versions of articles about this film found through Gnews, but it seems they do exist.[13] [14] It is kinda difficult to believe that a climbing exhibition of the visually impaired did not get coverage. Maybe a soft redirect for now? [15] Schmidt, Michael Q. 01:11, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uncle G and the Blue Wing Inn

[edit]

Hello Drmies,

As you know, Uncle G has been inactive of late. He assisted with my problem with Wolf House, and left a somewhat unusual edit request above. Then, he posted a draft of pretty decent start article about the historic Blue Wing Inn above. This is a topic I have had listed on my user page as a possible future article for some time. I am a slow poke and just hadn't gotten around to it. I am grateful that he wrote the article, and would be happy to improve it and add photos. But somehow this needs to be moved from your talk page to article space, maintaining attribution. Yngvadottir has commented on Uncle G's talk page about this, but who knows when he will be back? I am a bit bewildered by all of this. What are your thoughts? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:02, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I see you just moved it. Can it be attributed to Uncle G? He didn't make it up, by the way. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, he didn't. For example I don't think he used this. I'm up to my elbows in bog sacrifices right now or I'd muck about with that '-) Yngvadottir (talk) 02:09, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
The Air Police appreciates your help. DPL bot. 1900 ( Warrington (talk) 13:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC))[reply]
A Hammam

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Blue Wing Inn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saloon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:06, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Klootzak

[edit]

Would it be true to say "wikipedia has a lot of klootzaks on the website which ruin it for others?"♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:09, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you make that plural "klootzakken" (-en is the default marker for plural; note the double consonant to mark the vowel as short), that would be true, yes. Your list and mine may differ, though! Drmies (talk) 14:55, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why, because you'd include myself in your list of klootzakken?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

[edit]
Harem interior, Odaliske, Francesco Hayez
The Air firefighters arrived. the situation is hot. Two bot marks in such short time!!!!!! ( Warrington (talk) 13:51, 11 September 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mater (Cars) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • author2=Suzanne Fitzgerald Wallis|title=The Art of Cars|publisher=Chronicle Books|page=4}}</ref>}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:19, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Grace Sherwood FA

[edit]

Thank you from PSky and Wehwalt for your comment and review of this recently successful FAC. PumpkinSky talk 20:22, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Admin advice

[edit]

Now that the insults are directed towards me, I don't know exactly what to do, if anything at all on my end. Any advice? Bgwhite (talk) 20:29, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Invisible Doctor

[edit]
The Invisible Barnstar
Without your help, Wikipedia would cease to exist entirely. The world would fall into utter chaos, much as it did on 11 September. Even if You chose to be invisible today. Hafspajen (talk) 20:30, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your new-found fame

[edit]

If this is your first time for this kind of nonsense, brace yourself for finding traces of the K-Pop accusations all over the web forever. I still find my picture on the web every once in while combined with accusations that I am in the pay of the Aruban government, Paul van der Sloot, Joran van der Sloot, or some combination of all three.—Kww(talk) 02:21, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh, I'd much rather be consigned to some sort of strip mall-hell for K-pop haters than be associated with that. I have no doubt that those accusations are much more serious, even dangerous, than this K-pop nonsense. And in Alabama, they're alive still, those sentiments. Thanks for this relatively cheerful note! Drmies (talk) 04:24, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good, I thought it was just me. I ran in to the K-Pop Possee recently (albeit indirectly) at Talk:Rainbow (rock band)#Requested move 2 due to a collision with Rainbow (South Korean band). I'm amazed how much stuff there is is linked to it and a lot of the sources appear to be questionable at best. I cannot seriously believe that a band that is allegedly signed to a major label and allegedly that popular would not have had some sort of legal run-in with Ritchie Blackmore's lawyers at some point. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:03, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, I have a COI there--I LOVE Rainbow, and On Stage is one of my favorite live albums ever. Drmies (talk) 17:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to your post on my Talk Page

[edit]
Let's dump on Drmies!

Once again I logged in to add meaningful content and found myself engaged in a conversation with another editor (you this time) that I'm not interested in. Since you have instigated an action based on what you call my "ludicrous" claim of stalking I've had to reply to you. Go to my Talk Page and learn the value of subtle control through presence.

Thanks for nothing pal.

Sluffs (talk) 10:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • (stalking) Is today National "Dump on Drmies from a great height" day or something? :-/ Sluffs, you're not blocked anymore. It's ancient history, and we've all moved on. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:16, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see anything coming from any height, Ritchie. I am curious, though, about what "subtle control through presence" is supposed to mean. Look at the editor's history for why they were blocked, and you will see how infinitely subtle that supposed control was--so subtle it could probably cut through worlds and dimensions. Drmies (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We don't need a RS to say London is in the UK, right?

I've left a reply on my Talk Page to your incredibly strange and dangerous thinking about democracy and free speech as it relates to your role as admin on this site. More and more I understand why the UK is the only country in the world that does not arm its police. My right to live without fear are protected by the customs of my land which are based on the democratic principle that those elected to govern do so only with the permission of those who are to be governed. I deny your view as it relates to Wikipedia that "we're not a democracy" and maybe like Charles I you are sorely in need of having your head removed.

Sluffs (talk) 20:48, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even on the execution block, Charles I was impressed about his clean block log on Wikipedia, particularly when he had created two sockuppets (pictured)
I think comments such as this after his 48 hour block show its not going to much good.Blethering Scot 21:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps not, but then the next one will be longer. (Of course, if anyone disagrees with me as far as the duration is concerned, they are welcome to take any action they feel necessary, up to and including starting an ANI thread or even just changing the duration themselves.) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:57, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Order of Nakhimov, 2nd degree, for you!

[edit]
The Order of Nakhimov, 2nd degree, for you!
Please enjoy wearing this Order of Nakhimov, 2nd degree. Awarded for your "leftist, and anti-consumerism philosophy". Long live the revolution! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies/Archive_56&oldid=1142977818"