User talk:Drmies/Archive 58

Never knew or would have guessed that you were an Anti....

So that just tells me you are an excellent and non biased editor.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 04:24, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks--but I don't know that I am. I do know that there are plenty of excellent and non-biased editors here who put their responsibility toward the project before their own politics and opinions. In fact, look up this all-too long talk page and you'll see a dozen or more. Some of the best writers I've ever worked with are active here, and I think most of them understand that good (encyclopedic) writing is driven by things other than personal opinions. Still, I appreciate it; I hope that Spiffy's dog gave you an extra lick. Drmies (talk) 04:29, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

What's with the lack of references in Dutchy stuff?

I know the nl.wp tends to be sans refs frequently. I was just looking at Edison Award which rightfully is topped with an unreferenced tag. BTW, can you find a better ref for the Edison Award in this article? I want it for my new stub, Craig Hella Johnson. I'll look tomorrow, but I've stayed up way too late already. Gotta be awake to face the public again in the morning. LadyofShalott 05:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

• Face the public, milady? I dare say, it shouldn't be so difficult. All your faces are good ones. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Aw thanks, Crisco. I wish I could same the same for all the faces of the public. (Only certain ones provoke such commentary.) LadyofShalott 12:12, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
• Is that not good enough? I'm searching--but guess what, I had to use Google to find Google Advanced Search, which used to be a button on the search screen. This is the Edison website and should be reliable enough.

  I have nothing to offer on the quality of the Dutch wiki. It's sad and bad. You can go around and tag 90% of their articles as woefully unreferenced and unencyclopedically written. Compare Mathijs Bouman on our and their wikis and see the difference (granted, I worked extra hard on that one, since he's an old school friend and I got him up at DYK, but still). Have a gorgeous day! Drmies (talk) 14:29, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

3 October Festival and Rubberen Robbie would be easier to write if the Dutch equivalents had any sources, that's for sure. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, look at Robbie now. Turns out it was a can of worms. Funny--for weeks now I've had a few lines from their "Stars on 45" parody in my head ("onze luitenant stak de kazerne in brand"), and now you bring them up! Anyway, look at the article and see how important those guys actually were--quite amazing. Who knew they wrote "Een beetje verliefd", Andre Hazes's signature hit? So, how was the show? Did you play good? Had much beer? Groupies? Did Rubberen Robbie, or maybe Van Beukenstein play? Was Nils there? Drmies (talk) 20:19, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

If you're planning to play 3 Oktober, don't try and drive one of these through the centre of Leiden

Nice one! The festival was utterly brilliant. Leiden is a lovely place, very hospitable crowd, good audience, everyone wanted to buy us a beer. I don't think Rubberen Robbie were there but Maximum Overdrive definitely were. Nils may or may not have been there for all I know - I spoke to so many people I couldn't keep up. But to say "their song "3 Oktoberrr" is a perennial favorite at the Leids 3 October Festival" is frankly an understatement. If you don't play it in your set, the crowd will sing it for you! We ended up doing an impromptu version of it as the last number at the last gig, realising we would not get away without doing so. We've been invited back next year, on the strict condition we play it! Mission between now and then is to learn enough Dutch to understand the lyrics - I can now pronounce "mooi" properly, so that's a step in the right direction I guess. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Haha, thanks for the update. Nice to hear you had a good time. That song can't be too difficult to learn. Mooi! Drmies (talk) 14:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Garrejones44444777 and 'pets'?

Hello, Drmies!
Thanks for your Admin action in regards to Garrejones44444777 (talk · contribs) (Nb. All edits Tag: Mobile edit)

However I fear you have uncovered a nest of ducks! (or Bunnies & TweetyPies!)
Garrejones44444777 turns up on 2013-09-28, the day after Tweety1962compostion is indeffed as a sock of TweetiePie1947.

 Comment: These are all from the recent edit history of Person to Bunny:

• BugsBunny1957 (talk · contribs) 19:57, 27 September 2013. "Due to being out of date that was partially unavoidable so the cartoon was officially cancelled out of theaters" (Tag: Mobile edit)
  
• Tweety1962compostion (talk · contribs) different edits, but the name is similar (and mispelled too!) Already blocked as a sock of 'TweetiePie1947'
  
• TweetiePie1947 (talk · contribs) 17:16, 27 September 2013‎ " That was paritly unavoidable when April 1, 1960 was a expired date for the cartoon to be released." (Tag: Mobile edit)
  
• 205.223.222.48 (talk · contribs) See here "Canceled out of theaters due to Production of Music Difficulties " (Tag: Mobile edit)
  
• 208.163.137.16 (talk · contribs) See here "This Cartoon was officially cancelled out of theaters, mainly because [[Arthur Q. Bryan]] Died before the short could be released in 1959." part of larger edit
  
  •   Both IPs in Tallahassee, Florida [1] [2]

 Looks like a duck to me
So, not only is 'Garrejones44444777' disruptive, they are a sockpuppet and edit warring on multiple pages under different usernames and IPs.
If I should take this list elsewhere like Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations (WP:SPI) I'll do so. --220 of ^Borg 09:54, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)SPI does sound like the thing to do. LadyofShalott 12:07, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I did notice that, and going to SPI and requesting CU is the best thing to do. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:20, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) M'lady (& Drmies) too late I found out there has already been an Edit warring (WP:AN3) case. (and I thought I was sooooo clever) Indefs handed out etc. did no good of course! Several new accounts, new IP and away we go again! (Damned busy page here!) 220 of ^Borg 14:46, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, the joint is jumping (you're trying to edit the section, right, not the whole too-long page?). Yep, SPI will take care of that. Drmies (talk) 14:49, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Another sock: BugsBunny1958oscarwinner (talk · contribs) Trivialist (talk) 23:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• Not anymore. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 02:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

User:Garrejones44444777 is back at Person to Bunny‎‎, making the same dubious unsourced edits. Trivialist (talk) 00:27, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

word for anti-gun views

You said in your article talk post that you were not sure if there was a word for your position. Anti-gun covers it somewhat I think;but a word coined by some in the gun world is Hoplophobia although the "fear" part is probably (intentionally) insulting by those that use it, so I think you would probably not self-apply it. Gaijin42 (talk) 14:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

• Haha, that sounds way too much like a sexual phobia. The note on it not occurring in the DSM is kind of funny. Hey, I appreciate the reference, and I realize my stance is a total pipe dream. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:36, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

• One could entertain a fantasy of chasing Jeff Cooper down the street with a katana, whilst inviting him to invent a word for irrational fear of swords. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Chambara-phobia, Musashi-phobia or Mifune-phobia ? The last rolls off the tongue well. 220 of ^Borg 09:31, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• God, now I want to watch Soshi Okita, Burning Corpse of a Sword Master. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the etymology of hoplophobia is not sexual at all, but homosexual. It stems from the first organized militia forces, the Greek hoplites of antiquity, who as we all know from speculative movies and books, were raging homosexuals. They all carried very long, very large spears. Anyhoo, our modern-day words for homophobia and hoplophobia are in fact quite ancient; the lamestream media, as usual, is out to conceal WP:The Truth. Hope this helps! Wear your ancient label with pride, if you so choose!  :-)   p.s. Katanas don't kill people; Akira Kurosawa kills people. — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Um, actually Hoplite refers to a type of greek shield, not homosexuality. The term greeks used for what we would consider homosexuality was arsenokoitēs, but they did not have an identity for the concept like we did, it was just another kind of sex. The "famous" gay warriors (The sacred band), was quite small and isolated, and not a general class of "gay warrior", although it is quite logical to assume that guys out on a battle far away from their women might look to each other to let off some steam more than people think (probably even in modern times) Gaijin42 (talk) 19:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

How darez u qeustion my knowledge of ancientness stuffz? Hmmm. My humour has fallen on deaf ears. <cry> Yes, I know, the hoplites are a locked-shield-formation. *I* played the videogame.  :-)   And unfortunately, given my dim view of humanity generally and my WP:OR analysis of the linguistic evidence ("rape-n-pillage" is a phrase with long etymology whereas "homosexualize-n-pillage" gives zero google hits), I think it more likely that ancient warriors probably just found the nearest settlement and wrecked havoc on the locals. I'd just never heard "hoplophobia" before, and figured I'd inject some sillyness, into a word that strikes me as profoundly silly. Hope this clarifies! Best, 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

This is all well above my pay grade. Remember, I'm a friend of Eric Corbett's, a "good pal", so I know nothing about language. I'm going to ping Davidiad, who can speak the Definitive Word of Wisdom. Also, he can haz cheezeburgerz. Drmies (talk) 17:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

εὖ τετυλωμένον ὅπλον

I'm not really sure what I'm supposed to settle here, and I think the IP's just joking around, but hoplophobia is of course a modern coinage, as are all -phobia compounds except for hydrophobia (which actually just exists in verb form) and theophobia, "fear of God" in the Christian sense during the early Byzantine period. The hoplo- element of the word is related to hoplite, but in compounds like this morphemes are productive only in the broad senses, not via derivative, so in this case, hoplo- = "arms". And, as Gaijin42 pointed out, nope, no homosexual connotations at all in the hoplo- root, though it can also mean "tool", both literally and in the same metaphorical usage stoned American teens use it. An epigram from the Planudean division of the Greek Anthology (16.242) speaks of Priapus' εὖ τετυλωμένον ὅπλον, eu tetulomenon hoplon, his "well hardened tool".  davidiad { t } 21:01, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hehehe. That's what she said. Drmies (talk) 21:10, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Schools

It's at WP:OUTCOMES#SCHOOLS - you can uncontentiously redirect such articles yourslef, no need to push them thru AfD. ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:54, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

• Right on. Thanks Kudpung. I hope you're doing well. Drmies (talk) 23:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm fine thanks, but still very busy in RL. I wonder actually how I find time to remain so active here, but I feel compelled... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Compelled, huh? A d d i c t i o n . . . Drmies (talk) 02:24, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• I think that's what we can say about a l l o f u s. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah, I could be driving home right now... OK, I will. I have this under control. I can stop anytime I want. Like right no— Preceding unsigned comment added by Drmies (talk • contribs)

With reference to Yeats infobox removal

Hi Drmies,

I just wanted to apologize for creating that infobox on W. B. Yeat's bio page! I'm obviously a new user to Wikipedia and am still trying to get the hang of properly editing existing articles and creating new ones, and I am also still learning the proper decorum for doing so. I thought it was odd that such a monumental writer would not have an infobox yet, and now I can see that there is an obvious reason for why that is! It was a newbie mistake, and in the future I will be certain to check the talk page of any article I consider making an addition or edit too, as well as endeavor to be more careful with editing articles in general (especially major ones). Thank you for catching my mistake and for fixing it before anyone became too upset over it!

Sincerely,

• Davos, no need to apologize--none whatsoever. The thing is that infoboxes are kind of a hotly disputed item and a consensus was reached recently saying that (if I remember correctly) it's basically up to the main authors of the article. I looked for that discussion last night but couldn't find it before bedtime; one of the talk page stalkers may now. In short, the two opposing sides argued that, pro, infoboxes are really useful for a quick overview and, con, infoboxes are a kind of dumbing down and too often take up too much space. (The two sides may quibble with my off-the-top-of-my-head summary. I'm somewhere in the middle, I suppose.) But the Yeats article is also a Featured Article, and adding (or removing) an infobox is seen as a major change which would require discussion on the talk page, where I encourage you to post a note. Sorry, but you totally unwittingly and in perfect good faith stuck your editing pen in a hornet's nest (not one of my making, I might add.) Thanks for your note and for your edits. Drmies (talk) 14:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah nice one geezer Basket _Feudalist 14:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• What I see is that the boxes are widely liked all over the project, but a few editors are so strongly against them that I was urged not to use the unspeakable word for a few months, which is sad since advanced data base search relies entirely on them, - Mr. Yeats will not be found. For how long? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• Not long; merely until Ireland is a land united and free. "lol" Basket _Feudalist 14:57, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• Gerda, I don't make the rules, I just enforce them. :) Seriously, you know I can't judge the validity of your argument, nor do I want to since you're great and I'm totally on the fence on the topic. I just didn't want our new editor to get into trouble over something they probably were totally unaware of. If they take it up on the talk page, and you are indeed correct, then that infobox will be there shortly, I have no doubt. Drmies (talk) 14:59, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
• BTW, I have no doubt that Yeats will continue to be found, more than 1000 times per day. Drmies (talk) 15:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• As you are one of the many editors reasonable enough to avoid the hornet's nest altogether I should probably leave you alone ;) - However for enlightenment: 1) there are no "rules" against the unspeakable boxes, only essays. 2) I recently performed a similar revert. 3) I was not talking about views for Yeats, but for him showing in advanced queries of DBpedia. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• (Davos, Frau Arendt is a well-respected Big Shot Editor around these parts, and well worth listening to.) Where was that infobox discussion, if a discussion it was? Schoene Feierabend, Drmies (talk) 20:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• late, let's see: what discussion do you mean? The war is on since 2005, I was told, I feel like moving in a mine field. One day you see a decent discussion resulting in an infobox for a composer, a few days you try that same thing on Bach: explosion. One day you add one to Schubert's masses (we just sang No. 6, see my user), a few days you try the same thing on Mozart's Sparrow Mass: explosion. - When things got hot in operas, Ched started an arb case which resulted in four editors more or less gone and two restricted, as if we had too many editors. - I survived so far and approved this modest approach in an FAC. - In case you want to sample an enjoyable discussion I suggest Siegfried (opera). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• Didn't we just have an RfC or an ArbCom thing or something? Drmies (talk) 22:44, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• Didn't I just say so, an arb case leaving Wikipedia with four editors gone and two restricted. Only: it was called "infoboxes" but discussed behaviour, the older the more. (Don't look at what someone did last week, look at 2007.) See my talk for the link to the whole kafkaesque thing (look for arbitration or kafkaesque). But Siegfried is more entertaining, promised ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Some editors here might like to borrow something from my user page (which I borrowed from someone else). Dougweller (talk) 21:02, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Nice--thanks. Hey, you don't get a lot of barnstars. Are you sure you're sucking up to the right people? Drmies (talk) 23:13, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I keep meaning to but never have time. And I don't move the few barnstars I do get on my talk page to my user page anyway. Dougweller (talk) 15:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

An expert eye required

When you get a spare moment, please would you take a glance at this and also this. I've placed {{RPA}} on the former as I do not take kindly to being threatened on Wikipedia. In the latter the same user also threatens to have me "blocked". A line has to be draw somewhere and their comments are clear words of attack. Thank you. Wesley Mᴥuse 15:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• "Your hypocricy [sic]" can be considered a personal attack, yes (refrain, אומנות!)--the rest of the two paragraphs, not so much. The threat of having someone blocked, well, one person's threat is another person's warning; I don't think any admin would consider those particular remarks as very offensive (or, alternately, very serious). I don't know what to tell you. I pinged אומנות and will repeat, drop that kind of language please. If you feel you want to make something of it, go to ANI--we don't have an etiquette noticeboard anymore, for better or for worse. Drmies (talk) 15:31, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for looking into that situation, I really appreciate it. I wasn't too sure about the other two paragraphs, which is why I felt seeking a second opinion may be valid in case I was losing the plot. It does dishearten me somewhat that the user is trying to tar me with the brush of WP:FORUMSHOP and "contacting my friends for back up", just because I find comfort in seeking a second opinion on matters like this. After all is it not wise to speak to fellow Wikipedians on matters of this nature, than to go down to the local pub and talk to a bar tender over it? In my opinion, a Wikipedian would have more expert knowledge than someone who has never used Wikipedia in their life. Wesley Mᴥuse 18:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• Sure, but one man's asking for advice is another man's forum shopping, maybe. I don't agree with the "back up" phrasing, but I'd just let that slide and not bother me. Have fun at the pub. I wouldn't mind some shepherd's pie for lunch--and then maybe I'll know what it is. Drmies (talk) 18:25, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• He obviously hasn't taken heed of your ping. I've just had another onslaught of abuse. I've seriously had enough of that kind of angst from the user, to the point that I have now asked that he refrain from conversing with me until he can learn to be more civil. Wesley Mᴥuse 04:41, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
• And now there's this. It really needs to stop. Wesley Mᴥuse 04:45, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

ANI thread

I don't disagree with you about moving it to a talk page. But Bbb23 asked me not to move it to his or her talk page. And Bbb23 has repeatedly sanctioned people for discussing it on the MRM talk page, so I can't put it there, either. Would you mind if I move it to yours?William Jockusch (talk) 18:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• Ha, yes I mind! This is a happy place, William. With due deference to Bbb23, I hereby give you my blessing to copy to the MRM talk page (I've been "monitoring" there as well), but don't be surprised if there's an avalanche of "heard it all before". Now, I don't believe Bbb has sanctioned anyone for merely discussing something. But discussing something and trolling, wikilawyering, soapboxing, etc are different things: I have no opinion on what has happened and what your account of a past experience vs. his account may be; in other words, I'll take both of you at your word and your good faith. But perhaps Bbb has something to say on the topic--great advantage of his comments is that he's typically brief, as you have noticed. Drmies (talk) 18:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks, but I don't want a special blessing from anyone. The topic should be either fair game there, or not. Currently, it isn't, and I don't want to violate that, even with the blessings of an admin. So I've moved it here: [3]William Jockusch (talk) 00:44, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Sure, but that's hardly a high-traffic area. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Fancruft

Is this one of the worst cases of fancruft ever seen on Wikipedia? (I've pruned ca. 50k of it since then, but much more to go). - Sitush (talk) 06:52, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• OK, it's not 50k, but how's this for cruft? Also, I am an idiot. Drmies (talk) 13:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
• Holy shit Sitush--that's bad. I see that my old friend CorporateM tried his hand at it once but gave up quickly. Man! Drmies (talk) 13:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• Of course you are an idiot. Only idiots put themselves through RfA. It could be argued that admin status is the idiot's badge of honour ;) - Sitush (talk) 13:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• BTW, it is now ca. 100k removed. - Sitush (talk) 13:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

I think I saw someone on Twitter complaining about the Stephen Tompkinson, but the article was so large and the promotion so inter-twined with the encyclopedic content, it would take quite a bit of time to cull through it. The other page about gaming peripherals was much easier. Almost all of it was unsourced or sourced to the company website, so it was easy to delete. CorporateM (Talk) 13:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

CorporateM, you have outdone me: I am proud of you, and thanks. Sitush, I'm reorganizing the article, removing individual section headings for individual shows/movies. I may not be able to finish this before my body gives out. Drmies (talk) 13:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

CorporateM, Tompkinson has taken me several hours but I'm going to watchlist the thing - no way is that stuff going back in. Drmies, I noticed and have backed off - you have read my mind. - Sitush (talk) 13:52, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Drmies, that will be $5. I'm not as expensive as you - must be the admin premium ;-) (inside joke)CorporateM (Talk) 13:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• Have you ever considered that maybe you should pay me appropriately because I have a Ph.D.? Granted, it's worth a hell of a lot less than a BS in accounting, but still, I worked for it... Drmies (talk) 13:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• I thought a Ph.D. was BS.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• It's worth a lot more than your associate's degree, Bbb. Drmies (talk) 22:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• Tell that to the doofus who bought it on e-Bay for a helluva lot of money. On the other hand, no one has bought my Ph.D. You want a second one?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:01, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• ... As is the claim that reading books constitutes "work" :P - Sitush (talk) 15:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• Over-qualified. I need spin doctors, not Ph.D.s ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 14:09, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• What about Dr. Spin? Best of both worlds there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Some while ago I did some editing on the topic of spin on the public relations article. It was interesting, because in the PR profession, we take offense to the term. We think it means lying. However, the generally accepted modern definition basically just means "not being neutral" which isn't really an ethical problem at all. PR pros aren't suppose to be neutral. I wonder if I am accidentally bias on Wikipedia, if that is also spin, or if it must be intentional to warrant such a derogatory term. I've been meaning to chip away at the sub-articles of public relations and have a decent draft of History of public relations up. I might take that one on next when I get a chance. CorporateM (Talk) 01:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• "History of public relations"? You know, I don't think you'd be considered COI there, even by some of the most hardcore people. Nobody says Drmies can't write about the Netherlands, after all. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:12, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Ha, I just got done with "De vogels van Holland". Thanks Crisco, but the Netherlands don't pay me for anything I do for them; some people fare much better. Drmies (talk) 04:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Again with the Twittering, Drmies. Do we need "The Government of the Netherlands on Twitter" for more birds of Holland? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• If any of those tweets are from Pleuni Touw, sure. Drmies (talk) 04:35, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Pleuni Touw on Twitter... does she even have an account? No idea. She's a Golden Girl now, though, right? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:44, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Fuck off, Crisco: that's blasphemy. Next thing you know you're telling me that Brigitte Bardot got old. Any other dreams you want to destroy? Drmies (talk) 05:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Nah, she's still a young, nubile 80. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:07, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

As long as a certain someone doesn't edit the article on Crisco I think we'll be ok :-p CorporateM (Talk) 05:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I've always thought you should change your user name to CorporateMF. That's right Jack. Drmies (talk) 05:28, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• I don't even think Crisco is available in Indonesia. I'd just go straight for "Yippee Ki Yay CorporateMF", I think. All names can be made better with Yippee Ki Yay. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

User:Ultimate notorious editor

I noticed you unblocked this editor after Kww blocked him. [4] However, when I checked him, he shows up as  Confirmed as Buddhakahika (talk · contribs). Could you tell me why you think they aren't related? Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, that account was not related to Grounelzee except coincidentally, from what I could tell. I have never heard of Buddakahika before, so I have no opinion on the matter. I think Notory and Grounelzee aren't related because they were making very different edits (from the limited contributions I saw): Notory seemed like your typical run-of-the-mill POV editor who can't write English and thinks that Wikipedia is there to set something straight; Grounelzee is just a troll sock of a moderately more intelligent a**hole/LTV. But I say that based on only four edits by Notory. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Hey doc, I didn't see this conversation earlier, but when I saw your earlier unblock I checked Kww's page for any conversation and found the relevant discussion and therefore I'm sure you won't mind that I have now blocked the notorious one as a sock per the SPI findings of Reaper Eternal. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 13:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Spiff, Reaper--I only unblocked him because the block rationale was not valid, in my opinion. I didn't know all this other exciting stuff that you did. Drmies (talk) 14:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. Vgleer (talk · contribs) (a troll) and Buddhakahika (talk · contribs) (a pov-pusher) are definitely  Unrelated. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:06, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• I admire your gift for summary, Reaper. Drmies (talk) 04:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

You never know. Vgleer may be an incarnation of Buddhakahika. Obviously a CU check could never identify such a relationship. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 00:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

There is actually quite a bit of Original Research going into morphic resonance nowadays, and if it is someday verified as practical, we could easily use the google API which will no doubt spring up (the better to spy on your morphic ancestry my dear) to enhance checkuser. It would not only be able to investigate conscious mimics, and unconscious karmic inheritance, but would intercept telepathic control-signals from the sockmaster to the socks. HTH. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:15, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

No, silly, we can't use Google APIs. We need to stick it to The Man. Don't give in to their corporate duplicity! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:18, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I knew there was a reason my spidey-sense told me not to press that unblock button.—Kww(talk) 23:49, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Lol. It gives a brand new meaning to your friendly neighborhood socks. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 00:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Meles (genus), Saint-Vallier, Drôme

Drmies, are you planning to come back to this review of Meles (genus), or should I call for a new reviewer? Please let me know (here or there is fine). Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Oops. Drmies (talk) 19:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for finishing it. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:57, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Sorry. I did look at it a few weeks ago and meant to check if the edits took care of the problem, but didn't. Thanks for the reminder. Drmies (talk) 20:01, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Need Some Help

Hey Drmies, I went to Dianna earlier for help on a radio station article problem. She helped until she had to sign off for the night, she asked me to come to you for continued help, so I am. All the information you need to know is here on a post on her talk page. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:30, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

...and I admit that I have broken 2RR, but only because I think we have moved from an edit conflict to POINTed editing by a user I believe is a sock of a blocked user. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:31, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, I have no opinion on the latter comment, about socking. Try it out with an SPI, I'd say. As for the VARTV source, the best thing to do is to get a verdict of some sort from WP:RSN]] (and invite both of your opponents). Let me know if they revert again. Drmies (talk) 01:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I tried to get the socks connected via CU, but too much time has elapsed to make a clear connection. As for the VARTV reference, I will explain that via email. Thanks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 02:31, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Honda D engine edits

hi. I'm not new on Wikipedia. However, even though I've been making edits for several years now, I still am not at the level others are. Forgive me, I just don't have the time (to learn all the tricks, techniques, or to create a profile, etc).
I've been making good additions to the "Honda D engine" page, specifically three engines which I know very much about: the D15B7, D15B8, and D15Z1. In addition to being a walking book of knowledge on these engines, I own a number of original specimens. Original meaning they came in the car that I bought brand new from the Honda dealer in the mid-1990's. Read this paragraph a few times until it sinks in that I actually know and care about these motors.
Here's the problem: a stubborn Swede, Mr.choppers, who doesn't even own a car(!), keeps removing my additions. He doesn't know anything about the D15B7, D15B8, or D15Z1. He just takes pride in being annoying. Aside from being a d**k, he seems fixated on two things: 1, that I use an "anonymous" IP address and 2, that I don't have any book references. I understand that sometimes vandals use random IP addresses, but it's obvious by my edits that I am no vandal or punk kid. What self-righteous and callous Mr.choppers has a difficult time understanding is that MOST of the D series page is unreferenced. [heh! I wish I made my additions years ago! they'd be taken for truth today.] Well here we are in the 21st century, and unfortunately Mr.choppers has singled me out. He's picking on me. This is called bullying. He could focus his time on real vandals. (or better yet, turning off his computer and walking outside for a while). Instead, he removes my good and true edits. Have a look at his behavior! The guy has no concern for an increase in D series info. He sees himself as a Wiki cop. He's obsessed with the book rules, whereas I'm just concerned with helping the world gain more knowledge on Honda engines, such as the D15B8, for example. It's ironic that you (from NL) and Mr.choppers (from SE) are undoing my edits to an engine ONLY AVAILABLE IN USA. Does anyone see the irony here?
(I should book a flight to Schipol and start undoing additions to van Gogh made by Dutchmen, or additions to Scania made by Swedes!)
Citations? References? Do I look like a librarian?? If you two Europeans REALLY want that, then you must go ALL OUT. Put a [?] mark after every single sentence of each engine. (Won't that look pretty - a little blue question mark everywhere?)
The general populous already knows that Wikipedia may not be 100% correct. It's called the internet! People accept that some things could be inaccurate, but we still use it anyway. Right?
On to my questions: may I ask why you sent me a message reading "Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Honda D engine." ? How are my additions disruptive? And why isn't the spotlight focused on Mr.choppers? Is it because he has a [drum roll] Wiki profile? With a "Bhasa Indonesia" translation?? (pfff!). This Mr.choppers guy truly has too much time on his hands, and is damaging the Honda community's available information, that Honda experts like myself contribute to.

For the record, here's what the D15B8 entry looked like before my edits (and how "Mr.stoppers" prefers it):

   Found in:
       1992–1995 Honda Civic CX (U.S. model)
           Displacement : 1,493 cc (91.1 cu in)
           Bore and Stroke : 75 mm × 84.5 mm (3.0 in × 3.33 in)
           Compression : 9.1:1
           Power : 70 hp (52.2 kW, 71.0 PS) at 4,500 rpm
           Torque : 83 lb·ft (11.5 kg/m, 113 Nm) at 2,800 rpm
           Limit : 5,800 rpm
           Valvetrain : SOHC eight-valve (two valves per cylinder)
           Fuel Control : OBD-1 MPFI

and here's what it looks like after my contributions:

   Found in:
       1992–1995 Honda Civic CX (U.S. model)
           Displacement : 1,493 cc (91.1 cu in)
           Bore and Stroke : 75 mm × 84.5 mm (3.0 in × 3.33 in)
           Compression : 9.1:1
           Power : 70 hp (52.2 kW, 71.0 PS) at 4,500 rpm
           Torque : 83 lb·ft (11.5 kg/m, 113 Nm) at 2,800 rpm
           Limit : 5,800 rpm
           Valvetrain : 8-valve SOHC (two valves per cylinder)
           Fuel Control : OBD-1 MPFI
           ECU Code: P05
           Cam Gear: 5-hole, 38-tooth
           Head codes: PM8-1, PM8-2

Which one looks better to you?

Take a day or two before you answer. Think. The spirit of Wikipedia is to help. And I care very much about adding info only when I know it to be true. Is it a crime for me to add a few details to three engines?

Thanks for your time. 24.136.28.106 (talk) 03:54, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

PS. the IP address I'm currently using is shared by at least four working adults, so blocking this address would prohibit myself and those others from potentially helping Wikipedia.

• Eh, well, thanks. Yes. That's an interesting mix of possible expertise and insulting crap. Keep edit warring, keep inserting unverified information, keep insulting other editors, and your IP address will be blocked. Drmies (talk) 04:08, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Making arguments to support original research and insulting other editors will not win any debates on Wikipedia. However, I note that you mentioned owning the original manuals to the cars these engines are in. Sources do not have to be available online and I would consider such primary sources from the manufacturer acceptable use for specifications, assuming another editor doesn't feel it is overly detailed. CorporateM (Talk) 14:28, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

CorporateM, you must be a sharper reader, or less distracted by the grandstanding. If such manuals can be cited, of course. They're primary sources (if they're from Honda), but that would be perfectly acceptable. The IP does not seem to have noticed that I'm not in the NL (not that it matters); in the interest of full disclosure I'll cop to driving a Camry on the US highways and roads, with a four-cylinder engine, specifications unknown to me. Drmies (talk) 16:59, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• Ever the peacemaker, I see, Corporate. I swear, if even half of paid editors knew the rules as well as you do, controversy over COI editing would have been finished when there was still an article for every Pokemon species. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Experience and Wiki-knowledge help, but in the wrong hands they can make us a more successful POV pusher. Many of the skills required have nothing to do with Wikipedia, but with consulting, screening, etc. It would be nice if more PR agencies had a dedicated expert that knew our rules better than the average bear, but what would remain is the COI itself - they want something different than us and their ability to manage that is all that really matters - knowing the rules helps one do that.

Drmies' issue with Ogilvy is a familiar one. BrightLiners create a burden on the community to review our work, provide feedback and so on. The extent of that burden and the ratio of the burden to the value to our readers is important. I struggle to tread the line myself, because I need so much collaboration from editors on such a large number of articles and I can't take advantage of any single editor's kindness, so I try to spread it out and find editors with a natural interest in the subject. CorporateM (Talk) 01:06, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

The networking here is a great skill to learn; I'm in the same position you're in, needing help from lots of people all the time. Speaking of help, I got to drive the wife's Honda tonight, with its charming V6 (and a working radio!). Nice. Drmies (talk) 02:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I mainly refer to this character as "anonymous" because what else can I call him? A handle can be useful. I have also invited him (nicely and repeatedly) to simply provide sources and I even backhandedly offered assistance in spelling it out, if he could be bothered to pull out a manual from somewhere. Cheers,  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

komstigheden and futilities

What in the world is komstigheden? Google Translate is failing me, and I want a direct quote from this review of Njai Dasima. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• What, no date for the ad in De Indische Courant? Tsk tsk. OK. First things first, the author is "Alb. v[an] H.", right? And look above the image: it's "bijkomstigheden", which one could translate as "incidentals"; that is, random, trivial bits unrelated to the main action, which the review says are not found in the film--a positive mark, therefore. But you have that already in the article, I see: good guess. Drmies (talk) 17:09, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• D'oh! That explains why nothing was showing up. Thank you, Dr. Dr. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

User talk:167.206.128.5

There's an intelligent looking request for unblocking there. Letting you know as it was you that blocked the IP this time. Peridon (talk) 17:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• Yep, no one would accuse Mangoeater1000 of not being intelligent. That's why I blocked the IP; see also DoRD's note on an earlier unblock request. So I'm not going to do anything about it, but thanks for the note, Drmies (talk) 17:31, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Zimmermanh1997 is back...yet again

It is clear from this edit that User:Zimmermanh1997 is back. The IP being used traces back to Walkersville, Maryland, which is where all Zimmermanh1997 edits come from. I believe it might be time for a ban discussion. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:32, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• Go for it, Homer. Drmies (talk) 22:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Okie Dokie, I will type one up and post it tomorrow. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:08, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Going for a Record

I posted this message (which I thought was polite) on User:Nasnema‎'s talk page concerning this revert made with HUGGLE. I got this response. I don't need to look up what "FO" means. While I did leave a snarky reply, it is clear that Nasnema is using HUGGLE waaay too quickly and not owning up to mistakes. Mistakes made while using HUGGLE (like TWINKLE) can cost the person their access to that program. I thought you might have a word with Nasnema about the HUGGLE use and the NPA violation. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:26, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Well you are a liar. Nasnema  Chat  01:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• • Wait--who was called a damned liar here a few days ago? Can't an admin even go to Publix in peace? Crisco 1492, are you on the clock? (And check my recent edits!) Drmies (talk) 01:35, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• (That was me Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:05, 8 October 2013 (UTC))

• Well, you're in good company, BMK! Drmies (talk) 03:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• • • Sorry Drmies, I just post links to what is going on. Didn't know it would ping your phone. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:42, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• I mentioned you in a post on ANI (concerning the above), which you can find here. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:30, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
• @Drmies: Do check your email when you have a free moment (no rush). Thanks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:12, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Sure. Hey, no "ping" went off at the grocery store; I wouldn't know how to have that done anyway. Drmies (talk) 03:20, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Ha, again, no worries. In fact, I had a great time at the store: I chatted with a guy and took his picture (unfortunately it's terrible, and by rights it shouldn't stay up for long...), and then exchanged beers with the guy in the checkout line behind me: he gave me a Newcastle Werewolf, and I gave him a Sweetwater Motorboat. And then I made pumpkin muffins for my youngest daughter to take to school. On top of that, I used an angle grinder for the first time in my life, to cut through an inch of reinforced concrete--you should see that bathroom. What a mess. Drmies (talk) 03:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
    • I think you can somehow connect your Watchlist (via RSS) to your email. The RSS feed on your email would "ping" on your phone telling you it had changed. How one would do that is waaaay beyond me. :) Punkin' muffins sound good, I'm a Banana Nut Bread person myself. This bakery in town makes some excellent Banana Nut Bread. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:29, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Not films, but...

Eh, at least it's an English publication. Article, TOC. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:00, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• Here's another--Lilis Suryani. It's going to need a bit of work, obviously, but at least it has one solid reference. Drmies (talk) 17:08, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• LOL. (Thanks). Jakarta Post has a biography, and I happen to have a free photograph of her I found last month (after this was submitted). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• Article expanded. Apparently I was wrong about JP. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

• Wow Crisco--great work. I see that the Woodrich reference, which I found by chance somewhere, came in handy. Drmies (talk) 00:39, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

• Apparently it did, eh? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Rubberen Robbie at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 12:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Remington Arms

Hey. So I also just undid a number of revisions on the Remington Arms page that removed links. I nominated the page for protection WP:RFPP. If you want to second the nomination it might help? Thanks! --Zackmann08 (talk) 16:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• No, that's way too soon. I left a message for the user; let's talk first and shoot later. Drmies (talk) 16:37, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

This is on a topic I know nothing about ...

Someone pointed on my talkpage to Synthesizers.com, whose creator's name is identical with the company owner, and which has no independent sources ... all I have found so far is this, and I don't know whether that's a reliable source, or where to look for any that might be more obviously reliable. Pretty article, got reviewed in 2011, my question is do I tag it as possibly non-notable, AfD it, or can some more knowledgeable person identify a couple of refs to add so we can keep it? Yngvadottir (talk) 23:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• Did you just guess that I owned a Moog and a Korg in the 1980s? Drmies (talk) 23:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • My studio (16-track, 2") had a Mini-moog, a Korg something or other, and two DX-7s, as well as (later) some rack-mounted synths. I think the coolest synth, though, was one I never had, the Buchla system used by Morton Subotnik. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:54, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
    • You know they're making the Korg MS-20 again? My brother should still have our old one, somewhere. You had two DX-7s?? Holy shit! And a Mini-Moog...you know you missed my birthday, but I accept a late present. If it's the Mini. (The old one, or the programmable version?) Drmies (talk) 15:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
      • All gone now, I'm afraid. In theory they're in the studio in my ex-partner's garage (and I still have half ownership of the equipment), but I don't even want to know what's actually still there after he went through some hard times. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:07, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
        • Come to think of it, the Mini-Moog was the contribution of a third partner, and his family took it when he died. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:11, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
    • After looking through a bunch of photos, I'm pretty sure it was a Korg M1. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
• Wow--did you see those pictures? Looks like the old Moog modular systems! Quick, somebody play me some Emerson, Lake & Palmer. Dzaw, dzew dzew dzeeeuw... Drmies (talk) 23:58, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
• Well, it's tough. He might be notable by hisself. I sure want one of those cabinets though. I can't find more than I already have. I'm sure there's more on dedicated websites/zines, but separating the wheat from the chaff might be hard. Perhaps searching model by model is the way to go. But right now, I'd say send it to AfD (or forget all about it...) and maybe some synth geek will dig up some stuff? Cool, though--lots of companies are making clones of old machines. There's a copy of Sequential Circuits' Prophet 5 out, for $5000 I think, and Moog is again building MiniMoogs, in all kinds of versions. Anyone up for remaking the Oberheim? One that doesn't detune or break down constantly? I think Eddie Van H. is in the market. Jump! Drmies (talk) 01:03, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I had the impression you knew something about this stuff :-) That's what the forum posts are all saying - that this is good recreation of vintage tech. I hope we can keep this article; I'll drag my feet in case any talkpage stalkers can dig anything up. Meanwhile you could try messaging the editor about his product line '-) Yngvadottir (talk) 01:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC) ... like y'all have started doing. Good :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 01:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Now I understand: you are referring to my cleanup, I suppose--if so, and you're using y'all as a singular, you're making the same mistake as Christopher Hitchens did. Plural only! He mentions "all y'all" as the plural, but that "all" is nothing more than the addition of a kind of emphasis. Drmies (talk) 03:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
      • You and GoingBatty, though so far only you have added sources. I'm in a hopeful mood. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
        • Good. You're in the clear. Hitchens is not. Drmies (talk) 04:27, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
• I've just dusted down my Yamaha S80 synthesiser, which has a really good church organ setting. Wish to God I could play the bloody thing though. Really must knuckle down to it rather than wasting my time on WP. Eric Corbett 17:38, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Wow--we should start a band. Rosie will come and play it for you. Sippi plays it even worse, but she'll sing (something about her loving the world) at the same time. I had two extra girls this morning to drop off at school; you wouldn't believe how much noise four girls, one microphone, a keyboard, a detuned guitar, and eight feet can make. Our cheap-ass Casio keyboard has a "learn how to play" thing, with a tiny LCD screen indicating the fingering--but I can't read it with my old eyes, and if I could, it's too fast for me. Drmies (talk) 17:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

    I've always wanted to be able to play just one piece really well, maybe something by Chopin. That's surely not too much to ask. Eric Corbett 17:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

• Right! I've always wanted to sing like John Hyatt. I once said to a girlfriend that I'd give my left arm for that skill, and she scoffed at me--but then, she was a singer and knew that it wasn't hollow gestures and statements but hard work that can make someone a singer. Drmies (talk) 17:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah Eric, imagine being able to play this like this!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:56, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Rubberen Robbie

The DYK project (nominate) 09:23, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Ref Desk ANI

Drmies, I have a lot of thoughts about the recent ANI obviously. For the sake of both our times and energies I'll leave it at:

• "Just because we're online and unpaid doesn't mean we can behave badly to each other...In fact, there's pretty much nowhere where people working together to do something good are allowed to get into...name-calling. The same applies here, too."
• "Someone may very well be an idiot. But telling them so is neither going to increase their intelligence nor improve your ability to communicate with them."

I did re-read my posts. My biggest fear was that the 4 diffs would multiply & be lost in a wave of confusing/cross current diffs as I'm left hanging there at a dynamically updating Refdesk. If I was muddled in that concern my apologies but if you re-read that whole ANI thread I took a lot of your responses as compounding the GLing in an UNCIVIL manner. I understand that at ANI I'm just another number & most concerns are loose, jovial & informal but that kind of response to a concern like mine could be construed as cruel, & was inaccurate (the whole point of an OP that starts a GL). At the refdesk: "We should in all cases strive to exceed the minimum standard of civility", the OPs contributions were obviously causing me several concerns with this. My intent is not to bog down in this matter I felt justified in bringing this to ANI but you have taught me some relevant things I will keep in mind in the future. My sincere hope is that we both can revise that ANI in the spirit of: *Asking yourself "How would I feel if someone said that to me?" is often not enough, many people can just brush things off, and it's water off a duck's back. To get a better perspective, ask yourself:

• "How would I feel if someone said that to someone I love who can't just "brush it off?" If you'd find that unacceptable, then don't say it. And, if you've already said it, strike it and apologise." ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 10:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
• I saw no incivility on the part of your opponent. Drmies (talk) 15:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
  • "Opponent"?? . . . "saw no" (100% doesn't usually happen in human relations), I could say what needs to be said here but really the IP diffs & my posts above & our ANI interaction already do a searing job of it, nothing left to say. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 19:25, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
    • On rereading this rather rambling post I see now that you are actually accusing me of the same "gaslighting" which was denied in the ANI post. Now that's nice. Note that no one agreed with you that the IP should be punished--you could for an immediate block, remember. I still think that your answer was patronizing and not to the point, that your characterization of the IP's postings as uncivil was a gross exaggeration, and that starting an ANI thread was a non-starter, if you'll pardon the pun, and bitey to boot. What this nonsense on "saving marriages" has to do with anything is a mystery to me. Society should save marriages to prevent prostitution? Fo shizzle? And whose marriage--the prostitute's? The prostitute's parents? The john who pays for sex? The more I look at that entire discussion (and some other ones) the more I tend to think that...well. That particular thread was not your finest moment. Drmies (talk) 20:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Endpoint (Band) page removal

Hello,

It was brought to our attention that an editor removed the entire history of the band Endpoint from it's page. The page was created by a well respected music journalist, Ryan Downey. It now reads like the band recorded a demo in 1987 and then vanished. However, it lists a number of releases after 1987, which looks very strange.

Endpoint was a band that has a well documented political and musical history. There are several books published with chapters dedicated to the history of the band, magazine articles, and websites with information regarding the band's past.

Thank you in advance for your time and consideration in this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.62.54.22 (talk) 19:50, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You do realize that anyone can edit here? Fix it! However, the page has been unreferenced for yoinks. I just did a quick search and found there is plenty of coverage in the Louisville Courier-Journal, but it's paywalled. I suspect you may be local or for some other reason have access to their archive - if so, please add references. Also please add these magazine articles and book chapters. You can do it a lot better than some non-knowledgeable editor like me. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:11, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Bacon universe

I thought of you.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:21, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

• Nice. And it's a Dream Focus hit: we have a hate-hate relationship. Drmies (talk) 01:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of John P. Hermann

Hello! Your submission of John P. Hermann at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! DoctorKubla (talk) 19:56, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Caroline Joan S. Picart

Having trouble with a SPA (may be the subject or affiliated with the subject) with an attitude. The article, even before her edits, was a mess. A couple of years ago you removed some of the mess, but ... The article has few watchers, so it gets little attention. It's on my watchlist, I think, because I declined an A7 early this year (kind of a shame but you do what you have to).--Bbb23 (talk) 23:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, you know. Drmies (talk) 02:41, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

• Such good work and look at your "reward" (see below). I've made a few, mostly uncontroversial, changes to the article, but I'm hesitant to edit it more while you're "discussing" the content with BD.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:35, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

why did u delete my page?

why did u delete my page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dante20000 (talk • contribs) 02:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

• Because no credible claim of importance was made. Drmies (talk) 04:02, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Looks like Dante20000 doesn't know how to play well with other people, since he re-created the article immediately as Jayne Grace. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:07, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Thanks. I think that's the third time. Salt and pepper. Drmies (talk) 04:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
      • Salting won't cure (heh) the problem because Dante has used three different titles. If it continues, only blocking will stop it. You've warned him on his talk page, so hopefully he'll back off.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:39, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
        • I realized that after I hit "save page", but I'm sure this will end it. Then again, the subject was 5'10"... Drmies (talk) 15:45, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

On the Appropriateness of Edits

Madame: (I believe you're a woman by your profile, I beg pardon if you are not).

You originally wrote

"You can't source biographical information to a book written by the subject herself, and "top of the class" and (unverified) "wrote columns for" is just resume-style fluff. In addition, you removed a review of one of her books--and such references are precisely what this article needs. Please click on some of the above links to learn what Wikipedia is, and what it isn't. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:07, 11 October 2013 (UTC)"

I do not believe your assertion that an autobiography is not a source. Can you please state the basis for this? I am unaware of any rules judging the quality of ANY cited source; one simply cites what one believes affirms the claim made. Whether one believes the source is credible is a subjective issue; but a written source is a written source.

As for what is and is not appropriate for Wikipedia, I disagree with your assertions. I do not see you going through the webpages of politicians and deleting statements about to whom they are married? Who are you to say her bibliography should do without, for example, the gentleman to whom she is married? I feel you are offering great subjectivity on what you feel is relevant for an article and what is not.

I did accidentally remove one of her book reviews; a pity. In my efforts to undo some of your works (which did not remotely explain themselves, either; your edits vaguely spoke of how trite you personally found things, which is not a basis for deletion).

Despite our initial and apparent disagreements, I hope we may productively move to consensus.

04:26, 11 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballroom Dancer 001 (talk • contribs)

(talk page stalker) @Ballroom Dancer 001 - Please see WP:ABOUTSELF, "the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim". Claims of achievements and honors needs to be sourced to an independent third party. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:39, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

• My "subjective" opinions are based on what is commonly accepted in the best articles on Wikipedia. The name of a non-notable partner, or those of siblings, are not usually deemed noteworthy--and the partner's name was accompanied by an inline URL to their website, which suggests spamming. A person's autobiography is not usually deemed a reliable source for biographical information, and the information in question needs to be trimmed a bit more in order to be more neutral. The column writing will need to be verified by a secondary source, since the publications don't appear to be very notable and a secondary source might verify that they're worth mentioning; I also note that Asia Trend Magazine was used somewhere as a source, begging the question of editorial independence.

  You may not see where I go through politicians' articles (and those of artists, poets, writers, journalists, academics, musicians, etc), but they're there somewhere among the 140,000 edits I've made here. You may, of course, seek redress--one of the places where you can do so is WP:BLPN, for instance (click on it and you'll see). Now, my interest is to improve this article since the subject is clearly notable as an academic--but not as a ballroom dancer. And neutrality is an issue as well: Bbb (who is in fact an adult and a seasoned Wikipedia editor) signaled as much. We simply cannot allow those articles to become like resumes. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:46, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

To begin with, you are using an ad hominem attack:

"Now, my interest is to improve this article since the subject is clearly notable as an academic--but not as a ballroom dancer."

My username is none of your concern. You know nothing about me; for all you know, I am your former Ph.D. advisor. Do not attack my interests as a sign that I am somehow mentally inferior.

The use of the URL was inappropriate, in retrospect, and that was a mistake. That should be removed. Statements about her family life, however, are not trivial. Is it trivial to know Lincoln's wife's name? There is nothing inappropriate about listing such things in a biographical page.

I would be happy to continue this discussion, but I think it would be more productive to move one point at a time, rather than write long paragraphs (hopefully move quicker to resolution of what is in there and what is not). Ballroom Dancer 001 (talk) 04:53, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

• Huh? I'm not referring to you--I'm referring to the claims I removed in this edit. And no, you're not my Ph.D. director--he actually has an article here, with no fluff. It doesn't even say that he's an avid guitar player and plays the blues pretty good for an old white Yankee. Drmies (talk) 04:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Second opinion

Hi Drmies. User:Crisco 1492 asked me to get a second opinion here and I thought I might see if you would do the honors. I drafted the History section, which contains several controversies regarding trademark disputes (in a dedicated sub-section) and a controversial sponsorship of Candlestick park. Since he moved the content to article-space, he asked me to to get an opinion from someone else about removing the now-redundant controversy sections. I suppose the question is whether they should be part of the company's history or called out in separate sections, since I presume the current overlap isn't something we would want. CorporateM (Talk) 15:52, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Snowden October 2013

Hey there. I've been taking a long-term (and possibly indefinite) break from Edward Snowden and related articles, but I stumbled onto an interesting article today that brought me back to it temporarily. While I was there I noticed the administrative dispute over Axxxion's conduct that led to a one-week full protection (unfortunately in my view). In any case, as that discussion is now closed, I want to pass my thoughts along for your future reference, take them or leave them. I was actively involved in editing the article back in June-July-early August. Although there were some heated discussions on the talk page, generally speaking there was relatively little edit warring -- until Axxxion gradually started making more and more edits against consensus, some of them massive in scale. By early August there was a critical mass of editors who were ignoring settled talk page discussions and running roughshod over the article. Axxxion wasn't the only one, but he was offender #1. At first I battled this development, but after a couple of weeks I gave up and decided to put the article (and Wikipedia) behind me. I eventually came back but decided to avoid the whole NSA mess.

I think Axxxion's (and other's, but most of all Axxxion's) WP:DE has driven away other editors. It drove me away, and based on the ANI thread it appears he/she doesn't seem to have any interest in editing in a collaborative manner. (E.g. "I appreciate your advice, Drmies, but there is no need for seeking consensus where the point is observing basic rules of this Resource.") It's unfortunate that his/her behavior has resulted in the collateral damage, damage that he/she actually supports (see here, here). I don't blame you for locking down the article but I don't think it gets to the root of the problem. Ultimately I think Axxxion deserves a temporary topic ban leading to indef if this behavior continues. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 19:07, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

• Dr. Felischman, I wish I could respond at greater length right now, but I can't. I do not disagree that Axxxion is disruptive, and that they disregard basic tenets of the project. The same applies, unfortunately, to the other side, at least in that particular conflict (though that side disregarded different things). I will be more than happy to have another look and/or to reassess the situation: of course I don't want knowledgeable editors of good will to be driven away. Drmies (talk) 20:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
• But wait (I found I had a few minutes to spare): it's only semi-protection, and it should run out soon (and mind you, it was Mark Arsten, not me, who applied that). Also, Axxion hasn't edited that article in the last 50 edits, going back to 1 October. Drmies (talk) 20:42, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

You must be looking at the wrong page. I see full protection, expiring tomorrow, and Axxxion having made lots of edits just before the full prot was turned on. And some editors (including Axxxion) are now suggesting long-term full prot. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:34, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Btw I don't know who you're referring re "the other side," but if you're talking about Petrarchan, in my Snowden-editing days he/she could sometimes be unreasonable on the talk page, but not disruptive in the article itself. I don't recall any conduct problems, just some rather arguably extreme views. As for his/her conduct since mid-August, I don't know and frankly it doesn't matter much to me. All I'm saying is that Axxxion was disruptive back in August and apparently continues to be disruptive. It's not good for the article. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, just adding some facts here. My "extreme views" are backed by reliable sources and have the weight of the community behind them. I think this thread may be what the Dr is referring to(?) But my recollection of the timing behind your departure indicates it was my questioning that drove you away. In fact, it seemed in response to my asking for justification for the edit, where you removed Ed Snowden's White House petition information with the edit summary "recentism. You did not attempt to justify it, but simply said that you wouldn't be editing the page anymore. petrarchan47tc 19:11, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree that was a particularly frustrating conversation between you and me, but it wasn't what drove me away. I'm happy to have that sort of give and take. What was really frustrating me was the edit warring and constant going against consensus by other editors. At least you had the good sense to participate on the talk page. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Well. I'm glad y'all are talking. Talking is good. Axxxion is talking a little bit too. You don't like full protection, of course, but at least it gets the talk page going. I'm thinking, though, that some oversight wouldn't be a bad thing; when I have the time, tomorrow or the day after, I'm going to look more carefully at the history to see what, if anything, needs to be done. OK, Mrs. Drmies wants to talk to me; I don't know why but I'll have to comply. Drmies (talk) 23:06, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and my apologies for thinking you had turned on the full prot. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

You were right: it was full. But let's note that much is happening on the talk page; I hope it stays that way. Drmies (talk) 03:50, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Psst

Bamischijf. Sounds yucky, and as you know I can't really read Dutch, I just fake it. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Sounds and looks delicious, especially the doorhaalvloeistof bit. Noodles in half a door! (As you can tell, I read Dutch like a native.) I've added the appetizing image from the Dutch article. Bishonen | talk 20:37, 11 October 2013 (UTC).

Nasnema

Nasnema is claiming (in a roundabout way) that he/she was hacked. Saying he was "on holiday" and was "greeted with all this" on his talk page when he got back.

If this is the case, and not an attempt to get out of trouble, I believe a temporary block needs to be put in place and a checkuser run on the account. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, if they changed their password then there can be no more abuse, right? But the ANI thread is still running; let's see what wiser people have to say (wiser than me). Drmies (talk) 20:23, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
  • The cynical side of me is saying this is a scheme to get himself out of trouble. The CU would tell us if there was a hacking issue (solved by the changed password) or if he was trying to scheme his way out of trouble and deserves another block for wasting the community's time. Either way, I have looped both you and Ryan Vesey in on this one (since you both were apart of the ANI thread) and will let you all (and the other wiser people) hash it out from here. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:46, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) If they're claiming to be hacked, then I think a CU should be run, to prove or disprove the claim. If Nasnema rejects the CU, then that's quite suspicious. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 20:48, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

• Looks like the CU proved Nasnema wrong, check the ANI thread. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Wim T. Schippers

Hello! Your submission of Wim T. Schippers at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 03:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

• Drmies, wasn't sure you'd seen this. There's an issue with one of the five articles nominated, but the other four have been passed; if you can take care of this, then the nomination will finally be ready for promotion. Hope you can take care of it soon. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
• I'm kind of in the middle of a 14th-c German poem about a crazy prince... :) Drmies (talk) 04:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

• I was just talking about Schippers. I was in a museum and came across a huge installation consisting of metal tiles spread over a large area of the floor in the middle of the gallery. I watched as everybody carefully avoided stepping on it, as a guard stood watch. Naturally, I told my friend about Pindakaasvloer (although not by name, as who knows how it's pronounced?). Later I went back and read the sign, only to discover that walking on it was actually allowed. It was probably a little immature of me to then step on it just because I could. Oh well. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:36, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

• Mandarax, it's a trick. NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND would step on a piece of art, even it the instructions command you to walk on it. I mean, seriously. "Here, poop on the Mona Lisa. No, really, it's alright!" It's a test and you failed. Does JNW know about this? Drmies (talk) 03:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• Hell, you can't even get close enough to the Mona Lisa spit on it. It's behind glass, there's always a crowd around it, and if you're trying to defecate on it there's the logistics of aiming upward at an awkward angle. Oh, why do I even bother. The only thing that matters anymore is [5]. Everything else is ephemera. JNW (talk) 03:21, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• Tchoff-tchoff, I think. You totally have your finger on the pulse, JNW--thanks! Drmies (talk) 03:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• Hehe, an amusing logistical mental image, but one that I hope won't be lasting. BTW, for anyone planning a trip to Paris, don't waste your time trying to see and/or defecate on the Mona Lisa at the highly overrated Louvre; instead, go to the greatest museum in the world: Musée d'Orsay. Drmies, a few years ago, a different museum had an art installation that people could walk through, but visitors were required to put on special booties. And, as you may recall from my Burning Man saga, I've done much more than merely step on an art installation; I've drawn on it with colored pens. Oh, and nobody ever claimed I was in my right mind. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 07:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Literary Barnstar
		For teaching this fictional bird how to fly you are hereby awarded The Literary Barnstar. I regret, but Prussian orders are out of stock. De728631 (talk) 14:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you De, that's very nice of you. I'm reading Tor Ulven--there's an article worth expanding on an author worth reading. Drmies (talk) 17:06, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your level head. Per a suggestion at the drama page, note: [6]. You've also been immortalized here. Your comment made my day! Montanabw^(talk) 17:41, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

• Montana, if you want to be fair, you'll link the outburst! So it's like putting on your hairshirt every time you see that dark blue link. Drmies (talk) 03:19, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Esteemed immortalized admin with a level head, may I also sing my song of sixpence? I asked more than once if "page creation" is the same as "article creation". Looking at the immortalized example: who created this article? Right, Shirt58. And who created this one? - "I go and seek with longing" (article title translated) the answers which I expect will differ. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:07, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

They're not the same, as article creation is a subset of page creation. Eric Corbett 19:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Let me understand the "subset"? - No they are not same. For many Bach cantatas (not this one) I would have preferred to start from scratch, because I found something that I couldn't use but had to rewrite, see? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

What I meant, for instance, was that you could create a page in your sandbox, but that wouldn't become an article until you'd moved it to article space. So articles are those pages in article space. Eric Corbett 20:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Got it. The problem now is that someone else created the first article BWV 49 in 2010, but I wrote estimated 95% of what is there now, including sourcing. (The one source in the original is not considered RS.) Who created this article? - Some think it's clear-cut that I didn't, and by adding an infobox violated arbcom restrictions. Clarification is requested, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

The edit history clearly shows the article was created by Shirt58. It equally shows that since then you've done a great deal to improve it, but by a strict reading of the ArbCom sanction you ought not to have added an infobox. You ought to consider yourself lucky though, because I was once almost banned by ArbCom after someone requested clarification on whether or not I was allowed to prevent my RfA postings being moved to the RfA talk page. Since then of course I've taken very little interest in RfA; Wikipedia gets the administrators it deserves. It's black and white in your case though, you didn't create that article. Eric Corbett 21:46, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I often come across articles that are so bad it would be easier to get rid of them and start from scratch, but that's easier said than done unfortunately given the reluctance to delete anything from here. You'd have to be able to make a pretty strong case at AfD for instance. Eric Corbett 21:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Then let's spin the black and white version further: if I who wrote most of the content can't decide if that article gets an infobox, who else? In 2010, when the stub was created, there was no template yet. - If the stub had not existed, I would have created the article, - when I started writing Bach cantata articles, about half of them were red links. - Sometimes I wonder what our readers think, when they are confronted with the diversity of articles on the same topic, here ranging from GA such as BWV 103 (all with an infobox, naturally), "middle size" without infobox (Nikkimaria style) such as BWV 122, to stub (BWV 223). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:20, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

By and large Wikipedia doesn't care too much what the readers think, the aim is simply to avoid drama. If I were in charge of WP I'd change so many things your ears would bleed. Eric Corbett 23:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I care what readers think, and you do too. Yes, many articles deserve to be zapped and started afresh, but the deletion rules don't address article quality. This sucks for DYK creators as well; a smart DYK editor will create a sock to trim all the nonsense out of a bad article, and a week later the real account can show up to expand. Gerda, you know I have sympathy for you and your position, and I agree that there is something as the "moral" creator of an article, but yeah, that's not simple enough. And a rule/ruling that goes by "whoever created it..." lacks realism, but hey, the die is cast and the infobox war passed me by completely anyway. Drmies (talk) 03:18, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Esteemed topnotch editor, I don't want to template you, how's this? - What do you think of a new red cat for me? - I was told that I was restricted because of my poor judgement (simplified a bit), - I think mentorship would be better than content restriction, which ultimately hurts the readers, not me. Would you be willing to mentor me in case I wanted to enter an infobox discussion (certainly not anytime soon)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• Gerda, I couldn't possibly "mentor" you, anymore than I can give suggestions to God about his creation. I have advice, of course, for you and God--comments and questions perceived as snarky or unrelated ruffle feathers. If I were in your position I would bite my tongue more. Sorry, I don't like giving suggestions to people who are wiser than me. Drmies (talk) 15:48, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

• I bit my tongue in Teh Case and said I would give no evidence against any user because I didn't want anybody to be sanctioned. By some logic that resulted in me being sanctioned, - someone had to be sanctioned. This can probably be perceived as too snarky? (I urge you to not get involved. If the socalled war passed you, good for you, remain innocent.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:43, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

We can't have too much Ermutigung, - an article that might profit from your language skills, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Drmies, per this how would YOU Like to add a few infoboxes to some of Gerda's 5x expansions? Montanabw^(talk) 15:21, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. OK. I guess I'm going to have to read all this stuff. Thanks Montana--I could have been riding horsies, of course. Drmies (talk) 15:48, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

If you want to read only a bit, perhaps start here, with the unanswered question by someone uninvolved who arrived late in the case (and for whom I will vote if he goes for arb), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:20, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Lilis Suryani

The DYK project (nominate) 08:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Golden hour (medicine)

Hi Drmies, I see you've had discussions with this editor in the past; I've lately reverted their edits here [7], and notice other recent, self-references [8]. Any thoughts from you or your talk page watchers will be welcome. JNW (talk) 15:29, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

• All this while I was at a family reunion in Mississippi. It should come as no surprise that, in an area where every one has a dozen guns, Obama is seen as Satan, and healthcare for everyone is frowned upon (even as they're complaining that their own plan doesn't cover what they need it to cover), there is no internet available. Drmies (talk) 03:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• I hope at least the chicken fried grits were good. Really, it's like you're baiting me to say nasty things about the south, and just after I've written a piece on this; I'm not a sucker for his work, but it's hard to knock that painting. How many times do I have to tell you to relocate northward? As for me, God Bless Obamacare. JNW (talk) 03:48, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Like Montanabw^(talk) 23:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah, I remember that. Thanks for bringing it back up. You know this is an unpaid position, right? How is everyone? Any naked women you want to show me? Drmies (talk) 03:37, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• Please, you wanna see my returns from last year? It's not like anyone's paying me for being an online pain in the ass. We're fine, thanks, though with the girls traveling they've dumped their dogs on us again, so we've got four in the house, which is absurd. I've actually had a fine time painting the foliage the last few weeks, then working on a nude in the studio. Big shift in the palette between the two, otherwise not much difference. Great model, a hefty gal with ink all over her, including a tattoo of a tree, so it's full circle or something. I hope you and yours are well. Cheers, JNW (talk) 03:48, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• I've given this unpaid volunteer business some more thought. I, for one, am happy to recommend you to the Wikimedia Foundation for a regular stipend. Of course, a modest kickback will be appreciated. I trust the new school year is off to a good start for all, and hope you are favored with shining students. Or at least a few who can stay awake. JNW (talk) 19:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Someone else

I'm not supposed to block editors who attack me. Then, of course, there's the WP:BLP violation at the Larry Klayman article (and the first attack in an edit summary), which actually bothers me more. I thought of semi-protecting the article, but that use of my tools is probably also ill-advised.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

• An editor who acts like a moron needs to be blocked, and I see that's what you did. Same with semi-protection: if you haven't edited the article significantly, if you have no actual interest in the content, then do what needs to be done. Drmies (talk) 02:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• Actually, I didn't block the editor or semi-protect the article. One of your many wonderful stalkers blocked, and I requested semi-protection at RFPP.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:38, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

• I thought you were talking about 76.31.208.234 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)? Oh, from editing their talk page. Gotcha. Still, go for it next time. INVOLVED wouldn't prevent you from it, in my opinion. Drmies (talk) 04:05, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Lugnuts/Editnotice

Sorry to make another request, but could you or one of your many talk page stalkers evaluate this MfD for closure. I reverted the closure because it was so far out of bounds procedurally I couldn't stand it. Some editors are questioning my revert, but it would be helpful if it could be considered for early closure based on the recent history. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

"Some editors are questioning my revert" WP:ADMINACCT seems to cover it. Again. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

• This is a deletion discussion about a page in your user space. If that's not COI I don't know what is. This is not allowed. Period. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:38, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Not a conflict at all, when I've changed it and let the nominator know. But I guess policy of wasting everyone's time overides commmon sense. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

• If you seriously see no conflict of interest in closing a deletion discussion of one of your user pages, then you are just as good an editor as I thought. Congratulations. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:34, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh no! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 11:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

• Looks like "no consensus to delete" as most people don't mind the new wording. The original was out of line, very much so. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:42, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
• Closed. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:48, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the quick response.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:50, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

• No prob. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:53, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Wim T. Schippers

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gied Jaspars

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Wim van der Linden

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Hoepla

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps, looking at this impressive quadruple, you should rather read (not the unanswered question mentioned above but) Patrice Chéreau, for Intimacy "which sparked a debate about unsimulated sex on screen" (for DYK, I chose something else) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:26, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations, Drmies! It sure took a long time to finally get reviewed, but it ended up doing spectacularly. With 16,797 total hits, it's the most viewed hook of the month! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 02:06, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• Wow! Thanks Mandarax! Drmies (talk) 02:10, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Makes me think ... should I change the hook for Chéreau? But I want to show the pic ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• The most important DYK rule is if you can work sex into a hook, do it.
• ... that Patrice Chéreau, who directed a 1976 production of Wagner's Ring Cycle (scene pictured) at the centenary Bayreuth Festival, also directed a film which "sparked a debate about unsimulated sex on screen"?
• It's an acceptable hook length of 197 characters; as usual, ten characters for (pictured) don't count. Personally, I would trim some of the details, but I suspect you'd like to include it all. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 19:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you! I always wondered how I could get Hitler in a hook about a Bach cantata. What do you think of the shorter (?)

... that Patrice Chéreau, the stage director of the centenary Ring Cycle (scene pictured) in Bayreuth, directed the film Intimacy, which "sparked a debate about unsimulated sex on screen"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:56, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• Looks good to me. The second most important DYK rule is "shorter is better". Drmies, sorry to clutter your talk page with this, but I prefer to keep discussions such as this off of nomination pages to avoid unnecessarily complicating and possibly delaying them. You know all too well about DYK delays. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:15, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• Who wants to write an article, to shorten the hook further: Centenary Ring or what?? - Views for Chéreau are down to 800+, we need to do something ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• Mandarax, the more the merrier. That does not of course apply to DYK hooks--ask Crisco 1492 about his ?, which he's advertising all over the place--including his own talk page, for crying out loud. Yes, sex sells--but what sells more, apparently is a f***ing octopus making fun of my soccer team. That almost made me give up DYK. BTW, why are we helping Gerda beef up her numbers? She can die happily with Kafka under her belt. Drmies (talk) 21:18, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Eh now, that's my user page, not my talk page! (Haven't put "Shortest TFA" yet, have I?) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:40, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• I believe Chéreau is still alive, so I will not say here what I think of his Ring, nor will I write an article about it. I'm sure you'll find someone more diplomatic to do so. Now that production in Kassel with tremendous amounts of neon and the Rhinemaidens on flying scooters ... Yngvadottir (talk) 21:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• You believe what? - He died 7 October (article writers would like you to read!), that's why we are here. I am not collecting numbers for me, but for him ;) (was close to 8k the day after he died). - I saw the scene, a lasting impression, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:49, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
• I started Jahrhundertring myself, feel free to add. Would there be an English title? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

[9] I was even thinking of dropping you a line about this, since notability seems a good bet, but the edits were just too self-serving. JNW (talk) 18:45, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

You nearly scared me off with your user page...

File:Dainsyng.gif

Drmies user page is too scary to go alone, take this.

... but I still want to know how big the riot will be when I publish this on my talk page. Or is it better to publish this later, when I have finished my series about Michelin restaurants.

Ow, intention of the text is to show that I decide everything and the other party only has a role as supplier of information.The Banner talk 19:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

The Banner, are you stalking me? That's it. I'm replacing any Michelin ref of yours with a gayot one and visa versa. :) Drmies' user page once was much scarier. The page had his photo on it, but after too many people were scared to death, he had to remove it. Plus, the world supply of eye bleach was running low because of his photo. Bgwhite (talk) 20:27, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Huh, what? The Banner talk 20:33, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, my sense of humour is a bit damaged tonight. Reason: the whole Dutch Wikipedia incrowd is angry. They have a system that each administrator is evaluated once a year and when receiving more than 4 objections, has to survive a confidence vote. A few longer serving but controversial administrators are now severely under attack. And suddenly a yet unidentified administrator filed an appeal to back up the two administrators on the secretive "modmail". Big row that grew even bigger when two sockpuppets published the story. The administrator behind the two sockpuppets is blocked, but now everybody is fighting about what to do with the vote in progress... The Banner talk 20:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Yikes. A new way was found to make Wikipedia even more political and maddening. It's bad enough keep the crazy straight on one language site, little alone two. You have my sympathies. Bgwhite (talk) 21:13, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

There, that should make Drmies userpage less scary. :D - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:20, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Montanabw already tickled my humour by "complaining" about a massive SCOMN. With my vivid imagination it gave me a good laugh, something I needed. The Banner talk 21:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, that reminds me. I still don't know why Montana was referring me to the Superior Court of Minnesota--I've only been in that state once, and I had forgotten to bring my coat. In March. Banner, they don't have stars, but Hell's Kitchen is a fun place to eat. Best thing on the breakfast menu: the cereal. (Yes! Not kidding.)

  As for the Dutch wiki, I may have mentioned before that they can... never mind. I don't understand the place or its readership. Or how it's run. That's oud zeer also, which you can see if you look at my (old) contributions there. Your story is fascinating: is there a summary somewhere, with diffs and names? Who was the evil admin?

  Finally--my user page? wut? Drmies (talk) 23:11, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

  • LOL, no summary yet. One administrator blocked OT and ready for desysop (Grmbl76), one admin hiding edits against the rules with threat of desysop (Natuur12), one admin blocking an admin for sockpopping with threath of desysop (JurgenNL), one admin canvassing (yet unknown, but the game "find the culprit" is ongoing), one not-so-nice admin failing the confidence vote now left in limbo (Robotje), one not-so-nice admin making the confidence vote left in limbo (MoiraMoira), a few slamming doors (a.o. RJB, Olivier Bommel). Distrust everywhere and a vote totally screwed. I'm a coward, I took a runner! Too messy there. The Banner talk 23:55, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Update: Canvassing admin finally confessed. I politely advised him to quit voluntarily or face a desysop. (MADe) One admin was disgusted with the situation and stepped down (Andre Engels). One admin at desysop after being cleared of misusing sockpuppets and unbanned. But the admins are shocked about the breach in their secret society so he must hang (Grmbl76). All admin up for a confidence vote are returned, strange enough after a massive turn out of admins and former admins. One admin making himself increasingly unpopular by starting a desysop. (JurgenNL) And one editor driving me mad by claiming that the original intention of the confidence-process is the only thing that is right and that the present use are gaming the system and WP:POINT actions. That guy doesn't see that something can change in 7 or 8 years time (Romaine) The Banner talk 17:18, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
      • That's exciting! Is anyone still left standing? Drmies (talk) 17:21, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
        • It may be exciting to you - I am thanking my lucky stars I was manoeuvered into adminship here, not on some other Wild West Wikipedia. Sheesh. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
        • Ha, they call this a personal attack? (For the outsiders: "What a sad creature you are.") Who knew that the Dutch wikipedians were such pussies. Mama, he frowned at me! Drmies (talk) 17:29, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
          • To put it mildly, they are great in using different measuring systems. The Banner talk 21:11, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk: Penis

Thanks for hatting this discussion from September. Unfortunately, I don't think this is a decision best arrived at by consensus (no "Penis Gallery" on the Talk Page). I think it would be best for a truly impartial and disinterested Editor to be Bold, pick an image, post it in the article and then discuss. As you looked over the discussion, did you see a good candidate for this task? (I'll pass!) Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:55, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
P.S. How do you get that nice dog to appear on the Editing page? L.

(watching) whatever you want to present to your talk page guests goes to User talk:Liz/Editnotice, see for example mine, which includes a nod to the one who told me ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda!

Weeeell, it's not so much hatting as closing an RfC. Look, if you want to go ahead and pick a penis, that's fine. You can't pick mine; it's already taken. No, I didn't see anything very good. The horny donkey, his was huge but it was too close to the body to make the point. That dog penis, brrr--that red thing is just too obscene. An RfC-ish kind of thing might be tedious but at least provides agreement. And some good things do come out of committees, like the King James Bible. Oh! Didn't you say you hadn't read Human penis? Perhaps you'd be interested in Love dart. Drmies (talk) 21:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Damn. You know, I only went to this Talk Page because I was keeping up with L'Origine and he/she was active there. I really don't want to go through the Commons sea of penis photos. I don't want to pass the buck but I'll vote for anything that shifts the choice off my shoulders. I guess it's an RfC then. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

No, I just don't know. There's good arguments for an animal penis vs. a human statue vs. a drawing/schematic, and I couldn't possibly pick the best prick. Let's ask LadyofShalott what she thinks. Lady? Drmies (talk) 03:01, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to nominate my headshot for best prick. I'll upload an 8 by 10 (width by length) glossy post-hasta. Another bilingual pun et cetera ...  davidiad { t } 05:15, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and questions

Thanks for the heads-up, Drmies. I was just in the middle of moving the article when you left your edit/comment. Article is now back in main space. Did I move it right? That is to say, is there a more accepted way of re-creating an article?

Also, since I have your attention, could you look at the article and the talk page and tell me if I missed anything. For instance, I added a Wikilink to the article from the article it had been (temporarily) merged with, but should I do anything else with that article/section. Also, can I move or remove the notices at the top of the talk page? Anything else I'm overlooking?

--Lightbreather (talk) 20:03, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, the two histories needed merging, so that your contributions to the article are a part of the history. I took care of that. Next thing you need to do is submit it at WP:DYK, to get it on the front page: you have five days to do it in. Good luck with it; I hope you get lots of hits. Ask me if you have questions, and perhaps Mandarax will be nice enough to look over your shoulder like he does to me.

  No, the notices on the talk page should stay, but they don't do any harm. BTW, I saw GorillaWarfare mentioned on your talk page--she's great, and maybe you can in turn kick her in the rear so she'll do some more writing, not just vandal fighting. Drmies (talk) 21:42, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Drmies. I just thought it was time to return the org to its own article. Am I required to submit it to DYK? And if so, are the instructions to do so on the link you provided?

Also, can you tell me or point me to the help page that tells how one merges history... Or maybe that's something only admins do? I'm trying to learn this stuff as I go, and I saw the history entries for your actions, but I couldn't figure out what actions created those entries. Hope my questions make sense. I have learned a lot in the last two months, but I still have lots to learn. Lightbreather (talk) 22:35, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

You don't have to do nuttin'. But DYK is exposure on the front page (that I think gets 20 million hits a day). For an organization. That you care for. Yes, the rules are on that page; the actual nomination is at WP:DYKN. Give it a shot.

History merging is an admin job, since part of the process (the way I did it) is deletion before restoration, so to speak. It is done to preserve all edits made to the article and it can get complicated. That injunction to preserve history is one of the reasons that copying and pasting shouldn't be done in article creation; some smart talk page stalker I'm sure has all the links at hand, but you really don't have to worry about it too much. That's what we get paid the big bucks for. Drmies (talk) 23:00, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. I'll give it a go. Oh! And I added this one today, too. Also, FWIW, I think the first three orgs listed under "Pro-gun control" at the bottom of both of those pages are obsolete and/or miscategorized, but I'm afraid to remove them. What do you think?

Tomorrow is the Ada Lovelace Edit-a-thon, in case you're interested. Now I'll try to leave you alone for a while. Lightbreather (talk) 23:30, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. I would tell you to scrap the mission, the membership, and most of the external links... OK, I removed Americans for Gun Safety Foundation already, see my edit summary. American Hunters and Shooters Association looks fishy but I can't see an obvious reason to remove it. Americans for Democratic Action was easy--their article says nothing about gun control. Now, if you have a good reason to remove the hunters, do it and explain why in an edit summary. Be bold. I don't know how Ada Lovelace is, but it's a pretty exciting last name. Drmies (talk) 23:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

She was a mathematician who is now known as the world's first computer programmer; she wrote algorithms for Charles Babbage's mechanical computers. She was also Lord Byron's daughter, which probably would've been an even more interesting last name. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 23:59, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Ada Lovelace is beloved by all nerds and geeks and elderly bookworms (like me) who want to counter Wikipedia's systemic bias, and encourage young women to enter careers in science and technology, and win Nobel Prizes, and save the planet, and so on. Ask SarahStierch, who won an Ada Lovelace award today. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations to Sara. Good to know that we have editors that have accomplishments beyond our eyes here for such important issues. I feel a little small at the moment, but that's OK as I am not attempting to stand on anyones shoulders...just be proud and appreciative to be able to interact with people that deserve recognition in these manners. Thanks for the information Cullen!--Mark Miller (talk) 04:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I was looking at Maria Goeppert-Mayer to do a GA review, requested in that drive (someone created the review page after I got done with a first run-through; I asked them if I could take it). That was one impressive career; I read a few lines from her biography to Mrs. Drmies, and all we could do was sigh. It reminded me of the biography of Helen Vendler ("We don’t want any women here""--though our article on her is woefully underdeveloped and does her little justice. Drmies (talk) 04:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

That first one is a fascinating and inspiring life story, Drmies, though thank our lucky stars that those weapons she worked on with Edward Teller were never used in anger. All that unpaid work is like a "partial government shutdown" just for brilliant women. Thanks for your kind remarks, Mark Miller. Maybe was can hang out at a Sacramento museum or Davis edit-a-thon some time soon. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:57, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Maria Goeppert-Mayer/GA1

Thanks for your courteous note, please feel free to take this review. I hope our paths cross again! LT910001 (talk) 07:27, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK Ruud van Hemert

Hello! Your submission of Ruud van Hemert at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

DYK for TopNotch

Gatoclass (talk) 16:03, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Bacar Baldé

Hi there MIES, longtime no "see",

my last summary in this player's article will be self-explanatory. I think it's thus more appropriate to leave most of my last version.

Sorry for any inconvenience, keep up the great work and regards (if this is not the correct "order of feelings", we'll think of another one ;)) --AL (talk) 23:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

• Problem is the grammar, VASCO! Good to see you too, old friend. Drmies (talk) 00:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism? where?

I have clearly asked at the corresponding talk page 10/11/2013 for the protection removal on PXE's page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Preboot_Execution_Environment

I have given the reasons explaining why I consider the protection on that page only really protects Widefox and his abuse of power already reported at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Widefox_Abusive_editor_with_banning_power.

I can see the very same day 10/11/2013 you have set a protection on that page preventing "vandalism".

Let me ask you:

Are you accusing me of vandalism at WP PXE's page??

Are you protecting Widefox interests?

Because of the mentioned PXE page I have been systematically erased/banned/abused by some people here; are you one of them?

Please let all of us know why you do not remove the vandalism protection on WP PXE's page.213.37.84.214 (talk) 12:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• You asked for sanctions against Widefox here, Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive814#User:Widefox_Abusive_editor_with_banning_power.. I don't know if you kept up with it, but it was archived with no action taken against Widefox and some serious criticism against you. The thread you started on the talk page isn't going anywhere either. You seem to be under the mistaken apprehension that just because you ask for something it should be given to you. Your edits were widely deemed to be disruptive and that's why the article is semi-protected, but blocking you might be a better solution. Consider this: if sem-protection runs out and you keep at it, you'll be blocked. If you make any more frivolous complaints and unwarranted accusations (like that I would be protecting Widefox's "interests", whatever those are--I have no idea and I don't care) you'll be blocked. You can play nice on the talk page and make suggestions that are in compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines; have a nice day. Drmies (talk) 14:16, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I haven't asked for "sanctions" against Widefox it is not my job to decide is he has to be sanctioned or not; I have just reported his actions and abuse against my person. Unfortunately I cannot see if it was "archived" with criticism against me; I want to read it; where is it? is this the way WP admins protect each other? are you also protecting Widefox here??

The thread I started on the talk page CLEARLY states what Widefox is doing on that page and CLEARLY states why there is not "vandalism" on that page; then I'm asking you: are you teaming up with Widefox when protecting that page and avoiding ME to edit adding the information I have clearly supported all this time?

I'm not asking ANYTHING but I just not to be HARASSED, BANNED, ERASED; I have added the necessary independent SUPPORT for editing that page; And you cannot call that DISRUPTIVE because it is not; What do you know about PXE in order to know if what I'm editing is or not disruptive? YOU ARE DEFINITELY THREATENING ME WITH MORE BLOCKING you are part of this game; you are definatelly protrecting Widefox 213.37.84.214 (talk) 22:14, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

31 hours? Aren't you admins allowed to block for 31 years? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:38, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Come back

If you're planning visiting Europe, try Setenil De Las Bodegas other pictures see also Setenil de las Bodegas. (From Drmies: WOW.)

I am probably crazy, but I went on a new trip to Europe. Back again. Warrington (talk) 14:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Depends on where you went. Maybe I am not completely neutral in this case, but visiting the Netherlands and Ireland is something I can always recommend. Although I also enjoyed my time in Paris, Barcelona and on Sardinia. The Banner talk 15:37, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• Lovely! Nice places you chose . Did you like Sardinia? Sardinia is not that well known but wonderful... Warrington (talk) 14:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Where'd you go? And has my cousin in Goteborg visited you already? Drmies (talk) 16:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I have been a number of times in the north-west corner of the island, including Argentiera. The Banner talk 21:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
• Budapest. Did your cousin visited while I was gone? Blast, bad luck... Warrington (talk) 14:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

User:Nasnema

Nasnema has begun editing again. He reverted a number of edits yesterday using Twinkle. I've not seen any problematic reverts (other than that he isn't issuing warnings), but I'm curious as to whether or not you think those reverts are acceptable. Should he be using Twinkle's revert capability so soon after having rollback removed? Ryan Vesey 15:17, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• I agree that issuing warnings is important; I issued one for them, so to speak. The only troubling edit I see is this one--the typical unexplained, unverified IP edit followed by the typical unexplained revert. I do think that rollback and Huggle/Twinkle ought to be a kind of package deal: didn't we have some discussion over that on AN or ANI a while back? If you want to bring this up and argue on one of those forums that this user shouldn't be using those scripts (is that the right word?) while rollback is denied, I'd support that. But maybe some of the friendly stalkers know more about those technicalities. At any rate, simply reverting without explanation/warning is not a positive thing. Drmies (talk) 17:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• He will have gotten a notification to this discussion. I'll wait and see if he'll show up here before taking it to another board. Hopefully he'll agree to step away from Twinkle as a revert tool for at least a month. Ryan Vesey 17:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh boy - the Julie Walters revert was a mistake. I do not think it was a disaster though. On the subject of warning users I do not think that warning an IP user hours after the event is worth bothering about especially if they have not made many edits. If there is vandalism there is no requirement to make any comment so I will not always do so. On the whole I think you will agree that my reversions are generally right with the odd slip-up now and again. It must run in the family here as with my resident delinquent who will not be able to access my account now. Nasnema  Chat  16:47, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Nasnema, I hope the ANI thread showed you there was some good faith practiced or there might have been a serious block. The one slip, it's no big deal. It is, however, a good idea to leave (more) edit summaries, and even if it's hours later, the warning, if it is the correct one, tells other editors that the revert was done correctly and it tells the IP, if they're still around, what the problem was: in other words, I encourage you to leave them regardless of whether it was a few minutes or a few days. Especially with vandal IPs it's useful since ClueBot, if it reverts another edit, takes into account what's already been posted, and in escalating warnings admins will often not block if final warnings haven't been given--so if someone gives a level 1 warning but it's the fifth vandal edit, it'll take a few more edits (and disruption) than would've been necessary (if, of course, they take place in a limited timeframe). Hope you had a nice vacation; now it's back to the grindstone I suppose. There's homework, laundry, cleaning, files to catch up on, etc. Drmies (talk) 23:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. It was a good vacation although we should have all gone on it. A disaster really on the rebound. As for warnings if there is someone out to continually vandalise then there will be plenty of edits so a warning is necessary. However if it is just a one-off then not so sure that is appropriate especially if it an IP. Nasnema  Chat  23:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

crying to daddy

Sigh, would you take a look at this ANI thread Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Copy_Editor, and this article talk thread Talk:Trayvon_Martin#George_Zimmerman_was_told_not_to_follow_Trayvon_Martin , and trout (or whatever other action you feel appropriate) whoever you feel deserves it? The Involved (tm) are clearly talking in circles at this point. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:56, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I second that request Drmies. Please....but don't tell mom.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:59, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• Sure thing, my sons. I saw that thread earlier but had not yet felt the spirit move me. Please ping me if disruption continues. Now I gotta run and pick up my kid, though apparently the school is under lockdown: Gaijin, none of those problems with violence and lockdowns would happen, of course, if all children over the age of four and attending school would be issued a firearm. In my state, such a scheme might actually succeed. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 20:33, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Storm in a teacup, fortunately. Gaijin, keep me posted on that editor. Drmies (talk) 21:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Will do. Glad things were quiet. Obviously you spoke in jest, but to jump down the rabbit hole : Obviously children do not have the necessary self control and judgement (or aim for that matter) to carry firearms, but I would certainly support more arming of teachers and administrators. In the school shootings (or in general) "when seconds count, police are only minutes away". One could argue towards the complete prohibition and retroactive confiscation of guns to address the issue, but as this is politically (and otherwise) unrealistic... "you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time" (or alternatively, Because he's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now.) Gaijin42 (talk) 21:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

My solution is cheaper and safer. :) Drmies (talk) 23:04, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you 213.37.84.214 (talk) 22:11, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Patrick Califia comment may need to be removed again

Hi, You assisted last time we had some offensive comments left on the talkpage. Could you have a look at this? Thank you! Sportfan5000 (talk) 23:44, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• I don't think it's bad enough for revdel, though I support your removal. Tell me, where did you bring this up the last time? I can't find it. Was it ANI? I left a note for the editor: the way forward is through conversation, and we (you, and I as well) should have started that last time. Drmies (talk) 02:42, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I raised it at the BLP note board. I felt the comments were trolling in nature so i did not want to prolong anything but I support what you wrote. Sportfan5000 (talk) 16:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review

I know this is slightly outside of the articles you edit, but would you mind doing a PR on WTCF‎? I took that article to GAN back in July and it got reviewed today (it didn't pass). I am told that I need to work on the prose and how everything flows on the page. I have asked Wehwalt for a PR as well, so I can get different opinions on how things should look. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

• Hmm, well, those are pretty detailed comments. I'd start by having a look at how many sentences start with a date--that needs a change-up. Sentence variation. What the reviewer said about the lead applies to each individual section (and each individual paragraph) as well: try writing topic sentences for each section that introduces the content, before listing every detail. The reviewer is correct in that the article reads like a list; it needs to be turned into coherent prose, where sentences connect and paragraphs/sections are single units that are in turn connected and built towards a whole.

  I made a few tweaks to one section, but there's something I don't understand: Alex buys the channel, then sells it, then operates it? These are probably radio matters that I just don't get, like that time brokerage agreement. Perhaps explain that in a sentence or two? Drmies (talk) 04:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

  • I have a habit of being chronological when I write, especially radio station articles. To answer your question, Alex Media built and launched the station, essentially to turn around and sell it for a considerable profit. Alex Media sold it to Timber Ridge, but it takes more than the exchange of money to buy a station. You have to file paperwork with the FCC, different applications, wait for them all to be approved, etc. With the government shutdown, that got backed up. Though, since it's launch, Timber Ridge has operated the station, but Alex Media has owned it. They are now just selling it to Timber Ridge. Confusing, I know. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:22, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
    • The article says the FCC sold the frequency. How can that be if there already is a station on that frequency? Auction 91: so this was part of some sort of well-known auction? Perhaps there's something more to be said or wikilinked there. Drmies (talk) 20:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
      • The FCC determines areas that have a lack of radio signals and then sells those signals, as part of an auction, to the highest bidder. During Auction 91, Alex Media bought 103.3 (becoming WTCF). WLTK already existed on 103.3, but about 30 miles south in New Market, Virginia. Alex Media asked the FCC to allow WLTK to move to 102.9 (something the requesting station typically pays for). WLTK became 102.9 and WTCF became 103.3. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:37, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Nasnema

I have been keeping an eye on his/her edits since they started editing again. They are back to reverting, this time with TWINKLE, and seem to be slowing down but are still making the same mistakes. He/She reverted this edit but a quick check of IMDb shows the anon was indeed correct. I'm not going to comment on Nasnema's page after their last little blow up at me, but I thought I'd bring it to your attention. My apologizes for the double post. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Scroll up :) Ryan Vesey 00:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Day late, dollar short. :) Good catch Ryan. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:58, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

De re beerensio

So I'm stuck living out of a hotel in Little Rock for the next two to eight (or more) weeks bug testing the computer system meant to process the reformed Medicaid programs. Aside from being around some slightly professional people, the main benefit is that I'm near to the state's only decently stocked liquor stores. I've tracked down one that carries Gulden Draak and hope to hit it up tomorrow. Any other recommendations? I drink ales (pale or Belgian) and the more bitter lagers—stouts are only acceptable if more interesting than a chocolatey slurry. I hope all's well with everyone.  davidiad { t } 04:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

• Wooohoooo so you screwed it up for Obamacare? Gulden Draak, MAN that is good. It's one of my favorites. Like Duvel, but better. I like Delirium Tremens, as you know. What you could do is buy all the brands of one variety. We had a tripel tasting party last year, and then a Christmas beer event. Have you tried tripels yet? Strong, complex, slightly sour sometimes--I haven't had a bad one, though I'd stay away from Kasteel. The yellow Chimay is a great standard to compare others too. There's two good American tripels as well, by Green Flash (? or is that the name?) and by...sounds like Crisco 1492...Cisco Brewers, yes. Of course a tripel tasting session requires a strong mind and body, and that you don't have to get up too early the next morning.

  Hey, good luck straightening all that out. It really matters to a lot of people. Drmies (talk) 16:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

• So I finally got my hands on the Draak (the last bottle in Little Rock, it seems), but the store didn't have as good a selection as I expected. I also finally broke down and bought a bottle of Ommegang's Three Philosophers, but for some reason I've always expected to be disappointed by that brewery. Hopefully I'm wrong, but I'll probably be asleep by the time I'd realize it was nasty if it is. It's a quadrupel (I link because the article is two-headed stub that could use some lovin'). The software testing is interesting ... and also of greater consequence than what I've been doing since I became a government drone. The time in the hotel has been a bit productive: two more articles submitted and a third on the way. My goal is to hit the first 2014 numbers of ZPE, the Archiv für Papyrusforschung, Mnemosyne and Hermes so that for a few months my name is everywhere and my stock will rise going forward.  davidiad { t } 00:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

• Weren't they allied with Duvel, one way or another? (Or Duvel's multinational owner...) Three Philosophers isn't bad, and they make a double which tastes very Belgian. Going forward--as in up, up and away? I'm toasting you with an Affligem Triple--at $9 for a big bottle it's a steal. Drmies (talk) 04:13, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

• Going forward as in: remember Dave? That mother***er had it. Gulden Draak had some real -ness: consistent carbonation, a real body. Unfortunately, I drank them all. Started with Chimay yellow after dinner, followed with Gulden Draak and currently on the Three Philosophers. The lady was tired from teaching—didn't have a sip. I'm in no state to critique.  davidiad { t } 05:29, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
• I've just recovered from last night's tasting. Gulden Draak was just fantastic, but I actually prefer Nocturnum. I'll try to get my hands on your other favorites next week.  davidiad { t } 03:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Puppies

Warrington has given you some puppies! Puppies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your puppy must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever!

• Awww now who's going to clean up that mess? Did you empty the Budapest dog pound into the trunk of your Volvo Estate? Drmies (talk) 16:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
• Awww now who's complaining? Don't you have just as many babies at home? Warrington

SPIdey sense is tingling.

You recently welcomed user "Flin the flan warrior" (not linking him to avoid the ping). He showed up on my radar by editing the Michael.Haephrati talk page, which is on my watchlist and a known socker. Looking through the user contribs, its highly suspicious for a new user (though not necessarily haephrati, but such a random thing to hit?!) , with the first two edits on Jimbo's page, and then a series of weird edits, some labeled "test edit" where they delete some random bit of text, then revert themselves. (a few instances of that). I highly suspect that this user is doing some semi-innocuous edits to achieve autoconfirmed, and then is going to bust out the big guns. (also, the user appears to have some weird library of rare (and appropriate!) images they are adding to random articles. Obviously nothing actionable yet, and my sensors may be over-calibrated, but as you "touched em last" I thought I would ping you. I shall keep an eye on them. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

• I thought they were just screwing around; I welcomed them also to have an edit in my history to remind me. Let's keep an eye on it, yes. Drmies (talk) 20:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Categories

I will, thanks. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 20:38, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

• I appreciate it, Dereck Camacho. If you were an admin you could see the history of the category: it's been somewhat controversial, and the headnote was a kind of minimum standard to make it acceptable to the community. In a nutshell, there are BLP issues involved with categorizing someone as a rape victim. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

I see. I think that the name should be rape survivors, at least for the more modern cases. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 03:00, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

A S'more for you!

	A S'more for you!
	Sorry 'bout the test edits. Flin the flan warrior (talk) 21:34, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Gavin Brown (musician)

It would have been nice for some advanced warning before you deleted all the information I added to Mr. Brown's page, which took hours to put up in the first place. You can clearly see that the page is in progress and I'm adding citations and improving sources all the time.

I deleted the paragraph from his Biography because it wasn't properly cited.

I deleted the sentence about his A/R work with Universal because he no longer does that.

I understand wiki is not the place for original research but I work for Mr. Brown so he tells me that certain information is no longer true or relevant, or is new so I add it and work on finding references to that information so it is verifiable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crayolascribblez (talk • contribs) 04:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

• Whoa, I wish you hadn't told me you worked for the man, though I could have guessed that from your edits. Still, I thank you for your note.

  One at a time: yes, I can see you're trying to improve the article, but I do not agree that all such edits are an improvement. For starters, what you tell me the previous editors could have told you: you deleted all the prose from the article with the exception of the opening sentence. Not just "a" paragraph, all of it. That he no longer works at this or that job is immaterial: we're not a resume site, we're an encyclopedia. If he worked for some outfit (and it was verified by Billboard, apparently!), then his departure is no reason for removal. I'm not interested in "original research"--it's still a terrible article by our standards, but the lack of verification I signaled in my edit summaries is directly relevant to the reason I removed it, as anyone who looks at the edits can see. Most importantly, we don't do resumes and that's what this article had become.

  What I suggest you do, lest you wish the article be defaced by yet another tag (signaling a WP:COI) is that you find the sources that verify this or that notable production or song and write it into the article--write, not list. I don't see any reason why one would start with a list and then, maybe, come around to verifying it. An article should be started by an editor putting down legible prose and the references that back it up. One last thing, and this goes directly to your working for the man and what he tells you: "relevant" is not decided by the subject, which is what makes us an encyclopedia and not a glorified LinkedIn. What's relevant is decided by what the sources offer, in combination with editorial judgment. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 05:05, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

• Whether I like it or not you've raised some valid points. I did some reading on wikipedia citations and editors with a conflict of interest to make sure subsequent edits are done properly and with appropriate transparency. I redid the discography section, taking the lead from the discography you did for the Kronos Quartet. In an effort to remain as impartial as possible I did not link to any artist or album that did not have it's own wikipedia page. If other editors feel that linking to an artists website outside of wikipedia would be a usefull addition I leave it for them to do so. To address some of your other criticisms: in all instances where Mr. Brown is listed as a songwriter I added the song titles that he wrote on that album; the same goes for instances where he is listed as a musician: I added what instruments he is credited for playing. I have also added citations for all of my information. I hope that this new version proves in keeping with the wikipedia standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crayolascribblez (talk • contribs) 01:58, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Pony

Warrington has given you some small horses! Ponies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your pony must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever!

• Sheesh Warrington. More animals??? And no, I don't have as many children as I have puppies, though it's quite a kennel full. Drmies (talk) 16:30, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
• Sheesh Mies. Don't you love animals? If you are not nice, I am going to give you KITTENS! Warrington.
  • Well, sure I love them, but my yard space is limited, and feeding those kids is pretty expensive already. Is it nice to be back home, or is it cold and wet and depressing already? Drmies (talk) 16:54, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
• IT is, Dr Mies, it is. Cold and wet and depressing. Ssigh. (Ordinary phonetic transcriptions of utterances reflect only the linguistically informative quality. The problem of how listeners factor out the linguistically informative quality from speech signals is a topic of current research) ... Anyway, it was nice and warm over there, and here it is raining and all the leafs are falling, and that sort of thing. How is Your weather? Warrington.
  • Remarkably similar! Though not very cold. Fall has only just arrived here. It's great weather for having some nipponsoppa--go ahead and color that link blue. Drmies (talk) 17:07, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  • You know what, now that WAS a good idea. I go and buy some of it right on. Warrington.

This is for you

• Henri Goovaerts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

--Bbb23 (talk) 16:53, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

• Mandarax, JNW, can you help out? You guys know how to find sources for them artsy cats. Drmies (talk) 17:13, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
• BTW, there's two painters with the same name--the other is a guy from Antwerp, 1669-1720. Sounds like you two can write up two articles and a dab page, for a double DYK. Drmies (talk) 17:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

• Don't know. Gave a quick Google look and found virtually nothing so far.... JNW (talk) 02:13, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• That's disappointing. Still, I have good hope that your massive search, online and in the library, will soon deliver results. Drmies (talk) 03:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

A favour

Hi

Could you do me a favour, and use your magic revdel tools on the location name here just in case some superstar somewhere decides to get precious about it. Cheers.

Hope things are well with you, by the way (he added, in an attempt not to totally neglect the social graces...) Begoon ^talk 05:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

• I see the matter's been handled. Thanks Shirt! Drmies (talk) 15:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, handled is one word for it, I guess... I'll forego the adjectives. Thanks for having a look anyway. Begoon ^talk 16:37, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Right. Drmies (talk) 17:16, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

The Mental Traveller

I just completed the article {more or less). Could you have a look, if there is something that needs to be improved? Thanks Dmitrismirnov (talk) 08:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, it looks fine--though I would forgo the small print in those quotes, and that section is very long. The captions for the images in the gallery need tweaking, and one might well ask why those images are there in the first place. At least, that's what I'd ask if this were submitted for GA review, which should probably be the next step (or peer review?). Drmies (talk) 21:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hogere Burgerschool, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Batavia (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) 11:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Block and Help

Do you remember this? That has been continuing for last 1 year. I tried to provide help few times, but that did not work.

• I have filed a new report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Abhijit_puranik#20_October_2013, that is a sure sock, could you block the account?
• In my Facebook account they have sent friend request and asking for help. I have asked to stop creating new accounts immediately and asked to sign in and see if they can edit their first account. They may need some help this time. --Tito☸Dutta 13:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

What now?

Now what on earth is THIS? I am not avare of harrasing vandlas, whaterwer that means. Could that meant this one ? Or? Warrington (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, at least they tried to give you one of each. Don't uneven galleries give you the creeps? Maybe they though you didn't like uneven rectal galleries either. Why they didn't give you a set of male and female noses or toesies, I don't know. And I think they're from Vendel, where you've been harassing people, no doubt. Drmies (talk) 20:43, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

• How nice of you to put it that way. I am innocent, as a saint. Never harrased any vandlas from Vendel, ever. Can't help that people don't accept the way they are conceived. Looks like it gives THEM the creeps. Warrington (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

• OK, your anuses come from a couple of vandal IPs active in Timeline of Google Street View; see its recent history, and edits such as this one. Drmies (talk) 01:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
• Yes, it looks like a special movement. Still, they don't do it very well, aren't they. Can't get the finer points to show up on the screen. With special thanks, Warrington, your poor Swedish buddy. (talk) 18:46, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Drmies likes this.

Pending changes

I tend to stay clear of this beast. I wasn't one of its proponents and I have trouble with it. What did I do wrong at Lindsay Lohan? I followed all the instructions in rejecting the IP's changes, and you'd think my rejection would be automatically accepted, but now it's a mess, and I'm afraid to touch it.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If I revert on a PC-protected page I usually stay clear of the PC interface and do my normal revert/edit summary/warn routine (with Twinkle). Works just as well. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Neil, but I'm still curious why I can't use the PC interface successfully.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:48, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree it's weird. If I do use the interface to reject changes sometimes I have to accept my own revert to make it live and sometimes the revert is automatically accepted. Haven't figured it out. If you do, please let me know. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Neil, that's exactly what's happened to me.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I've had mysterious things happen too; it doesn't often that I run into those pages but I think I do what Neil does. Drmies (talk) 01:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll try to remember next time not to do it. If I happen to be patrolling RFPP and someone reqeusts PC, I go to the next report. I'm not sure I even understand how to evaluate when to semi-protect and when to impose PC. It's times like these when I really appreciate how hard it must be for new editors.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Haha, I do the same thing at RFPP. I can't remember how it went--I think I applied PC to some article, completely innocently, and next thing you know there's a bunch of jerks calling for my head. Apparently I had missed some Hugely Important RfC somewhere; I haven't touched it since. Drmies (talk) 01:54, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Speaking as a non-admin, it seems pretty much like a gut call from what I've seen. I think Mark applies it the most but that may be because he's one of the most active at RFPP. Saved me from pulling out my hair a few times when well-meaning anon editors regularly added the same BLP violations to articles which went live immediately. For example, there was some movie star who had a different last name for his passport. Well meaning editors kept adding it as his birth name. Trouble was, the editors didn't read the source properly and missed that the last name was from his mother's second husband (the man she married a few years after divorcing the birth father). Putting it as his birth name was problematic to say the least. With PC on, IP's can still make edits (the majority of them, in fact) but that one good-faith addition can be stopped. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

WP:ADMINSTATS does't have a separate category for PC, so I can't say if I'm doing it the most or not, but yeah, I guess I do tend to add it pretty regularly. Usually if there's a BLP that has recent vandalism but not enough to justify semi-protection I'll default to PC. Or if a page has been semi-protected for years and someone requests unprotection I'll PC it usually. The only downside is that edits still show up on huggle and then I go to protect it and realize that it's already PC protected. What we really need is to be able to use PC2 on pages that are being targeted by socks, since the reasonably determined ones can get autoconfirmed without much hassle. There was some vote where PC2 was outlawed though, sadly. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:26, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I blocked two autoconfirmed socks already today; it's really quite easy to get to that status. That "some vote" is probably the same one I was thinking of, but I lost interest in the discussion. I can see the advantages of PC, yes. Drmies (talk) 03:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Reliable source webpage

Hello there, I'm including as reference the website of the TV channel and programme used as reliable source for the Pan AM 103 entry. Regards.Celebritiess (talk) 05:22, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• A website for a channel that supposedly aired a talk show on which a person showed a ticket doesn't sound very reliable. Moreover, this appears to be a non-notable person in the first place. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 05:31, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

AdvanFort and MV Seaman Guard Ohio

Do you remember this mess that was at AN and the COI Noticeboard about 5 days ago? I'm inclined to accept the AfC on the company; I think he's done a quite adequate job finding refs now. But I have an ulterior motive: as I've said at the AfD on what was the article on the ship before it got moved, I believe an article on the company is the best home for (brief) coverage of the brouhaha over the ship. And you may recall NATO-Legal, who has been asking me for advice on my talkpage in one of their IP guises, who is the other player in this mess. So I'm up to my armpits in this. Now that I have had time, as I suspected, there are at least the usual kinds of sources on the ship itself (which I found via an abandoned AfC draft on a sister ship, which has a pic I have nominated for deletion on Commons). But there's an AfD running, so no moving stuff back to its original title and gutting it and replacing it with boring nautical details like length, beam, call-sign ... Any opinion? I have an article I'd rather write, but I may have time for both this "weekend" if I don't run into another mess like Henry Adams Bellows / Henry Adams Bellows (businessman). Yngvadottir (talk) 16:34, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, are you vested in keeping the ship (incident)? Since there is nothing wrong with moving (properly attributed) information from the ship to the company, as far as I'm concerned, if it's your opinion that the company article is good enough. I usually agree with Masem, I have found, and I'll take their word to the bank, but that doesn't mean the content can't be kept in a different context, since Masem's comment pertains to the incident as an article, not to the incident as properly sourced (if I read their comment correctly).

  I've written an article on a ship that was seized by the Israelis, as part of some Palestinian aid flotilla (can't remember the name--something like Mary or Maryam?), and that could have been argued to be a BLP1E ("P" subbing for "ship", maybe), I suppose. But in accepting the AfC, the AfD should not be an impediment, IMO. Drmies (talk) 18:07, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

There is disagreement over where to put the incident (and which bits are notable). I see the place for the incident as under the company, and agree with Masem that the company article needs to avoid smearing people involved with the company (obviously). There are a number of different viewpoints, including TheRedPenofDoom's view that the coverage of the incident strays too far into interpreting maritime law. But I fear by moving the ship article to be about the incident they've made it about the incident, which I believe should be the least of the 3 (unless and until it does revolutionize the field(s) of maritime law, Coast Guard patrolling, and/or piracy). What I would otherwise have done is stubbed the ship article and made it all dry and technical. However, I'm not sure I have the cheek to accept the AfC myself and then cover the incident there myself, especially since that's probably very much not what the AfC submitter wants. And to a lesser extent because I would then have a responsibility to watch the thing at least 18 hours a day for BLP violations. Hmm. I may write the other article first and hope some Indian newspaper does a nice write-up on the ship itself to fill the news hole. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

OK, I just now saw when and how (and possibly why) the move was done, and I was thinking about undoing that when I saw Bushranger's comment, which confirmed my opinion that it's really out of process. I moved it back, and left an explanation on the talk page. I don't know what that does for your weekend, but I believe moving it back was the right thing to do. Drmies (talk) 19:46, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, that was sweet of you. I still don't know what to do about the company, but research may well decide that - I think there's been a name change and even if there hasn't, I want to know where they got those 2 ships from. Ship infobox and dry details of dimensions, registration number, call sign, etc. coming tomorrow after more sleep. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:50, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I remember sleep. I wish babies were born with all their teeth already in the right place, though Mrs. Drmies's nipples probably have a different opinion on that. Drmies (talk) 14:17, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Pitfour estate

Sagaciousphil needs some help. Beside of a lot of other home-stuff-problems she is upset because her GA didn't went well. Grammar boy, and Yngvadottir, you are the stars in this kind of thing... (not me). Or anyone else, stalkpagers, who wants to help... [10]^{Article needs an intensive copyedit (c/e) for basic style/formatting errors and to fix awkward syntax and sentence structures. I think these copyediting concerns are too substantial and require too exhaustive of a time and effort to rectify that it should be done outside of the GA process, and such preparations should be done before seeking another GA review.} Hafspajen (talk) 20:16, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Why not ask Eric Corbett? He's the best at it, he knows such articles; that's why we have him on payroll... Drmies (talk) 20:26, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

  I'm already on the case. Eric Corbett 20:47, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks Eric. I'm sure Jimbo Wales has already signed the check for this job. Seriously, thanks. Drmies (talk) 21:42, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

  I'm quite sure Jimbo and his acolytes would prefer it if I just buggered off. Fat chance. As for Sagaciousphil, she'll have her GA or I'm a Chinese whore from Mars. Eric Corbett 22:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Hey, that worked. Sagaciousphil is back! Nice of you, Doktor! Hafspajen (talk) 22:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• If you're that whore, I owe you five bucks, a piece of gum, and an apology for running off. Drmies (talk) 22:44, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• As for that wording... Mies, MIes. I hope still that she will help to fix some dog-articles. Hafspajen (talk) 08:11, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

• I didn't realize you'd edited it before. The comments on the GA review were a bit vague (that's not a criticism, but it's true), and I can't see, for instance, which statements are unsourced. Drmies (talk) 22:53, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

  Direct quotes such as "Ascot of the North" are always a problem even in the lead. They need to be cited right away, but then you'll get some reviewers claiming (incorrectly) that the lead ought not to contain citations. Eric Corbett 23:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

  True dat, and it shouldn't be the opening sentence anyway. Can you rewrite it? You may know that I automatically write opening sentences that start "X was an x...". Drmies (talk) 23:44, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

  So do I, but we're on the job now. Eric Corbett 19:33, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

  I tweaked that opening paragraph some. I'd like to be able to make the opening sentence say more, in the way that Bramshill House starts by announcing it as a Jacobean mansion, and an important one at that, but I don't know what kind of category this building falls in. (Like the category of "Big house" in Ireland.) BTW, most of what I know about this topic I learned from Wikipedia, and from reading W. G. Sebald. Drmies (talk) 22:41, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

May I introduce myself?

Hi I'm talkingfacts (yeh, I know, its not a very creative name, but its what the spirit moved me to write that late night when I created it). I'm a newbie on here, and my maiden voyage in the past week was rocky; I got involved in a fight, and I didn't know how to conduct myself with the vicious attacks, and I ended getting myself blocked. Well, the block is off now, and I've written a page of introduction, and someone recommended you as someone who might be a good mentor for me. I don't even know if this is the correct place to contact you and introduce myself, but its what I found; I will likely make many mistakes in the first weeks and months, hopefully no more of them will get me blocked. I'm actually a softie, and I'd like to help people be nicer to each other, and ultimately I'd like to have a role in helping to ensure decent and kind-spirited communication on wikipedia. Hello! write back!Talkingfacts (talk) 20:24, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Your subject heading reminds me of a De La Soul song--"let me introduce myself--I'm Mr. Monkey!" Hey. Yes, I saw that note by Ohlendorf77. I'm not sure if I should be anyone's mentor: even my kids can't behave properly toward each other. But I'll give you one piece of advice, if you don't mind: the water is under the bridge, so let it go--even referring to "vicious attacks" means that it's not over. If your desire is to teach them Wikipedians manners, I wish you good luck: they're a rowdy bunch, as you noticed, and I'm not the cleanest of editors anyway. Do let me know if I can help in any kind of practical way. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 22:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

  One can allways study the Wikipedia:Civility and try to do so. And other wise pages (how to get started pages). Hafspajen (talk) 18:39, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

  WP:CIVILITY is a hippie dream that should never have been allowed to become one of the pillars. Fuck the hippies I say. Eric Corbett 18:48, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

• Gosh, Eric. Aren't we trying to show up a charming side of us for the newbie? "oh my gosh, you just fell out of the 20th floor! are you ok?" Hafspajen (talk) 18:55, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

  I've got no idea what you're talking about. The incorporation of a hippie dream into one of the most perniciously vicious projects I've ever been involved in doesn't make it not perniciously vicious. Eric Corbett 19:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

• Eric, there is a Mancunian who favours "Look after those that look after you, fuck off those that fuck off you" (Lattlay Fottfoy).- Sitush (talk) 19:58, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
• Ah yes, Eric and the pillars.31.55.39.166 (talk) 20:10, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

• All you need is a love, (for better or worse). Hope is not offending you if I tell you that I like you, Eric. But of course Wikipedia can be vicious. Hafspajen (talk) 20:20, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

• I love hippiedom. I haven't met a hippie since 1985, and my hatred, what I have of it, is reserved for the ones who really hurt us: politicians of a certain ilk, gaybashers, racists. Drmies (talk) 21:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

interaction question

I've got two editors who can't play nice with each other. One editor has agreed to stay away and the other editor refused. The "other" editor made some edits again, threw some nice words and the whole thing blew up again. What's the best to handle this? Bgwhite (talk) 20:43, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

A duel. Let them fight it out between themselves. Eric Corbett 20:51, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Or (but don't tell Eric) issue a civility block (ahem) if the choice words were real bad. I don't know, Bg, and without knowing the details I think the best I can say is give the other editor a serious warning and don't be afraid to follow up on it. Civility is one thing, but if behavior gets in the way of article improvement, a block may well be called for. Eric, a duel isn't always fair either. For instance, you might outshoot me but I can probably outrun you--and who gets to pick what the contest is? Mind you, in a fistfight I'll fight like a girl--your balls are the first to go. Drmies (talk) 21:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks Drmies. I left details short on purpose as it is a loong mess. If this was a case of two experienced editors, Eric gives a valid option of letting the MAD doctrine follow its course. However, this is between an experienced editor and a newbie. It's not a fair fight. Sort of like putting a Northern Englishman and a Dutch professor in the boxing ring. The Englishman's balls are made of steel and the Dutchman is knocked out in 5 seconds. Bgwhite (talk) 22:12, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• That's why it should've been done this way (text in lower third not related to cartoon). De728631 (talk) 20:33, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Maria Goeppert-Mayer

Re: Talk:Maria Goeppert-Mayer/GA1: is there a problem with the article that needs to be resolved? Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:05, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

• Shoot, no--I forgot about it until I got to work this morning and saw the window still open. Sorry Hawkeye--I will get on it. Drmies (talk) 14:14, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

  Is it okay now? Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:17, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

User:Senor Cuete

Hi Drmies. This user seems to have declared war on WP:ALUM, as I discovered when he undid some of my copyedits on articles I was improving in relation to my drive to help get Operation Crossroads to FA. He has accused me of vandalism, and this wasn't very nice either. Please examine the matter in as much detail as you can and make whatever comments you deem appropriate. I have always been impressed with your fair-mindedness and if there is any criticism for me then of course I shall take it like a man. Incidentally I was recently in the Netherlands for the first time in many years. It's still a great place. --John (talk) 18:01, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well. I'll reserve my opinion on the back-and-forthing, but clearly that remark was ridiculous, and they made it worse on their talk page. I hope they've changed their tune; in the meantime I've issued them a warning. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:51, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I am many terrible things but a nationalist is not one of them. --John (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Cookie!

	Here's a plate full of cookies to share!
	Hi Drmies/Archive 58, this is for your neutral handling of gun-related issues, and for putting Wikipedia in front of personal politics... Not an easy thing to do sometimes! --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 20:26, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

• Sue, that's very nice of you. Guns are very important objects in our world and (sometimes) marvels of beautiful metal technology and craftsmanship, and should be properly represented. My (impossible) politics have nothing to do with that. By the same token I am also trying not to turn articles on all these horrible gun massacres into memorials. There should be memorials, but not here. That gun legislation in the US is ridiculous and contributes to gun violence is in my view so obvious it doesn't even need restating, and our politicians ought to be tarred and feathered, but that's not a matter for Wikipedia. I suppose I'm an old-fashioned liberal, who believes that education is the way to all kinds of progress, and that is what I think Wikipedia can do. Partisan article writing does not help. It serves no purpose to list the massacres involving a certain type of gun in that gun's article, for instance, nor does it serve any purpose to keep information about gun violence out of general gun articles.

  Anyway, thank you. Anyone is free to come by and grab one of these cookies, but check your guns at the door. It was good practice in the world of Beowulf to leave the spears and swords outside, and it's sad but necessary practice to do the same on my university's campus--signs were put up outside every door of every building a couple of weeks ago, suggesting what kind of state I live in. I will just have to be nicer to students and hope that a sign is enough to stop the mentally deranged and criminally insane, since we refuse to let the legislature stop them. Drmies (talk) 22:51, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Page Move Request

Could you move WWHC to WWHQ? WWHQ is currently a redirect, so that will need to be deleted. This is all uncontroversial. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• Sure--but what's the source for the change to WWHQ? Drmies (talk) 02:47, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Heh

Heh. Template:Fried-shit-stub. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 04:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• Ha, thanks--I forgot about that. Apparently I still had a sense of humor in 2009. Drmies (talk) 04:13, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• I saw that, too, and smiled. So, you can't polish a turd but you can ... - Sitush (talk) 04:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• That's what you say, Sitush. Listen, BFC is truly a work of genius. Filthy, sick genius, but genius. Hardest part? The gravy. (I'm not good at making gravy.) Drmies (talk) 04:24, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
• And while we're on the topic, I found a turd that needs polishing: Open English. Drmies (talk) 04:25, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• Ugh. They'd have to pay me. But I'll lend you my chamois. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 05:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks--I do need a new one. I can hardly use the one from my old bicycle shorts (which has polished plenty, so to speak) to clean windows or articles with. Drmies (talk) 16:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Chatography

Per this past discussion, I thought you and Mandarax would be interested in learning the scientific term for the area and the art of electronic digital games. Science, you see? Please note that the previous name for this concept was not very scientific. -Thibbs (talk) 10:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

But also (and for serious) note that this isn't a canvassing attempt. Just an aside I thought you'd appreciate. -Thibbs (talk) 10:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• I do appreciate. What was the previous name? And, if you say "previous name for this concept", aren't you saying that the concept exists? I may need a sub-page for this talk page, devoted to philosophical bits. And on that note, time for coffee. What do you say, Mandarax? Triple sugar, as usual? Drmies (talk) 16:13, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, "coffee" is really just an excuse for drinking sugar water. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Shower (Juggling)

Thanks for pointing to the page to make the case for inclusion of video links (via a wiki page) and to saying I can make the argument on the talk page. I did however make the argument on the talk page and no-one bothered to check it out - simply reverting my edits. I will make my arguments at the suggested page but it would be nice if editors bothered to check talk pages before reverting. Thanks Robynthehode (talk) 17:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, you can lead a horse to water... But you can insist in a number of ways; one is by making an explicit invitation on a user's talk page. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 18:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Skater's talk page.
Message added 18:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SKATER ^Speak. 18:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I just want to say ...

A professor of Medieval Studies

... that this is a look that surely inspired respect in the classroom. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:58, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

• Hey! I never gave permission for that photo to be used! Drmies (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  • It's not you, it's Sven Two-Beards. Bishonen | talk 19:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC).

Robert N. Rooks

I don't think the article qualifies as an G10 or A7, although I saw inadequate (but some) evidence of notability in the few sentences which were not WP:BLP violations. I think it would have been OK to let the AfD run as blanked. I'm not going to restore the article, because that would just be making a WP:POINT, but I don't think it should have been deleted immediately. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:54, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• Arthur, I understand; thank you for coming by. My train of thought was that the preponderance of the content violated our BLP guidelines; as I said elsewhere about JamesBWatson's initial decision not to delete it, it's a matter of judgment and I want to assure you that I looked a few times at the article before I pulled the trigger. The SF Weekly piece certainly gives reason for deeming the subject important enough for an article (or at least to ward off speedy deletion), but that's why I never considered A7. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:30, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Rape victims

Category:Rape victims, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 03:19, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

• You're kidding. Really? Drmies (talk) 12:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Nothing personal old chap. Last !vote was no consensus about 6 months ago, so it's time for another go around. Your removal of this cat from verifiable cases, and its current state (already chock full-o-blps) indicates to me it's not workable.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:19, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Obi, until you understand the not-so particular meaning of "historical" there is no need to come by and explain things any further. I'm sick of the business, I've spoken my peace at the discussion, and I'm not going to be bothered by it. So don't come around here appeasing for this business; I'm not interested and it only irritates me more. Drmies (talk) 14:43, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Discrimination

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.149.35.242 (talk) 13:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Between this thread, the wikiexperts thing, and the massive abortion that is the Suburban Express thread, it seems like the zombie-trolls are REALLY coming out of the woodwork for haloween. You kill em, and they keep on getting up!Gaijin42 (talk) 15:02, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

If you have anything to add here, it'll help with filter work. Best, m.o.p 16:12, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Rule of Law

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.88.168.1 (talk) 19:11, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

MS Mikhail Lermontov

Hi Drmies, if you've some free time to look at the article and its talk page I'd appreciate it. Someone who's done a lot of personal research on the subject (dived around the wreck and combed through the transcripts) and has formed their own conclusions has tried to take ownership for a while, using several IPs. I've gone light on the warnings because I think they've got a lot to bring to the party, but WP:OR is plainly an issue. Thanks for any help, and very best always, JNW (talk) 19:47, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

• Mmm. You always pick exciting topics. Hey, I watched The Shining tonight. The art work on the wall looked a little familiar? The nudes, the landscapes? Drmies (talk) 03:19, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Perhaps the topics pick me. I find it very interesting when folks who are intimately familiar with an aspect of a subject get involved; look no further than the talk page at Harriet Stowe. As for movies, I'd rather visit the museum. Who even notices the backgrounds? JNW (talk) 04:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Someone's agent, no doubt! :) All we have is this. I've been through a few times. Perhaps you can have a look at their collection and tell me what I should pay attention to next time? After you clean up the article, of course! Hoping you and yours are well, Drmies (talk) 04:09, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Didn't know we had a collection of prints by the old masters (including, ahem, Whistler--or is "Old Master prints" to be read "old master prints"? but isn't that reserved for woodcuts?). Mind you, I'm usually there with the kids and that makes concentrated viewing a bit difficult; maybe they have those prints in a section I haven't seen yet. Drmies (talk) 04:11, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
      • Museums rarely place prints or drawings on permanent view, possibly to preserve the more delicate works on paper, but also because people would race right past them in order to look at the purty color pictures. We are well; I hope you are, too. I recently had a grand time writing a piece on Whistler, and am staying busy with a number of articles. Also painting nudes, of which you'd approve. JNW (talk) 04:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
        • As long as your better half approves. I certainly do. Any chance you can paint a nice, big set of testicles for my friend Kelapstick's User:Kelapstick/Senhor Testiculo? Drmies (talk) 20:51, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
          • Not without substantial financial compensation. Then we can talk. But nice of you to think of me for a painting of balls. JNW (talk) 01:51, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Autumn

	How to survive
	Special award for The Doctor who prescribed nyponsoppa against autumn leafs falling, cold, depression and laziness. Works very well! Hafspajen (talk) 21:44, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

• You know, I looked around, but didn't find it--I had no idea we had an English term for it, let alone a Wikipedia article. It's cold here now as well: we had hotdogs and vodka and more around the fire in a friend's backyard tonight, and now some nyponsoppa would go down nicely. Maybe I can get it on Amazon...you know you're in a food desert when you have to order your (organic) grits from Amazon! (They just came in, LadyofShalott, so come on by.) Drmies (talk) 01:34, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

• There should be some Swedish shops in New York... Or scandinavianbutik? Maybe you should try the IKEA... they have Kalles kaviar... or swedishfood Rose-Hip-Soup-Mix Hafspajen (talk) 12:10, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

• I ordered a pound from Amazon. Are you Facebook friends yet with the restaurant in Vissefjarda? :) Drmies (talk) 04:14, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

List of new religious movements

Hello!

I have made a few attempts to clean up List of new religious movements, which is a list article with a long history of contention, topic bans, puppetry, even at least one major contributor who was de-sysoped. Unfortunately, I haven't been successful in the attempt at cleanup. I'm asking you to take a look at the recent activity on the article and the talk page. Although I have my own thoughts on what some of the issues are, I would rather get yours without my frustration bleeding through too heavily.

I am dropping this note for the most recently active admins I saw, and I am hopeful that those extra eyes will make a difference.

Thanks for considering it, cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 21:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

• Holy moly that is one long list. Kind of exciting, really. Looks pretty clean--what's the problem? (I spotchecked the bibliography, and it seems to be that all the works are actually cited, right?) Drmies (talk) 03:22, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
• Tgeairn, if this is about the narrow issue of the inclusion of "Landmark" (or what it goes by now), I will be happy to enforce the RfC--just let me know. Other issues, well, I suppose you'll have to go RfC by RfC? Tricky stuff, I can see. So--who got desysopped? Drmies (talk) 03:29, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I think RfC by RfC is going to be the way of it. The active editors on the list are talking past each other, and the references are somewhat all over the map on the subject. I think the problem is the all-inclusive list criteria, and I nearly got POINT-y and added a hundred or so entries that all have been called religious movements by some source somewhere... which of course would have only added fuel to the fire. The sources are mostly primary in this context(IMHO), but finding good secondary sources that refute them is difficult as it becomes about proving a negative (for instance, there aren't any secondary sources that say that Jediism isn't a religious movement, so it stays on the list).

This is part of a whole series of articles either created or heavily edited by an editor who is now topic-banned from the area, although I question whether or not that editor may in fact still be editing in the topic here (they certainly haven't stopped editing in this area on wikiquote or wikinews).

On top of all of that, there is the edit warring on the lede - but always avoiding the actual 3RR bright-line. I would have warned on the EW, but didn't as I've been one of those being reverted. I think at least one editor doesn't understand BRD, at the very least.

Thanks for taking a look, and please feel free to weigh in if you see a place where it will make a difference (maybe on the edit-warring?). Cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 15:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Can you (or a talkpage stalker) check my work please?

I'm late for bed and as you know I don't really read Dutch ... Hyperion Lyceum. Thanks. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker): I checked the page, work looks good, but there aren't any sources. Those should be added before you head off to sleep. Without them, the page could be put up for deletion per GNG. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:44, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I know, I know ... but I have to sleep, I work nights :-( So long as I didn't drop any clangers, it will have to be up to the silly billy who created it in Dutch and/or the mercy of passing strangers recalling that secondary schools usually get kept. Thanks for checking my part in it. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:56, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

By the way I did find a couple of sources, although there are two profound mysteries: when it was actually founded, and why some articles in the archives at Het Parool come up as blank pages. What are they hiding?! Yngvadottir (talk) 13:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Should I take a break?

Thanks for your time, I can see from looking at the ANI logs that you guys have more fish to fry than worrying about a probably one-time vandalism.

[11]

"So it is entirely possible that Rolf_h_nelson should have taken a break from editing last month; let's hope that they did."

To clarify, did you mean to write that perhaps Podiaebba should have taken a break, or do you in fact mean that perhaps I should have taken a break as well, in addition to or instead of Podiaebba? Rolf H Nelson (talk) 00:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

• Oops--it seems that I copied and pasted the wrong name. My apologies: I amended the record. Thanks for pointing this out. Drmies (talk) 15:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/John P. Hermann

Drmies, this nomination has been sitting for over two weeks, so I'm giving you a ping. Something needs to be done soon, or it's going to be closed by someone as abandoned. Hope you can do something soon! Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:49, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

SpacemanSpiff,'s buddies. Give the nice visitor a nice lick.

• 
• 
• 
• 

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:26, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Ruud van Hemert

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Unilateral major deletion of content from MV Seaman Guard Ohio page

Hi, can you do something about the major deletion of content [12] from the MV Seaman Guard Ohio page by a user called TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom. This was done with total disregard to the comments left by several users including yourself on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MV Seaman Guard Ohio incident. Thanks. 109.128.150.134 (talk) 12:34, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I replied on my talk page; I intend to get to this starting with accepting the AfC on AdvanFort, but maybe someone else has more time and/or would rather keep the main coverage of the incident at the ship article ...? Yngvadottir (talk) 12:59, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

@Drmies (talk) & @Yngvadottir (talk) : In order to avoid a revert-war, I have NOT reverted the article to it's previous version and instead flagged the deletions by TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom as inappropriate on the talk age of the article.

I trust that you will do the needful as best as you see fit and in the mean-time will sit on my hands and not update the page anymore till you folks are finished with it. Thanks for your time & have a nice day ! 109.128.150.134 (talk) 18:13, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Trusty dog

We would need a semi-protection on this page where editors have trouble with an Ip-adress, someone who regularly removes almost all of the added Olde English Bulldogge pictures [13] with the motivation that they do not belong to this breed. But of course they are, File:OEB Pup.JPG, File:OldeEnglischBulldogge Jung.JPG, File:Renascence Bulldogge Welpe.JPG (text=Old English Bulldog Welpe). Silly. There are not many picture of this race, and now they go and remove allmost all of them. Why should the authors lie about the pictures? Hafspajen (talk) 21:44, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, I don't know--don't drop the word "lie" when it could be a mistake or a matter of opinion. In the WP:BRD cycle, it's their turn to take it up on the talk page; you could play the nice guy and start a brief section there, in which case you have the moral high ground for that ugly dog of yours. Drmies (talk) 23:25, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

• OK than, no lies, but why would they say that there are just the sort of ugly dog of mine is on the picture as they say? If they say it is an Olde English Bulldogge than it is probably an Olde English Bulldogge, ugly as it is. Everything ends up me being nice all the time. Is getting monotonous somehow... Do you belive in Universal grammar, by the way? Hafspajen (talk) 20:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

• I looked earlier today and your IP hadn't returned, so all's well that ends well, at least for now. Yes, you being nice is the best thing, and more people will love you even more. I haven't studied Universal Grammar and haven't read the article very carefully; I'm going to hold off on answering that. I believe all kinds of things are universal--but whether that's for instance a separation into nouns and verbs, I'm not sure of that. Drmies (talk) 00:06, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for John P. Hermann

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Good point -

[14]. Wish I would have thought of it. — ChedZILLA 01:26, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for appreciating my comment

Thanks for appreciating my comment on Eric's talk page. I appreciate it! I really do think some people need to think more carefully about these matters, and not use some semi-robotized mechanism for blocking, etc. If that was what was needed, we needn't have administrators at all, just some expert system software that searches for a list a "bad words" and then administers automatic blocks. Of course, we do need administrators, but they should use carefully-considered judgments and critical thinking to improve their decisions. We all fail, but I hope I don't appear to fail in this matter as often as some of my fellow admins! At the moment, I think that some of them might fail the Turing Test for carefully-considered and thoughtful actions over blocking.  DDStretch  (talk) 05:03, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

• Right. Well, you know, I prefer to think of the glass as half-full, extend good faith and all that, but Turing is an appropriate metaphor to throw in here, unfortunately. And I'm sure that someone somewhere is marking me down as yet another mindless supporter of blah blah, but those editors probably don't know how often I've stuck my neck out for or asked for an unblock of some editor with whom my relationship is at the least troubled. We are asked to judge intent (we: not just admins!) when issuing vandalism warnings, for instance, and context is part of that. Is there an intent to disrupt the project? Does someone really take ownership and chase away editors? Are comments made in response to ongoing disturbances (or what is perceived as such)--like in the Guy Fawkes article and elsewhere? All that matters, and that takes the roboblockfilter out of the equation. Plus, how much good does a block do?

  This stuff about Eric automatically getting a break because his content edits, that's nothing unique: after all, we have "vandalism-only" blocks, where we are supposed to measure the ratio of vandalism versus other edits, and often enough an editor may have a couple of edits that are not vandalism which are completely snowed under by clear vandalistic edits. Judgment is involved there as well, and we do that all the time. And perhaps it should be considered that his article edits and arguments which some claim as exhibiting ownership are typically supported by a host of other editors, and that this might mean that they're right. The problem with this clamor about an Eric cabal is that it denies good faith on the part of his supporters, and I for one don't ascribe bad faith to Worm, though I strongly disagree with their actions. If the other camp wants to be taken seriously, they have to accept that such is a two-way street...see, now I'm talking "camps" and I don't want to. I don't agree with his wording or his responses, but I'm not him, and no one has ever proven that anyone left because of them. OK, much too long. I appreciated your measured comment, and I hope this will have a moderately happy ending. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:11, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

TU

I hate this bad-pupil situations, but I owe you one thanks-for-not-blocking-me. Simply, I didn't take him as serious editor so I assumed 3rr don't count in such cases. --HistorNE (talk) 18:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks, but you might yet be blocked, and the same goes for your counterpart--depending on the admin who looks at your case at the ANEW noticeboard. Edit warring is wrong even if you're right, and breaking the WP:3R limit is only allowed in clear-cut cases of vandalism or WP:BLP violations. I hope y'all work this out. Drmies (talk) 19:31, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Anyone

Canvas stretched on wooden frame

Anyone interested? Page stalkers? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unusual deaths (7th nomination)...Hafspajen (talk) 19:30, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

• My dear Warrington, you have the best of intentions--but please be mindful of WP:CANVAS. Since I voted for deletion, and so did you, someone else might think you're seeking a deletion-friendly audience...! Tack sa mycket, Drmies (talk) 19:33, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Oh sorry. No I just thought it was fun. Silly article. You may delete the Anyone stuff, all of it. Hafspajen (talk) 21:06, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Too late! I voted already! But I don't think Drmies' talkpage stalkers are especially likely to be deletion-friendly, just because he is. Who cares what Drmies thinks? Bishonen | talk 21:15, 30 October 2013 (UTC).
      • That's right Bish. Though I'll have you know that I was verbally sexually accosted this morning--"Just give it to me!" Also, I am a xe (or a she, like my alter ego). Drmies (talk) 22:49, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Fun, fun fun... Actually I didn't even noticed that Drmies was involved... And Bishy is never doing ANYTHING one is telling her to do... Just remember the Big-Bishonen letdown about Danish Jante-lagen... Hafspajen (talk) 18:37, 1 November 2013 (UTC).

Furniture making

So it's okay as long RE also supports making furniture out of white people? Biofurniture is a redlink perhaps I'll go write ... nah, never mind. NE Ent 02:07, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Troll cat

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

coi colaboration

I recently sent a friendly warning/notice to an editor that I know has a COI on a gun related article, warning them about some of the policy/consensus changes that have happened re wikiexperts etc, and offered to assist them in their editing. They have replied to me, but indicated that they would prefer to communicate by email. I am trying to guide them to do as much as possible on wiki, but could use some guidance. I know about WP:MEAT obviously, and in relation to WP:CANVASS there is mention of off-wiki communication, but are there any other policies specifically addressing this type of scenario?. In particular I gave them guidance about not using personal knowledge or internal sources since those would fail WP:RS and WP:V and they have offered to email me sources. I will of course evaluate those sources against those policies to see if they are within policy for our use, but it seems like this might be necessary, because publicly posting the documents may run into copyright or other issues. Is it acceptable to collaborate (unpaid etc) off wiki and then have me make the edits that I personally think are within policy without running into WP:COI? What if I disclose the collaboration? Gaijin42 (talk) 18:32, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

• Look, I think I totally missed the "wikiexpert" discussion. I do think that you would do best to play it safe and keep everything above the table--that is, on-wiki. If someone needs to give you information that should be used in the construction of an article but can't be posted publicly, then it shouldn't be used in the first place (unless it concerns BLP violations as a reason to exclude some information, etc.)--they can always post them (for copyvio reasons) off-wiki, if they are not otherwise accessible. That technological burden is on them, and I think it should be if only to keep you out of hot water. I don't know as much about related policies as I maybe should; I think you listed the relevant ones already, plus USECOMMONSENSE of course. Really, stay on the safe side--but I think that's really what you wanted me to say. So you're right! :) Drmies (talk) 18:39, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, obviously I am going to use common sense (or at least as much of it as I have). I just wanted to make sure there wasn't a bright line WP:OFFWIKI or something I should be aware of. (which I totally just made up, and it came up a real link, so I read it, and it pretty much confirms what we just said, but still seems vague.) Gaijin42 (talk) 19:08, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I think there's precious few bright lines here, and that's because these things are rarely simple. Just ask CorporateM. One can work for a company and be perfectly neutral. One can edit "for" another editor and make absolutely perfect edits that violate nothing--except that they may be proxy edits. Sometimes it may be beneficial to have access to material that other editors shouldn't have access to. So some vagueness is probably required; you see what kind of stuff can happen if things are overdefined. Look at the current version of ANI and search for "bully": in all cases judgment is called for, as it is here. Good luck with it, Gaijin. Drmies (talk) 19:14, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I disagree with Drmies strongly in this case. One of the best ways COIs can help is by providing difficult-to-access sources and they are usually copyrighted. Email is the best way to provide them. The idea that off-wiki communications is somehow not transparent enough is just fodder for those that see corruption everywhere and allege you are conspiring to undermine Wikipedia, which is just rediculous. On the other hand, detailed content discussions are always preferred to be on the Talk page so other editors interested in the article can see them - which has nothing to do with COI, it's just common courtesy.

Additionally, there are a plethora of areas where email is best. In one case I had a large client where someone in executive comms created an article on a blatantly non-notable exec. After months of attempting to correct it through the corporate jungle, I discreetly asked an editor to make the obvious deletion nomination I was unable to do myself in an official capacity. It is also not unusual for me to use editors to provide feedback to clients (feedback I know they need, but they aren't taking from me), while sparing them the embarressment of getting the feedback publicly on the Talk page.

I would go so far as to say that every COI contributor would do much better with at least a couple editors they can confide in privately. As long as they are not actually conspiring in some way... CorporateM (Talk) 19:42, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

But Corporate, your example falls under my "excluding something for BLP reasons". Drmies (talk) 20:12, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Some examples may be, but that is not a good basis for defining "exceptions to a rule". Editors should use email when it is convenient, useful or needs to be discussed privately. They should use Talk when other editors interested in the page should see it. CorporateM (Talk) 18:25, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

This is totally none of my business...but, why are you going to so much trouble, Gaijin42? I guess you care about the article and believe this Editor has something of value to offer. But I don't know that I would go to such lengths when there are plenty of other articles that could need some attention where you wouldn't be placed in this awkward position of acting as a proxy. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:39, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Working with COIs or any POV pusher is a pain in the ass most of the time... Then again, so am I sometimes. Just ask user:Keithbob ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 00:57, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Notification

I exhumed your modified version of Floquenbeam's proposal at AN: WP:AN#Revisiting Drmies' proposal for a general rule on civility enforcement. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

• Are you kidding? I proposed something and it's taken seriously? I gotta go tell Mrs. Drmies. Hey, I can't wait to see the count on Troll cat! Drmies (talk) 18:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

• Don't get ahead of yourself. LOL! I don't know how serious it is being taken but perhaps you have more input to clarify the proposal.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:19, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, I find myself hesitating to respond to the respondents for fear of seeming pushy. But it got some support when it was in the belly of that beast of a thread, so I figured it deserved another look. Anyway, I must go to bed shortly; can't look like too much of a hag tonight '-) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:54, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm also very interested to see how troll cat turned out. I have an inkling it'll soar past 5000 views. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 01:59, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

URRRRGH. It didn't. :( I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 02:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm. That's too bad; thanks for checking. Maybe with the picture of the milk hare puking it would have gotten past that magic point. But it was FUN. And it all started because of Hafspajen and some memories of Vissefjärda, and a book which mentioned that place that showed up in a Google search. Drmies (talk) 02:18, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I checked again; still not over 5000. Who counts the hanging chads overnight? I was so hoping there would be some. Drmies (talk) 17:26, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

You give me bad conscience. Still didin't got anything on Vissefjärda, but I am working on it... Hafspajen (talk) 18:19, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

We're here for fun, my dear Warrington, not work. Hej, have you build a nice house or library recently? Drmies (talk) 15:16, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Boo!

	Hello Drmies, Mark Miller has given you an lovely bat, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a lovely bat! Enjoy!
	Spread the goodness of a lovely bat by adding {{subst:User:Miss Bono/Halloween}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Trick or Treat! Happy Halloween Drmies! I hope you have a great day and remember to be safe if you go trick-or-treating tonight with friends, family or loved ones. Happy Halloween! -- Aunva6talk - contribs 02:39, 1 November 2013 (UTC) Help spread Wikilove by adding {{subst:User:Dainomite/HappyHalloween}} to other users' talk pages whether they be friends, acquaintances or random folks.

'tis the season

Louisa Venable Kyle wrote a children's book on The Witch of Pungo ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:32, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• That's a GA, I hear. Thank you all! And I hope y'all had a nice Halloween too. Drmies (talk) 16:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Pasta abuse

My grandma was Italian.

If I ever so much as hear about you flinging that stuff at any kind of edifice supporting buttress again, there'll be trouble.

No, I mean it. Big, scary kind of "wish I hadn't done that" kind of trouble.

You are told. Begoon ^talk 01:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• Well, I didn't think that was a particularly well-chosen metaphor. Drmies (talk) 02:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

He only made the pasta...he put it in the fridge and someone else took it out and tossed it. Cold pasta seldom adheres well.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:00, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey Mark, that's almost clever. You think that gets you out of trouble for deleting my message from Sandy? Not even close. You're still a dead man walking. . Begoon ^talk 02:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

My mother was Italian. I've had stickier pasta....and harsher words hurled at me! LOL! ;-)--Mark Miller (talk) 02:08, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Oh, ok then. Begoon ^talk 02:09, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

OK

I followed your advice so I renamed title of section [15]. Calling someone "Israeli" isn't an insult, and I already cooperated with few Israeli users regarding sources. Still, there are many users who see this project as tool for spreading own political agenda, it includes any nationality. For example, I edited this page and replaced various issues with reliable sources [16], I also left explanation on talkpage, and I consulted two authors regarding more sources [17][18]. Then, User:Greyshark09 come and simply revert everything wihtout any discussion [19], even with insults in summaries like "disruptive editing" [20]. This is not his first time. So sorry, but with all WP:AGF I don't see he anything more then political activism in such edits. --HistorNE (talk) 17:24, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• That may be, but "Israeli" appears to be pejoratively used, as if it invalidates their edits. It's no different from "good pal of..." or "typical US POV editor". It's hard sometimes to refrain from commenting on editors, believe me, but it's worth trying. Now, if someone's behavior is problematic, there are avenues for it, and patterns of disruption (incivility, POV behavior, COI editing, etc) are probably best handled via an WP:RFC/U. It's somewhat tedious and does not in itself produce immediate results, but it can be part of a paper trail that admins and others can use to evaluate problematic editors. And it's best to approach such an avenue when one has clean hands, so to speak. Drmies (talk) 17:30, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Happy Halloween

	Hello Drmies, Hafspajen has given you some lovely Halloween-kids, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a lovely kid! Enjoy!

• Aw that's nice. Rosie would like that unicorn outfit. Drmies (talk) 19:06, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• I would go for the elephant, I think. Hafspajen (talk) 19:14, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• According to Google, Haspajen means you. What does it mean? Drmies (talk) 20:31, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
• Means nothing really. It is a random Scrabble word, if you have played scrabble, and with your education level you should... just a funny word. The word hafs could mean - hafsig[21] - sloppy, and pajen means the pie. _{Sloppy pie,} if you would like a translation...Hafspajen (talk) 21:31, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

"Zeugma"... Now I have to learn a new word too? ;) Have a good one, Tgeairn (talk) 04:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Stop it immediately

(Titter.) Perhaps someone needs to incorporate this into the new "violating request of user to stay away from their talk page" template. - Sitush (talk) 17:09, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

WP:HOUNDING Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 16:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

• You should really read the second paragraph of that page, Dogmatic. And your putting this charge on my talk page is not going to prevent me from blocking you for disruption if you keep it up. I have had no content conflicts with you that I'm aware of, and a quick perusal of your recent edits will confirm, I think, what I noted on User talk:EatsShootsAndLeaves. Drmies (talk) 16:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  • You, on the other hand, should really read the definition of WP:VANDALISM. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 16:55, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
    • They probably should have grilled me on that a bit more when I ran for admin. There wasn't a template for "violating request of user to stay way from their talk page, so there. I'll go back and tweak it for you. Anyway, you just posted on Andy's talk page though they told you to stay away. You can rant on this one, if you like, and when it gets too irritating I'll remove it. But if you go around again bothering editors and disrupting stuff, you will be blocked. Drmies (talk) 16:59, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Shock horror... Dogmaticelectic has been blocked indefinitely now. I get the feeling that this is actually what they wanted, but there we go, that's one more disruptive user out of the way for now... Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:55, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

• I just became aware of this user yesterday because I watch the Twinkle talk page. After looking at their recent behavior and how many times you calmly told them to calm down or expect to be blocked I felt enough was enough already. And I have to agree with Luke, they knew this was coming and pretty much invited it to happen instead of toning it down a bit. I expect an angry unblock request full of bad-faith assumptions and conspiracy theories any minute now... Beeblebrox (talk) 18:03, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  • I hate that "ah you all hate me and you've been wanting to get rid of me all this time so I'm going to call you out on it". Anyway, Beebles, don't hold your breath for the unblock request; they can't access their talk page anymore. Drmies (talk) 20:27, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Dog has been pushing everyone around the past two days, it's almost like he was on a self-destruct cycle. I can see why he was blocked but I think he should be given back his Talk Page access. He was irritating but it's not like he went on a rant. It's just me but I think unless some Editor is being truly disruptive, they should be able to engage with other Editors on their Talk Page and appeal their block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:01, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

• An avenue is laid out for them. Their behavior was disruptive enough for my taste, and this was hardly a singular event: they've been spouting that nonsense for weeks. It's a pattern, not an outburst. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

It was pure, unadulterated suicide-by-admin ES&L 01:06, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Mass cat deletions

What would you suggest be done vis-a-vis these mass deletions? I left the indicated message, on the editor's talkpage. No response from the editor. And the editor is clearly back to editing. There are too many for me to revert without tools to do so easily. And then, there is the problem of the behavior, which is unacknowledged as being inappropriate. Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:12, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

• I don't know. I wish you left actual diffs for me to click on. I agree it's troubling. I found a few more (two of which I reverted, The Old Spaghetti Factory and Olive Garden). I can't legitimately use mass rollback, since they've been making a bunch of very different edits since then. Let me leave a note for them. Drmies (talk) 20:34, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
• Well, I just rolled back a few dozen of those edits. I hope I got the right ones--but without edit summaries they don't have much to complain about if I rolled back a valid edit. Perhaps you'd like to see what I missed, and what's been done recently. Let's hope they spend some time answering your question. Drmies (talk) 20:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks. Shall take a look as you suggest.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I will now go to bed mourning Manganaros. Damn. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:58, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Happy Movember

I light of Movember, I bring to you User:Kelapstick/Senhor Testiculo, a large pair of balls that is the mascot for a Brazilian testicular cancer society. Should the title be in Portuguese? Anyone care to make it bigger (That's what she said)? --kelapstick^(bainuu) 19:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

• Wait--this is from my Facebook buddy Hoyt, right? Can't answer the title question--some MOS buff could. I'd just leave it since it's clear enough. Drmies (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  • It may be the same, but I didn't see his post. I received it from a friend of mine in Toronto. I'll keep the name as is. --kelapstick^{(on the run)} 23:45, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
    • Check out his profile pic--you'll find him in my list of friends. (And yes, that ball sack is a tenured professor!) Drmies (talk) 00:01, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
      • That's him. I had no idea..but come to think of it I have never seen the two of them together. --kelapstick^{(on the run)} 00:26, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
        • I laughed until I saw the photo. I just don't see how that mascot can be described as pair of snowballs. Maybe some snow that has been on a street for a few weeks. That would make a good DYK, especially for April 1st.
        • Kelapstick, I'm having a major conflict of interest problems. I left them a message, but they responded back by saying, "I've always been ready to cast a critical eye upon myselves". There are also major sockpuppet problems as they use different names to edit, but they are all the same person. Any thoughts?. Bgwhite (talk) 00:48, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
          • Well, the Dr.'s grammar is fancy, but I'll see a copy of their Ph.D. before I believe the title. And I know why you post that Dr. Who drivel on my talk page: to get under my skin and make me block you, after which you can desysop me and take over my edit count. Fat chance, Bgwhite. Drmies (talk) 00:56, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
            • I think the Doctors primary field was cheese-making. I don't think it is the real doctor for a number of reasons. First, his name isn't "Dr.Who" (and never abbreviated) it is simply Doctor. Secondly, the reference to "myselves", as he is always one person it should be singular. Thirdly, LoS likes Doctor Who, so your point is invalid Mies. I'm watching the first season of Star Trek, the original series, the special effects are superb. They had a dog they strapped a unicorn horn on, instant alien. Sulu is in -120 degree weather, and was sword fighting shirtless Iast episode, set phasers to stunning ;) --kelapstick^{(on the run)} 01:06, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
              • I don't accept the validity of British cheese. The "myselves" joke is obviously in reference to Bgwhite's comment about sock puppets. But as poor as your arguments are, you invoked the Lady and that does, indeed, invalidate all my comments. Bgwhite can have my edit portfolio. Below the belt, K-stick, but well played. Drmies (talk) 01:11, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
                • One must always know when to play the trump card. --kelapstick^{(on the run)} 01:16, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
                  • I've been thinking of DYK hooks... Brazilian cancer association exposes all to see for cancer. Brazilian cancer association goes balls out to kick cancer. I sent the article to a few people. Brazillian mascot exposes himself in front of children for cancer. My mother-in-law sent me an email saying thank you. My father-in-law opened his email and said this turned him off of sex for a month. I really don't know how to respond to that. Bgwhite (talk) 08:32, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Eliade

Hello Drmies, if I may ask about this. Essentially, we have a user trying to whitewash a more controversial episode in Mircea Eliade's past. The impulse is perhaps understandable - admirers of, say, Ezra Pound or Gertrude Stein or Paul Robeson or Picasso prefer not to dwell on their accommodation with totalitarian regimes - but nonetheless to be avoided. All mainstream scholars agree that the Iron Guard was fascist and anti-Semitic, and these were its salient features at the time of Eliade's involvement (ca. 1937). Once Romania became communist (starting in 1944-47), what survived of the Guard, either underground or in exile, was anti-communist, but this is not really relevant to his biography.

Since the user prefers to edit-war, I thought you might have a look. Now, what also caught my attention is that Pgarret and Major Torp have similar editing patterns. Given they've both done reverts here, that could be significant. Thanks for any help you can provide. - Biruitorul ^Talk 02:22, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

• If you are sure that you could make a case at SPI, I'd do that first. It would make everything else easier. I can't easily judge that (not tonight, anyway), but if you think there's a case then file it and see what comes up. In general, I looked at a few of the recent edits and I agree that a certain amount of whitewashing seems to be taking place, though it's a question of editorial judgment as well (whether to pick the word "nationalist" or "fascist", for instance, to describe that club in an article on someone else). Anyway, this edit is not OK, as far as I'm concerned. Update: see if you can make that case for an SPI. Point to this. Argue that the punctuation in edit summaries (note single dash with spaces around it) is the same, and that oddly enough both used the word "tautology" in the recent edit summaries in the Eliada article. Maybe Dennis Brown can give you a hand as a parting shot Gotta go, Biruitorul--always a pleasure seeing you, and take care. Someday I want to have a drink with you. Drmies (talk) 02:48, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Talk page stalker comment: Editor interactions. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 07:59, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

• All mainstream scholars agree that the Iron Guard was fascist and anti-Semitic, and these were its salient features at the time of Eliade's involvement (ca. 1937). Well not everybody, only the Romania specialists. Not the English. Or Swedish. I didn't know about it, for example, even if I did recognize the name of Eliade. And this is not really relevant to his biography, why not? Why should everybody hush down everything, just because somebody is famous? I do think it is relevant. Hafspajen (talk) 17:21, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Keul, István (2008). "Politische Myopie, mystische Revolution, glückliche (Un)Schuld? Mircea Eliade und die legionäre Bewegung: rezentere rumänische Perspektiven". In Junginger, Horst (ed.). The Study of Religion under the Impact of Fascism. Numen Book Series: Studies in the History of Religions (in German). Vol. 117. Brill. pp. 397–418. ISBN 9789047423065. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:09, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
• 'Exactly. Hafspajen (talk) 20:11, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

• • I'm not quite sure what your point is. Of course I am referring to scholars of fascism and of modern Romanian history, not of farming methods in medieval Normandy or Japanese naval policy of the 1920s. And a leading expert on this topic is Francisco Veiga, who is not Romanian but Spanish.
  • In the Romania of 1937, the one in which Eliade allied with the Guard, every political force was "anti-communist", excepting the banned communist party itself and fellow-travelling leftist intellectuals, who all together numbered in the hundreds or low thousands and were of almost no consequence electorally. Because of this broad consensus, it didn't figure as a contentious issue, and no party, the Guard included, really sought to capitalize on it after about 1924, when the local Red Scare began to die down. What issues motivated the Guard after 1944, by which time Eliade's politics had somewhat evolved, is an entirely separate issue, and, as I said, not really relevant to the man's biography. Which is why the lead should refer to the Guard as "fascist and antisemitic", not as "ultra-nationalist and anti-communist", a phrasing that waters down what it was when his personal support for it peaked.
  • OK, Drmies, I will look at setting up that SPI report. And given Romania's position in a beer area and a wine area, there should be some suitable intoxicant I can locate. - Biruitorul ^Talk 22:00, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Lot of vandalism

The article Humour is vandalized a lot. Oh please some nice admins, give us ... a solution? : Hafspajen (talk) 17:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

• Well, it's already equipped with pending changes approval something... Drmies (talk) 17:42, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
• Yay!! You mean this one? [22] It didn't exactly stopped any Ip to edit. As a landscape architect may I recommend you some plants for You to cover your fence with climbing plantsHafspajen (talk) 17:53, 3 November 2013 (UTC)