Jump to content

User talk:Drmies/Archive 70

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

Dutch cuisine

[edit]
This is how I would crop it.

This is how WE illustrate the Dutch cuisine here on Wikipedia... Hafspajen (talk) 23:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that this is the Dutch cuisine talk page... Is there anything, besides Drmies' personal dislike of raw onions and herring, really wrong with the image? Perhaps the moustache? - Takeaway (talk) 23:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the Rollmops. The Banner talk 23:28, 26 June 2014 (UTC) Did somebody serve kroketten, Bitterballen or frikandellen?[reply]
Well, the composition. Because the man's face (eyes, and so on) is not visble, only the big gap, tounge and moustache and the - fish. It is kinda scary, especially in high resolution. Also the herring and the mans face and hand have the same colour. It is backed up with the colour of the garment, and all this emphasize the gap. . Hafspajen (talk) 23:19, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
" --fish" is nice coming from someone whose culture eats gravlax. BTW, I've never had a frikandel, though I'd pay some good money for a Kwekkeboom kroket. Or one from Van Dobben--I don't want to appear too picky. Drmies (talk) 23:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We don't eat gravlax upside down. Hafspajen (talk) 23:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The man's face is only partially shown because I didn't want to deal with privacy rights. The moustache came with the man. The tongue comes with eating herring this way (I already threw out the photos of lips squishing down onto the soft, oily fish). That the man's skin colour is similar to the colour of the fish is unfortunate but unless I can find someone of perhaps African descent eating a herring this way, that will always be the case. The gap formed between arm, fish and face is a result of the aforementioned and tends to only distract people who view an image as if it were a piece of abstract art: you see it and I see it but hardly anyone else does. The reason to include this image is to show that many Dutch people, unlike elsewhere, do indeed eat their fish "upside down", and that it isn't a very aesthetically pleasing thing to witness up close for the uninitiated. But hey, that's Dutch cuisine for you.... - Takeaway (talk) 13:54, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Can we use this image instead? Hafspajen (talk) 14:28, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd thought of using that image, just as I'd thought about using this one. Both images don't show the fish in detail. - Takeaway (talk) 14:41, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Blame the fish... but can't you take a separate picture on the fish on a plate? Hafspajen (talk) 14:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You could of course take a separate photo of the fish on a plate but that wouldn't really be the same as seeing a slightly rotted down Dutch style herring with chopped raw onions ready to slide into someone's mouth, would it? Perhaps you shouldn't be hanging around at the Dutch cuisine article so much? - Takeaway (talk) 14:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Was working on that article before you started, you know. And this picture brings back the memories of Grandad, why do you have such a big nose? Why do you have so big teeth? Hafspajen (talk) 15:00, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So images such as this one and this one didn't make you feel squeamish but a close-up of someone eating a herring the Dutch way does? Every cuisine in the world has things that seem strange, and even disgusting, to others, but is that a reason to not show it here on Wikipedia? - Takeaway (talk) 20:37, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is a far better picture than the guy who has half his face cut off.

Xanthomelanoussprog, Drmies, Crisco 1492, Yngvadottir, Dennis Brown, Kelapstick, Gerda Arendt, LadyofShalott Mandarax, Viriditas, De728631, Dougweller - and any other page stalkers - do you think this picture above should be used in Dutch cuisine? Hafspajen (talk) 20:43, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I may nominate it for Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates‎, so you all can hear what the professionals say about low quality pictures... Hafspajen (talk) 20:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, don't assert yourselves with all that rotten fish you manage to eat and see, we Swedes eat ever worse things, right, like Surströmming. The tounge picture is of bad quality, that is the problem. And there is better to use. Hafspajen (talk) 21:15, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hafspayen, you might want to nominate the badly focussed, or oversharpened, or white-balance-what's-that?, or the-built-in-flash-is-fine-for-food, or the 300x176px images that you apparently did feel to be of high enough quality first. - Takeaway (talk) 21:20, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)I tell you, Takeaway, what the problem is, and why you go on fighting for this picture. Because it is your own picture. And yes, Dennis, it is sad with the craydish. Swedes eat very strang things sometimes. Hafspajen (talk) 21:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was called but have no idea of Dutch cuisine. To caller: I added a ref to the composer, a pdf, it has a short paragraph in Swedish about a string quartet (at the end). I got the place of premiere. If anything else is worth mentioning, feel free to add, just double the ref name.
Gerda, you are doing a great job. I will look once more. Hafspajen (talk) 21:29, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There doesn't seem much of a problem, really. The only problem here Hafspayen, is that the photo disgusts you for whatever reason. It doesn't seem at all to be the bad quality because you easily accept photos that show much worse quality. So please play nice... - Takeaway (talk) 21:39, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is how I would crop it.
  • I guess I never realized we were actually talking about inclusion. Takeaway's picture is not bad at all. I do kind of miss the rest of the guy's head, though, and if it had had a less distracting background it'd be great. But it shows detail that the others don't, and that's useful. Those guys standing together by the herring cart, well, the essence of eating herring is not that it's a social event (it's not), and the one guy is better looking but the detail is lacking. I do appreciate everyone's interest in the matter and while I dislike the onions, I have started to eat maatjesharing, if only because I feel I should, and it didn't make me puke. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:05, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, now I will butt in. Both photos aren't perfect. The top photo is a bit over cropped, but the other one NEEDS cropping. Are we trying to show the environment or the method of eating? Knock around 25% off the top, bottom and right, plus 10% off the left, then it might be the better picture, without all the distracting background. Right now, you can't even tell it is a fish at thumbnail resolution. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:03, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, here is the deal, Takeaway. If you graciously chuck that half faced man, I can go through your pictures and see, if I can nominate something for Featured picture‎; (if I find any). As for Hafspayen, it is Hafspajen. Copy and paste works for most. And Dennis crop is simply brilliant. Great picture, great balance. Both arms forms triangles, the white of the box repeat itself in the white text area, and the composition works great. Hafspajen (talk) 22:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the extent of Dutch cuisine was those chocolate sprinkly things they're so obsessed by. Every time I've been to the Netherlands I've looked out for the nearest Chinese restaurant. Dutch beer is OK though. Eric Corbett 22:35, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but are you proposing a deal on an admin's talk page Hafspajen??? :O Lol! I really don't feel the need to have any of my photos nominated as a featured picture here on Wikipedia. I also think that the image with the "better looking man" lacks detail in the fish but on the other hand, if you look closely, you can see half chewed herring inside his mouth and something seems not completely correct with one of his molars. Nope, neither a herring selfie nor my hubby. I don't know who's hubby he is actually, if anyone's. - Takeaway (talk) 22:41, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Take it or leave it. It was meant like nice gesture, but your ways are making it impossible to be nice with you. Hafspajen (talk) 22:52, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your kind words Hafspajen. So very civil of you. - Takeaway (talk) 23:06, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, one of the reasons for lopping off so much of the man's face in the first image was because I didn't want to deal with any privacy issues here on Wikipedia. What about the photo of Mr. Goodlooking? Did he give permission to have his image used or are we just assuming that everything's O.K.? - Takeaway (talk) 22:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're thinking of Personality rights, not privacy. And from this photo, I doubt you could pick this guy out of a crowd (very similar to the first photo in that respect), and he seems to be intentionally posing for the photo (which is less certain in the first photo). My guess is that we are safe here. Either way, I don't care what photo if any that you use, but policy isn't a bar here. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is you who are not arguing about facts, but has to drag in comments like Perhaps you shouldn't be hanging around at the Dutch cuisine article so much, and The only problem here Hafspayen and proposing a deal on an admin's talk page Hafspajen??? :O Lol! and Hafspayen, you might want to nominate the badly focussed, or oversharpened, or white-balance-what's-that? and this kind of comments and edit summaries like thx Hafspa'''j'''en. And when I am telling you that it is not very nice, you go and tell me that I am the uncivil? Come on. Hafspajen (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so very much again Hafspajen. All your comments have only been nice and reasonable. - Takeaway (talk) 23:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, you don't get it. I am telling you that the picture is wrong, and you are telling me that I am as a person all wrong. Now that's a difference. Hafspajen (talk) 23:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so sorry that I don't get it. I must be much more stupid than you are. - Takeaway (talk) 23:43, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to reconsider calling another editor stupid. I've been blocked for far less. Eric Corbett 23:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. I meant to say that I must be way less smart than Hafspajen is. Sometimes I'm just too much in a hurry when typing things. - Takeaway (talk) 23:53, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copula (linguistics)

[edit]

Hello, Drmies. I have just removed your last two additions to Copula (linguistics). I don't think that the definitions of "linking verb" in those two grammar textbooks constitute a significant controversy in the understanding of the English copula. It looks more like slightly different uses or explanations of the term complement rather than substantive disagreement about the term linking verb or the nature of the copula (though I haven't actually read the books you cited yet). If you disagree, maybe we can hash it out at Talk:Copula (linguistics). Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 01:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cnilep, what controversy? I added detail on what grammars say a "linking verb" does. That one textbook recognizes two kinds of complement and another adds a third is ancillary: what matters is that the reader gets a broader idea of "linking verb" than what the current section gives, which is nothing except for some forms of "to be". Are you aware that there is no article for "linking verb", that English verbs has nothing on the topic, and that Wikipedia is read by a whole bunch of students who are not professors on linguistics, and maybe would like to know what a "linking verb" is and does? I have the feeling that you (and a colleague from the linguistics project) aren't really interested in what Wikipedia can do for the average reader. You may not know this, unless you have children in the US school system, but nobody knows what a "copula" is. Millions of schoolchildren are raised with the concept of "linking verb", however, which redirects to your copula. As for your "complement" suggestion--that article is already owned by someone. Drmies (talk) 02:45, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Although the word controversy sometimes describes an argument or fight, the word (also) means "holding different ideas". If "one textbook recognizes two kinds" while "another adds a third", that is controversy in the sense I meant the word. Sorry if I was unclear; I was thinking in terms of WP:NPOV, which suggests that articles should treat "all significant viewpoints". I was thinking that it said something about major viewpoints and significant controversies, but I don't see that now.
That said, I suspect that the two authors don't actually hold such different ideas. A bit I removed said, "But while some grammar books recognize only those two types, English allows for predicate prepositional phrases as well". What I imagine (though as I said, I haven't read Lester's book) is that Lester may not have intended to argue that predicate adjectives and predicate nouns are the only types of complements English linking verbs allow. If he does, that seems like a rather odd view since, as you say, other kinds of phrases can also be complements.
I am well aware that the vast majority of people interested in language have no particular interest in the specific terms of art that linguists use. I was not aware that the traditional-grammar usage of "linking verb" is not treated on Wikipedia. That can be fixed; I'll be happy to work with you (or, come to that, on my own) to add content to the current redirect page.
By the way, I recently rewrote the page Traditional grammar. If you would care to give it a quick reading, your opinions on which parts are most in need of clarification or improvement would be helpful. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 04:40, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved your sentences to Linking verb and made a few additions. Cnilep (talk) 05:11, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now that's progress. Thank you. I'm a bit miffed because of what you see in the history of Complement. I strongly disagree with the tenor of that article and the reasons for the revert--as a grammarian I simply can't stand for the "fulfill the meaning" kind of stuff. Your rephrasing to "in addition" is fine with me, thanks.

    My concern with our linguistics coverage is that all of the articles I've looked at related to this matter is highly technical. I'm teaching Advanced English Grammar this summer, and for most of that audience (English and Education majors, senior and graduate students; our text is Huddleston and Pullum) our articles are way too technical, practically incomprehensible (I tried it out in class), so imagine what it's like for the reader without that background--I think you can understand that since you taught some regular US students, I surmise. It's for them also that we should write. Coming from a dependency-grammatical descriptive background I have great problems with books such as Lester's (don't bother getting a copy unless you're going to teach high school, maybe--and he does say, "there are two types of subject complements") though even that is a leap forward compared to the treatment of grammar in most other US K-12 books I've seen, but to treat (as basic treatment) all this stuff based on valence is simply too complex and theoretical for the average reader. I wish to find a middle way, a proper treatment (by which I mean properly descriptive based on current theory) that is accessible to a reader with a high school or basic college education. I think with your Linking verb you are striking such a balance, and I thank you for that. Drmies (talk) 14:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • BTW, (your) Traditional grammar looks like a very fine piece of work. I can see some room for expansion, in citing more of these morphosyntactic examples (the treatment of prepositions and subordinators is always a litmus test) and in pointing out where and how such treatments fall short, for instance in theories of the predicate. But the history section is a good start for many students--though it seems to me that while "The primacy of Latin in traditional grammar persisted until the beginning of the 20th century" is accurate, the indirect influence of that method persists, at least in the US educational system: even if the teaching of grammar is often marginal (and typically done in the context of writing, really in the context of AP writing) the very tenets of the traditional Latin-based grammar persist--in the primacy of part of speech, in the incorporation of semantic arguments rather than syntactic proof, in usage prescription under the guise of grammatical validity. That is something worth stressing, I think, to make that foundational connection clear. You know, how answering the phone is dictated by Latin-derived theories of the copula: "This is she". Drmies (talk) 15:27, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you agree with this reversion?

[edit]

Dan56 continues to revert my helpful contributions. @ Black Sabbath (album) they undid several improvements that I made yesterday. Can't you see that he is reverting me to hound me and prevent progress at the article? Harmelodix (talk) 16:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • To start with a partial answer: yes, I see no reason to believe that Dan56 is hounding you in the sense of WP:HOUNDING. I also don't subscribe to the notion that Dan is "prevent[ing] progress" or something like that. However, I do not agree with their edits to the "Music and lyrics" section, which strike me as not improving the article. Drmies (talk) 17:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I see DramaMongering, for the last few days with this user, it seems. Mlpearc (open channel) 17:29, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Care to explain why you decided to make your first ever edit to Farrah Fawcett? Drmies, this is a Wiki-gang of Dan56, Mlpearc, and Caper, and they are trying to hound me away from the project. Harmelodix (talk) 17:34, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Caper454, I did you a favor and reverted your last edit. You can't say shit like that--not on this talk page, not in Wikipedia. See WP:NPA, which does not explicitly exclude amateur psychology and pretend-psychological advice, but is otherwise clear enough. Capice? Drmies (talk) 18:07, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Harmelodix, I'm not going to throw myself into this fight by also editing the article. And yes, I don't see POV pushing there, though I do see edit-warring all over the place. Also, I resent being asked loaded questions--as if my not seeing POV pushing is caused by my blindness or something like that.

    Dan, I am sure you read my comment, and I suggest you restore at least that edit, since, well, it's better written.

    All of you, what's the matter with you? Mlpearc, I don't know if you're following that editor around just cause they're obnoxious in one article--but come on, you know better than to do that. Even if the FF article needs a tweak, do you think it's helpful to do that now? Harmelodix, that edit had nothing to do with your edit, so AGF, please.

    Keep y'all's conflicts limited to one article, one issue at the time, and leave the personal accusations out of it. You can't accuse someone of drama mongering and then doing nothing to lower the atmosphere. Drmies (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

[edit]

I appreciate your change to the discussion in response to my comment. My intent was not to chide, but to encourage reconsideration. And that you did. By the way, my wife and I have catered over a dozen seders, for as many as 110 people. Small in comparison, but the primary motivation is always service to those seated at the tables. Everything else is secondary. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, thanks for setting me straight, Cullen, and again, my apologies for diminishing a rather big thing. BTW, I thought of you the other day while making, you guessed it, rice and beans--again, without using a microwave (or lard). All the best, Drmies (talk) 03:04, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dan56 and WP:OWN

[edit]

I take it by this edit that you might be starting to come around to my complaints about Dan56. He has undone nearly all the work I've done there this week, so I am going to walk away from the article, which he only reverts progress at BTW, where is his effort to expand and improve it to GA? I can't spend my mental energy and precious time if the next time I log-in Dan56 has undone it all, and I am pretty sure that's exactly why he does it. I'll try to find another corner of Wikipedia where he won't obstruct me, but I have a feeling that he has already edited most of the pages I like. Well, thanks for helping me, Drmies, but Dan56 is far too exhausting and difficult, and its just not worth it. I will say that its an extremely effective tactic, to undo hours of an editor's work to a state of poor quality prose both drives that editor away and maintains the article at the level he wants it at. Thanks again, but I think I'm probably done here. Harmelodix (talk) 16:22, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Harmelodix, I am not the person to talk you back into it, I'm afraid. I do see problems with Dan's behavior in this article, but I do not yet see proof that it is directed particularly at you, for instance, or that it's happening all over the place. I did find that revert to be pretty exasperating, and if I were an uninvolved admin (at this stage I'm probably not, so I'll play it safe) I'd get pretty pissed (well, I am) and warn them admin-style. You know, maybe one of the talk page stalkers is willing to have a look at it. Hell, maybe Malik Shabazz is willing.

    Anyway, one of the possible next steps is an WP:RFC/U, as a kind of fact-finding mission into an editor's behavior, which can end with a recommendation to seek this or that way of dispute resolution. Don't run off yet, please. Drmies (talk) 16:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    • Thanks for encouraging me, Drmies, but Dan56 undoes almost everything I do, so he is exasperating me. I don't know th3e first thing about RFC/U, its too intimidating to be a realistic option for me. Since you are too involved to warn him, will you please consider restoring my contributions that he undid last night? Otherwise, its just a matter of his reverting everything I do and nobody is defending my edits, so he wins by attrition and I just seem like a complainer. Harmelodix (talk) 16:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • As tempted as I am to hit 'undo' (or, really to hit rollback and call those edits disruptive), I can't, since I must practice what I preach. Mind you, I'm still not happy with your edits in the first place--not because they weren't improvements, because they were, but because of the timing. I want to let that RfC ride for a little while, and then see what happens. I'm here for the long haul and I think that it's better to go through the tedious, lengthy, and painstaking process of hammering out consensus than to try and force improvement when some editors are clearly in disagreement. But I do think that Dan is pushing it, and if I hadn't been so involved (I am because you asked me to) I might have acted already in some fashion or another. Drmies (talk) 16:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • To be clear though, I made those improvements before I started the RfC and Dan56 removed them. Harmelodix (talk) 16:53, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you made a grave mistake

[edit]

This is the second time that that team creates an new article and uses merge to destroy a proper article, just because the leader of the pack does not agree with that article. I am gravely disappointed in you and I take offence of the rude comment you use.

Aymatth2 states it so nice that I can propose the replacement of his advertising article by my version, but the effect is that the whole crew will turn against it and it never happens. I really had expected a bit more background research. The Banner talk 19:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • What comment, Banner? "Cheesehead" is purely hypothetically used, if that's your problem. And maybe you should consider that I took up for you in urging your opponents to look at your nomination as made in good faith. If your argument for deletion is, basically, "advertising" and there is not a soul to support that notion, then maybe you were incorrect. AfD is not the venue to seek in-depth background research--and didn't you actually challenge them to write the article on the building? Drmies (talk) 19:30, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If it hadn't have been Drmies who kept it it would have been any of the 1500 or whatever number of admins we have. That you can't see that it didn't stand a chance of ever being deleted from the outset is the worst thing. As I said, show the sources which document the restaurant in detail and discuss the cuisine and it might be worth keeping in its own right.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:27, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What you want is that I turn the article in the same type of advertising as the article about the hotel. I take pride in it to keep "my" restaurant articles absolutely neutral and without promo. That you don't like that is not my problem. The Banner talk 10:20, 28 June 2014 (UTC) "my" as in articles written by me, do not claim ownership but think I have an extra responsibility towards those articles to keep them accurate and spam-free.[reply]
  • Banner, I had a look at the merge discussion after I saw that you nominated the restaurant for deletion. That AfD is most likely going to close as "merge", given the comments in the merge discussion. I could of course close it as made in bad faith--that you'd rather see it deleted than merged is not evidence of you putting the project before your own article. Now, various suggestions are made there that would allow it to stand alone, and I suggest you listen to them. You may hate that "gang", but they've been here for a while and you would be wise to consider that they may be right even if they don't like you (or you think they don't). Kom op zeg, we're all grown ups here. Drmies (talk) 19:34, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Banner, you're seriously abusing the AFD process. It's not there to settle your personal scores and differences. You nominated the hotel article for no other reason than the merge proposal for the restaurant article in the first place and now you've nominated your own restaurant article out of some bizarre reason that you fear the "gang" are going get one up on you by having it merged and you want the "community" to somehow override this through an AFD through a delete or keep or whatever. Madness. If that's not enough to get you banned from ever nominating an article for AFD again I'm not sure what is. You're most welcome to post at the village pump or whatever and get wide input on the merger proposal but it's really rather disrespectful to nominate your own article during a merge discussion. The AFD should be speedily closed. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ernst, even if you're right, please--this is a happy place, so consider tone. Let's not raise the temperature any more. You all are headed toward a street fight, and I don't want to referee that. All of you have helped me in the past, and I like to think that I've done some of you a good turn as well in the past couple of years. I really wish you all could work this out amicably. Drmies (talk) 20:03, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Speedy keep", item 1., requires "and no one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted". I don't really want to close that if my closing vote is the only one to suggest that "no other than...". Drmies (talk) 20:05, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are you even capable Banner of saying something even remotely positive? All doom and gloom with you!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:22, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, by the way. Do you consider this and this a positive action? And what about this and this edit? Looks like preparing another battleground as I had De Bloemenbeek and De Heeren van Harinxma prominent on my job list... The Banner talk 17:34, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You took them off of your user page in a hissy fit, claiming never to work on restaurants in hotels again, I do consider it a positive yes, because you gave up on them. I even stubbed one of them.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:43, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yes, I can: I believe that The Netherlands will become World Champion and that they will beat Mexico five to one. And I enjoyed it that England and Spain were going home so soon but I predict that the USA will have a shock win over Belgium. The Banner talk 16:20, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You may be right! :-) I was very impressed with them in the opening game in particular.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:29, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@The Banner: You can't say that I've haven't made an effort to try to get the restaurant article expanded and kept [1] Does that really look like the actions of somebody who is deliberately trying to destroy somebody's work?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:42, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Knowing that you work in a team, it really looks like it that the article over the hotel is only created to be able to destroy/merge the restaurant article after you could not get the article you liked it. Your sudden effort to create articles about restaurants/hotels that I had prominently on my job list just add to that. And then we have the ridiculous story about Kilmurry Ibricane, where a perfectly good article was destroyed to create an article without realistic content. Without the article about the RC parish, you would have no serious content at all for the civil parish. So now you have a silly article about a civil parish with a list of priests serving it. Sorry, mate, the warmth you radiate is about 100 degrees Kelvin. The Banner talk 14:19, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On good articles.

[edit]

I currently have Rape during the Rwandan Genocide up for GA status, but the reviewer has dropped off the face of wikipedia. Last comment on the review was 27 April 2014, and has not edited since 3 June 2014. I asked on the GA help desk what should I do but have had no response. Do you know of anyone who might finish the review? BTW, Moosezilla, scary. Tenner the Scofi channel make a movie on it, gotta be better than Sharknado Darkness Shines (talk) 19:37, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • DS, I just read a couple of paragraphs--the lead, and half a dozen body paragraphs. I don't think I can help you: I can't stomach it. I was going to consider doing the review, but I'm sorry. Oh, the reviewer is Dana boomer? I hope she's alright.

    Anyway, and you know I deliver the bitter medicine, I think the article needs a good scrubbing for punctuation and prose things (note the copy edits I made in the first paragraph). I'd ask Eric or some other hardcore copy editor. As for the reviewer, I don't know GA reviewers as well as I should. Crisco 1492 might have advice, or might take it on. Good luck with it, DS, and thanks for taking that up. Drmies (talk) 19:58, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries mate, I know it does not make for pleasant reading. Eric duly asked. Thanks for the advice. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:07, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. And I prefer Sharktopus over Sharknado any day, but don't tell Kelapstick, who was an extra in that movie, I believe. Drmies (talk) 20:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Remembering Sharktopus makes me melancholic, miss him. (Don't tell the BracketBot.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:17, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification

[edit]

Hi Drmies. My comment about not messing with you, on User talk:QTxVi4bEMRbrNqOorWBV‎ was not out of any negative experience with you. We have never interacted.Jytdog (talk) 20:54, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone noticed...

[edit]

...a recent increase in the number of uncooperative, stubborn, argumentative, truculent and querulous editors, who are also strangely sensitive to perceived insults? Could this be related to schools being out and millions of high school students (who, of course, know everything, and are certain of everything they know) with nothing else to do being unleashed on the Internet? BMK (talk) 21:57, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I notice some very good newcomers on Buddhism-articles. Very pleased with it! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 03:58, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Maybe they made good use of Dennis's rectal dilators. Yes, Dennis, feel free to explain that on someone else's talk page. And don't put that picture here: Hafspajen will find twenty others, stick them in a gallery here, and upset the children. Drmies (talk) 04:08, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What picture? Has anyone said Pictures ? slightly euphoric, weird glow in eyes, still slightly euphoric Hafspajen (talk) 12:40, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Of course he loves it!! Hafspajen (talk) 16:35, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reminds me, we're going to see the Monty Python Live broadcast next Sunday night. I hope they aren't as disappointing as the Everley Brothers were. But you youngsters may not recall the Everley Brothers. Dougweller (talk) 13:46, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RE: "Complaining"

[edit]

I didn't revert anything, other than the erroneous restoration of citation overkill. FTR, "complaining" (a present participle) was Harmelodix's original phrasing ([2]); all I did now was change it to "complain". Unlike Harmelodix, my edit summaries explain why I make my changes, much clearer than a dubious "c/e" explaining nothing. Dan56 (talk) 02:44, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • What it looks like is reverting piecemeal. I call "complaining" a gerund/participle, but that's just a technical deformation. Harmelodix, if "complaining" was your word, tsk tsk! (By the way, you seem to suggest that there's something wrong with using the participle; I don't see what hte problem is.) Happy editing, Drmies (talk) 03:49, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please add an edit notice to Talk:Cancer pain for me?

[edit]

Per Talk:Cancer_pain#Invitation_to_readers_to_comment.3F (the last couple of comments). --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 04:24, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Anthonyhcole, I am very sympathetic to your proposal, and I'll do it if you get a few more supporters. I'm not afraid to invoke IAR, so I will certainly not say "the rules say it can't be done", but I'd like to see a bit more support, and for the RfC to run just a wee bit longer. Is that fair? Drmies (talk) 14:12, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake

[edit]

Sadly, your plea for help on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History did not get a warm response. Sorry. bobrayner (talk) 11:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ha, nice passive! But Ubikwit's nomination needs to be judged on its own merits, unless you wanted to propose a speedy keep per item 2, "disruption"--but clearly there are those who are unrelated to the nominator who voted for deletion. I don't understand Ad Orientem's comment either--an admin (a closing admin) shouldn't have a problem closing that thing based on arguments, and the AfD is hardly that problematic. There's no socking, no outside canvassing, nothing. Look: if someone like Cullen votes to delete, there must be something to it (regardless of nominator's intent), since Cullen is the nicest guy in the world and will do his utmost to prevent any article from deletion.

    I did see that Ubikwit had filed an SPI which was laughed out of court as a fishing expedition. If this is really serious business (HOUNDING etc) then you (plural) should do something about that; I'm hardly familiar with the matter. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:07, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

not fast

[edit]
Any explanation?

Today, I met the article of Wilhelm Killmayer again, and I think it was you with whom I struggled about a reference for the hook "The calm already contains the catastrophe", right? (April 2011, before the templates for noms were invented) - Also today, I changed my battle cry "I stand singing in defiance" to "Ich gehe nicht schnell" ;) - visit my talk for dreams pictured, by Hafspajen, of course, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:49, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem, do you MEET articles? Hafspajen (talk) 18:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This one, yes. (I ment to clarify, that I didn't meet Killmayer in person, unlike a few others who mostly have infoboxes ...) - I created a new one who was a red link in the dream article, and he is a student of Killmayer, just as Rudi Spring (whom I know) - small world, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:29, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You know Rudi Spring? How exiting! Hafspajen (talk) 19:36, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) I listened to some concerts with him and met him afterwards. The Rheingau Musik Festival mentioned in his hook opened today. One of the concerts was a Christmas hook. - I looked up our old DYK discussion, just for fun ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Upon
To an Englishman, "I met the article" sounds wrong, "I encountered the article" sounds slightly wrong, whereas "I encountered a problem" sounds mostly right. I think "I looked at the article again" or "I remembered the article" might have been what was intended. "I took on the article" or "I continued editing the article" would also work. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:41, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unless Gerda was joking... Hafspajen (talk) 19:43, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I did nothing intentional, not even "look again", - I happened to arrive at the article by chance, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hafspajen (talk) 19:53, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"chanced upon the article" is better... --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, - never encountered the use of chance as a verb, and certainly not with preposition "upon". Fit's the 2011 hook nicely, Fin al punto, or "pointy", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:19, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IPA pronunciation of German things

[edit]
An IPA for all of you

Good morning Drmies, do you sprekken this Deutsch thing that some people east of Holland and west of Poland still seem to? If you do, or any of your stalk page talkers do, please could you add an appropriate IPA pronunciation thingummy to Altes Stadthaus, Berlin? The original article author is not happy with his attempt and has therefore removed it. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:54, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, every German word in IPA looks excessively strange to me ;) - I remember a dispute when I tried to correct Buxtehude, - solved when we realized that it was the Danish pronunciation, - he now has both, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) To paraphase Homer Simpson – "Mmm, IPA" – and maybe a nice Kölsch for the "German things" part of the subject of this section... What a good idea for a hot summer day. Thanks for planting the thought. Think I'll have me one right now. I would suggest you folks do likewise.
Looks like all I have in the fridge is a Grapefruit IPA and an American Red Ale... Decisions, decisions... Mojoworker (talk) 00:11, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a northern German I like to think that Kölsch ([kœːɫʃ]) is actually not a Bier ([biːɐ̯]). It must be some sort of medicine rather since it is served in such homoeopathic doses. De728631 (talk) 19:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Amusing vitriol

[edit]

Kind of gets you right here. Should I sign it for him?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:02, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to: I blocked him. Acroterion (talk) 22:16, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Try saying it outloud in an excited tone, it is really funny. Chillum (Need help? Ask me) 07:32, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have really been impressed with how many people remember me and welcome me so warmly since I recently came back after a very long break. Chillum (Need help? Ask me) 07:24, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kpop articles

[edit]

Aer you going to go through every single Kpop article and remove the stage name, real name and hangul translations of both from all kpop articles, or just random ones you feel like? Seems like there should be consistency, and the majority of articles have a member info box giving member names and translations. You are arbitrarily removing them from one or two articles, but ignoring the other hundreds with the exact same formatting.

Also, U2 members have their own individual wikipedia pages which have all of those facts on them. Not exactly a relevant comparison.

Also, it's not consistent across all things, but jpop articles also have tables with such information (where people have put it in) and that's even when the member real names are used. Are you going to go through all the foreign language music group articles and remove any translations, birth dates, nicknames etc from all of those pages as well? You seem to have arbitrarily chosen to remove such information from a couple of pages without any real justification or system, and ignored the fact this is typically relevant and factual information. I would think that having the hangul of a foreign person's name would be entirely relevant, since it's usually presented on most pages which are about a person with a name written natively in a foreign script. e.g. Japanese, Russian, Korean people

Lonyo (talk) 15:13, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is a relevant comparison. A list of members should be a list of members--names and instruments. That the U2 members have their own articles is irrelevant; you should ask yourself why someone who reads an encyclopedia would want to know someone's blood type or favorite color, and if they don't have an article, they are as yet non notable and needn't have a date of birth listed. I'm not "arbitrarily" doing anything: I'm just not doing everything (but more than one or two). I'm leading the way, so to speak, so you can follow my example. As for all these scripts--great, but we're the English wiki and I fail to see the relevance. Yes, all these tables need to go, and I appreciate your help. Drmies (talk) 15:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, please see WP:BLP on properly verified information and MOS:FLAG for that abuse of flag icons. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:33, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So the fact that the article no longer makes sense is fine? In the Members box on the right, it has nicknames. In the members list, it has real names. Some of those are not obviously linked. And apparently foreign scripts on English wikipedia are bad. And it's amazing how it's been a way for years and now it's a problem. This is why people think Wikipedia is getting dumb. Yay removal of factual information that allows peopel to actually understand who people in a group are. It would be like having a Spice Girls article with "Posh, Sporty" etc, and then a list of real names, but nothing to indicate who was who. So good job, you've made the page less helpful. Lonyo (talk) 22:07, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, fix the Members box on the right. And copy the information which is still left in the history, and put it on your Myspace page. This is an encyclopedia, not a collection of fan pages or a promotional outlet for SM Entertainment. (Seriously, Lonyo. Five million years of evolution, the invention of script and internet, so we can have articles on teenage bubblepop? That is the height of your ambition?) Drmies (talk) 23:46, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Admin assistance

[edit]

Please could you or one of your admin stalkers take a look at Special:Contributions/Pacnews. I'm getting fed up of reverting them but it is a very slow-moving thing. They're obviously WP:SPA and probably WP:COI. I'm not even sure that the article subject is really notable but the hassle might be stopped with a block. Ta muchly. - Sitush (talk) 16:59, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • (talk page stalker) Copyvio. I dropped them a stiff note about that; I'm hoping that new wrinkle may get them talking, or modifying the article more constructively. Others may wish to weigh in on the edit warring or AfD the article, but the editor is demonstrably drawing on additional sources, so the subject may squeak by on notability. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:42, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • IMO in this instance you've been too nice - since your final warning about blanking some time ago, you've kept describing their edits in edit summaries as good faith! I have left a second final warning with notes about both blanking and edit warring and insisting they start talking; I note that you have left one note on the article talk page. If they resume either blanking or edit warring with no talking, leave a message; it may well be the reason behind their edits is COI, but at this point what matters is the disruptive effect, and it's just possible they don't realize we do block for such behaviour. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2-1

[edit]

Phew, that was close. I take full responsibility for the Mexican goal, since I poured tequila shots at halftime. Drmies (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proost! Here's to another chance of having a classic final with Oranje as of one of the protagonists. Man of the match? De728631 (talk) 20:13, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ja, proost, De--ik ben met bier nummer vier bezig, geloof ik. Huntelaar...I don't know, it hurts me to say that. I think that Robben was the Man of the Match. Now, you'll have to clear the obstacle of Algeria... I mean, fo shizzle, how'd you get that lucky? Drmies (talk) 20:16, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, to be fair I'd even says Ochoa deserves the title for keeping all those shots on his box handball style. And you know, they say a match will last 90 minutes and in the end the Germans will walk off the field as winners. But then they've got a history of botching premusably easy matches. Don't misunderestimate them Algerians. De728631 (talk) 20:28, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, who else but a German would make a handball comparison? Yes, he's a great goalie, and if it weren't for him they wouldn't have tied Brazil. Drmies (talk) 20:32, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • De728631, I think you know a thing or two about "close" now. (Not "Klose", oddly enough.) Man! Y'all came this close! Who knew that these Algerians could play like that? But der Mannschaft rolls along: congratulations. Drmies (talk) 23:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

[edit]
I am BracketBot. Kiss me.

Hello, I'm BracketBot.

page stalker watching

I have automatically detected that your edit to Caesar Blackwell may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • id=E0zSAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA27|year=1895|publisher=Alabama Publishing Company|pages=27–28}}</ref>)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hafspajen, I love you. Can you make BracketBot stop? Drmies (talk) 23:51, 29 June 2014(UTC)
Yes dear, do you want to opt out the bot, or what? Hafspajen (talk) 23:59, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I did and I got reverted. I am not trusted. Dangerous life. Hafspajen (talk) 00:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, it is back again. Hafspajen (talk) 01:32, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • BracketBot is truly one useless critter. Here is the most laughable example of pathetic templating: User Elsa367, age 9 by self-declaration wrote a cute essay / article about caring for a dog. Of course the ending included a :). For which she/he received the BracketBot message faster than the speedy delete notice.[3] sigh... I sent a Wikilove Puppy of thanks and hope this editor sees it. Fylbecatulous talk 11:31, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Russell

[edit]

Dr, you closed the RfC at Jason Russell. I noticed that no one actually implemented the changes, so is took a stab myself. Style aside, do you think my change honored the spirit of the RfC? Two kinds of pork (talk) 23:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure, and thanks--though what you have now is pretty much what we had then, except for the viral part. So let's try and keep an eye on it: with that RfC in hand reverts are easy, and that is why they're so good to have (I say this for the onlookers). Hey, is one of your kinds from Conecuh County, Alabama? Cuz we ate the hell out of you today, with mustard. Drmies (talk) 00:32, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The viral part is perhaps the most reported part of this story. One of me goes better with slaw on the bottom of the bun.Two kinds of pork (talk) 00:40, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm familiar with that, yes, though I frequently fry that in your own fat after having cooked it for an hour or six. Drmies (talk) 02:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I ate the hell out of my brothers and sisters today. We are truly the magical animal.Two kinds of pork (talk) 03:52, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gender bias task force

[edit]

Hi Drmies, I saw you recently closed an AN/I discussion about an Obi topic ban with the comment that he had been put on notice.

He is causing a problem at Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Gender bias task force. I set this up last year as a gender gap task force, and stupidly used the term "gender bias" in the title instead of gender gap. Obi has arrived to say that it must therefore cover systemic bias against men too. I've had to post an RM to have the page moved to gender gap. He is dominating the page and now the RM discussion. Can you keep an eye on it? I think the situation isn't going to stop (whether there or anywhere else) until someone deals with it; the concept of "on notice" doesn't seem to work.

I've also asked Bbb23 because he seems to be active on men's rights sanctions. SlimVirgin (talk) 03:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • But he's only made 98 edits to that talk page, and only 84 in the last few days! It wasn't me putting him "on notice", but rather all those editors who were ready to deliver a topic ban. Listen, I don't think I can tell an editor to stop posting somewhere. The community can, though: I think you should take this to AN. That's kind of kicking the can down the road, but that's the appropriate place to kick it. Can't easily "enforce" something (Bbb-style on the MRM pages, with a ruling by the community) if there's nothing to enforce yet. So that should be the next step--it's lengthy and frustrating (for everyone involved), but it's the right way. Drmies (talk) 04:45, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The idea of having to engage further to avoid further engagement is not appealing, and it's of the many reasons we have a gender gap in the first place. That talk page could be exhibit one! SlimVirgin (talk) 05:08, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure, I understand. But you have a choice: either you continue to accept it in the project (and the talk page indicates that this is likely perceived as disruption by others) or you engage it in a forum where you can get the community to stop it in all forums. It is likely that, given the problems raised by a number of editors in that ANI thread, you will have your way if you ask for a topic ban of sorts. By the same token, I feel that AN is generally a better, less temperamental forum for such a discussion. I wonder, and maybe Bbb23 (or Binksternet or TParis, or one of the other cats active on the MRM talk pages) can shed light on this: can the MRM community sanctions apply to this project page? I don't remember the exact wording, and it may sound like kind of a stretch, but it's an avenue to explore. Or Obi can of course cease and desist. Drmies (talk) 05:22, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The MRM sanctions say (my bold): "Sanctions imposed may include restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors, bans from editing the Men's rights pages and/or closely related topics, blocks of up to 1 year in length, or any other measures the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project. Additionally, a 1-revert rule applies to all related pages (until October 27, 2014)."

    These are in place indefinitely. The gender gap page shouldn't be a "closely related topic," but Obi wants to turn it into one, and in that case those sanctions do apply. SlimVirgin (talk) 05:28, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's interesting. Obiwankenobi, SlimVirgin makes a good point. If you are successful in your opposition to SlimVirgin's requested name change--of course, it's the spirit, not the letter, which means here if you are successful in broadening/redefining the scope of the project--you may well succeed in pushing that project under the umbrella of the MRM restrictions, at which point your multiple plethora of discussion/talking points could hypothetically be seen as disruptive, since the "smooth functioning of the project" is jeopardized, if not by content then by sheer number. Drmies (talk) 05:37, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) SlimVirgin left a message on my talk page about this. I'm taking the position that the project is subject to MRM sanctions, just as I have on other pages that are not necessarily obvious. I have notified SPECIFICO about the sanctions because he has never been notified before. Obi, OTOH, has been notified back in 2013. Obi's behavior, both on the main project page and in the move discussion, is clearly sanctionable (in my view). It's just a question of whether I should impose sanctions, which means he would have to appeal them to ANI if he wished to, or if he should be taken to AN. My god, if prolixity was sanctionable in and of itself, he would be banned forever; he goes on and on and on. Anyway, I'm not doing anything more tonight.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:32, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clearly, Bbb (thanks for weighing in), you are the bad cop. Or you have BIG COJONES--is that a violation of anything? Well, SlimVirgin, these are serious considerations. I also am done for the day: I got a lot to do tomorrow and I'm going on a road trip so I might not be able to check in for a little while. Perhaps the other two editors I pinged have something to say as well, perhaps Obi will choose the better path. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 05:39, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's a fair point, and I hadn't considered it in that light. I will disengage and take a wikibreak to consider my actions. I will not pursue it further and I will stop posting there for a self-imposed page ban of at least one month to consider my actions, and will not try to impose a different scope (before yesterday, I never knew the scope was only female gender though to be honest - like gender studies I figured it covered both) - anyway I'm done and I'm taking the path of disengagement and reflection. Sorry SlimVirgin for having mucked up your task force.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 10:27, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, so I've been asked to give an opinion here by four different people on all sides of this thing. Considering I haven't stepped foot in this topic area in almost a year, I'm not sure why I'm considered some kind of expert on the sanctions. Bbb23 and Drmies are clearly more qualified, in my eyes, to implement it. That said, I don't agree that the MRM sanctions apply to the Wikiproject task force - however - they would apply to any discussion about the task force and the MRM. This would follow the same logic that not all biographies are covered under the Gun Control sanctions, but any sections of a biography discussing gun control would be. But (big sigh) I think we've all lost our marbles here because we're talking about sensitive subjects and everyone feels the other is being insensitive to our concerns. There is a serious lack of communication, and I fear part of it is because Obi-wan was recently involved in a heated ANI dispute and he's feeling a bit attacked at the moment which is hindering his ability to articulate his thoughts well. The RM will help solve the confusion over the name, and Obi-wan is going to take a break from MRM for the summer. Let's all try to show a little more sensitivity and understanding.--v/r - TP 17:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think TP's viewpoint presents a lot of value here. It would make sense to treat the sanctions the same way we treat stuff like WP:BLP - it applies to discussions of the topic regardless of where they are, but doesn't necessarily apply to discussions on pages categorically. A discussion of Warren Farrell would be covered by the sanctions, even if it's happening for some odd reason at Talk:Koalas. On the other hand, a discussion of Koalas that takes place at the task force in question here probably wouldn't be covered (though, I could see an exception if it was intended as an obviously WP:POINTy disruption stemming from a conversation about the MRM.) Despite the fact that I fairly frequently disagree with Obi, I do believe he makes valuable contributions to the project, and sincerely hope that he's able to step back in a way that allows him to be more productive after having some time to cool off from some of the recent discussions. Although I don't usually publicly announce it myself (and one of them was related to a significant IRL situation where stepping back seemed to be the only viable option, as an editor who works on gender stuff on Wikipedia, I end up stepping back from controversial areas involving gender on Wikipedia myself fairly frequently when I feel like heated discussion has gotten to me in a way that makes it hard for me to be productive. Kevin Gorman (talk) 18:28, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I, too, agree with TP on this issue. Some articles are covered by MRM in all contexts. Others are subject to sanctions, but it depends on the issue. When I said the project was subject to sanctions, that was shorthand for saying what TP said more eloquently. BTW, it also makes the analysis of whether someone should be sanctioned more difficult. As for Obi, I applaud his withdrawal and apology. Any sanctions against him at this point would be punitive (and a bit mean, too).--Bbb23 (talk) 22:29, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please help

[edit]

Please have a look at this and help if possible, I have no idea who to turn to with this so I'm trying to contact more experienced Wikipedians.

--Samotny Wędrowiec (talk) 22:55, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry, but as the great Polish American poet B. Dylan said, it ain't me you're looking for. Besides, your complaint there is a bit on the vague side. There are no names, no issues, no diffs, no specifics, so you're probably not going to get much in the way of a practical response. Drmies (talk) 04:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This be the one

[edit]

Thought you might want a closer look at that original left-handed 65 SG Mlpearc (open channel) 05:14, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Towel

[edit]

If you can pull yourself out of those complicated gender discussion, and take a look at Towel. Are we trying to assemble all possible ways of using a towel or what? It is a list of Hundred ways to use a towel, much like 100 Aspects of the Moon or the series of Thirty-six Views of Mount Fuji. Hafspajen (talk) 13:13, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • As an extra privacy measure, a towel can be wedged into or draped over the gaps of bathroom stall doors or changing rooms.
  • Rolled up in a horseshoe shape, a towel can be used as an emergency toilet seat cover in frigid or unsanitary conditions.
  • Place a towel over delicate surfaces, such as a car hood or table, and place harsh items on the towel instead.
  • A thick towel can be used to prevent items from rolling off a slanted surface, such as tools on a roof.
  • Rolled up lengthwise, a towel can be used as a keyboard rest.
  • A towel can be used to conceal items, such as surprises in a basket or valuables in the front seat of a vehicle.
  • The controls of gym equipment can be covered with a towel to prevent distraction by unwanted biofeedback readings.
  • As emergency gift wrap.
  • As a cushion when kneeling on a hard surface.
  • As an emergency writing surface with an available marker.
  • Sacrifice a cotton towel as fuel for a fire or as the fabric for a torch.
  • A small sports towel can be used as a substitute handkerchief.
  • For impact protection of the head, a sufficiently thick towel can be used in construction of a makeshift soft helmet.
  • A towel can be rolled up and used as a headrest or assist in compiling wayward soft items, such as multiple small items of clothing, into a suitable pillow.
  • Sacrifice a towel by cutting it into strips for all things string, ribbon and cordage can be used for.
  • When camping in cold weather, wrap fire warmed rocks in a cotton towel and place in the bottom of a sleeping bag for extra warmth.
  • Lay a towel over a vent or grille to prevent items from falling through.
  • A large towel can be used as a makeshift sack or hobo's style bindle.
  • As an emergency, though awkward, one person changing room.
  • To shoo insects or as a fly swatter.
  • To remedy the noise of vibrating appliances.
  • Towels are often draped over the heads of suspects or crime victims to protect privacy during transport.
  • A towel can be used as a placemat to eat on or, if its large enough, as a tablecloth.
  • In the absence of an air pump, attend a flat bicycle or other small tire by lining the rim with a towel(s). This will restore some emergency semblance of functionality to the tire and help prevent further damage to either it or the rim.
  • When standing on a moving vehicle, such as a bus or subway, and no seats or handholds are free, a towel can be looped around an overhead bar to balance oneself.
  • A suitable sized towel can be used in construction of a hammock or other suspensory apparatus.
  • In a water scarcity situation, morning dew can be mopped up from from grass, boulders or other surfaces with a towel and water squeezed out.
  • When lost at sea and fresh water has ceased to be available, non-cartilaginous fish can be diced and placed into a towel and the moisture wrung out. The moisture from such bony ocean fish is not excessively salty, and can sustain life.
  • Where it can be threaded through, or a length passed under the base of large items, a towel can be used as make shift handle to carry heavy or awkward things.
  • As a makeshift apron.
  • A small towel can be placed over the eyes as a night mask.
  • As a painters drop.
  • When the need to shatter glass or ceramic arises, a towel over or around the item will protect from hazardous shards and also muffle the sound.
  • As a substitute rug.
  • Cook bacon in a microwave by wrapping it between two layers of clean kitchen towel and cooking till done.
  • A disposable kitchen or tea towel can be used in microwave cooking to prevent liquids, such as soup or chili, from splattering the interior of the oven.
  • Drivers often keep a towel in their vehicles to deal with repeat instances of fogged up interior windows.
  • As a substitute curtain.
  • As a complimentary exercise to pull-ups, towel pull-ups may be implemented to help in further working the forearm.
  • Distract aggressive animals with a towel.


Ah, Dougweller wiped out out the 100 interesting things you can do with a towel... Hafspajen (talk) 21:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But you can never just throw it in, can you. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:46, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Phew! The orange-picker can be so cruel! haha. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:38, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Got that orange space-suit ready, DrM?: [4]. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:57, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
... but they might still get 3rd? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:47, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How are you, Marty? Hafspajen (talk) 01:13, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

!

[edit]

Here we have one of the dog-article changers. A Yorkshire Terrier live to 17-20 years, according to Wikipedia! Althoug, this say different. Hafspajen (talk) 17:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

She's new, we'll see how she goes. She says she lives at home with her boyfriend, which doesn't make a lot of sense. Could be a kid. Dougweller (talk) 20:48, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) This little gem: "not to metion im quite smart" caught my eye since it seems to contradict what she's trying to say. Every second word on her user page is misspelt, which makes me believe that it's someone flying a false flag, just pretending to be a young girl. Thomas.W talk 20:58, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, a dream-boyfriend? Hafspajen (talk) 20:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have just put the WikiProject:Dogs recent changes watchlist up on my toolbar, beside the one for the Cats. You'd be amazed at the vandalism that can be done to a seemingly benign article like Tortoiseshell cat! I will begin to look after the doggys too. Fylbecatulous talk 21:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank GOD, you have heard my prayers. (But don't tell me I put too many pictures in articles. I never put in too many - ever) Hafspajen (talk) 21:05, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ツ I love images. That's what they say with the cats articles too. But they are all so cute. Here's some funny vandalism for giggles... These type of cats can also mate with hamsters, making what's called a tortster, talk about gansta! (from tortoiseshell cat article page; removed by ClueBot) ツ Fylbecatulous talk 21:11, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is from a dog article: The Great Pyrenees , life_span = 40-45 years, Food- Ham, Colors blue and green. Are they dogs? No these animals are closely related to the fish, because of their small features. Scientists believe that in the year 2020, the Great Pyrenees, also known as the American Spagogie, will have taken control of The United States of America and will have partial control over eastern France. In the year 2056 the breed will be running the Summer Olympics. This breed is clearly superior to others and all other animals in the world. The founder of the Great Pyrenees breed was and still is Daryl Dixion. The Great Pyrenees is a new breed that has been used for ten years by the Canary tribe, including those of the Basque people, who inhabit parts of the region in and around the Trylsafjlk Mountains of southern Hawaii and northern Texas. Long Live The Great Pyrenees! ... Hafspajen (talk) 21:19, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I am amazed, just speechless. I must admit, it is clever and creative... Fylbecatulous talk 21:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is more. Hafspajen (talk) 22:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here you go: "the polar bears believed that they were not dogs and instead thought they were retarded, midget polar bears. so they protected them, taught them how to swim and hunt seal. they would dive into the cold waters and swim into the seals mouths, and set a bomb inside them, (a bomb that only destroys seals of course)after a short while the bomb would go off" -...
  • that is one, and there was the: The Coton de Tulear developed on the island of Madagascar and is still the island's national dog. For food the cotons used to gather in a pack of 40 to 50 and would naw at the ankles of elaphents, this hunting form would last days. the cotons had such great stamina and strength the elephents could never seem to kill them. ... Hafspajen (talk) 22:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Another one

[edit]

I don't know how you ended up being the victim (*uhem, I mean editor) that I keep bringing these types of Bright Line items to, but an IP made this edit adding a more complete list of executives to the Key People parameter, whereas our norms are to only include CEO and co-founders for the most part. I wouldn't want anyone to think I was involved in such an edit and I wonder if you would be comfortable reverting it. CorporateM (Talk) 20:10, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CorporateM, they are all listed as co-founder. --kelapstick(bainuu) 20:43, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the documentation for the userbox says up to four people. I have just reformatted it using {{ubl}}. --kelapstick(bainuu) 20:47, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh oops! I am moving too fast. They are all listed as co-founders on the website too and we do typically include co-founders in the infobox. Looks like a swing and a miss on this one. CorporateM (Talk) 20:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your input/comment is requested

[edit]

I feel that you have a decent understanding of the situation between Lightbreather, myself and others and feel that your comment can shed some light on it here at Arbitration Enforcement. My apologies for involving you, but I feel that cooler heads should prevail. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 01:44, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, I did, but I'm not sure you like what I had to say. I think you should have used the talk page much more, and you may well be edit warring. Sorry. Drmies (talk) 04:15, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I value your fairness and forthrightness. I'm working to better Wikipedia, not get into fights which is what happens the more I converse with LB. But its not just me that seems to be avoiding communication with her, quite a few of her article Talk page postings have gone unaddressed. Either Editors don't care or they don't want to interact with her either. The ARE is a good exercise though, I've learned some new things and found some interesting information about LB as well. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 05:21, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm better at drinking beer with people than solving problems, no doubt. FWIW, tonight's brew is brought to you courtesy of Grand Lake Brewing, from some altitude up here in Colorado. Drmies (talk) 05:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Youth-hostel

[edit]
Sibylle von Olfers Marietje in Sneeuwland
Same wall, floor, l'estetique..

Do you remember the story about the Baltic Youth-hostel and the drunk Russians? now this is what it looked like (except guitar and table). The newly found recreation place - yeah, right. Hafspajen (talk) 14:10, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I used to enjoy Amsterdam youth hostels with their co-ed dorms. Dougweller (talk) 15:56, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How are those? Hafspajen (talk) 16:00, 3 July 2014 (UTC) The Story of the Butterfly children ? This looks like and this (look inside book) like a really fine illustrator to me. Hafspajen (talk) 18:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch or Flemish

[edit]

Pieter Claesz, in the article Still life#Dutch and Flemish painting someone put the caption Dutch painter. Is he , or is he Flemish? Hafspajen (talk) 03:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wow. I just looked at the article--born in "Belgium", career in "Holland". I really don't know, Hafspajen. What do the books call him? (I had a somewhat similar situation: go to Early Sorrows and see where his "nationality" links to--but I suppose you can't do this with the language of painting.) Drmies (talk) 04:53, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Seems to be classed as Dutch. The New York Metropolitan Museum of Art has his bio under "Dutch Paintings in the Met", and refers to Flemish painters, with whom he is thought to have trained in Antwerp, as if he wasn't Flemish. Apparently until recently confused with a Pieter Claesz from Steinfurt, his birthplace seems to have been ascertained from his name as written on a document written two days after his death (Pieter Claesz van Berchem), and his son's name.''If one tripped on his or her left leg and was born on an odd-numbered day, or tripped on his or her right foot and born on an even-numbered day, one should ask someone else to slap his or her corresponding hand in order to negate the bad luck. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:48, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the god advice and classification. Has anyone seen Mies lately? Hafspajen (talk) 20:54, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I'm here--just not here so much. We went for a walk today--in Rocky Mountain National Park, and now I want to get a job in Denver and move out west. Holy moly Haffy, you wouldn't believe how majestic this part of America is. It blew me away. One more day, and then we have to rush back to Alabama, in a day and a night. Drmies (talk) 00:13, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But I do. My relatives took me there. Was hiking there it was fantastic. And try Bryce Canyon National Park and Yosemite too. Hafspajen (talk) 00:14, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad that you are in my neck of the world Drmies and that you are enjoying it. I hope that you didn't get snowed on. Enjoy the rest of your trip. MarnetteD|Talk 04:30, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My daughter-in-law and her family are from Denver. My son talks about moving there with the extended family, of course. I so want to go. I love high altitude; having grown up in the foothills in the piedmont of South Carolina. (yes, we haz mountains there...). and the added benefit of (shhhhh) medical marajuana. Fylbecatulous talk 12:39, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen the trainwreck at ANI about the 'Siduri Project'

[edit]

The guy now has 4 accounts and still hasn't a clue. I should have blocked 2 at the beginning but took it to ANI instead, and now.... Dougweller (talk) 13:41, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I looked at their "project page". Clearly they misunderstand what Wikipedia is. I don't think there is anything preventing you from blocking any alternate accounts though, is there? Drmies (talk) 00:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've done that and the user is happy with it. I'd hoped someone completely uninvolved would step in but never mind, it was the sensible thing to do. Dougweller (talk) 19:02, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Robert Dulmers

[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 16:03, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You speak Dutch, right?

[edit]

IIRC you both speak Dutch and are an admin. Would you be willing to have a word with User:Natubico, also known as User:VKing, about why this kind of thing isn't appropriate? (The Nicolas Pleumekers vhose views he's trying to promote is clearly the person operating both accounts.) I've tried to a very limited extent to engage at User talk:Natubico#Oost, but given the response don't feel I'm going to get through. According to his own userpage he has limited English, so a Dutch-speaker may do a better job of getting through. I'm also reluctant to get involved in any protracted debate with him as some of the views he expresses ("Non-blondes, of which there are so many by now, that planet Earth is in serious danger of becoming totally unliveable", "natural blond-race-territory had been invaded and taken in more and more for centuries again by blackhaired, Southern-European agressors, like Romans and Gallics", "those, who (or who's forfathers) in the past have emigrated to an other race's natural territory") look to me like outright neo-Nazism, but again this may just be a problem with translation and these phrases in the original Dutch aren't as offensive as they appear. Since he also thinks vitamins are a species of microbe, believes hair dye causes mental illness, and, assuming Google Translate is correct in its translation of nl:Overleg_gebruiker:VKing is banned for life from Dutch Wikipedia, I'm not hopeful. Mogism (talk) 00:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Where's the blond stuff at? Drmies (talk) 03:40, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Looks like that stuff is also on their userpage: VKing (the first paragraph in the "The name VKing" section). Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 03:49, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ha. Thank you WK. Now what do we do? MfD the user page? I do not approve of this kind of racialist soapboxing. Delete it? Scrap that section? Your advice is appreciated. Drmies (talk) 03:54, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Agreed. My guess is blank the relevant sections (basically the entire "The name VKing" section, including the "Vivism" subsection) per the first bullet at WP:POLEMIC for now; I'ma go do that if you haven't already. There's quite a bit of inoffensive stuff on the user page too as far as I can tell, so outright deletion of the entire page is probably not in order, unless someone tries to edit-war the sections back in. If we do want to delete the page, an MfD is going to be the way to go. AS for the editor themself, I haven't looked too closely at their edits, so I dunno whether a block is appropriate or not (though I see you blocked Natubico already). Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 04:05, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Thanks. I saw a bunch of edits that seemed positive enough, at first glance anyway, so I'm hesitant to block. The other account (look at the user page) was an easy block--it represented an organization. Let's see; perhaps VKing has something to say on the matter. Thanks for the help, Drmies (talk) 04:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • I could be wrong, but I have a hunch that things will not end well for our Viking friend. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:13, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
              • He's also very concerned about our treatment of grass- link to Commons page. This guy ought to have a gig at the Leicester Comedy Festival. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:49, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
                • Having read his website and some of the delightful views expressed there ("Now, when all the violating of the natural Northern-European territory by subtropical invaders had reached the limit and made the Northern-Europide blood cooke finally, it may have been the subtropical elements, including the Jewish, who by that time already were in decisive positions, who canalised this anger thus, that it would bring them material gains. They made them colonise Asian and African countries, instead of invade the countries of former subtropical occupants in order to take a bloody revenge.", "The German government couldn't affort any more, to maintain all those Jews, concentrated in camps, it may have been forced, to reduce their number as painlessly as possible, because otherwise finally none of them could have been taken care of any more.", and so on) this guy is clearly either an outright troll or a fully paid-up neo-Nazi. As long as he limits himself to adding photos of Dutch and Belgian parks, which is what he seems mostly to be doing, that's fine, but I'm not going to waste any more time trying to engage with him. Mogism (talk) 11:39, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I have filed a request for information with Kafka, a Dutch investigation bureau/archive specialized in (extreem) right wing politics in The Netherlands. Let's see if they can shed a bit of light on this person. The Banner talk 12:25, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I left VKing a note, and removed a silly list from their talk page--it should have been in a sandbox in the first place, but it's also a BLP violation since they themselves considered hair coloring as a possible cause of mental illness. In other words, if someone is on the "blond" list but they're a natural redhead, then being listed incorrectly will only serve to bring back the trauma, and the consequences of hair trauma are of course not studied well enough but likely disastrous. Drmies (talk) 14:48, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tiny glitch...

[edit]

I promised not to interact with you-know-who, although his friends rejected (C) the peace proposal or just ignored it (S and A). But for the last few days I am looking at Template:Odense with two links to disambiguation pages. Could you give a note to "him" to get it fixed? The Banner talk 15:36, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Given that I do a fair amount of work with lists and you seem to do a fair amount of scrutinizing of disambiguation links I'd say quite the opposite actually and that it's likely to be a frequent occurrence. And the dab solving tool no longer exists... One wonders though why you would be spending a few days looking at a template I recently created though... You're quite welcome to help dab my templates or lists so long as it's constructive and you don't leave snarky edit summaries. Unlike you I have no problems with any editor making a constructive edit to things like that. Better to do that than report the "error" to Drmies every time it happens. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:27, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest Wikipedia:WPCleaner The Banner talk 17:18, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest Link Classifier, it's changed my life, DABs show up in bright yellow background (and redirects with green text). Fully customizable as well. --kelapstick(bainuu) 17:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Does it offer solutions for de dab-links? The Banner talk 17:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Kelapstick I tried to add Link Classifier, and don't seem to have gotten it to work. Can you see if you can tell the problem (I know nothing about js code.) I did already have installed a related script that makes redirects green, but changes none of the other link colors. Maybe that conflicts? LadyofShalott 18:14, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't offer a solution for DAB links, but it does highlight them, so they are much easier to recognize. I will have a look LoS. --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Try purging your cache LoS, and see if it works. User:Anomie/linkclassifier would have been better for me to have linked. There is also an "on/off" button that can be installed, which I may try. My favourite is how it links pages nominated for deletion in red. --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:21, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I did look into the wiki cleaner thing but it looked too technical so I didn't follow through.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:35, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. Blofeld, my comment re link classifier was mainly directed at you, I find it handy when I preview an edit to see where the DABs and redirects are showing up without any effort, thus not requiring DAB solver, as they are captured before the edit is saved. --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:39, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just tried it and it cocked up by current coding so reverted it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually adding:
importScript('User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js'); // Linkback: [[User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js]]
importStylesheet('User:Anomie/linkclassifier.css'); // Linkback: [[User:Anomie/linkclassifier.css]]
My mistake in adding the wrong link above. --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It still doesn't identify dab pages or wrong article links, only redirects, and in a lot of cases I don't want to see piped links also turning green within articles. I think I'll pass on it, thanks anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for fixing it for me, K! I like it! LadyofShalott 21:15, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Zimmermanh1997 - Part Ugh!

[edit]

As you have previously dealt with this user, I am making you aware of the new SPI against User:Zimmermanh1997, which can be found here. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:27, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of James McLemore

[edit]

Hello! Your submission of James McLemore 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! Cloudchased (talk) 23:43, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions welcome

[edit]

Your input concerning a repeated incident by another user at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard would be appreciated. Cheers. LRD NO (talk) 02:09, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Further shenanigans at Ashwant Dwivedi

[edit]

Drmies is presumably on the interstate, and I have stuck both my mouth and my foot in, so I wonder if other experienced editors/admins could have a look at Pacnews' edits, in particular stuff like this. (They've also added sources, albeit not strong ones, but I gave them a second final warning for blanking earlier today.) I'm hoping this can be resolved without a block, but Sitush was right to flag it further up the page, it needs further eyes on it - and maybe someone is a better diplomat than me. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:09, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, pound to a penny we now have a sock. Any takers? - Sitush (talk) 21:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pacnews The Banner talk 21:19, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - at least someone else can see the suspicion. Actually, I suspect the socking has gone at that article pretty much since its creation but the gaps in time and AGF mean I would usually assume that it is a result of someone forgetting their password. This one is a bit more ... well, you've said it at the SPI. - Sitush (talk) 23:29, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This SPI was quickly processed and the verdict is: "Technically indistinguishable" So, Mr admin-trainee Deor, another project to earn kudos. The Banner talk 10:12, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Media review on FAC

[edit]

Hello Drmies. Judging by your profile, you seem interested in Wiki's media files. I was thinking if you were able to check the non-free media (photos and audios) used in Megadeth, my FA nominee. The review page is here for comments. Everything the best.--Retrohead (talk) 09:58, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Let me try it again...

[edit]

Some time ago I posted here an draft article that I was not happy about due to lack of sources. That gave me some extra sources and made me launch that article. So, now I want to try it again but this time it is a bit more difficult. The case is Rôtisserie Rue du Bois. To make it harder, there are some confusing hits on the internet. Rôtisserie Rue du Bois was not part of Hotel Victory (mentioned on internet as Hotel Acsoay) but they did share an entrance at Van den Boschstraat 3 in Alkmaar. Main entrance for the restaurant, side-entrance for the hotel. Still it were different entities. Any help would be appreciated, even an advice to move it into the fridge. The Banner talk 13:44, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Our Robocop Remake

[edit]

Just reading about this. What the hell? It's, like... well, it's better than Sy-Fy at least. "Nearly every review that’s been written thus far highlights Fatal Farm’s contribution, which features an impressively long series of graphically exploding penises, which Seger describes as 'a real stand-out'." — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't tell me it is a good one

[edit]
File:.Zelda the boxer dog on a boat in Lake Lanier, South Carolina (9 September 2002).jpg
Older fawn boxer enjoys boating on Lake Lanier in Landrum, SC.

This is a single purpose account, with the one mission to edit the Boxer article and to put this picture in the article. and to put pictures about [the fish he catches on Wiki. [5]. We can't get rid of this dog, it keeps comming back as a bumerang. And it is not a good picture, (half the dog is in the shadow) and it shows more of the boat than of the dog, the dog is sitting in a weird angle, and there are a lot of weird shadows in the picture and it really has no encyclopedic value. Hafspajen (talk) 17:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, so you are here! Thank you! Hafspajen (talk) 18:21, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I forbid you to move into a house around graves - every Chinese knows that is bad luck. Dutch should know that too. Hafspajen (talk) 18:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
World class saucing company with years of experience making top shelf products- that would be Lea and Perrins. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You would not believe the neighborhood. The size of the lots, of the houses, and how tastelesslynouveau riche everything looks: I mean, the interior of this million and a half dollar home, whose stomach can handle that? They're all homes from the last decade or two, made to look, in that typical American way, like they're old--what they call "modern" here means something like "pre-flapper". Today was the day for lawn mowing, apparently: I must have seen a dozen crews at work (there's maybe two dozen homes in the area)--presumably the only time there's non-white people in the area. I knocked on a few doors for information on the cemetery; at one house the cars were in the driveway but no one answered, and I wonder if they just don't open for riff-raff. Mind you, this is just after I came from Mount Meigs, Alabama, part of which is historically black, and which butts up against Pike Road, Alabama, which is a white upper middle class expansion, now with its own school district and all. A very strange morning. Drmies (talk) 20:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Hafspajen (talk) 18:30, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not a very polite dog owner, that one. Can't we write an essay Don't put your own pet on the Wikipedia? ... Could be useful... and plenty of examples to illustrate it withHafspajen (talk) 04:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your sage advice...

[edit]

Hi Drmies, now that seemingly (hopefully?) that LB has made her last remark in the ARE process, I'd like to ask something of you. You advised in your comments that it would be good for me to use "more process". Beyond using and participating more on article Talk pages where LB is involved, did you have any other recommendations? Best regards, --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 20:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey Hotrod--I hope my comments made clear that I have not been following those articles very closely. That particular case, as far as I could tell, was really about talk page discussion: contentious subject matter does, unfortunately, often involve copious amounts of talk page diplomacy. So that's all I have to say, really. It's not very sage, I'm afraid, and I can't say offhand what else you could be doing. Not edit warring (if that's what you were doing, or what they think you were doing) is always a good idea: one easily gets slammed with a block for that. But to speak the plain truth (to quote Blazing Saddles), I've outvolved myself from many such areas--guns, Korea massacres, flag icons, etc., and I'm feeling much better. Take care, and your opponent also, Drmies (talk) 21:17, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand your desire to "outvolve" yourself entirely... :) One additional question, you just used the word "opponent". Admin EdJohnson did as well in the ARE. Truth be told, I don't consider LB or anyone here on WP an opponent. That kind of belief IMO would defeat the group effort nature of the site. I'm not ignorant to the fact that spirited, often heated, debates happen continuously on the site, but at the end of the day (to quote Rodney King) "Can't we all just get along?" That's the spirit in which I edit and make the effort (most of the time) to interact with others. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 21:29, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's especially on Wikipedia that I think the word actually is appropriate, since that's very often how these things go here, unfortunately. But really that's by the by. Drmies (talk) 00:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Towel-two

[edit]
A Common wild boar piglet in the Netherlands

I have serious doubts about this totally unreferenced article, List of animals representing first-level administrative country subdivisions. I asked a Canadian editor living in Japan since 1987 if the Cairn terrier indeed is [6] the Ehime prefectures animal and he said no, it is the Japanese river otter. Many of those animals mentioned has nothing to do with Japan, More weird, the Aichi prefecture has Great Dane, ? according to article, also Hyōgo prefecture has Great Dane, ? ... Kumamoto prefecture - Pug, and intensly weird - Tochigi prefecture has Puli? how on earth, the Puli is Hungary's national symbol. Hiroshima ... has Basilosaurus. These look like jokes to me. Those animals like Great Dane, Puli has nothing to do with Japan. And Fukuoka prefecture has Appaloosa horse, that is an American horse. Hafspajen (talk) 00:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This strikes me as much more reliable version Hafspajen (talk) 00:49, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SOOOO, it was Anselm, - here - revert to original. Sherlock Holmes (talk) 00:49, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's well above my pay grade/intellect. Nice pig, doc. Drmies (talk) 15:39, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But Anselm has poor knowledge in zoology. Hafspajen (talk) 15:45, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, maybe not. Hey, rent Doc Hollywood. It'll make you feel happier. Drmies (talk) 15:50, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, maybe not. It looks like Doc Hollywood has some investigation issues, is it You who is behind it? Last time a film made me happier it was Monsoon Wedding... It was interesting, exotic, funny and beautiful. Good music too. Hafspajen (talk) 15:57, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, but I saw it and I'm on the case. (Taking a break from grading grammar homework...) Drmies (talk) 16:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Anyway, Anselm was just the one who copied - rather uncritically this - CRAP - so if you wan't to kick someone in the but, because the neighbours treated you bad and didn't answered at the door - try the IP who came up with it. Drmies, you're smart and powerful, I hear. (also think - they might have been in bed or something .. the neighbours- not the IP) Hafspajen (talk) 16:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But Cooper pheasant to Copper pheasant is correct, no? Drmies (talk) 17:14, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hafspajen (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio in Doc Hollywood

[edit]

Your guess is as good (maybe better) than mine. I thought other websites that copy and paste from Wikipedia are supposed attribute to Wikipedia, but I suppose IMDb doesn't bother. Thanks for your message. 75.177.156.78 (talk) 17:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...

[edit]

oh, well, why do we bother. Hafspajen (talk) 17:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sergeant Stubby, a Boston Pit Bull in WWI

[edit]
stars, stars ... stars -falling on dogs...
stars, stars ... stars on urban dogs...

Could use some help on this. An urban legend seems to have grown up around him culminating in him being called "the only dog to have been promoted during battle." and the most decorated dog. I've tried to do a bit at the article and have started a talk page discussion. The only source that approaches an RS that says he was given rank in the Army is this Smithsonian article, but this Smithsonian story doesn't say that, nor do the earliest sources I can find (see the talk page). Various articles repeat the claim, eg Sinbad (USCG), American Staffordshire Terrier, 1926 and probably others. Purple Heart says he was awarded that medal. Hm, looking more at Sinbad, I wonder.[7] [8],[9]. Anyway, back to Stubby before I fall asleep here, another problem is that one Robert Conroy was the main person involved with Stubby throughout his service and until he died and even decades after, but isn't mentioned in his article. I guess I need to get the National Geographic biography. Dougweller (talk) 21:17, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can remove "the only dog to have been promoted during battle." Not true. Hafspajen (talk) 21:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Connecticut website has a link to the New York times obituary of Stubby. Either its there or it isn't. Given the obituary and the source, I would assume it would have been mentioned if it exists. If it does not exist, it could I (and probably should) be discussed s an "Urban Legend". [[User:|7&6=thirteen]] (☎) 13:08, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:7&6=thirteen, thanks. It's at[10] and there is nothing there about him having any rank - these claims seem to have arisen much later. It discusses decorations, etc but doesn't say they were official (unless I missed something) - in fact there is no mechanism for the US government or military to officially award animals. I think a lot of these were given to him by soldiers who had been awarded them, as well as those that weren't military. Dougweller (talk) 15:24, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Smoky

[edit]

Smoky (dog) described by Wynne, "Smoky Served in the South Pacific with the 5th Air Force, 26th Photo Recon Squadron [and] flew 12 air/sea rescue and photo reconnaissance missions."[1] On those flights, Smoky spent long hours dangling in a soldier's pack near machine guns used to ward off enemy fighters.[2] Smoky was credited with twelve combat missions and awarded eight battle stars.[3] She survived 150 air raids on New Guinea and made it through a typhoon at Okinawa.[4] Smoky even parachuted from 30 feet (9.1 m) in the air, out of a tree, using a parachute made just for her.

Smoky's another example of us perpetuating urban legends. Smoky was a mascot.[11] A fantastic dog it seems. That first source is a blog reviewing a self-published book. I can't find any really brilliant sources for this, but this points out she wasn't an official war dog. As does[12] which says the same about Stubby. This[13] is a good source but doesn't mention any battle stars. Dougweller (talk) 09:26, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And on the other hand, Chips may have been allowed to keep his medals, although our article says differently. See [14] and [15]. The US still has no official medals for dogs, but one organisation has set up a medal system.[16]. Dougweller (talk) 09:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

‎

Sigh, Dougweller what we need is a military expert really, not a dog expert. We should try at the Wikiproject - War or Military Awards or I World War or something like that, if there are such projects. Hafspajen (talk) 16:07, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Right, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#American war dog urban legends. Drmies, do you want this all moved there? Dougweller (talk) 16:39, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, we can drop a copy for them, I am fine with it. Hafspajen (talk) 16:41, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Chatting (email) to a Smithsonian curator, they may revised their Stubby page. We shall see. Dougweller (talk) 14:51, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dougweller, did you had any results and what? Hafspajen (talk) 16:13, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing yet, User:Hafspajen, just an indication that the page will be rewritten. I hope I didn't upset them when I pointed out that the miniature purple heart on his coat was a medal that didn't exist until 1932. Dougweller (talk) 21:01, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OOoops. Hafspajen (talk) 21:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

[edit]
  1. ^ Kohl, Joyce (1998-01-30), "Go Inside Yorkie Doodle Dandy". Retrieved from http://goinside.com/98/1/yorkie.html on 2007-02-15.
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference PatsyAnn was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ "WW II K-9: Smoky", Olive-Drab.com. Retrieved from http://www.olive-drab.com/od_wardogs_famous_smoky.php on 2007-02-15.
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference SmokyBook was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Chrome

[edit]

Nominated Chrome for FAC today, FYI: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/California Chrome/archive1. Grab your popcorn and watch the show. Montanabw(talk) 23:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Time to go

[edit]

I will return (as i (un)fortunately know myself), but now will go on an extended break. Nice working with you my wiki-friend!

Dankiu, happy vibes --AL (talk) 18:07, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Johnpacklambert

[edit]

Your edit to Lee D. Baker has been undone by Johnpacklambert without any discussion on the talk page (but an IP has appeared to muddy the waters). Nigel Pap (talk) 03:29, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I reverted. Can't see what else happened--stupid iPad. Johnpacklambert needs to find a more suitable hobby than fucking around with real people's biographies. Drmies (talk) 03:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Johnpacklambert is still at it. I think my request for help at the administrator's noticeboard was closed prematurely. Nigel Pap (talk) 02:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

why do we have to keep discussing this? Please, let's reopen the BLP topic ban discussion. He really shouldn't be editing in this area as he can't be trusted. Viriditas (talk) 03:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please review the links I posted. He seems to be protected from any type of ban. I have no idea why this is but I find it strange considering the massive disruption he's responsible for on Wikipedia. Viriditas (talk) 04:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nicola Rizzoli

[edit]

I'm not sure I agree with your assertion at Nicola Rizzoli that referees do not represent their nations. They are affiliated to their national associations and hence serve as a form of representation of those nations in matches. Not sure where you got the idea that they don't represent their nations. – PeeJay 14:24, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, eh, at the risk of sounding dumb, you know referees don't actually play, right? Of course they don't represent their nations. Unless I missed the play-off system where each country submits a couple of refs and the ones that make it through the play-offs make it to the final tournament. I guess I got this silly idea from 40+ years of watching soccer. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 21:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to win a qualifying competition to act as a representative of an organisation. Being selected by FIFA is as much of an honour for the referees as coming through the qualifying competition is for the teams. You'd think you'd have known that after 40+ years of watching football. – PeeJay 22:26, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, referees don't represent countries. Referees represent the body that issues the rules, PeeJay. That's their job. Why I should have to explain that is not so clear to me. Drmies (talk) 23:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly you've missed the point entirely. – PeeJay 12:23, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)I thought FIFA made a point of spreading officials equally between all participating associations? I'm not sure if that kind of positive discrimination adds more or less to the notion of being a "national representative". Official FIFA match reports do not give officials flags, like the teams, but do show nationality. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:32, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The nationality of referees is important, it is mentioned frequently by pundits and displayed on TV screens - though I don't believe flags are used for referees in the same way they are for players. Perhaps a discussion at WT:FOOTBALL is required? GiantSnowman 10:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK suggestion needed for Genes, Brain and Behavior

[edit]

Hi, I got my first GA... (I'm a late bloomer, I guess :-). The bot notice on my talk page mentioned that having been promoted to GA, the article is eligible for DYK. I was thinking of an appropriate hook, but all I can come up with is "...that Genes, Brain and Behavior has developed standards for the publication of mouse mutant studies?" which strikes me as a little bit boring. Do you perhaps have a better idea? Thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 15:11, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • (talk page stalker)According to the linked paper the journal is taking the lead in imposing stricter standards for publication in order to raise standards in the design and conduct of experiments on mice- the ethical implications of using live animals for flawed studies. Maybe this could be expanded upon in the article- DYK the journal GBB is in the forefront of raising standards on lab use of live mice (or something like that). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 16:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nice suggestion, I'll think about that a bit more, thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 17:09, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Victor Krylov

[edit]

Hopefully, you (or one of your stalkers) will not be able to resist helping out with an article about a professor. An editor came to BLPN and asked for help with another editor. The other editor is the creator of the article and a "friend" of Krylov's. He's not capable of editing neutrally. He's been adding massive amounts of unsourced material. There are no actual refs, just a couple of ELs to the subject's websites and an incredibly long list of works by the subject, meaning to the extent any of it is sourced, it's self-sourced.

I decided to help out, but I'm not getting anywhere with the COI editor. He's calling me a vandal, which, for him, I think is a generic term for anyone who doesn't agree with him. He's removed maintenance templates. He keeps reverting. I've warned him with standard templates and even a more personalized message. Last warning was of 3RR (he's up to three reverts). I could revert again and still not breach 3RR myself, but I prefer not to edit-war. The original editor who sought help appears to be staying out of it now (probably wise of him).

I admit to a bias against editors with COIs generally. If I had my way, we'd have a bright-line rule about it, but Wikipedia hates bright-line rules, so we're stuck with the usual rule with exceptions.

Perhaps someone who is less put off by attitude than I am could help out.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:32, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think if one follows the money, it's High Speed 2- both Krylov at Loughborough and David Thompson at Southampton are being quoted by opponents of the new line. Krylov's publicly accused a couple of academics associated with Southampton of "academic misconduct" and "plagiarism of ideas" in an Amazon review of 2010 here. Thompson's here.- maybe as notable as Krylov. From a handout by Hillingdon Against HS2 However we are able to access and share key research literature that the government is likely to refer to. This will include prominent work by academics David Thompson and Victor Krylov.. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 13:13, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Group of 88 plot starts to thicken

[edit]

I removed the material about the Duke lacrosse case from biographies where the person had not played a significant role per WP:UNDUE. There are some people who were part of the "group of 88" who had a larger involvement in the case so I left those alone. I fully expected that this would provoke some response and User:Thowland has undone all of my changes. Here's the odd part - Thowland registered in 2008 but made no changes until January 2014. Until today, he had a grand total of 11 article edits, none of them about anything to do with this case. I wonder what drew his attention to my edits? Nigel Pap (talk) 02:16, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • As I said in response to another participant, I don't do conspiracy theories. Trying to figure out how to handle my job and my kitchen takes up all my brain power. Drmies (talk) 03:33, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What's for dinner? Hafspajen (talk) 05:39, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bacon, what else? Bgwhite (talk) 05:56, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Right, contrary to his own words, Drmies is part of the bacon conspiracy whose aim is to transform all food in the world into bacon or a derivative.--Bbb23 (talk) 09:12, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alternative silly religion - but they probably allow bacon.
Hey! It's the middle of Ramadan- and the days here are 18 hours long. Last thing my neighbours want is the smell of frying bacon. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:17, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What, a little difficulty on the way will just make them stronger in fait. Hafspajen (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As to the faith, Hafspajen .. I've added thé alternative for the neighbours of Xanthomelanoussprog, I don't think that the first two will pass at any time. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not. Unless it is Turkey bacon... Hafspajen (talk) 10:42, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On their behalf, I thank you! However, the infidel will have an "English" instead (but not with Benedict's red kidney beans). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:45, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Can we now stop this discussion .. you guys make me suffer! --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:52, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Hafspajen (talk) 10:53, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
'Enforced' following of Ramadan in a bacon and beer free country? --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, now I get it! Poor you. Hafspajen (talk) 11:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of bacon, after an echocardiogram, dozens of EKGs, stress test and a CAT scan, the doctor says I have no notable blockages in my heart. I took this to mean that I can eat all the bacon I want, since that is what I was doing before, and it seems to have worked out just fine. I'm sure my cardiologist would not agree but the tests don't lie. Oh, and I finally looked up pace instead of guessing what it meant because of you (my guess was right, however). We ordinary rednecks don't use that in normal conversation. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 13:27, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BLESS you, Dennis, nice. Hafspajen (talk) 19:05, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, it just means that you're cardiologist doesn't think you're totally sunk yet. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:01, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
…a heart so strong that we had to go to the cemetery three days after his funeral, to beat it to death. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I did quit smoking a few years ago, changed to snus, which I order direct from Sweden, and joined the gym last month. But if you knew how much tobacco smoke, alcohol, weed, partying, bacon and other meat and just sheer abuse this body has seen in 50 years, you would wonder how I'm still alive. The fact that my heart is still in great shape seems implausible, yet true somehow. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 15:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If the stuff about your heart was what you alluded to a while ago when you spoke of medical problems, I'm sure you're relieved that the news is good. Medical tests, particularly waiting for the results, are not fun. Apparently, you have a strong constitution. Don't take advantage of it. Mazel Tov.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:05, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That reminds me I need to call my specialist, and that I should not miss my appointment Wednesday. Thanks for the reminder. Drmies (talk) 17:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just remember that a piece of bacon a day keeps a doctor in pay.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • ll
    ll

I think Johnpacklambert has supplied an answer to my mystery. It is mentioned on KC Johnson's blog. Enjoy your bacon! Nigel Pap (talk) 14:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bu.

[edit]

Drmies, can you please revert Phil's and Eric's article Blue men of the Minch ‎ to its original state? Requests for page protection has protected it full protection, but unfortunatelly conserved the wrong version. Blue men of the Minch is a featured article; and has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Thus I imagine has to be correct - see here - Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Blue men of the Minch/archive1 and now both editors fight agaist some guy who is changing the content - and the last edit is a disputed edit, reverting Phil, he reverted Phil's and Eric's version to his own. And now is fully protected - so no one can edit it, only administrators, I think it would be fair to revert to the Featured article version. Hafspajen (talk) 19:10, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you want to take a look at this: [17] and other latest changes at your article. Hafspajen (talk) 19:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's always the "wrong version" that gets protected, just the way it is. And neither Sagaciousphil nor I could care less what version of the article is protected, or which WP eventually decides to keep; we're done with it. Eric Corbett 21:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, now, don't give up so easy. Hafspajen (talk) 21:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eric Corbett, I may not have congratulated you on this FA--my apologies. Nice work. Please see the talk page for what I hope is a solution of sorts. Let's let cooler heads prevail, and let those be ours. Drmies (talk) 02:51, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Sagaciousphil has just emailed me what I believe to be the proper solution to this mess. It is not entirely accurate to describe the blue men as sea kelpies, they should more properly have been called storm kelpies, as are those inhabitants of the Corryvreckan. So basically we have two areas inhabited by storm kelpies, in the larger of which they're known as the blue men. Therefore renaming the article to Storm kelpie, rewriting the opening sentence along with a few appropriate adjustments elsewhere ought to restore sanity. I won't be doing that though, as my blood has yet to stop boiling. Eric Corbett 14:32, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Eric; I appreciate it. I (or Ghmyrtle, I suppose) can do that--but my problem, as I just noted on the talk page, is that I do not have access to all the relevant material. (I didn't realize there's two kinds of kelpies either.) I tagged Sagaciousphil on the talk page and perhaps they'll leave a clarifying note there. Again, I appreciate your help and you're more than welcome to stay on the sidelines. Plus, I wish there was more available material... Drmies (talk) 14:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    There's more than two types of kelpie, but that's another story. Sagaciousphil has access to the sources (obviously), and hopefully she'll find it in her to help resolve this tempest in a teacup; she's a much nicer person than I'll ever be or ever was. Eric Corbett 14:50, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where's Mandarax?

[edit]

@LadyofShalott:. Does anyone know where Mandarax has gone too? He hasn't edited in three weeks. Was going to post that there literally was a burning man at a regional burning man festival when I noticed he hasn't edited in awhile. Bgwhite (talk) 22:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't the slightest idea where he went. On a related note, did I ever tell you about the time in 2011 when I lit my face on fire? No worries, I am still as handsome as ever. --kelapstick(bainuu) 22:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If catching your face on fire didn't damage your appeal, maybe "handsome" isn't the right adjective. ;) Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ha. Well played Dennis. Actually It does show a bit if I get a little sun. But over all I was back to normal in a month. The miracle of polysporin. But I did look like Two-Face from batman for a little while. --kelapstick(on the run) 01:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now I know why your company sends you to Mongolia in the middle of nowhere and not one of the thousands of mines closer. Also makes sense why you live on an island in a state nobody cares about. Bgwhite (talk) 01:36, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sadly my French teacher wasn't keen in teaching us the various meanings of "baise", and the students sucked all fun out of it in... three weeks. Besides, as French Canadians we had more fun naming the parts of a church to see which ones would get her to gasp... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:39, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@kelapstick, Téléfrançais was before my time. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Moin non plus, je n'ai aucune idee ou il est. I also have no idea where Mandarax is. It is strange for him to disappear for so long. LadyofShalott 23:58, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's Alive (Buckethead album)

[edit]

Wikipedia:NALBUMS States "... Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting."

Space does not permit merging track listing into Buckethead's discography. He has released over 100 albums. 128.226.67.180 (talk) 04:35, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you think Buckethead's albums in general do not meet Wikipedia:GNG to have their own pages. Perhaps you should suggest removing or merging all or most the individual albums articles to Talk:Buckethead_discography. 128.226.67.180 (talk) 04:46, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mess

[edit]

I made a mess of the references here, Mies, could you please fix it (obs not Yngvadottir) Hafspajen (talk) 17:22, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You did, Drmiterix. Hafspajen (talk) 19:13, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you wan't to be even more adminish, how about some this. ? Hafspajen (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MIES!! Our Lady of Lourdes (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|views)[edit]this.

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is a highly targeted article and now protection is removed and we have same problem again, content getting changed or vandalized. Very few page watchers too. Basically it is just me and I noticed that vandalism is often undiscovered by the usual page patrolers, who knows why. .. Hafspajen (talk) 04:44, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Pradip Kumar Singh

[edit]

I saw you had replaced the AfD notice on this page after it had been removed by User:Rksinghrules & had placed a warning on their talkage. The afd notice has just been removed (&replaced by me) twice by a couple of IPs: I suspect this is Rksinghrules socking, but am unsure as to whether this justifies launching an investiagation at SPI. There have been other disruptive IP edits, notably replacement of a load of dead?useless links from another article on an Indian anthropologist that Rksinghrules is championing. Thoughts?TheLongTone (talk) 17:56, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Whether it's a sock or not, there was enough disruption today that I just blocked one IP for 31 hours. I'm watching to see if there's further activity. —C.Fred (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • C.Fred, thanks for keeping it clean. It may well be that this is Rksinghrules, but it doesn't matter so much to me. Those IP contributions are so poorly done/argued that no admin in their right mind would count them as anything. And that's the odd thing: I see no evidence at all by any of the participants. I pinged Randykitty, who can perhaps unleash some science on the subject's resume. Drmies (talk) 18:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I WILL GIVE YOU 1000*2 BUCKS IF YOU REMOVE ALL THE TAGS AND NOTICES FROM ALL 3 articles of Pradip Kumar Singh, L.P. Vidyarthi and Vijoy S. Sahay. Thanks 106.218.184.230 (talk) 18:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wow! That's something else than the usual legal threats. Hey, I can be bought, too! I can give you a better deal, too: I'll remove them for $1950, how's that for an offer?!?! --Randykitty (talk) 18:56, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, Mies, if I send you 20 crowns, can you please page protect the above article? (20.00 SEK = 2.93 USD) Hafspajen (talk) 21:21, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You know, I am kind of hot on recycling, ever since the Swedish state made this sexy video to encourage everyone to recycle more. I can surely make about 20 crowns of those bottles I have home...
Panta mera = recycle more! Swedish state advertisment ov TV. Hot!!! Hafspajen (talk) 22:58, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The only word I understood was Shit!!! (and that was because it was written down) It's funny how (given the close connections between England and Scandinavia) how different the languages seem. Mind you, I once spent ten minutes listening to some "Norwegians" before I realised that they were Geordies, and a family at the Black Country Museum a couple of years back speaking "Greek" which turned out to be Dudley accent. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:30, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Now you know how weird we are... How's with the Dutch? Hafspajen (talk) 12:28, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My heart goes out to the Dutch people, but this also a catastrophe for all caring people. Take care, Drmies. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:08, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mylan

[edit]

If I have this right user:FreeRangeFrog removed an indiscriminate list of more than 200 products here as I suggested. An SPA user:MylanScofflaw not only re-incorporated the list, but altered the article to say the company, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, was actually "a multinational tax avoidance scheme masquerading as a..." This apparently has to do with a recent decision to re-incorporate in the Netherlands where taxes are cheaper. The user's name, seems to suggest they are here for the exclusive purpose of pushing a point-of-view. user:The ed17 re-incorporated the list of 200 products (can't imagine what he's thinking) and a minor edit-war took place, but all the while, people are edit-warring over the list of 200 products, I'm not sure anybody noticed that the article now says they are a tax evasion scheme, which is obviously not true.

sigh, another day in wikiland.

I have a COI. CorporateM (Talk) 23:21, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I reverted The ed17 and Ktr101 because I didn't realize that the edit that brought back that hideous list also included inappropriate content that could be certainly considered borderline vandalism. Further, I have now soft blocked MylanScofflaw for an obvious username violation. They can create another account if they wish, we'll see if they insist on inserting the same inappropriate material. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 23:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I brought it here to Drmies because when I saw a username like that I presumed some administrative action would be needed one way or another and figured you might be too WP:INVOLVED to do it yourself. I don't know all the rules about using the tools or even what a soft block is. It's strange how all these articles are abandoned for months, then a COI gets involved and there's suddenly all this activity and interest. CorporateM (Talk) 23:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm not sure anybody noticed that the article now says they are a tax evasion scheme"? No, I noticed the new lead. :p Just not the list of products. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Even assuming that I was WP:INVOLVED (which I'm not), clear disruptive editing, vandalism and inappropriate usernames fall into what is considered appropriate admin action in most contexts. They can always drag me off to WP:ANI when they comeback :) §FreeRangeFrogcroak 23:45, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't notice it until I got an email from Mylan with a screenshot of the Wikipedia article and just about spit my drink out. I was actually only recruited to work on the page on their CEO, so I didn't have the org page on my watchlist. It's on there now so I can keep a lookout for when someone starts accusing FreeRange of censoring FACTS and the TRUTH, a position that he/she may already be accustomed to in our relationship ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 00:28, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes lurking Drmies talk page is so worth it... I can honestly say this is one of the funniest accidental reverts I've ever seen. I think the only competitor would be hugglers reverting a BLP to describe someone as assassinating both Hitler and Caesar. I totally understand how you missed the lede changes FRF, but this is awesome accidental humor on a mediocre day ;) Kevin Gorman (talk) 00:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Kevin Gorman: To paraphrase this game I'm playing: You get a revert, YOU get a revert -- EVERYBODY GETS A REVERT!!!' - Some dude in Borderlands 2. I'll take my trout now. With salt. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 03:01, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • We aim to please, Kevin. Like CorpM, I also can't imagine what The ed17 is thinking, ever, but that's in part because I just don't remember what it's like to be 17 and a half. That Ktr101 gets dragged into it, that's a nice fringe benefit. CorpM, let me just add, while we're at the watercooler, that I actually know Ed and K, in the flesh so to speak, and I remember them fondly. What could have made this even better? Well, how about GorillaWarfare blocking you for abuse of M? ('Cause it's my letter.) Drmies (talk) 00:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, my life was looking a little bit bland lately, so I decided to spice it up with a revert, realize that I was complete idiot, revert my revert, and then try to pick up the pieces and walk away with dignity, all while a massive explosion occurred right behind me. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:03, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We'll know Drm®ies is doing COI editing when we start seeing a tradem®ark sym®bol in front of every "M"®. Username policies are stupid - I hope my first block ends up being for something more interesting. CorporateM (Talk) 02:11, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In honour of the departed Mandarax

[edit]

Mandarax was our resident grammar Nazi. Weird Al has just released the video, word crimes. It has some of Mandarax's pet peeves... literately, irony, its/it's and Cambridge commas. The Gathering of the Juggalos is next week, Mandarax is probably getting ready for that by going to a Juggalo boot camp.

  • That's the third hit. First was a note from a friend on Facebook, second was an email from a student in my grammar class, and now this. BUT, as I should remind everyone, as fun as that video is (in a 1980s kind of way--remember when all videos had words and Peter Gabriel-style animation?), it's not about grammar. Spelling, apostrophes, etc--not grammar. Just ask Cnilep. Drmies (talk) 00:03, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not even to who / to whom? (For some of us, it's a blurred line between what is grammar and what is not). NE Ent 01:44, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hey NE Ent--nice to see you again. Who/whom is probably the only example of a grammatical issue, yes--you're correct. But that one also has gone by the wayside: while historically speaking "whom" should be used when in the object position (note that one often sees "accusative", though it's really a dative), the development of English (toward an analytic rather than a synthetic language) is rapidly doing away with that requirement. Our article on Who actually has some decent discussion (well, examples): Who_(pronoun)#Usage_of_whom.

        Speaking more broadly, what you're pointing at, the blurred line, is highly problematic when one is teaching for instance advanced grammar (as I am this term). Weird Al's type of discourse is perfectly acceptable for most US English teachers (in K-12), who use the term "grammar" to mean something like "traditional correctness in writing". In my class, I refer to that attitude as "linguistic hygiene" rather than "grammar". If you like, I have a challenge for you: find me a decent (recent) book that has actual rules of grammar--not writing rules, not hygiene, not rules for style and usage. I think you'll find it extraordinarily difficult. Later, Drmies (talk) 16:11, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

      • A friend reminded me of this--I like Stephen Fry's argument very well. Drmies (talk) 16:26, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Uripp

[edit]

This was recreated after you deleted it but before the account was blocked. Meters (talk) 01:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

[edit]

hello ™NaDaNeville (talk) 01:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A DYK

[edit]
Landschap met groenten en vruchten op de voorgrond (landscape with fruits and veggies in the foreground) WHERE IS THE FRUIT?

Yngvadottir has expanded Évariste Vital Luminais 16 July, I illustrated it. I wan't to nominate it, because Yngvadottir does not do any DYKs any more. But - there are not enough references. Hafspajen (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Haf actually began the expansion on 8 July, so if some kind person would find a few extra sources - notably for the artist's personal life - and if it's verified that it's been expanded 5 times (which I suspect it has starting from his work) he could self-nominate, leaving me out, and beg for mercy (DYK now allows 7 days for nomination, rather than 5, and that can still be stretched if you ask nicely, I believe). Yngvadottir (talk) 16:15, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Miracles happen on DYK, like today writing, approving and appearing was all in one day. - I would recommend to nominate the seventh day the latest and have the time stretch from then on. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How beautiful it is to do nothing, and then rest afterwards
No, pictures doesn't count as expanding, or so I have been told. Anyway, there is a new time limit of 7 or 10 days - nowadays - can't figure out if it is 10 or 7 - all say different. Hafspajen (talk) 16:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC).[reply]
I wish I could help, but right now I can't--maybe tomorrow. Sorry Haffy and Yngvadottory. Gerda, gratuliere zum Weltmeisterschaft! Drmies (talk) 21:30, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit, Hafspajen: there's a big fat melon in the foreground. Drmies (talk) 21:31, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

......... ?? Hafspajen (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Ah, missed the apple ... of course there was an apple too.... Mies? are you fitt to take a look at the Évariste Vital Luminais? Just think nice yellow template on your page .... Hafspajen (talk) 16:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC) I wan't to ask if it is really the meaning to put these giant templates in the lead, because then the lead is all template and nothing more then templates - like this for example. It destroys the layout of several articles that had an image in the lead before. Hafspajen (talk) 19:05, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

??? Hafspajen (talk) 21:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is a big template. Maybe those can be collapsed one way or another? I think that this particular one ("Christianity") is usually placed, or should be placed, following the lead. Drmies (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If it is placed in the lead it covers everything. Why not see also? With a big template like this you can't do anything with a small article, it will take over it. It will be all template. Hafspajen (talk) 22:18, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah, sure--I mean, that's for the talk page or, better yet, the project talk page... Drmies (talk) 23:32, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, there are real fights going on - some remove it - some put is back. No guidelines, I imagine. Hafspajen (talk) 23:47, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sexy Sadie ..

Mandarax is not dead

[edit]

Hi, Doc. Thanks for the emails. (Sorry for the delay; I don't check that email very often.) I see there are some notes here and elsewhere about my demise, so I figured I should drop by to let people know that I'm still alive. It's just that I was driven away from Wikipedia by the extreme incivility at WT:DYK. Even though none of it was directed at me or anything I did, it all created a contentious and antagonistic atmosphere which I found intolerable. But it's okay; to quote the main perpetrator (an admin) on the subject of his driving away users: "So what?" I took a quick glance at WT:DYK today, and the problem seems to have abated, but the extended period of intense unpleasantness destroyed my morale and has still left me unmotivated to contribute. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 22:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What happened? Hafspajen (talk) 23:10, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Oh no! I am sorry :-( I wish I had some ideas to offer about fixing that. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:40, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I hope you stick around. Thanks, Matty.007 11:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mandarax. You're alive and well. Good. Sorry to hear about your troubles: little birdie tells me you're not the first one. And now I see that you actually did respond to my emails, though why I should meet you in Edappally to hand you $1000 billion, I'm not sure. Perhaps you can explain?

    YOU CAN MEET ME AT LULLU MALL,EDAPALLY,KERALA STATE,INDIA

    Mobile---> +91-9526386159

    GRANDSON OF BENE MERENTI

    Dear,

    Please send me 1000 billion $.

    Drmies (talk) 16:36, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now that's what I call walking around money. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 19:48, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

[edit]

I saw you archived my talk page for me in May, Thank You.

Your old comrade. Marcusmax(speak) 04:36, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

[edit]
Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

.

[edit]

BALTAZAR Hafspajen (talk) 00:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban

[edit]
One for you and one for the next person.

Hi,

I noticed that you used your admin tools to close ANI discussion which involved me and concluded that "disruption is cetainly there" (diff).

Will you please be so kind to present diffs of my disruptive edits and wikipedia policies I violated? Thanks.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:34, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • See the list at the ANI discussion. Clearly that list was long enough for the participants. You may take this up at AN for an appeal; not here. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:49, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hello,
    • I apologize if my question was not clear enough. My question was not appeal. It was a query about your administrator action.
    • The participants in the related discussion who belong to a small group of editors involved in numerous disputes with me did not ban me. You did. Will you please be so kind to respect WP:ADMINACCT and explain why you issued a topic ban on me "on topics involving 'Serbs and Serbia 1900-current' (broadly construed)" and justify your explanation by presenting diffs of my disruptive edits and wikipedia policies I violated. Thank you.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Please notice that WP:ADMINACCT says: "Administrators are expected to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct and administrator actions and to justify them when needed." I understand that you might be busy on other matters, but please be so kind to respond to the above query about your administrator action? Thank you.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 04:16, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Given that it was a community discussion and Drmies was assessing consensus, the onus is all on you. Drmies is under no obligation to reply further now that he's told you what the appeal route is. Take it to WP:AN. Ed [talk] [majestic titan]
          • No. It was Drmies who concluded that "disruption is cetainly there" (diff) and banned me. Per WP:ADMINACCT Drmies is obliged to respond to my above query. I deserve to know why I am banned.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 04:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • As Drmies wrote quite clearly above, "See the list at the ANI discussion. Clearly that list was long enough for the participants." So, read the list at the ANI discussion, and your question will be answered. Drmies also told you how to appeal. Pestering the closer is unwise, in my view. Instead, please move on to edit productively in topic areas unrelated to Serbia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:53, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
              • I think there was no evidence of my disruption at related ANI discussion which justifies my topic ban. I sincerely apologize if I am wrong. Drmies obviously concluded there was and used their admin tool to ban me. I deserve and need to know what was the basis for the conclusion that "disruption is cetainly there" and why Drmies banned me. On the other hand Drmies is obliged to reply to my query above because they are not exempted from WP:ADMINACCT.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 05:22, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The evidence is in the ANI thread, and I accept at least a number of the charges as found in the diffs. I'll point out just a few. This edit was linked to by a defender of yours, and it is not a positive edit (esp. given the removal of sources). On Talk:Đurđevdan uprising you seem indeed to be going around in circles, failing to address in substance, for instance, the point raised about the reliability of the sources you brought up. Future Perfect at Sunrise mentioned "persistently obstructing discussions through stonewalling and refusal to get the point", and that's evidenced on the Durdevdan talk page and on Talk:Pavle Đurišić, which looks and sounds like an echo chamber. In summary, because I am not going to comment on every individual diff (that's not my job), I find the complaint warranted and a topic ban the best solution to the obstructionism you have displayed. I hope you will take some of these comments to heart. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 14:11, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • You presented no evidence at ANI thread for your conclusion "disruption is certainly there" (diff). That is why I asked you to explain why you issued a topic ban on me "on topics involving 'Serbs and Serbia 1900-current' (broadly construed)" and justify your explanation by presenting diffs of my disruptive edits and wikipedia policies I violated (diff).
    • Your reply does not (completely) answer my question:
      1. Why you issued a topic ban on me "on topics involving 'Serbs and Serbia 1900-current' (broadly construed)" - You gave no answer on this part of my query. There is nothing particularly related to Serbia in them (Pavle Đurišić was Montenegro and Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Đurđevdan Uprising was in Intependent State of Croatia in modern Bosnia and Herzegovina, while accusations against me are related to articles about Croats, Muslims, Bosniaks, Jews, Gipsies, Albanians.....). When a couple of editors saw serious accusations against me they stated that I should be indeff banned. If you believe that accusations against me were justified why did you topic ban me only "on topics involving 'Serbs and Serbia 1900-current' (broadly construed)" and not completely?
      2. justify your explanation by presenting diffs of my disruptive edits - You said you will point to a few diffs, but actually presented only one (diff). My one and single revert (based on BRD and WP:CAUTIOUS) of bold addition which violated WP:NPOV and gave undue weight to outdated and/or non-neutral unreliable sources which present some people as particularly bad and other particularly good, based on their ethnicity. I explained my position on the talkpage and in the edit line. The other two involved editors dismissed my position, violated BRD and WP:CAUTIOUS and edit warred to push their position. Did I violated wikipedia policies and joined them in the edit war? No. To conclude: the diff you presented does not justify the topic ban you issued on me. It is actually an evidence of disruption of other two editors who participated at related ANI discussion. I did not ask you to "comment on every individual diff". I asked you to present diffs which are enough to justify the topic ban you issued on me.
      3. what wikipedia policies I violated. You gave no answer on this part of my query.
    • In your comment you pointed to unjustified accusations of other editors involved in numerous disputes with me.
      1. I am sure I don't have to remind you what WP:NPA says about accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence ("Serious accusations require serious evidence."). What evidence Future Perfect at Sunrise (who is also involved in numerous disputes with me) presented at related ANI discussion for their serious accusation against me? None.
      2. Re Đurđevdan uprising, not addressing concerns about reliability of source can not justify topic ban you issued on me. The other editor was concerned about article's not citing reliable sources which refer to the event as uprising. I actually did address that concern when I said to another editor "Why did you write "the article needs to cite those reliable sources that claim that" although article does cite reliable source (Petranović) which emphasizes that this event is known as "Đurđevdan uprising"? On top of that I cited a dozen of sources which refer to the event as "uprising". If you take a closer look at that talkpage you will really find evidence of disruption, but not mine.
      3. Regarding Pavle Đurišić, I think you should take a closer look at article talkpage. For instance (this section) might give you an idea who was actually responsible for persistently obstructing discussions through stonewalling and refusal to get the point. Also, the vast majority of (dozens of) issues I pointed during my review of that article were resolved by reaching a consensus at article's talkpage. Anyway, more or less, the same group of editors involved in disputes with me already got me banned for that article.
    • I hope that my reply is enough for you to realize that you made mistake when you decided to topic ban me?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:Antidiskriminator, it's a little extraordinary that you chose not to respond to charges in the ANI thread, which was open for two weeks (from 6 to 20 July), and instead afterwards you come here to harass the closing admin. I note that you stated, in your single edit to the thread on 10 July, that you would be on holiday and unable to "respond swiftly to queries"[18]; in fact, you didn't respond to them at all, even though you edited other parts of Wikipedia quite diligently in the meantime. For instance, I see 57 edits from you on 13 July alone (mostly small ones, of course). If you have now realised that it would have been a good idea to prioritise differently and defend yourself in the ANI thread, nagging at Drmies in the lawyerly and repetitious way you've been doing above isn't the way to repair the situation. In fact it's becoming disruptive, and I strongly advise you not to post here again, at least not on the same errand. Take it to WP:AN, as Drmies has told you. There is no special format for appealing a topic ban on AN. Just start a new thread under an informative header, such as "Appeal of topic ban for Antidiscriminator" or whatever, and then explain why you think the topic ban should be withdrawn, fully but (in your own best interest) concisely. Bishonen | talk 12:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Deletion review for Bibliography of Aeolian Research A

[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bibliography of Aeolian Research A. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

I was going to wait for your reply at ANI, but since the remaining articles were deleted I went ahead and started the deletion review. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 09:35, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Regardless of whether those silly subpages violate copyright, they don't belong here, and if they're restored on a technicality, it will just create more wheel-spinning to get them deleted through another process. Why would we want to copy and paste other websites to our "website"? Really, sometimes people get hung up on the silliest things here, or maybe it's just me. Now back to my non-life.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:16, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI discussion

[edit]

Thanks for closing that discussion about the Antidiskriminator topic ban. There could have been more input, but the consensus was nevertheless fairly clear. The sole !vote against was from another disruptive user whose behavior I believe really should be examined in the same decision, because the amount of WP:CIVIL violations just in that thread is not supposed to be acceptable. I know ban discussions are inherently toxic, and some level of acrimony is to be expected. But dredging out a 2006 discussion where I clearly showed good faith and using it as a stick to beat me with, and then continuing to escalate that by talking about myself and at least one other user in terms that should really be beneath us - that's really over the top.

If this just goes by, unnoticed, it will continue to leave a really sour taste in my mouth - I do everything right, over the period of decades, and yet there's nothing to stop people from throwing shit at me as they please. Honestly, I would prefer any resolution to this issue than it just being ignored. If you find that I did something to actually deserve this kind of treatment, I want to know about that so that I can fix that. If you need to censure me for provoking the issue, that's much better than nothing, too.

I realize this gives you another task to do with regard to the same difficult discussion. Sorry for the waste of time. I wish it wasn't necessary. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:08, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Joy, I don't want to re-read stuff from 8 years ago any more than you do--probably a lot less. I will say that the comments in that thread stayed on the right side of civility, at least as far as I can tell. I am not familiar with that editor. I do know that you're an administrator and have much experience here, and I really think that the particular exchange between the two of you should have, well, not happened. I mean, I feel a bit silly telling you (you've been here longer than me) to not respond after one or two or three or four back-and-forths, but really, why didn't you?

    If that user is really so problematic, bring it up at ANI or start an RfC/U. I can't do such an investigation for you. Sorry. Drmies (talk) 14:59, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see in the meantime that another person saw that thread, and decided that it was not on the right side of civility. I guess it's a matter of interpretation. As for not feeding the trolls... sigh, I often can't just ignore stuff. On related note, would you recommend that I respond to the continued discussion at User talk:Zvonko or not? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:39, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, indeed Bishonen judged the content of that thread differently. I think there is little you can add to any discussion there (haven't looked at it since my brief comment); the more you can leave that be, the better it is for you as well, lest you be judged as instigating trouble. Appearances are important, and if there is nothing of great substance you can add, stuff that otherwise would fly under the radar, I'd stay out--anyway, it's just an unblock discussion, isn't it? Drmies (talk) 19:16, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17

[edit]

Feel free to baby site for a while, I'm off to go work out at the gym in a half hour, so I won't be around for a few hours. Thanks for pitching in, btw. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 16:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cheez and frigging rice. Eight edit conflicts to check "yes". Drmies (talk) 16:23, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can you imagine trying to do a moderately complex edit on the article if it were unprotected? The fact is, most of the editors disappeared after it was protected, telling me they weren't interested in consensus. You and I have seen a few of these before, haven't we? Sandy Hook and others. This just has the added element of international POV pushing. Other than the ECs, it is actually going pretty smoothly (knock on wood). Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 16:35, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On an unrelated note, I have a rib roast in the oven, twice baked potatoes on the side, cold Budweiser in the fridge (I know Drmies, but I'm poor, white trash) and within an hour, expect to not concern myself with this article for the evening: Wikipedia has driven me to drink, and I haven't even had the chance to thank her. (with apologies to W.C. Fields) Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 18:53, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, I just saw that. I think that's a bad move. They haven't been editing a whole lot and haven't been active in the article or the talk page--if they had, they might realize that this complicates matters considerably. I mean, every single edit to the talk page gives me up to five edit conflicts. Imagine if that happens to the article, with all the edits deleted in between, and with a lot of autoconfirmed editors whose zeal overrides their common sense. Drmies (talk) 19:56, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe this is a time miscalculation, based on the edit summary. Speaking of time calculations, it is Kelapstick leaves for Regina has started. (refresh), so I will not be able to monitor. Will check in from the Maple Leaf Lounge, however. --kelapstick(bainuu) 19:57, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (ec) I know, I was editing it before it was fully protected. There was just no stable version, with things like flags or entries in the See Also section being rolled back and forth dozens of time, sometimes without even an edit summary.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:58, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I probably need to just walk away, I was in the middle of reviewing my reply on why unprotecting was "fucking stupid", and decided to not post. The way it was done was improper and rather arrogant, particularly since he hadn't been dealing with the problems, and now can just walk away, give us the finger and say "deal with it". Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:56, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Before I leave....this article falls under WP:ARBEE, so ANY admin can put it under 1RR just by placing the appropriate notice on the talk page (there is no existing template, you have to make your own) and in the edit page notice. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:59, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He has admitted a miscalculation of time zone as the reason it was early (having thought it was already 24 hours when it was 20). The talk page needs to be massively trimmed down, I am having trouble loading it. --kelapstick(bainuu) 21:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ask him to. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A year and a half after you opposed my RfA

[edit]

I am inviting you to leave me some feedback, 18 months after you opposed my RfA. Do you still believe I am not fit to be an admin? Do you believe I have been able to improve past the concerns you have brought up? Do not be afraid of being too harsh, I am specifically welcoming criticism as I believe it is the best way to improve and I am always looking to learn from my mistakes. I am particularly looking for feedback as to whether you have objections to myself lifting the self-imposed 1RR restriction I had agreed to towards the end of my RfA. If you don't have time to comment, don't fret it either, this is nothing I'll lose sleep over. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:49, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've seen your name go by here and there and have never felt the need to question your decisions or your edits--will that do for now? I cannot find where you agreed to such a restriction. If you want me to give my opinion on the restriction or whether it should be done away with, drop me a link to a diff. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was nothing like a formal agreement, just something that happened during the 'crat chat. To be perfectly honest I anticipate no objections to removing that userbox from my userpage but I felt kinda weird doing it without asking, and tought this might end up a good opportunity to ask for some feedback. Thanks for taking the time to respond. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 20:12, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition

[edit]

Finally, it's very gratifying.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:08, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have thrown the gentleman a line, wisely or not. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:54, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your usual measured, conciliatory style, Yngvadottir. Not mine, but, of course, based on the user's perception of me, I can do whatever I wish. :-) Just so you know, the user did change from citing his own work directly and instead, I assume, cited the sources his work cites. Unfortunately - he removed a lot of the disussion from his talk page - the material was still incredibly undue and written like a student thesis rather than an encyclopedia. What do they teach post grads in Britain, anyway?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:23, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I hope it isn't outing myself to note that I don't know because I got my MA for staying out of prison for a few years and paying £5 ... still and all, we've had a lot of academics come acropper because they haven't edited it down to point - reference - point - reference - further reading. And I need something to keep me from spending the entire rest of the day on Nazi architects. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:34, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What's really odd is that they haven't touched the actual Robin Hood article. --NeilN talk to me 21:55, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A widely acclaimed academic paper... Every. Single. Time. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 22:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see now an IP made a declined change request on the talk page a few days ago. And now we have another new editor showing up. --NeilN talk to me 22:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb23 is only god-like, but we all know that Drmies is a God. I hope my dyslexia didn't transpose any letters. Bgwhite (talk) 22:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Who are the other gods (good thing you didn't call him a dog)? BTW, our friend is now plastering the rant on his talk page on other Wikipedia pages, including Wikipedia talk:Be bold, Wikipedia talk:Who writes Wikipedia and, of course, the last refuge of the desperate Jimbo's talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:40, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Small point: not Jimbo's talk page but Talk:Jimmy Wales. I reverted as it was offtopic. --NeilN talk to me 23:50, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the correction, Neil, but my guess is he meant to do it on Jimbo's talk page but perhaps wasn't aware it existed, so he picked the next best thing.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:45, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm clearly dopey today; I wondered why I couldn't find it on Jimbo's talk page. However, I believe the timeline is incorrect here; he hasn't posted it again since I left my verbose note - in fact a bit before then. Or am I indeed utterly dopey? It's kind of hot where I am. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:21, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, you're correct, I didn't realize it. I'll go apologize for that part, although I doubt it will change his opinion of me as an arch fiend.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:45, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What Screaming scull? Never heard of something so silly. My tastes are narrow: a nice soft bed, a big plate of food and nice walks, that's enough for me to be happy... his mother was not an Alsatian

Forgive me if this urban myth is well known to everyone but me, but I just heard about it, and it's relevant to the tangent here. Three famous orchestra conductors, Herbert von Karajan, Georg Solti, and Karl Boehm get together. Solti says he's been told that his conducting is god-like. Boehm replies that god told him that Boehm was the best conductor, to which von Karajan says, "Funny, I don't recall telling you that."--Bbb23 (talk) 01:53, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I heard a variation of that same joke, but the version I heard involved Jimi Hendrix, Jimmy Page and Eric Clapton. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh, my tastes are so narrow; I've never even heard of Jimmy Page. Just out of curiosity, which one was god?--Bbb23 (talk) 04:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Eric Clapton- graffiti from the early 1970s. Just found the "famous" LP cover of Karajan in a leather jacket with a light shining from his groin- EMI Classic "Ein Heldenleben". I heard of it years ago but never seen it till now (not going to provide a link, as one site is in Japanese and the other's got a server on dial-up). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 05:13, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, "Clapton is God"--but that's overrated. The highest god in that trinity is Hendrix, of course. I didn't really start listening to Led Zeppelin until five or six years ago and I guess I haven't been the same since--but no less an authority than Mandarax can confirm that nothing in the Page or Clapton repertoire is quite like Nine to the Universe, if only for sheer improvisational force. Now, who are Boehm and Solti? And were they Fender or Gibson players? Drmies (talk) 05:34, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Solti is the "Screaming Skull", who did a recording of Wagner's Ring Cycle (It can be truly said that Solti has succeeded in penetrating Wagner's Ring) with John Culshaw. He played Fisher-Price guitars. Karl Böhm- his father was German, his mother was an Alsatian, his axe of choice was a Brazilian rosewood LoPrinzi. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:18, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But Jimmy Page was the sexiest. There is a swampy steamy video for "Satisfaction Guaranteed" by The Firm in which he plays guitar with a beer bottle. Although he has not aged well; he now looks like the Quaker Oats man[[19]]. Fylbecatulous talk 12:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look

[edit]

Drmies, It has been quite some time since I have been on; however, I am back. I am working on finishing an article here for upload. I have gotten help from a friend, and we are doing some clean-up on it now. Please review and comment on the article when you get a chance. Thank you. Doc2234 (talk) 23:16, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17

[edit]

Look - we're both nice people - at least i assume you are, please assume i am. But i'm not agreeing to deleting countries from the 'response' part of the thread - i'm 100% cool if people write offensive content under any country's post - but unless you want to change the subject heading (dumb) idea - then i don't agree with you simply deleting stuff. You haven't convinced me of your view (no offense) - and I get the impression that I haven't convinced you, either - so rather than just deleting stuff, can we please just diplomatically elevate this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil Kessel (talk • contribs)

  • Phil (please sign...), I don't know what you're talking about with "offensive content". I think what you need to realize is that we simply cannot insert every country's response. There is no reason for it, it clutters up the page, it's nothing but cliches. Just because someone prints it doesn't mean we should. So I didn't "just" delete stuff: I deleted judiciously and with an argument, and with at least a couple of editors agreeing with a pruning of the section--and some editors wanted to cut a lot more. You didn't actually present an argument for inclusion, only that "you can't just delete stuff", which suggests that anything goes. But we need commentary to be relevant. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 13:51, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Best known for IP

[edit]

Thanks for your comments. I checked back through the history of wind wave and discovered apart from two brief expletives, the IP made a pretty solid argument for his edit, and I was a bit annoyed that nobody else had actually fixed up the prose after the protection, which I've now done. I guess having heard "he started it", "no I didn't" from the kids I'm just more tolerant of these sorts of shenanigans these days. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:49, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks Ritchie. As I tried to indicate I'm a bit torn. Too many of their good edits were simply reverted, as if the source (IP/vandal/whatever) of the edit is enough to damn it. I've slummed as an IP and am frequently astonished at the response one gets from some of the "vandal fighters". Also, I'd note that on Ian Gow there is no more disruption since, in my opinion, the proper course was followed. It didn't go the IP's way (or mine), but it proved the end of it. And in my case it's still "she started, no she did"--the little boy is beginning to assert the assholishness that runs in the family, though. I blame their mother, of course. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 17:22, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't edited as an IP since I got this account, when Wikipedia was very different and nobody minded edits without references (I think this is me). I do patrol CSDs and AfDs, where new editors get slammed regularly without thought, and call out things when I can - the University of Michigan Men's Glee Club being my ultimate "stick it to the deletionists" going from AfD to GA to DYK. I think the LTA case for this guy was worth opening because when you switch IPs your good and bad edits get forgotten - if you took an article from start to B class, nobody will remember or even believe you, so it's worth getting it all together. And I'll mention no names, but some people who edit warred in the cases on that page should be given a serious amount of sea food - my kids do try on passive aggressiveness and apologies that aren't (eg: "I'm sorry I accused you, but you were the last person I saw with the remote control so you must have nicked it"), and we get wise to it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, you're both a waste of space but someone thoughtfully removed the message per WP:DENY. WCMemail 14:11, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They made Festina affair a slightly less terrible article. Drmies (talk) 14:57, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My comment noted much of their editing is an improvement. Whether you revert for good or bad reasons, whether you explain yourself or not, whether you treat him well or not, the response is to call you a cunt. I dare say that the dilligence with which some people display in removing his edits is down to being pissed off with the guy due to the way he responds. And for the record I didn't do that but I sure as hell felt like it. The whinging about IP persecution is a fig leaf for being a knob. WCMemail 15:32, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Marshall

[edit]

Thanks for your edits to try and clean up the tripe around the drink driving charge. I don't suppose you feel like dropping by the talk page - there's an editor insistent on claiming that it gave him a criminal conviction in the absence of any reliable source for it. The Drover's Wife (talk) 20:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please

[edit]
J G Linneman Trompe l'oeil

Can you please delete this Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Le Moulin de la Galette.jpg ? I am decided to witdraw it but someone is editwarring with me and won't let me do that. I don't want to be harrased because I don't allow myself be harrased. It is my nomination, I can witdraw it if I decide that. If I wan't to remove it it is not up to the other editor to revert me. Hafspajen (talk) 22:31, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry Hafspajen, I don't know how that works. In other projects you can't simply delete something, you can only close it. Can't you just write NOMINATION WITHDRAWN in black ink all over it? Drmies (talk) 23:10, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know how FPC works, but at FAC you simply post a note at the review saying that you want the nomination to be withdrawn. Eric Corbett 23:45, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, posted it. Before i removed it, but it is not witdrawn. An editor lately was popping up there like for a couple of weeks ago and making things a bit difficult - most of the time for me. All my nominations look like ten-to five times as long as any other noms -and some comments started to be uncivil, and some of it is just looking for nonexisting faults, faults that are not really faults and so on, like like this one. I decided that I will not let this one turn into a new circus. OK, then he is reverting me. And I am getting reverted, as you can se att the project history.
  • Renoir and the fading of carmine lake. I've got some inkjet prints from the 1980s on display that have remained relatively unfaded (the inks would fade within hours in direct sunlight). I think this is because the prints are pressed up against the glass, and oxygen can't get at them. Left a commission bid on that painting- the photos I took with my phone don't show the vibrancy of the yellows. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:35, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Needing your help at the PXE page.

[edit]

Hello I'm re-starting my work in the PXE page; job commitments forced me to take some time off from the PXE page.

I'm finding some "bot" Lowercase sigmabot III have erased yesterday from the talk page important information about the work premises for the PXE page. This bot also erased the references to the copyright violations incurred by the project ERPXE and the project was again spamming the page. I have erased the project link but Matthiaspaul put it back yesterday.

It is not my idea starting an editing war, I'd like to work based on the already achieved consensus. Could you please help me a bit with the internal issues? Thanks a lot

213.37.84.214 (talk)

Some update; the bot owner helped; the template subst:DNAU prevents bot archival, I have added the template but "now" I'm facing Dsimic manually erasing the same content from the talk page arguing Wikipedia:Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass. I appreciate it if you can take a quick look. Sorry for bothering you. 213.37.84.214 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 08:24, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies!

[edit]

It's been a while since I've bothered you with something to fix or discuss, but I see you have enough on your hands already! Thanks for giving me thanks, of course. I'm currently copy-editing New Imperialism for fun (yes, you read that right, I can't even believe I typed that out...), and happened upon this sentence in the section about the Dutch East Indies: Being one of the smallest nations in the world, it was in fact impossible for the Netherlands to even attempt to establish a typical settler colony. (unsourced, of course). I'm contemplating changing it to Being one of the smaller, less populated nations in the world, it was in fact impossible for the Netherlands to even attempt to establish a typical settler colony. (bolding just to emphasize changes here), but I wonder if I should just remove it because it's kind of irrelevant. And since I hear you're Dutch, maybe you have a suggestion? (Or, want to push a POV? Since you'd definitely have a COI. Ha!) No worries if you don't care at all. Ansh666 14:36, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My gosh, that was painful, much of that article reads like a "politically-correct" high school research essay, and is horribly sourced to boot. (Surprise, the decent sections have much better sourcing.) Left more tags than were there before, even after clearing paragraphs full of {{cn}}s (one at the end is good enough, sigh). Why did I ever think this was going to be fun? *complain complain* Sorry, just needed to rant a bit... Ansh666 15:19, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obviously a candidate to be removed. Logical, but I don't recall reading such a claim in any sources I've consulted (and it wasn't just the Dutch; very few countries seem to have used the "settler" method in South-East Asia; probably too populated already). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:12, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, removed, since in general I don't have the time or patience (well, ok, I'm on typhoon vacation, so maybe I've got a bit of time) to find sources, and if Crisco hasn't I don't think I have a chance. Thanks! Ansh666 03:14, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents posting on Allen750

[edit]
File:Psychokinesis, resaerch on Stan Lee's Superhumans Mind Force (Hellion).jpg

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Requesting opinion on NPOV report

[edit]

I really appreciated your participation in the discussion earlier today. While I'm bugging you, would you mind taking a look at this NPOV report I just wrote up? I'd love to hear your opinion.

If there's another experienced editor you think would be better able to examine this, please let me know! Thanks! FekketCantenel (talk) 00:45, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like I started a bit of a fire! Whether I get in trouble or not, I wanted to thank you so much for all the revisions I see you making, your advice, and bringing this to the attention of experts. I hope I get to learn more from you in the future! FekketCantenel (talk) 01:55, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, sometimes you get more than you bargained for. I left a long note at the noticeboard. Let me just say that I think your instincts are correct, and you were certainly correct about the tone and content of those articles. Thanks for bringing it to attention, Drmies (talk) 02:09, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Needing your help at the PXE page.

[edit]

Hello, unusual work commitments have kept me away from the PXE page for a while . Now I'm back and I have started working editing the page content; for a while the page will show several changes, please consider it is a work in progress.

My problem: There's a user/bot (Lowercase sigmabot III) that have deleted from the PXE talk page key information: specifically the topic that proved ERPXE repeated copyrights violations, and the link to that project was again added by 94.159.160.82 on January; as you can see the only contribution from this user was adding the project ERPXE reference back and he got away with that w/o problem. I have restored the missing information and I have removed the offending link before start editing the page and now I see that Lowercase sigmabot III every night erases virtually the whole content of the PXE talk page. The PXE talk page has the agreed bases (PXE page working premises) for the editing that I'm doing now, it also contains valuable discussions that should stay on the page to avoid re-discussing old topics. I appreciate very much if you or NE Ent could help me stopping Lowercase sigmabot III from disrupting the PXE talk page every night. I already left a message in his talk page but he has a sign saying "This user replies where he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect." I think probably you guys have better ways to deal with this issue. Thanks a lot for your help

213.37.84.214 (talk)

  • You unarchived, and then it archived again because you didn't follow Σ's instructions. But that's not the point anyway: it's in the archives. Nothing was ever missing. I gave the links to the archives on the talk page, and they are in fact listed on the talk page already--but this is not the most important issue. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I restored the topics and I did follow Σ's instructions today as soon as I saw them; it seems the thing is back to normal now, thanks for your help 213.37.84.214 (talk)

"masked" IP's on Talk Pages?

[edit]

Not sure who to address this to - several commentators on the TP's for the Israeli ground offensive and the downed Malaysian jet have no User ID or IP address following their comments - this makes it very difficult to address the correct editor for comment replies, etc. Is this a known bug currently being looked at for Wikipedia? Can you point me in the right direction to put in a complaint? Thanks. HammerFilmFan (talk) 09:01, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 has attracted several inexperienced editors who are not signing their comments by adding four tilde characters. Normally, User:SineBot would notice and add the signature, but I saw mention that SineBot is currently not operating. A manual fix is to add {{unsigned}} but that requires a fair bit of effort. Johnuniq (talk) 11:08, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Johnuniq. Yes, I've noticed that too, and it's hard to sign for someone given the enormous amount of comments made there, and then of course there's the edit conflicts. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:37, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well...

[edit]
Vanitatum vanitas

Returned, and why the fuck did i return? To be absolutely eaten alive with insults and accusations (please see the WP:FOOTY discussion titled "Sergio Busquets and Míchel Salgado").

This brings me to this small request: can you help me WP:VANISH my wikifriend? I have followed the instructions at the proper page, but fell miserably short (as always with technicalities), please lend a hand.

Sincerely, kindest regards --AL (talk) 21:32, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

:( Well, as a 'crat, I can do this for you; the usual way to request a courtesy vanishing is actually to email the bureaucrat mailing list via Special:EmailUser/Bureaucrats, but now that you've requested it here, it's not really necessary. Let me just make sure, though: are you sure this is what you want? It's not really a light step, and is meant to be permanent; it involves me renaming your account to something random, so that it might be difficult for you to log in again. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:39, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, please, 100% sure, that WP:FOOTY discussion left me on the verge of literal tears (also follow up the discussion at Panhead2014's page for more "fun"). But, before you do, answer this question please: my account will be renamed, but with the contents it had? I thought "vanish" meant that, remove the userpage, the talkpage (when possible) and the list of contributions. Puzzling, please reply before i give you the "Go" signal --AL (talk) 22:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up: don't worry when you say "...so that it might be difficult for you to log in again.", when i vanish is to NEVER enter the site again, not even as a reader. Keep it up --AL (talk) 22:06, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What will happen is that your contributions will remain, but they will be reattributed to the new, random username, rather than your own. (So, any edits you made will show up in the edit history page as having been made by, say, "Vanished user 12345" rather than "Always Learning", as they are now. Your user page, and any subpages, will be deleted, and your talk page will be blanked (it can be deleted entirely if necessary, but it usually isn't). Your signature on talk page comments won't change, though, as there's no way to go through and change them all. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:29, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • AL, are you sure sure? And what am I going to do when I get to the Guadiana bridge, and it's night and it's raining and I'm all alone--I don't even have your number! But more to the point: you are, apparently, being cast in a poor light by one editor, just one--and you have other editors and an admin (a snowman, even) backing you up in terms of content. That one editor has a talk page full of warnings, and they don't even have a hundred edits. Why let yourself be chased off by someone like that? I could have done something for you, maybe, before all this, and the snowman isn't the worst person in the world. So take a moment to think about it-- Drmies (talk) 22:56, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for your kind words, as always! I don't have a phone number, more bad news from this guy man :) I was destined to leave WP more than i was to enter it, funny it took me this long to do it, i only had fun for oh, let's say, the first year or not even that, i'm in my EIGHTH.

Mies and/or Writ, yes i am "sure sure", ready when you are, lights out on me please. I would like to have my talkpage also destroyed entirely but, if it's too much trouble and since it's not all that customary, then don't bother.

Kind regards to you both (and lots of other great mensch, sorry for "harassing" you :)) --AL (talk) 23:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All right then; I'm very sorry to see you go, but I can't say that you should stick around a place where you don't want to be just for our sake. We'll miss you! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 23:31, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thanks WK, I suppose. I see that you just deleted his old talk page as well. VASCO was a fun guy. Passionate about football, and quite passionate also about making those articles as good as they could be. I'm sure it would have been great to have a couple of beers with him and lament politics and mankind. He's from Portugal, that's no secret I suppose, and I hope that the economy turns around on him and his countrymen and -women. Who knows, we might see him again. AL, you know there's always a cold one for you, though with your luck it'll probably be a Heineken, haha. All the best, old pal, vaya con dios. Drmies (talk) 00:53, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Uhm... did this editor just leave over another Footy situation? Man....that is rather sad. I hope they return. We need editors in this area that are as dedicated as Drmies states them to be. I raise my wine glass to them (can't drink beer...gout).--Mark Miller (talk) 01:04, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yep, Mr. Miller (nice to "meet" you by the way), and this time i'm not fucking around. For more details ask User:Panhead2014, i am sure he'll tell you what a horrible editor (maybe even a horrible person, without knowing jack about me) i am. WP has no place for stuck up editors like me who also have "issues", and my English is also not all that good to begin with. Fuck me!

Mark, Mies, Writ, all the best for you, final words, take care from Vaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasco! --84.90.219.128 (talk) 01:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was only restoring the correct content which Panhead insisted in remove. I did not want to enter in an edit war, but his insistent reverts left me without options. I'm deeply sorry about that, and this will never repeat. Thanks, MYS77 ✉ 01:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, if the guy returns (I'm pretty sure he will, and with all the "voracity") with the same approach, I'll contact you and/or Snowman. Thanks, MYS77 ✉ 02:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't understand your last message in Gringo's page. Or I'm lost in the conversation, or you had a misunderstanding with the Portuguese. I'll explain what I told him below:
I said that only due to a crazy guy we were almost dumped out as well, and we had to be careful with these type of users. Also, I said that you asked me to call the admins when the situation reaches this point instead of "warring".
Regards, MYS77 ✉ 11:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It was an attempt at a joke to prove how bad my Portuguese was. And AL hated Ronaldo... Drmies (talk) 14:46, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sorry about that. AL hated him indeed, and after a little conversation with him I have a question to you. An intro has to contain a reference in it, or is not obligatory? Because the reference to Salgado looks poor, when considering that BDFutbol is a link. Cheers, MYS77 ✉ 15:21, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Better phrased if i may: there is a WP guideline that states that if an introduction does not contain a ref it is not wrong, given that the intro is a summary to the "real" contents (in the case of football CLUB CAREER, INT.CAREER, HONOURS, etc), and those contain (or should at least) references. Am i in the right? --84.90.219.128 (talk) 15:45, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't have the time to look up WP:LEAD to cite it, but the gist of it is that yes, the lead can contain information that is not cited there but is properly cited later on in the text. I wish Vasco was still here; I could tell him that I dreamed that Ronaldo and I were walking hand in hand along the Copacabana. Drmies (talk) 20:23, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Don't worry, it'll get better with the proper medication ;) Now I'm off (dunno if forever, but for a very long time), just going to convey your answer to MYS77. Besties! --84.90.219.128 (talk) 22:25, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies/Archive_70&oldid=1160940903"