Jump to content

User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz/Archive 30

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25←Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31Archive 32→Archive 35

Hacks

Kiefer...I didn't say "corporate hacks" in the deletion discussion...I mentioned it on Jimbo's yap page. I don't think this website should endorse, assist, even encourage those editors or companies to openly edit our articles...hence my opposition at the Afd...which is related but a tad different than the comment at made at Jimbo~'s sidebar.MONGO 16:51, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi MONGO!
Please accept my apologies if I mis-represented you. I think I said something similar on Wales's page and may have just copied it.
Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:16, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh no, I said it...just not over the precise same thing...no biggie.--MONGO 00:22, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Virtue, true rhetoric, and civility

Warning signs of excessive editing are sometimes apparent, for me and others.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Extended content

My horses are resting ...

... for now at least.[1] Malleus Fatuorum 18:30, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll follow you into the breach, once more, per usual! :)
Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:56, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
In the meantime, do you have any idea why the serial supporters of underage admins like Newyorkbrad remain at liberty? He's obviously a very anodyne character, but he's nevertheless full of shit. Malleus Fatuorum 22:06, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Malleus,
We all are full of shit. ;D
That said, both of you should have precise appraisals of each other's contributions to the project; such appraisals would be substantially higher than either of you have expressed lately.
It is difficult to change adults' behavior, and so greater tolerance needs to exist for the peculariarities of adult contributors. Brad has made sufficient self-deprecatory comments about his manner of writing that I have trouble finding his smoothness irritating, even when I disagree with him. I was impressed when he stopped the DYK proposal about failed blowjob attempts by Sexy Cora with a precise five-finger exploding heart tap suggestion that such a hook wasn't the best use of Wikipedia's Main Page; similarly, he pointed out an unwarranted assumption I made with Dylan620's RfA, and let me do the corrections and apologies rather than pushing me to take the corrective action. A stiletto hand-shake is more graceful than a Claymore. (21:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC))
I cannot remember any case where Brad has made any difference in the outcome of an RfA. RfA has a lot of problems, but Brad is not one of them.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:06, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps you've forgotten Newyorkbrad's recent vote to have me banned, because it wouldn't be right if only one arbitrator took that position? Can you find any moral footing in that? And have you actually looked at Newyorkbrad's voting pattern? Malleus Fatuorum 00:13, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
I'll have to review the ArbCom case, Malleus. I'm tired. I was not happy with any aspect of that case, and in particular I had expected more of NYB than to endorse such a misuse of "disruptive", even if all the other kids were jumping off that bridge. Or are you referring to the discussion before the ArbCom case? (I didn't follow the events a few months before your case.)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:23, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Don't take the trouble. It was a travesty, and Newyorkbrad played his full part in it. Malleus Fatuorum 00:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
I looked at the case again. At least they did say that your editing was not disruptive (or perhaps slithered away with "falls short of being disruptive") in the findings section, before wantonly misusing "disruptive" to justify banning you from Talk:RfA. Please link me to the previous discussion at ArbCom, when the case was not accepted. I had trouble finding it at the later travesty.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:43, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
You mean this? That arose because the guardians of the 9/11 article didn't like being told it was shit (or it might have been crap, can't remember, but you get the idea). Malleus Fatuorum 20:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
I just checked; I called it shit and crap. Malleus Fatuorum 21:06, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
You are seldom at a loss for words! ;)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Your input would be really appreciated

... over at the Civility, clear, plain and simple sandbox. Pesky (talk) 09:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

A civility policy needs to be written to empower administrative action. This is not a priority for me.
A statement of purpose would be more my style. We are here to write an encyclopedia. All our actions are to be judged in so far as they contribute to that goal.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:28, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Our rules need be no more complicated than the rules at summer camp. There are two kinds of people, nice ones and mean ones; if you want to stay, you have to be or work on becoming a nice one. We have activities as part of our program. Campers can ask their cabin-leaders for advice at almost any time. However, campers should respect that counselors and the camp directors have a lot of work to do, and should think before speaking (to avoid speaking to disrupt the group from its activity or draw attention to themselves rather than the group's activities).
The contentious applications of civility have to do with a camper overhearing the camp director chastise another camper for coming into the camp office and disrupting the director's work, and the camper exclaiming, "But you have to be nice!". At summer camp, the second camper would be quickly told the facts of life; at WP, the second camper causes a headache at ANI, too often: At least, my favorite explanations---the explanations of adults at ANI that there is work to be done and that the camp director has the authority to chastise a camper who is disrupting his work and wasting his time---seem to be forgotten at RfCs and ArbCom evidence.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Why is the world not simple? Pesky (talk) 13:35, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Comments, please!

On this :D Pesky (talk) 09:55, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I tried but was largely reverted by Wikidemon, who likes to avoid awkwardness and disagreement, while being able to block without consequences.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:29, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Keep trying! We can do something here. Pesky (talk) 09:04, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I want you!

... on this team at WT:CIV. You would have been one of my hand-picked team members if I had been picking a team for this, for many reasons. Please bear with us, join in, and let's get something sensible and workable (and fair!) in place, instead of the impolite adjectives mess that's been causing such a lot of hassle. Megahugglesnugglecuddles ... Pesky (talk) 10:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

King Crimson and Discipline Global Mobile

DYK nomination seeks reviewer

  • Thanks for thinking of me Kiefer; however, I no longer get involved in DYK. My memory of it, though, was that it was fairly easy to get an article listed. You nominate it, and then leave it. Provided you have met the criteria, it gets listed, and there are rarely any questions or extra work to do. Good luck! SilkTork ✔Tea time 16:27, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
You are right, of course.
I thought with 10 KC edits, you might find it fun. :)
Now that I think of it, I probably didn't need to write Santa Claus either, because I met the criteria then too!
Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Alternative hooks

(Re MF talk) The second part of my suggestion is better than my proposed clause in the middle. I didn't like "insist" but my rewording went too far in the other direction... Geometry guy 22:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Geometry guy!
"Insist" is too strong, I agree. The article's "eschew" sounds like the writing of a student who has been preparing for SATs. We can do better!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

A knotwork, a design often associated with Celtic knots. The outer design is a a circle, surrounding what appears to be a triangle surrounded by a Celtic knot at first glance. Closer inspection of the triangle reveals that it is in fact an organic part of the inner knot, which seems to have two continuous segments linked by knots. At first glance, the knotwork appears to be symmetric; closer inspection reveals that the right-hand knots seem to be the reverse of the left-hand knots and there are are small differences among the "twin nots"; the right and left hands of the design have variations, much as our right and left hands have subtle distinctions. The design is not symmetric with respect to 120 degree rotations: The center of the pseudo-triangle is above the center of the surrounding circle, but visual balance is maintained by extra knots below the lower pseudo–line-segment. The background is crimson.

  • ... that the music company Discipline Global Mobile prefers has the policy that copyrights belong to artists and consequently does not own even its corporate logo (pictured)?
The latest nomination benefits from the felicitous phrasing of Geometry guy.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Discipline Global Mobile

Hello! Your submission of Discipline Global Mobile at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that 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! Ishtar456 (talk) 23:27, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ishtar456!
Thanks for the notification and for your attention to the responses of Geometry guy and Silver seren. who were the champions of DGM during my slumber.
Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


Orphaned non-free image File:Discipline Global Mobile logo.gif

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, Skier Dude.
Steve Ball has generously donated a finer image, with a CC 3.0 BY SA license, so this coarser fair-use image may be deleted.
Thanks!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguations

SKU and other DGM stuff

Extended content
Disambiguation link notification for March 12

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Discipline Global Mobile (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Sku
Guitar Craft (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Sku
International Standard Music Number (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Sku
Robert Fripp (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Sku

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Sock it to me, DPL bot! Sock it to me!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:33, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Progressive rock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Wave (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:59, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Fixed  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:07, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Album covers

Balefire or Puff the Magic Dragon: Revision deletion

Categories of album covers
Admins don't want to rev-delete 2 categories

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

{{Admin help}}

My new categories of album covers,

functioned as galleries of "fair use" images, contrary to the spirit of WP:Fair use (and perhaps violating copyright).

Please revision-delete the history of those pages.

Thanks!

Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:17, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

No need - some kind editor (beat me to it...) has added the "No Gallery" tag - thus the images do not display, and therefore do not cause a problem with Fair use. A text list of links is perfectly acceptable.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick arrival, but ...
the two pages' histories each display a gallery [2] [3], so trespassing against our fair-use policy and may violate copyright law. Thus, I think that a revision deletion is needed.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:16, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
No. The update of the cat to remove a NFU image is sufficient, in the same way that we would remove a NFU image from an article but not go so far as to revdel the entire history that had the image. --Stephen 03:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Steven,
Did you examine the history? The RevDeletes would remove roughly two edits by me, and none by anybody else. This is very different than revdeleting an article history, which would destroy the record of valuable contributions etc.
I noted your response at the talk page for copyright problems, where I asked for rev delete.
Thanks,
Yes, I looked at the history. There was nothing that met the criteria at Wikipedia:Revision deletion#Criteria for redaction. And, noting your comments at the copyright problems talk page, your request for administration help did not ask that I identify myself as a copyright expert or otherwise, therefore you shouldn't make any assumptions in that regard. --Stephen 05:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Stephen!
Thanks for your response. However, you seem to have skipped the first criterion, which endorses removal of copyrighted material.
My comment on the talk page for copyright problems merely states that you did not identify yourself as having any particular qualifications regarding copyright and neither drew a conclusion nor invited anybody else to think.
Please do not ask a statistician to commit the base rate fallacy. :)
Thanks,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
I skipped no criteria. You are confusing removing revisions that contain textual copyright violations with removing revisions that include NFU images. --Stephen 12:35, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Stephen,
Our policy is to avoid displaying galleries of art, because such galleries violate the "fair use" policy and copyright law.
A violation of our policy appears in the page histories. Deal with it.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:41, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

P J Crook

Thanks for the kind words. I have been somewhat of an advocate for acknowledging album cover artists, and tried to petition to have the template infobox album include a line for cover artist (it was rejected). i have created categories for both the fair use images of albums by artist, and for the albums themselves, as you can see with Category:Albums with cover art by Mati Klarwein. I like the idea of linking the fair use image categories and album categories in this manner, and will likely create such a category for king crimson albums with covers by her. ive also done this for book jacket artists, such as Category:Book covers by Richard M. Powers. I feel your category for Crook is appropriate, and said so at the proposal discussion. Seriously, though, dont worry so much about any possible bad/ignorant intent from other editors (which i dont see). stating your case and refuting others cases with examples, rationales, should be enough. wikipeace.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 21:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello!
Crook is an interesting case. I suppose her other art should be covered, but her only mention is in the KC articles.
My time constraints and unmet sleep needs made me irritable the last few days. I don't doubt that the efforts at categorizing are well intentioned, but I think that the "don't template the regulars" advice should guide Twinkle-happy gnomes. They should have to check a box stating that they have read the lede of an article before they suggest moving articles and recategorizing things; they should be pushed to write informative edit summaries and they should be pushed to write on user talk pages, by Twinkle probably.
Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:18, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:King Crimson album covers by P J Crook

After passing the virtuous pagans, we descend ever deeper

:Knowledge is a deadly friend

If no one sets the rules.
The fate of all mankind I see
Is in the hands of fools.
— "Epitaph" by King Crimson

Category:King Crimson album covers by P J Crook, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Category deletion discussions must add zing to your day, but are not worth my time.
Instead of having one informative category, we have two vague categories. We have no examples of P J Crook's art except the King Crimson covers.
Now this waste of time is over.
 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:41, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Famous last words.... Boy was I wrong!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Extended content
Of course, Koafv/Justin has proposed eliminating my beloved epigraph template. "Of course, you know that this means war!"  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
[Pesky hums nice chord progression from Court of the Crimson King]. Ahhh, nostalgia ... Pesky (talk) 21:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Peter Sinfield's out-Morrisseying Epitaph lyrics and lyricism first wowed me. Then the sonic boom of 21st Century Schizoid Man knocked the world on its butt. Then the Fripp--Belew duets and Belew's Byrne-ultimatum lyrics blew my mind. Pretty heady stuff to play while jogging (for soccer).  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:37, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
It's the sub-constructions within the music itself that really make my spine tingle. Still – even after all those years. (Eeeek! just counted 'em up ...... God, I feel old! I was about seven years younger than my youngest son is, now!) And, of course, Greg Lake was just bloody gorgeous ... Pesky (talk) 22:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
(For your eyes only)
If we continue this conversation, I shall paraphrase Clarence Worley discussing Elvis Pressley, or Ray Davies singing about David Watts (not Charlie Watts, but perhaps Bill Bruford). But I would not be fulfilling the office of friendship by neglecting to suggest that you peak at Robert Fripp's instrument.... ;p
ROFL,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:17, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I peeked, but didn't peak ;P Pesky (talk) 09:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Cursed homonyms! I get so little practice with English spelling in northern Midgård.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:19, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
roflmfao! Give my regårds to Fenrir when next you see him; he's almost "family", so you will be quite safe ;P Pesky (talk) 09:34, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
It would be inappropriate to make reference to the Midgård serpent.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:36, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Serpentia Midgårdia monoculis? Pesky (talk) 11:23, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:P. J. Crook

Category:P. J. Crook, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Look, Koafv!
Stop wasting time with these idiotic noticeboard discussions. Just propose a re-name and ask for assent, and do it. Less discussion and less waste of time. Go to the noticeboard only if you cannot get consensus.
Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:46, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
For comparison, examine Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Core Collection albums in The Penguin Guide to Jazz, which concerns a novel case that deserves community discussion. Please strive to restrict the noticeboards and templating to (a) failure to reach consensus through user's talk-page discussions or (b) novel cases that deserve deliberation by the experts. Thanks!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:13, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Category:P J Crook
BLP-names BLP-schnames

Category:P J Crook, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:35, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Please stop Honestly, will you please read WP:CAT, WP:CFD, and WP:CIVIL. Please. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:36, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Koavf, you proposed moving a category to the wrong name, which suggests that you did not read the lede before recategorizing it. You seem to recategorize 3 articles per minute, a rate that suggests that you are either a speed reader or an ungoverned twinkler. Do you read the ledes at least? Will you read the ledes in the future?
 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Koafv,
If you want to continue playing your little games on Wikipedia, I suggest you never use that vandal template on me or another editor again.
Your functioning must have been lower than usual for you to invite any administrator to nuke all my contributions. Please stay away from me.
Also, stay away from articles that I edit. You have enough trouble with reading the name of a living artist in the lede of an article, without as a renaissance man and polymath correcting my errors on mathematical articles I've developed. What fact do you think should be added to the epigraph article to bring it into start status? Semilattice properties? Cosmic convergence? 16:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Category:Art by P J Crook

Category:Art by P J Crook, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:38, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Vandal-Schmandal, nuke-schmuke
Seriously, stop it

WP:CIVIL If you don't stop stuff like this then I'm going to get an admin involved. I honestly don't care if you don't like me, but you're being inappropriate. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:57, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Justin, you called KW a vandal! It's not really appropriate to accuse others of incivility, under those circumstances! Pesky (talk) 20:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Actually, he used a vandal template that invited any administrator to "nuke" all of my Wikipedia contributions. He's lucky that Ceoil didn't jump out of his computer's keyboard and slug him!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:52, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I suggest that you apologise for your sanctimonious hypocrisy Justin, else it may be you who finds himself in hot water. Malleus Fatuorum 20:17, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Pot, meet Kettle. Altering someone else's talk page comments is not civil; however, neither is calling an established editor with whom you have a content dispute a vandal. LadyofShalott 20:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

::Nobody asked you, LadyofShalott.

This is the dangerous template he left, whose nuke button I leave for you to test:
{{Vandal|LadyofShalott}}
Please don't remove it without redacting your stupid "civil" remark.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 01:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC) 01:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Kiefer, I think you possibly misunderstood Lady of Shalott here. Take 'civil' as 'politesse' rather than WP:CIVIL and you get closer to it. Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:16, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen, I trust your judgment more than mine lying under the threat of a nuclear strike, and have struck my irritated (and already redacted to be less hysterical and asinine myself) comment. Thanks for your kindness,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 01:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I can understand why you are absolutely bloody furious. If it's any consolation, the Nuke tool requires an admin to use it, and only picks contributions out of recent changes. Even so, it was completely out of order. Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
That explanation does help me to relax. I trust that the nuclear option requires some affirmation ("Are you certain that ...?") and may be quickly reversed in case of mistakes.
(Now I understand why an administrator was able to remove a vandal's work last year in a minute, after I had spent 15 minutes going through part of his vandalism.) :)
KW needs to sleep.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 01:40, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Elen is correct in her interpretation. Thank you for your redaction, Kiefer. LadyofShalott 02:15, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Piping the link from "vandal" to "Kiefer Wolfowitz" seems way out of line to me. I don't know about the specific dispute and don't care to learn. I recommend basic civility to all editors, even to my friends. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:45, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
I wouldn't have cared if I were called a vandal, given the source, and certainly would have cared less about being called a vandal than about his fixation with reinserting periods into the name of the artist P J Crook, which seems slovenly and willfully disrespectful to a nice painter.
Koafv/Justin did not just link me to a discussion of vandalism, which would have been an egregious, base and baseless personal attack. He used some vandal-template that invited an administrator to "nuke" all of my Wikipedia contributions, which is about the most asinine and hysterical action I can imagine here.
 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:46, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Justin, your keyboard must be faulty, because I can't see any other reason for you to use {{vandal}} instead of {{userlinks}}Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:26, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Seriously, that would have got me into one of my wanting-to-hurl-people-violently-about-the-room moods, so I can barely imagine what it must have done to you! But here's a nice beer for you :D Pesky (talk) 07:16, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
A kitten for you!

Enjoy the rest of the day.

In ictu oculi (talk) 16:10, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi In ictu oculi!
Thanks for the peaceful note and good wishes.
I shall be happy to run across you in the future, although I pray not where the "religious issue" of periods in names divides us, particularly after I have seen you leave a similar kitten on Piotrus's page. Piotrus is a mensch's mensch, whom I've forgiven for his introduction of Foucaldian discourse analysis into WP and the newspaper.
Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:53, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Rock albums by British−American artists

Category:Rock albums by British−American artists, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Justin, you seem to be turning up here an awful lot with these things. Is this just pure coincidence, or something more sinister? Pesky (talk) 21:29, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
@Justin/Koafv,
Thanks for the polite message.
@TPC,
Justin does a lot of work on categories, and so he leaves messages on a lot of editors' pages.
I was irritated with what I thought was a dogmatic and disrespectful attitude towards the BLP periodization (Roger J-B Wets and P J Crook), but I've seen that Jason has some expertise and does get his hands dirty properly categorizing things. (I probably should not edit when I've been traveling and helping people move during the weekend before a week of deadlines: I was pretty crabby a few days ago.) So my security forces have been told just to follow Koafv around, but not to intervene and certainly to use no force. ;)
I would favor scrapping UK and American rock categories, as essentially being non-informative. Lists of bands in other countries may be interesting. Pigeonholing King Crimson or The Pretenders as "English" or "British--American" seems like a distraction of no interest to anybody.
I was glad to read that you have an appointment scheduled. If I were you, I might have tried psychic surgery or slept beneath a crystal pyramid to get some relief. Good luck!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I probably don't notice how much Justin gets around, as I don't watch vast numbers of talk pages (despite what my watchlist tells me!), and I hardly ever get involved in XfD discussions or cat. discussions, ever. So I suppose I was just doing that quasi-maternal thing (sorry, can't help it, comes of having had kids, grandkids, nurturing livestock, and all that! I'm afraid it's a bit ingrained after so many decades!) It's reassuring to know that Justin isn't picking on you, particularly. I had gathered that you'd been a bit crabby (can't think how I noticed, lol!) Just to freak you out nicely, you remember that little discussion you and I had about waveforms and so on? – I was kinda expecting another bout of crabbiness around now ... ;P I would certainly have been burned / hanged as a witch not long ago! Unless, of course, I'd made myself utterly irreplaceable in my local community to the extent where nothing would have tempted them to get rid of me. Sometimes I see what you've written, and am an unsure whether you should be given a chill pill, one of these from Tesco!, some nice 'shrooms-on-toast, Forest-style, or whether the eight-foot plaited leather bull-whip, applied judiciously, would be better! All done with great affection, of course. And the black leather gear, thigh-length boots, and dominatrix evil grin ;P Pesky (talk) 12:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I get tired of reading bullshit on an encyclopedia. If I point out a falsehood, I get blue links to civility and threats of dire consequences, e.g. civility blocks; the bullshitters swaddling clothes.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:19, 16 March 2012 (UTC) Have J. C. 37's misunderstandings of WP:NPA, WP:Civility, WP:Blocking moved from fatuous bluster to wrongful blocks?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:50, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I hope I'm not too tiresome for you! It's not the pointing-out-of-falsehoods which is likely to make people splat you with links, so much as the adding of descriptors like "fatuous". One of my suggestions over at WT:CIV is "Someone may very well be an idiot. But telling them so is neither going to increase their intelligence nor improve your ability to communicate with them."

I'm making a wild guesstimate as to the region of your IQ (or whichever other measurement suits your fancy), but I'd hazard a guess that, compared to you, the vast majority of the human race are stupid. That's just the way it goes, if you're well above average. And they can't help it. Geniuses have to be cautious about mocking the comparatively-afflicted ;P As per your question, not having looked at them, I have no idea. Pesky (talk) 12:55, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

It was fatuous bluster. I overlook mistakes, of course. But if somebody---negligent in effort and empty of knowledge but posing with authority---is bullshitting on the topic of conversation, which already is a subject of debate, then that person's behavior deserves brief but pointed remonstration, particularly if the person is in a position of authority and public trust.
I prefer Helen Thomas over George W. Bush.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:01, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment and reminder about tact. I made a similar comment about SG's memory some time ago. I also have noted that compared to von Neumann or Kolmogorov, we are all brain damaged.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:04, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
It did not help that P J Crook shall be moved to P. J. Crook, despite WTT's discussion of reliable sources' favoring (or favouring) "PJ Crook". Our society and our references, e.g. Wikipedia, should show respect to genuine artists---most of whom are almost painfully sensitive. And she seems like a nice person from the little I know of her....  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:12, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I'm in agreement that the term / name used should be the precise one that artist themselves uses. What's more reliable than the artist themself? I've developed a kinda way of thinking about differences in speed, type, etc. of human cognition and thought-processing of all kinds; partly because I'm HFA, partly because I've professionally instructed people right through the range from severely mentally impaired through to real genius. If you imagine a room full of people, a third of whom are red-green colour-blind, a third of whom are blue-yellow colour-blind, and the remaining third can see only in monochrome, none of whom realise that there are things the others can't see, and getting annoyed and frustrated at the apparent arrogant and stubborn and obstructive stupidity of most of the rest ... there you have a close parallel. Autism-spectrum people can miss things which are blindingly obvious to a load of other people; non-autism spectrum completely lack the ability to see (with immense speed) non-obvious details which are overwhelmingly clear to the autism group, and the remaining third lag behind both groups and can't see what any of them are going on about, which means they must all be crazy ... I think the whole world is a bit like that. It's one of the biggest reasons why one shouldn't think of high-functioning autism as any kind of disability, it's just a huge difference in thought-processing. We can;t help it, and the non-auties can't help not seeing what we can see so clearly, either. That's just the way we are. Males can't help being males and females can't help being females; same kind of thing. It's not something we/they can actually change, no matter how much we might like to be able to. Shire horses don;t make good racers, and Thoroughbreds are totally useless at pulling two-ton drays.

If you just temprarily removed the word "fatuous" (and all its synonyms) from your WikiVocabulary, you'd probably get 75% fewer unwanted linky-reminders. Pesky (talk) 13:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Metal Evolution, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rush (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Done.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

A nice soothing beer for you!

It may help. It may not. One day, m'lad, you must make your way over to the Forest, and I'll treat you to one of the nicest beers in the world. Pesky (talk) 07:14, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

From Wikipedia to DGM—and back again!

Nice to see that Wikipedia's article led a reader ("seasonedsoup" on March 09, 2012) to the DGM Live!'s forum.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:26, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Quality of mercy is not strained department
Comment on behavior and reduce negative-reinforcement

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Incivility
Hi.
Please take the tone of your rhetoric down a notch. personal attacks and incivility are simply inappropriate.
Please try to talk about the content in question and not an editor.
If this sort of thing continues, you may be subject to further sanction, such as being blocked. - jc37 23:43, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Please go away in peace.
I wrote about his stupid behavior, not any stupidity---per WP:NPA.
You should be concerned that he's damaging articles, without having a clue what he's writing about, per Pillars 1-3 and 5 of this "encyclopedia".
Have you left him a warning about any of the first 3 pillars, like "hey, this is an encyclopedia, so you should be responsible about editing, especially about living persons---especially since our biographies become the most visited biographies on the planet"?
 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC) 12:10, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Redundant redundancies
This is it
A bowl of Froot Loops

Kiefer.Wolfowitz does not always follow his nose,

which sometimes doesn't know,

the flavor of loops,

where ever he goes.

KW does not write in Brian Eno that "Eno is recognized as a master of colorful breakfast-cereals", despite having heard that Eno is fond of loops and ....

KW wishes that a WP editor would not have written in Roger J-B Wets that "Roger Jean-Baptiste Wets is an American programmer".

Seriously You need to stop this right now. If I see this kind of incivility again, I'm going to report it. I'm telling you once more because I know that you know better and I'm sure that you're a productive member of the project. There's no reason for you to be so hostile and rude to others and if you don't stop, it's going to impede your ability to be productive as well. I hope you understand what I'm saying here and take this as a final warning (again) that you cannot flagrantly be belligerent to other editors. Simply put, Wikipedia does not need you if you're going to be so off-putting to others and keep them from wanting to engage the project. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:05, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Koavf,
Please read my reply to a similar but much better worded concern.
I don't rewrite your articles on Brian Eno and write that he is a cereal manufacturer---because at day care a friend of mine ate Froot Loops, and I read that Eno loops things. I am aware of my ignorance, and my humility prevents me from destroying articles, particularly BLPs.
Bot-like implementation of WP:MOS heuristics---regardless of BLP guidelines, respect for living persons, and veracity---deserves scorn. I am tired of your rigid editing on P J Crook, whose lack of periods has led another editor to a worse fiasco at Roger J-B Wets.
Please go in peace.
 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:09, 13 March 2012 (UTC) 12:10, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
False modesty
Unwarranted self-deprecation
 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:05, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
More redundancies
(The title is WTT/David's, not KW's. 15:27, 13 March 2012 (UTC))
Hi KW. I know we've had our troubles, so you are welcome to take my comments with a pinch of salt, a dash of tarragon or even a blob of marmite. Feel free to just ignore them all together, if you so wish. I notice that you've been having a few troubles recently, with categories and requested moves. Can I suggest you change tack with regards to Justin? You seem to have made quite a few comments regarding his editing style, rather than actually discussing the substance of his nominations. Those nominations are wholly within standard wikipedia process, though it's not an area that I edit often. Some of your recent comments seem to be completely at odds with your recent insightful regarding summer camp WormTT · (talk) 12:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi David/WTT!
Nice message! :) How can I not give you my full consideration?
Justin has been showing up in article after article, in which I have been editing, and I cannot see how his noticeboard-style (rather than talking with editors on talk pages) results in a better WP or is reasonable. I repeatedly asked him to read the lede of articles before he recategorizes them, and I am sorry that he still has failed to reply to that request.
I am unimpressed with most of the discussion at the category noticeboard, which seems concerned with quoting poorly understood parts of the MOS, whose proper application requires first establishing the facts in question. Your recent edits showed that this expert panel had misunderstood the MOS. You looked at P J Crook's spelling in RSes, which none of the others has claimed; I believe that one has found an example of "P.J. Crook" once.
I had already struck-through "go away", adding " go in peace", before your non-redundant and thoughtful note. "Go in peace" remains good enough for some reliable sources, and should it be should be good enough for Wikipedia.
I noted your ascension to the clerkship on Malleus's page. I would trust your judgment not to close tight RfAs, and I think that you should consider helping out as a bureaucrat also. I have previously noted wishing that you had won ArbCom election, rather than AGK. I should be happy to co-nominate or be an early endorser for you as a bureaucrat.
Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
So you did! I hadn't noticed, I don't habitually watch Malleus' page. I did however notice that I had been mentioned with regards for 'cratship on WT:RFA. I left a note there regarding my feelings on the matter, but basically it's a very high level of scrutiny for a button. I ran for Arbcom because I saw flaws in the system along with a negative perception, which I thought I could improve. I'm not a repetitive button pusher, it just doesn't hold my interest. As for clerkship, it's feeling horribly bureaucratic for very little useful output, so I'm unsure if it's a role I'll stay in. I'd much rather help new users at a twee drinking ceremony.
My thoughts on PJ Crook was that if she calls herself PJ (a common shortening, such as PJ Harvey) - then it's actually a common name, not an initiallisation. The sources seem to agree with that line of thought in any case. When it comes to the categories though, it does appear to the outside observer that you emptied a category which was up for deletion and placed all the items in an almost identical category. It appears to me that they are coincidental factors, but I can see why other editors are bothered by it. It also gives the impression of double the number of categories up for deletion, which never helps.
I've looked at Justin's recent tagging though and I don't see that he's doing anything wrong. He's raised these issues in the place that most editors would expect them to be raised. For example, bringing them to CfD exposes them to neutral editors who have no hat in the ring. It's not hard to post a neutrally worded note at the relevant wikiproject. If you consider an article that might be going through a deletion process, would you expect the nominator to discuss the deletion with the wikiproject first? I certainly wouldn't. Either way, negative comments regarding Justin using AWB or not creating articles only serve to take away from your other points which, in general, are correct.
Oh, and can I just say thank you very much for the vote of support and offer of nomination with regards to cratship, I really do appreciate them. WormTT · (talk) 13:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Fripp was not face down in Folk City

The Roches

Hi, I reverted your addition of the Robert Fripp template to The Roches (album). Although he produced and played some instruments on the album, it is not artistically his album and is not included in the discography of his template. A similar case can be made for Todd Rundgren, who has produced many more albums than are credited to him as an artist or as a member of a group.

-- J. Wong (talk) 22:18, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi J. Wong!
WP:RS: Please review the discussion of Fripp's production of The Roches in Eric Tamm's musical-biography, which is available on line at Robert Fripp. Tamm discusses Fripp's audio verité style, which also appeared in Peter Gabriel's 2nd album. Is there any similar (academic-musicological) reliable monograph on The Roches that discusses that album and dismisses Fripp's production as you have?
WP:OR but fun: When a folk-singing friend played that album in my misspent youth (c. 1985), I exclaimed, "Wow, that sounds just like Robert Fripp". Can you name another song by the Roches that has anything like Fripp's guitar? (Your condescension "played some instruments" is ridiculous.)
Mary Roche sings a bunch of songs on Fripp's Exposure album also. (The orgasmic climax has never been credited, to my knowledge.)
Obviously, Todd Rundgren should be listed on Bat Out of Hell, given his famous contributions, including the one-take ad-libbed motorcycle guitar-solo (which are discussed by Meatloaf and his musical partner in an interesting documentary, btw).
If you have not been struck dead by a bolt of thunder (or been decapitated by an Uncle Bonsai record moved by divine wrath) for profanely failing to show appropriate respect to both Robert Fripp and Todd Rundgren in one paragraph, ;) then I'd wish you'd reconsider. :)
Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:35, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Seriously, the third sentence of the article states "Robert Christgau praised Robert Fripp's production of "this witty, pretty music"[1]
  1. ^ Christgau, Robert (April 30, 1979). "Christgau's Consumer Guide: The Roches Pick Hit". The Village Voice. Retrieved 30 November 2011. Relevant portion also posted at "The Roches: The Roches > Consumer Album Guide". Robert Christgau. Retrieved 11 June 2006.

    2. "Robert Fripp's austere production of this witty, pretty music not only abjures alien instrumentation but also plays up the quirks of the Roches' less-than-commanding voices and acoustic guitars. Thus it underscores their vulnerability and occasional desperation and counteracts their flirtations with the coy and the fey. The result is not a perfect record, but rather one whose imperfections are lovingly mitigated. Replete with memorable melodies, heartbreaking harmonies, wise words, and lotsa laffs. A"

    I submit that the Village Voice is not prejudiced against Folk City and its critic can be trusted if he focuses the review on Fripp's production, to an excessive extent imho and probably Fripp's too. I'll revert your revert, per the existing citation referencing. (No need to read Tamm.)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:44, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
    I think your edits give way too much undue credit to Fripp. No one is contesting that he produced the album nor made a major contribution to it as such; the links and citations are more than adequate for that (although the Tamm reference barely mentions the album). But your desire to include it among his other directly attributed artistic works is your point of view, which as editors we should strive to avoid. I have no doubt you believe the album should have been called Robert Fripp & The Roches, but it wasn't. I can accept your addition of more from the Christgau citation re Fripp's contribution, but your inclusion of the Tamm chapter and the Robert Fripp template are peripheral at best and lack any significant relevance to the article subject itself.
    -- J. Wong (talk) 15:28, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
    Dear editor J.wong:
    You should read what I twice wrote,
    • "he focuses the review on Fripp's production, to an excessive extent imho", emboldening added 13:13, 16 March 2012 (UTC))
    above and in my edit summary.
    Then you should correct your fatuous falsehoodssuboptimal statements.
    You should have doubt, especially when you "have no doubt".
    Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

    More constructively: Like most articles on albums, The Roches has the attention span of an 8 year old kid with ADD suddenly deprived of Ritalin and nearly overdosed on Froot Loops. Why not add to the article something about the Roches? A sentence or two about Fripp seems okay, particularly because the audite veritee (or whatever French BS name it was called) seems to have been widely discussed, also for Fripp and for Gabriel 2.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

    Discipline Global Mobile

    I'll do the review on this, your post in the April Fools thread won me over. I'll probably post initial comments tomorrow. (I'm not a very experienced GA reviewer though, so be warned.) Mark Arsten (talk) 04:02, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

    Thanks, Mark!
    Remember the advice given to Cameron Crowe by Lester Bangs, "Be honest and unmerciful."
    Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:56, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
    Well, I'll try, I might only get half of that though... Mark Arsten (talk) 14:45, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
    *LOL*
    Innocence and virtue will lose to experience and treachery every time!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:39, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
    Well, be that as it may, I've passed the GA. My comments were minimal, but the article was in good shape when I got to it. I think you did a great job putting together an article on an obscure (to me, anyway) topic like that. I take it you're a fan of Fripp? I'm not familiar with him, I'll have to look him up. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

    Notifications

    Thanks It's no secret that I was put out before at your tone, but you've been very courteous lately and that deserves recognition. We can all get bristly at times (especially when others have opposing views), but it's the mark of someone truly mature to change course and act in a civil and polite manner. Thanks! —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

    Hi Justin!
    I shall frame your "very courteous", "truly mature", "civil and polite"! :D
    I agree that, having categories, Wikipedia should not have insane categories and chaotic organization. I do appreciate the experience and policy-knowledge you bring to discussions. (Although, I still need more perspective when you propose re-categorizing an infant category!) Again, nice job with the Eno and Byrne article!
    Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

    File:-Possible Productions knotwork- by Steve Ball.svg

    The OTRS system has verified Ball's CC3.0 BY SA donation of the image.

    Hi Kiefer, the permission for this image is confusing and not properly documented. (The linked website doesn't refer to the image, and the permission you quoted doesn't indicate that he is licensing it CC-BY.) Could you go through the WP:OTRS process so that there are no questions about the copyright status of the image? Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:02, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

    Hi Calliopejen!
    Ball was happy to donate a file for our use and in fact volunteered a higher quality file than the one we could have used per "fair use"; I notified him regarding the intended "fair use" as a courtesy. I did write "CC" "BY and SA" in our correspondence, because Wikipedia doesn't need him to sacrifice other rights.
    To see the image at Ball's website, please review this diary entry, which contains another version of the image. In fact, that image has exactly the same name as the file Ball emailed me. (I chose the more descriptive name to avoid conflicts with other files and better to match the original logo's users, Robert Fripp's Possible Productions.)
    Under the circumstances, and given the headaches apparent in dealing with OTRS (including my privacy concerns), I should be happy to identify myself to H J Mitchell, Verno Whitney, or Fetchcomms (or I suppose Phil Knight or Silk Tork). I have contacted the first 3.
     Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:28, 19 March 2012 (UTC) 16:55, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
    Just to note - if you are concerned about privacy issues, I'm pretty sure you could just have Ball email OTRS directly. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:15, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
    Thanks for the reply. I would rather not bother Ball, again. I did improve the description at Wikimedia, following your complaint. I agree that I was unclear. Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:18, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
    Thanks for that, but I don't think it really resolves the problem.... What is needed (best practice is to have this go through OTRS) is a clear, unambiguous statement that he is the copyright holder and that he releases it under CC-BY-SA. Where you can't just copy-paste a single quotation confirming this (as in the best practices declaration of consent at WP:CONSENT) someone will really have to look at the whole exchange to ensure that the license grant is sufficiently explicit. (Things like "sure, you can use it" are never good enough because it's not explicit enough that any reuser can use the work, for example.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
    Hi Calliopejen!
    I shall send the exchange (minus personal discussions) to OTRS as soon as I can find simple-minded instructions.
    Thanks again for your help!
    Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
    Basically, all you have to do is email permissions-en@wikimedia.org. If there's a problem with the permission, they will follow up with you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:24, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
    Hi again, Calliopejen!
    Thanks for your help. I trust that the emailed [redacted per confidentiality] correspondence with the enclosed file-copy suffices to establish the CC-3.0-BY-SA bona fides of File:-Possible Productions knotwork- by Steve Ball.svg.
    Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:51, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
    Verno expedited the OTRS, and all is taken care of now. OTRS was easy, after all. Thanks to everyone.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:51, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

    OTRS

    I have fetchcomms' talk page on my watchlist, so I saw your request. It looks like VernoWhitney is the only one who responded thus far, and since you were specifically looking for him, obviously you should work with him. That being said, if for some reason VW can't handle the ticket in time for the image to hit the main page, feel free to hit me up. As VW said, it'd have to be done through the official ticketing system, although if you're really uncomfortable with that Mindspillage and Keegan (both OTRS admins) are usually on IRC, and you can head over there and ask them for advice. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:07, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

    Hi Sven,
    I named only a few names for simplicity. I would be happy to send the correspondence confidentially to you, of course. I should read what Verno wrote before replying further.
    (I improved the description at the Wikimedia page.)
    Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:15, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
    I removed my (duplicate) questions from HJ Mitchell's page and Fetchcomms's page, following Verno's and your responses. Thanks again.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:24, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
    I shot you an email. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
    Thanks again, Sven, for your help and exemplary contributions!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

    A Navbox template for Robert Fripp

    just goes to show that the being that has been called "this Fripp" has been a very, very mobile intelligent unit for some time.

    I requested that a hero create the template, and Quibus, my Djinni, granted my (first?) wish!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

    Some stroopwafels for you!

    Thanks! It was fun to work on and I'm glad I could help. I'm not sure about two more wishes, although Djinni kinda has a nice ring to it... Is that an official Wiki title with perks? — Quibus (talk) 16:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
    You did a really nice job on the Robert Fripp template! Thanks again! :)
    Cheers!
    KW 14 March 2012 (UTC)
     Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz/Archive_30&oldid=1143114387"