I'm glad that Amy Cuddy describes her field as "social science" rather than "social psychology", although she is a real psychologist who runs real double-blind experiments with saliva samples!! (just my personal academic prejudice there, against any Jonathan-Miller-type-body-language-topic, haha). But she has a few interesting things to say - quite a novel presentation for TED, I would have thought. I was reminded a bit of the some of the work by Harold Garfinkel in the 1970s. But she is a really engaging and sincere speaker. And that's from someone who hates motivational speaking...! Martinevans123 (talk) 17:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. It's not how long those legs are, but how assertive you can be with them. Ooo, err, missus. Actually she has that kind of Hilary-Clinton-Max-Factor mid-west charm, don'cha' think, dude? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, Gareth. That is the funniest comment I have seen this year!! (although it is only 2 Jan, I guess) But I know exactly what you mean there. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:31, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I like the Christmas music you are playing here! See mine on my user. You asked for an editor's contributions on Wehwalt's talk, - see mine and the archive and look for the name to get an impression, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thank you. You are very welcome. I have seen some of the great work you have done all over wiki. And I see lots of real music at your page - the music that really moves you is the music you sing, isn't it, especially in the company of others. Am reminded of the quote from Lou Holtz: "A bird doesn't sing because it has an answer, it sings because it has a song." And yes, your opinion of that now blocked editor looks very similar to mine. I feel much less cheated (if at all, in fact). Best wishes. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently many people thought that Fred the Tramp lived a truly enlightened life. But, yes an iconic image. It's a shame that all of the best images of him are copyright of The Wolverhampton Express and Star (and I should know... haha) Martinevans123 (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In Your Own Sweet Way
Thank you for quality contributions to articles on churches and halls in Wales, filled with music, for treating In Your Own Sweet Way in your own sweet way, for a clear view on ""a poorly-run bureaucracy with the group dynamics of a cult ... marks will be deducted for obvious expressions of exasperation or humour" - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
Hi, I'm trying to get Wells Cathedral to GA standard (with help from several editors). As you have edited it several times in the past I wondered if you would be willing to take a look - and perhaps contribute to the discussion about images on the talk page?— Rodtalk16:50, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rod. Long time no see. I hope you are well. That's very thoughtful of you. I have not made many edits there, but I will certainly try and have a look. It's very considerate of you to ask. Cheers. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi ME: Re Teddy Wilson & "adding more links (although not strictly MOS?)", what does MOS mean? I'm behind the times.
HAPPY NEW YEAR.
Hi Tolesi! Happy New Year to you to! Apologies, I meant WP:MOS. I think it's generally frowned upon to link anything in a direct in-text speech quotation. But if it's a literary quote, especially in a block quote para, I think it's generally allowed. But am no expert. I see there are plenty of links in the other blockquotes there that no-one has complained about, so looks fine to me. I thought that the Teddy Wilson quote was a really great addition. Well done and many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info ME.
What d'you think of the photo in the Earl Hines article? Uninteresting, I'd say. If you Google Hines Images, there's that fun one [I think] of Hines in a furry overcoat, nice and "Jazz-age" 1920s, the right 'flavour' I'd say. I know knowt about copyright etc and even less about how to upload photos. Do you? It does seem to have been used quite widely if you click on 'more sizes' underneath. If it's 'allowable' and you like it, might you be able to do it? Beyond me! Best wishes. T — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tolesi (talk • contribs) 16:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Tolesi. You really don't like signing, do you! Yes, tend to agree. I'm not sure the current lead image is "uninteresting" as such - if anything, the presence of Private Charles Carpenter makes it a bit too interesting! And it's not always easy to get an "action shot" of a pianist, even a jazz pianist. But there seem to be loads of images on the internet, so there may well be something. But copyright can be a minefield, so it may not be easy. I'll have a search. This little site has some really classic images [5]Martinevans123 (talk) 16:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
'Signing?' I'll try!
Thanks for those other pics: I really like the yellow poster too and I'm sure more & better pics would really help - so good luck. Now, 'signing' ....... Tolesi (talk) 17:56, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Re Possible Hines pics, ME.
If you are able to magic-up some better Hines pics, M.E., the existing 'Hines performs for Private Carpenter' one wd obviously go well with the opening of the 'Birth of Bebop' section and its 'Six members were drafted in 1943 alone'. Then, as well as the young and 'flash' Hines-in-that-overcoat and your suggested yellow poster, Google images wd seem to have enough later pics but I don't know to what extent they wd be use-able. There are good 'band' ones too. Whatever .... good luck. The article needs you!Tolesi (talk) 13:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try and take a look. Meanwhile, was just listening again to one of my all-time favourite Hines tracks - Boogie Woogie on the St Louis Blues, from one of my favourite Hines albums An Evening With. Can you believe that left-hand trill that goes on for a full 2 minutes 50 seconds!! (2:56 - 5:46) while he's playing a series of jazz classic tribute riffs with the right hand!! It's just amazing. Love it. Maybe some kind of record, haha. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but d'you know what I'd take to my Desert Island? Probably "Angry" from 1934 or "Maple Leaf Rag", 1935 I think - both on iTunes. And then, after 1,000 other possibilities, I think I'd take "The Midnight Sun Will Never Set" - from 40 years later and on iTunes again. That feeling of, "Well here we are one more time, this time in Sweden and we'd better give the punters a little something"..... and up comes what? A little thing that starts as almost nothing - and becomes ... one of the most BEAUTIFUL things I know. Good luck with the pics if you can - now for some signing!..... Tolesi (talk) 21:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Here is some useful advice from User talk:Ww2censor: "Martin, there are a few on the commons here already but pre-1923 US published images are in the public domain and you can do specific searches by licence such as a Google advanced search but that does not bring up anything, so you will have to look elsewhere, like the LOC or a Flickr Creative Commons search (in that case you must be careful to determine if the licence is in fact free)." Martinevans123 (talk) 11:04, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good news, ME. The 1hr Earl "Fatha" HInes docu is now back "up" ... but now @ https://vimeo.com/58414566. It's real pity if all the previous YouTube comments have gone for ever - there were some fascinating ones, especially the ones from professional musicians. I wonder how long it will survive for this time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tolesi (talk • contribs) 13:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for telling me, Tolesi. I'll certainly try and take a look. Yes, it's a pity that YouTube comments get dumped like that. I might even have commented myself, haha! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your good edits/rationalisations, ME re the Hines TV film. Looking at your edits, what are/how can we get rid of[?] the peculiar-looking abcdefgjij letters that now appear in front of note 9 in the Hines Article? I don't know what they are. They also appear in front of 'Dance' @ notes/refs 66 & 73. Are they to do with repeated refs to the same source? But they look like 'mistakes' to me! Best wishes ..... onwards & upwards! Tolesi (talk) 18:30, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I just thought it might be tidier. Yes, those letters just mean repeated refs to the same source. That's the standard way, so don't worry. There are other ways ,like just using <ref>Nairn, 1975</ref> or by using {{sfn|Nairn|1975|p|ps=}}. But those are usually used for printed sources, so I'm not sure if they are also best for videos. I'm no expert on refs. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for telling me. As a new user, I guess that is only to be expected. In fact, even "senior editors" with platinum medals get reverted for copyvio now and then if they are not very good at paraphrasing, I have found! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, it's something that worries me at times. It's a real problem when it's something very short. But I think he's struggling on more than just that, hopefully he'll find his feet. And his edits alerted me with a serious problem on some linked articles, so that's a plus. Dougweller (talk) 13:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was wondering whether the new editor and the ip editor might in fact be one and the same. I did not check out the geolocate for the ip. But again, that might just be a novice editor problem. I think that you were quite wise to post that copy-vio template. (All we need now is an archaeological input from Prof Nick Thomas, haha.) Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And now they've again removed the statement that it's a glacial moraine - I've got more than one source for that. I don't know if it's worth hitting 3RR for this or not, but it's pretty clear what they are doing. Dougweller (talk) 15:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)I've got several more sources at Talk:Llys Helig. Dougweller (talk) 15:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not being any kind of physical geography expert, and with only a marginal interest in the place (mostly the church bits), am happy to leave it to you. But it looks like you are right. I'll provide any support I can, of course, if required. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for acting and commenting on BWV 105, and for believing in me keeping good company ;) - The former: please go and help discuss, project classical music has to be convinced that infoboxes are good for something, a viewpoint from outside the project might be helpful. The latter: of course I do, but not everybody thinks so ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:32, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Father Ted (or even Sister Gerd) shouldn't get the blame for Father Jack's outbursts... especially if Father Jack has seemingly decided to park up his rusty wheelchair at the "St Dennis' Home for Rested Clergy". Martinevans123 (talk) 11:56, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Robert Fripp's late Uncle, Alfie Fripp, was the longest serving and last surviving British POW of WWII. He helped the construction of the tunnel "Harry" portrayed in The Great Escape.
Please help improve the article Alfie Fripp before it appears on the main page.
"Do you realise how annoying it is to be accused of "stalking" someone when you are just trying to suggest suitable links in a new article?" No, you probably don't. - anon
Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is approved
If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
I will not revert your last edition, but I do not think the fact the they were paid or told to try to fake is not relevant. Additionally the wording rigth now is quite repetitive. I believe that article would be better without info in brackets.
I explain: the main point of the article suggests that if somebody has a reason to fake good can do it better after reading the article. I agree with you that normally there is no economical (or other) reasons to fake good in a test, however in real life there are also many cases when somebody may be interested in faking good in a clinical test due to economic reasons (getting a job, obtaining a positive evaluation that may help him not to be sent to a mental institution...). The cited article would only be directly relevant for such cases: people taking the test that have some motivation to fake good. In the cited article motivation is that they were told to do so and paid. In real life you might be motivated to fake even if not paid... and it seems you are more capable of doing so after reading WP.
Finally the info you added is not relevant since both groups of people were told to fake good and received money for their participation, and there were still some differences between groups, therefore indicating (in medical terminology) that differences came from the "treatment" (reading the wikipedia article) as opposed to the "placebo" group (reading a non-relevant article). --Garrondo (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for very politely coming here to leave me a note. I think you meant ".. but I do not think the fact that they were paid or told to try to fake is relevant." yes? Please revert my addition at the article if you choose, information in brackets is never ideal. Perhaps subject characteristics would be better placed in a footnote?
Yeap, sorry. Regarding footnotes... I do not really like them, and truly, I do not think it is needed... every scientific job has its pros and cons, and I do not think we should really describe in detail the article. We are already saying that the article is a primary work and its results "suggest", so I believe that we are representing in a NPOV its message. Moreover, I included the articles because they directly addressed the wikipedia article, because it is really out of the question that knowing a test may change how you perform in it...--Garrondo (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I quite agree with you about real life "motivation to fake good". But I'm not sure that monetary reward is wholly comparable.
Well, as I said: it is surely not exactly the same, but no controlled study (placebo vs treated) can be exactly as real life. My personal POV is that it is probably as close as it can be. --Garrondo (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think the instruction "try to fake good" meant to the control group of subjects in this study? I would suggest that instruction might well have been meaningless. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, not really. I am not really knowadgeable of projective tests, but for example in many personality tests it is well known that some people try to fake good simply to try to look more normal, in this sense in some tests it is common to include questions that indicate if the participant is trying to fake questions. It is also a common tactic in neuropsychologic evaluations when there is suspicions on a person trying to do worse than he/she is capable. In this sense if I was asked to try to "fake good" in the Roscharch I would try to say things as normal as possible, which admitedly if you do not know anything about the test (really hard in these days) is hard to do, since you do not really know what is expected.
Nevertheless: My main point is that I do not see how the fact of being paid could influence differently both groups, since both were asked the same task and both were paid. This is the main reason why I do not think that including it simply going into too much detail (and probably giving undue weight to this source and it results, and yeah I know that that is precisely the thing that you are trying to avoid).--Garrondo (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply. As I said, please revert if you wish. I was agreeing with you about the level of detail. I guess we will never know how much the control group knew about the test before they volunteered. My main aim in adding a bit of detail was simply to make it clear that none of subjects were actually being psycholgically evaluated in a real setting. But maybe people would guess that from the title and the context - and of course they are free to actually read the abstract, or indeed read the full paper if they pay for Taylor and Francis access. (By the ways, I think those refs should actually say that a subscription is required, shouldn't they?) Yes, I wholly agree that one single study should not be given too much weight. But it does seem to be unique. My motives, like yours I imagine, are to produce a balanced article, even though in the past, I have argued very strenuously for the possibility that showing the images, and giving a full explanation of how they are interpreted, may have undesirable consequences. So adding detail which weakens the plausibility of the results of this one study would actually be detrimental to my cause. In the past, in this article, it seems to have been very much a case of "the more detail the better." Martinevans123 (talk) 20:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will revert then... Regarding your POV: This is quite funny, because I am then leaning against your cause (I am probably closer to thinking that showing the images is at least harmless), and nevertheless it was me adding the articles, and on the other hand you have just said that you were trying to balance the sources even if in the past you were against showing the images... Is'nt it ironic? :-)
Regarding "suscription required" I have not contributed in a few years, but when I left it was not compulsory to include that field, specially in med articles where most articles are subscription-required. Best regards. --Garrondo (talk) 20:42, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Yes, the irony was getting to me, haha. Indeed subscription sites are pretty much the norm. Many people have ways round that, I guess... I just like to be warned! (I think it's preferred for Good Articles). Of course, I shouldn't even be trying to improve this article (that's why some of the other editors, who were of a similar viewpoint, walked away), since the further away it stays from the Main Page, the better, in my opinion. Thanks anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:51, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah-ha, seems my plan has worked out a treat, tee-hee. Please trample, revert and mutilate all you want... Now I can see why Garden gets a capital "G"! I wonder of there's an image anywhere.... Martinevans123 (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that, being an eco-friendly gardener, trampling is something I try to avoid, and mutilating is an anathema. No, I much prefer just to breathe - preferably quite heavily haha! PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, seems I was sadly mistaken. Not sure if watchlists encourage collaborative editing, or just allow annoying stalking by worthless ne'er-do-wells. Now, where did I put those luminous "Plebs Keep Out" signs that Malleus very kindly left me.... Martinevans123 (talk) 23:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's very thoughtful of you Gerda, thankyou. It's good to see someone carrying on the great Lutheran tradition. I was secretly angling for a topic ban on Manchester churches and a three month block, but hey, we have to be grateful for a few words of encouragement. In fact, checking my edit history, it seems I even managed a few pre-emptive stalks - no mean feat! But I'm sure some favourites are in season all year round. :) Martinevans123 (talk) 08:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Would you please stalk someone else's edits!" Otherwise I shall have to ask St George to set his dragon on you, Martin. – Don Buzzard – The WelshBuzzard – 08:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] Post script:@ Gerda, Great link — that page is new to me. Thanks!
(gulp)... I don't see many Good Articles in his cv. In fact, at times, I think he may even stray onto the wrong side of the Wiki civility policy. :( Martinevans123 (talk) 12:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yummy. Thanks for the treat, Gerda. Some of us plebs are used to far less impressive snacks. I'm baffled about who Br'er Rabbit was, what he did wrong, and why he was banned. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:36, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What he did wrong: you read the article or what you find under "pride and prejudice" (published 200 years ago yesterday) on my user and then ask the many who supported. St Malleus was the first to oppose, I could have been the one but was travelling. It didn't change the outcome anyway. - What he did right? For example this design, quote "Happy editing!" (If you only see a tag there I was reverted again, - then look in the history.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, well "socks" can be quite useful, sometimes.(Except for when an editor gets "too big for his boots", of course, when socks are the worse possible remedy). To quote that old adage "Looks like a duck, smells like a duck... probably a rabbit." But, of course, both readily depatched with the aid of the subtle 12-bore shotgun. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, smells too much. Br'er Rabbit was the one account accepted by arbcom. "Teh Community" (of which to be part I am ashamed, and which the rabbit happily escaped) had to go after years old prejudices, "Happy editing!" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm stalking a fan. He lives in a high-rise block.
And here I am. He shouldn't have turned my rock.
He's brushing his teeth. He doesn't look bad from this far.
I'm hailing a cab, and I'm going to follow his car...."
Oo-er! I don't think Mr. Morrissey likes judges very much - not since one made him cough up a load of dough to his ex-bandmates ("Magistrates who spend their lives hiding their mistakes" cropped up years later on You Are the Quarry). Oh no, I'm not bitter, officer! PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oooo, that monster looks a bit creepy! Wasn't he a pal of Malleus? But the little hummingbird is lovely. I guess we must make allowances, as it seems he was dyslexic. Maybe he still is? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:45, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That Jack Merridew seems to be a very talented chap. Looks like it's all done with "rect" on an image map. How ingenious. Well worth noting for future reference - one might even imagine a large Baroque mansion with a different Bach Cantata behind each window! But I might just borrow that charming humming bird (when no-one is looking), as it seems to reflect so well my own rather flighty editing style. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So far I found no bad bits I could give you to ignore ;) - You know about teaching animals, right? The slightest step in the right direction: praise excessively! Ignore the rest, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:46, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "even though"? Exactly "because" some are more equal, you have to be ready to ignore, ignore, ignore. You can find the phrase "some more equal" also on my user ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:33, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
lol, that is funny. So much more worthy than the obligatory "box of oven-ready wiki kittens" or the mouthwatering plate of "cookies-that-look-like-fossilized-dinosaur-dung". My own recent exciting discovery seems to be pure "Sigmund Freud Meets Walt Disney". Martinevans123 (talk) 21:52, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just found a nifty wee tool, which lets you know which pages you've edited in common with other users. Might be useful if you can't remember whether you've previously stalked someone or not, or if you've forgotten where you've seen them before. Here's an example! -- Hillbillyholidaytalk11:43, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What a surprise to find you lurking in the Blacky pictures! sorry, Pictures. But, to quote another recent editor: "I hope that wasn't a personal attack"! lol ... What a rubbish tool. I see no record of my six month phone-tap and multiple low-light spy-cams on J3MrsDoyle. Nor of the hours I've spent cruising past her luxury Manchester hill-top Pennine apartment in my growling-Beamer-with-the-blacked-out-windows. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:16, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you wish to make what you see as corrections please support your edits with appropriate edit summaries and, if necessary, a discussion thread on the Talk Page. Your recent edits did not appear to be constructive. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:53, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's not really a question of me "liking" or not. I am very surprised that the claim is made only on the Swiss page on the EADS website, and not by Eurofighter, or any other of the other Partner Nations, or by most general aviation sources, or by Jane's. Why should the aircraft only go at that speed when policing Switzerland? Or perhaps it's just that no-one else sees "supercruise" as useful nomenclature? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martinevans, I just finished a full rewrite of Umberto Boccioni if you would like to review the change, hopefully for the better. You actually stumbled across it in the early stage of my long process earlier. I appreciate your good edits.--Nixie9✉05:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's very kind of you to invite me. I will try and have a look later - I'm sure it will be very good. I do apologise for intruding while you were busy. Some people use those "update in progress" tags to let others know the article is in a state of flux, when they do a major overhaul. I always forget. But it's encouraging to see an editor who is so open and not over-protective. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Martinevans123, to my knowledge, Bosch and his customers did not suffer from inquisition. If you have different information, you may add it to the article. However, it should be less cloudy than the sentences that I deleted. Thanks for caring. Agric (talk) 22:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding, Agric. Yes, maybe that was a bit cloudy. I don't have a copy of that reference, so I don't know what Schuder says in her book. I think the Spanish Inquisition was in force over the period of Bosch's lifetime. But I would be very surprised if their activities extended very often, in that time, to the Duchy of Brabant. But again, I don't really know. I imagine that Schuder was talking generally - that Bosch was merely aware of the power of the church, which would have been "figuratively personified" by the Inquisition. Perhaps including Schuder's slightly colourful language adds an unnecessary slant to that passage of the article. To tell you the truth, I was more concerned that you had deleted material that Linfert wrote (but which again maybe should have been in quotes) - if he thinks there is a suggestion of temporal continuity, then that's just his art critic opinion. I guess there's no one single definitive rational explanation of everything in this painting. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:12, 4 February 2013 (UTC) p.s. oh and why is Wilhelm Fränger not allowed his umlaut? haha[reply]
In German, as well as in other languages, the spelling of names is often even less logical than that in the rest of the language. It is common that German names have an "e" after the Umlaut vowel instead of the two dots. It's important that WP observes these things. Otherwise links fail. Re "temporal continuity", this idea stems from the thought of a hypothetically continued Eden, without the extradition of Adam and Eve. But this has no relation to horizon and landscape, and it is not possible to paint. Then, how many generations would you need from two persons to 200? Agric (talk) 11:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's true. I guess we would make a definitive decision if and when Wilhelm Fränger got his own article. But I'm sure you'll want to apply your correction to the article systematically. Maybe Linfert only raised the issue of temporal continuity as a red herring, i.e. as a "common misconception" - I'd have to read that source to be able to decide. I'd certainly agree that it doesn't look like the same time to me. But again, I'm not sure how far Bosch intended this work to be a history lesson. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:22, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that I "eliminated" anything. I reverted your one of your many edits, with three questions in my edit summary, as I thought they should be discussed. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for telling me. We obviously have very different interpretations of that section of the programme! I really don't think what was said was just said to please the emotional psychic Phillipa Langley. Certainly there was a pronounced curvature. But this was a lateral curvature, not the classic "Hunchback of Notre Dame" type of hump. The short answer is - no-one will ever know. I think the archeo evidence is at best debateable. As the archaeologists reminded us "hunchback is not a medical term". Martinevans123 (talk) 11:47, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there we are - it had to come. She'll be on "I'm a Celebrity" next. (Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind seeing how she reacts when asked to eat a handful of insects.) Deb (talk) 22:14, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
One of the UK's most original, distinctive and entertaining bands. Impossible to pigeon-hole and always amusing. Much of their stuff done very much toungue-in-cheek, almost vaudeville at times. But brilliant tune-smiths. Often compared to that other UK hand. I have all their albums. Mutter Slater and Andy Cresswell-Davies both deserve a wiki article! Still touring I think. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:50, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Martin. I notice that in one of your recent edits to this article, in the infobox you changed the architectural style from "Gothic Revival architecture|Gothic Revival" to "English Gothic architecture#Decorated Gothic|Decorated". May I suggest that this is misleading. To pipe "Decorated" to "English Gothic architecture" means that is is part of the true Gothic tradition that had more or less ended by the 17th century. But the present St John's was not built until the 19th century. The architects copied the Decorated style, but it cannot be argued that the church is in the "proper" Decorated style, but rather was inspired by it. May I suggest that you either go back to "Gothic Revival architecture|Gothic Revival" or, if you wish to emphasise its Decorated nature, make it "Gothic Revival architecture|Gothic Revival (Decorated)". (If you wish to reply, please do so on this page, to keep any discussion in one place.) Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:07, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do wish to reply, haha. Many thanks. I do apologise. I had assumed that these two were close enough to be synonymous. As my edit summary siggested. I was seeking only to get the text and the info box to match. If you think they can differ, or indeed should differ, I am more then happy to leave them exactly as they are. I have reverted the change. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. There is no conflict with the text which is worded carefully to say "Its architectural style is that of the late Decorated period." not that it is "in" Decorated style (maybe a bit pedantic, but I guess that you know what I mean). And now of course the infobox matches the categories as well! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I blame my subconscious, of course. Although it's a Victorian church, it's situation in the middle of Atherton, with the traffic running close around it, always reminds me of one of those ancient little churches you see in the middle of many French towns - it has an almost medieval feel to it! So that's my excuse, anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:33, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"In folklore it is said to be deposited in the wake of meteor showers."
Hi Tony. Is this you sending out an "ESSO-S"? (apologies). Are you sure? I am highly flattered, but neither am I scholar or student. Even Handel needs wikilinks and commas, I guess. Indeed, I know less about GFH than I do about JSB, and that's not much. I do hope you have asked Gerda! I must admit that the template looks to me pretty good already. But I'll try to have a look. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that the restoration only went well up to a point. Wheeler seems to have died before the end of it, and Baker, the man they employed as conservator, left the job half finished. This meant that there were people working on it who were not as experienced as they should have been. Wheeler seems to have been cautious. He was already looking for solutions, long before the restoration committee, the funding and all the rest were in place. He started out on architectural objects like pinnacles etc, to see if his techniques were going to work. From what I can gather, much of what he was doing is pretty much the same as when I was involved in the conservation of sandstone buildings and monuments in the 90s.
He was proposing to replace statues that became really badly deteriorated, but this seems to have been knocked on the head. They made some heads in clay and stuck them on the broken figures in the Coronation of the Virgin to see how it would be received. There was an outcry against it. Not sure why. Maybe somebody felt that it contravene "conservation" as against "restoration" . But this would be relatively surprising at that date, as people liked to see things "fixed". Anyway, a new figure of Christ was carved and set in place in the high gable. The original was broken off at the waist. I'm not sure who the sculptor was. Don't know if it was Wheeler. I remember seeing a TV program on it and he was such a nice humble man who felt a tremendous honour and tremendous responsibility at having to carve the figure of Christ.
How utterly fascinating. I head no idea that you had been involved in such work. It sounds very worthwhile. I wonder if any other editors might know what that programme was, or even what channel it was on. I can see that the idea of clay replacements would be controversial - you might be able to get a very colour match, in fine detail, in a durable material, but the purists might fear that you'd end up with a clay church. I would imagine that master masons like Wheeler are very hard to come by these days - certainly many times more so than in years past. The "skill base" is just not there, like it used to be, I guess, even 100 years ago. Many thanks for the note. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Too bad you had to engage in a discussion about "bullying" lol. The phrase "I very much doubt that no matter how hard I try I could ever be as trying as you" sounds somehow familiar. But it never pays to accuse anyone of being a sockpuppet, does it. And I was quite startled to see that Mad King George Ponderevil is "the only one one who can read here". What a relief.
Just wanted to call your attention to brand new topic Quarteto Novo and invite you to edit or change it, based on your interest in related articles about Brazilian musicians who were band members or collaborators.
Interestingly, no article existed for the band itself, so I just created one. It's based on the Portuguese version (my translation), adding some links and some categories suitable for English WikiPedia, and InterWiki links for the Languages section. I then back-tracked to articles about the band members and collaborators, and added inlinks to the new topic.
Since it's based on the PT article, which did not have a ton of references, neither does this version. That's a defect which should be fixed, and a lot of the claims made in the article should be checked out and either referenced, or removed (notably, the opinion stated in the last sentence of the article).
Feel free to have a look at Quarteto Novo, and help me improve it.
Yikes, I hope you're kidding about the bot/spam!! No, this is serious, not sure what you meant about the spam, etc. And thanks for the edits you've already made (I realized you/someone was there, when we collided on one of my edits.) Thanks for the help!
P.S. If I'm seriously doing something wrong here by adding an "Invitation" section to your talk page, could you explain the right way to do it? If it's about the "cc's", that's because they also made substantive contributions on one or more of the band member Topic pages. --Thx
No, no. I'm sure you are doing it very well and efficiently. It's just surprise on my part, that's all. You didn't use my name - so I was immediately reminded of the sort of unsolicited videos I get sent on YouTube by hopeful pyramid-selling scammers, musical no-hopers and evangelical white supremacists, etc., etc. It's a very good idea to get some interest. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
... and e-mails with [no subject] carrying an hyperlink. Anon - 15:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
... whatever can you mean Anon. But, yes, spam is unwanted at the best of times. Let's hope no-one else was too inconvenienced. (or that they invested in such a wonderfully tempting scheme.) Martinevans123 (talk) 20:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mathglot. I must have imagined that winning awards makes them real, in English, when in fact, they may be simply natively virtual. But I do also have to admit to an unfortunate predilection for capitalizing the names of things which seem to me to be even only vaguely hovering on the borderlands of becoming proper nouns. What a dreadful combination. I see that Língua francesa wiki seems to be somewhere in between on the subject. So please do revert and/or copyedit as you see fit. Muito obrigado! Martinevans123 (talk) 20:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin. It appears that the whole sockpuppet investigation thing is stalling, User:PaleCloudedWhite appears to be retracting himself from his initial position (or, at best, has decided not to actually go through with an SPI), and Gareth has suggested we should move on from the "unpleasantness". I'd like to think, as a fellow Tab, you'd understand that I wouldn't go nearly eight years on this poxy website, just to create a bunch of socks to piss the Welsh off in the past month, but then again I only achieved a Desmond from Pizza Hut, so I probably have remnants of mutiny and a certain amount of stupidity in me. No matter what, the air is clear between me and Gareth, and I'd kind of hope we could achieve that too. I'm still "mega-up-for-it" for a check user, but it appears (a) no-one has the balls to do it and (b) it appears to fall into the "fishing" aspect of SPI. Shame, I'd like it to be cleared up once and for all, but then, as a bureaucrat, I understand this place works..... bureaucratically. Summary: can I propose we put the "unpleasantness" behind us and just move on? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What an excellent idea. Spoken like a true gent. I'm almost glad I voted for you again ("lol") Martinevans123 (talk) 22:18, 18 March 2013 (UTC) p.s. I love pizza, even more than M4 junctions in fact (although without the fish balls) p.p.s. Mr Benn must have had loads of different socks, but we never saw any of them, did we? (Happy face)[reply]
Hello Martin. For better or worse, I decided the only way to resolve the whole sockgate affair was to open a thread at ANI. Your name is mentioned because you were involved, albeit only tangentially. You may wish to comment here. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 14:24, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello PCW. Off the ANI page already? But not "hatted" I see. I'm really not sure what I could add - that seems a very clear and sincere account of what happened. However, I will never forgive you for sullying my glorious image here with all your "shitstorm" dirty socks gossip! My saintly reputation is now in ruins and blackened for eternity. Yours "evermoor", Rosa multiflora.
Not sure I said "glorious image", nor "saintly reputation"... A pity you had to react like this Martin after I'd tried to clear the air between us. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to my glorious saintly talkpage, dearest Old Rambler. Yes, truly pitiful. Now the air is thick with black hostility again, alas. I find I'm even choking on the heady fragrance of virtuous Rosa multiflora. (I have lost the immortal part of myself, and what remains is bestial, someone once said, I think).
No, no, no, no! Come, let's away to prison.
We two alone will sing like birds i' th' cage.
When thou dost ask me blessing, I'll kneel down
And ask of thee forgiveness. So we'll live,
And pray, and sing, and tell old tales, and laugh
At pale clouded butterflies...?
You really must give yourself a bit of break now and then, Rambler, else folk might begin think your position and reputation are more important than reasonable doubt and free speech? yours, in sisterhood, "Old musty stockings."
Never mind. I had hoped we could continue on a reasonable footing, but that looks unlikely. Let's not talk again, we clearly aren't designed to get on with one another. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so offended, I refuse to even respond, as you can see. Personally, I'd sack your designer. Your foots are obviously far too reasonable for even the tiniest of socks. Now... where did I put those recalcitrant leg-warmers.. yours, aye, "Old Toe-mangler"
"As flies to wanton boys are we to th' crats, They kill us for their sport."
You lost most of us. Well played. I'm not sure if you think your responses are intelligent or clever or witty or somehow Wilde-esque, but no. They're none of the above. Hope to never cross your path _again_. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:30, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shucks, that's me well and truly chucked out of St Mary's then... (sad face) But thanks for the warm words of encouragement (happy face). Who exactly is "most of us"?
I don't know whether or not that thread was closed to your satisfaction, PCW, but I was at least glad to see a clear statement from Martinvl and some wise words from Dennis who, I sincerely think, is one of the best and most reasonable Admins here at the moment. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:24, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
".. progressively stalked, accused and then ridiculed by the Welsh." .. just saw this for the first time. Lordy. Lauging my socks off. Still.. progressive stalking, a big improvement on the pre-emptive variety. "Nid yw hyn yn ffwcin Facebook, eich bod yn gwybod!!" But thank you RM, you have my every sympathy. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:12, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[15] still knockin' 'em out after 35 years. a class act .. now, don't get greedy, me ol' china ..
.. currently touring.. let's hope they make it to deepest darkest Wiltshire..
.. 'ere, Paley, me ol' mucker, I 'ad one of them ramblers in the back of me cab last week! lorcs alive, 'e made a rite mess of me posh leatherette upholstery with his muddy daiseys (wot looked a lot like dead pig's noses, as it 'appens), but yer's the funny fink - he wasn't wearing no almonds!! strike a light, 'e must be a rite Robert deNiro! yours, Clevor Trevor
didn't make No 2: [16] .. "I say, ding-dong!" ... my goodness, these possessions, getting on top of us all (nice demented screams, Kevin)
well, there's genius, and then there's true genius.
Hi! Just a note about your change to the numbering - I've partially changed this. The digits refer to the number of horn parts rather than the actual number of horns in the orchestra - eg for that particular mass, in the premiere performance there were "14 string players... 13 woodwind and brass players...", although the orchestration asks for 1 oboe part, 1 bassoon, so on and so forth. So I think the digits are a good way to give this in shorthand form rather than, say, "two horns" which implies that literally two horn players are required for a performance! Hence Orchestra#Classical orchestra which says, say, "2 flutes, 2 oboes" but obviously a lot of orchestras have massive woodwind sections - so it refers to the number of parts.
I hope I'm not overexplaining myself, haha. It's not possible to write it all in an edit summary and I feel bad about undoing helpful edits, so I thought I should give my reasoning to you. ~ Riana ⁂13:17, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Riana. Your explanation is quite exemplary and I wholly agree. I really don't know how that could be made any clearer in the article. Many thanks for reverting and for your polite note. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries at all! Thanks for being understanding - and your point about MOSNUM absolutely does apply to the number of soloists (two soloists is two soloists regardless of orchestra/choir size!) so I'll just have a peek through the masses to see if I've done any more like that. ~ Riana ⁂13:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(listening in) I like the heavenly creature on the top of this page! Feel free to look at the other Schubert masses also, one after the other to be "performed " on DYK. We sang the Sparrow Mass today, and more yesterday (on my talk), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Martinevans123. You have new messages at WP:MCQ. Message added 10:19, 1 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Very hard to tell. Looks grammatically correct. I have searched for images of something that would fit the description but have drawn a blank. Would give benefit of doubt for now, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:22, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Jean Cortot, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Grammarxxx(What'd I do this time?)21:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person"? how bizarre. Which company, product, group, service or person is that, exactly? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:00, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Could that user be blocked? They have started several edit wars on other pages with other users all about the same issue! Definitely a sock puppet? Thanks! Uh oh Uh Oh Again (talk) 19:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, I think they are as bad as one another. Personally, I'm in favour of Scottish remaining Scottish and English remaining English. But this is a full grown edit war and the user shows no sign of stopping and doesn't seem to be willing to comprehend or settle. Uh oh Uh Oh Again (talk) 19:57, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The two recent ip editors at Annie Lennox seem to have very similar agendas, although one locates to Fife and the other to Glasgow. I'd certainly support you in asking for admin intervention at this stage - to protect some of the targeted articles and/or to issue a more official warning. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:03, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Peter, many thanks. As usual, my additions to one of you new articles appear as useful as crumpled stray fag-packets on the finely trimmed lawn of your labours. I'm really not sure where I found "Germany Street". This site [21] clearly has it (unsurprisingly) in Phoenix Street, so I have corrected the entry accordingly. I'm pretty sure the foundry is long, long gone. But I wonder what it produced. Cheers Martinevans123 (talk) 11:46, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, I see that it says: "Phoenix Foundry was owned briefly by Edmund Sharpe, the architect and entrepreneur. It made railway rolling stock in the 1840s and 1850s as well as castings, steam engines and other engineering products. The site of the foundry is now occupied by a retail park." Curiously, checking his article, I see that it mentions Germany Street! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:35, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Must have been woman's intuition when I added this earlier..
I just created my first music related article today (Lord Flea) n'all! - Flaw of the jungle
Why thank you! Providing the spellings in U.S. English nearly killed me though. I came across the most horribly spelt and named article earlier.. Off-color humor - Fffggnnrrrr!
Haha, yes always worth a "browsing a sister site", I say. Ooo-err, missus. And here's some more rhymingcouplets that you are sure to enjoy: [24] (Stevie Riks is quite talented, actually!) yours, Old Mother Manson
Why did the chicken cross the road? - Terry F. Wit
Of course at first, this situation appears to be a typical avianphenotype / genotype response to some hitherto unknown environmental cause or internal cue.
The standard answer given appears to be simply 'to get to the other side', however, crediting the subject with intentionality and to assume it even knows what a road is could be misguided, and raises issues of comparing degrees of consciousness between humans and animals (generally thought to be impossible).
The distinction isn't made as to whom the word "why" refers, is it the subject's thought processes, or my guess as to his reasoning?
Looked at either way, we ultimately reach the so-called 'hard problem(s) of consciousness' (specifically the subjective component to experience), itself a contentious area, in that it has been regarded as the only question in science we don't yet know how to ask, let alone solve. Possible quantum-mechanical explanations for consciousness may (in the future) be able to address the question of why, but all calculations or solutions would inevitably be partial due to the Uncertainty Principle (besides, mathematically the question is incomplete).
More to the point, i didn't personally observe the incident, so to ascribe any motives for this bird/road crossing situation is going to be guesswork on my part, could well be fabrication on yours, and in any case providing a definite statement on physical processes still leads back to Heisenberg and problems of perception (even if this incident had been fully observed by me).
So in conclusion, my reply to your question is that question itself needs reframing as it is most likely unanswerable, if not moot..
Except that "the only question in science we don't yet know how to ask, let alone solve" must be ... why did Jim Davidson ever have a career? yours, Ernie the Giant Chicken
Abu banana!.. Years back the local rag offered a prize of the first three series of Family Guy to the writer of the funniest postcard, answering what is the dog called? I drew a picture of Stewie on a bit of old cardboard with a speech-bubble coming out his mouth saying "MY COCK STINKS!" - needless to say, I won the dvds.. I feel like..
That article about Mike sure puts other trashy bio articles into perspective. You know what they say here.. "looks like a duck, sounds like a duck ... probably tastes like Little Rock Chicken".
Gee heck, Hilary, whaat arhh reeally need is "(probably almost) the best rhyming-dictionary (not quite available yet) in the world (nearly) ™" Billy the Clints
haha a classic!! 'ere mate... I 'ad that ol' Charlie Crabgrass in the back of me cab the uvva day! An' a rite mental geezah 'e was an' all. But the funny fink was, 'e was a dead-ringah for that psychopractic bruvvah of mine wot's always arht to do me in!! yours, in fear of me life again, innmate-in-a-long-term-hinstitution ..."Do hurry up Denis - you know we've got Jimmy Savile coming to dinner!" - ah those happy days... before Mrs Thatcher was a lady...
I watched this with my brother last night absolutely agog and agape - The SS/SAS gag and the union thing have made it into Spitting Image page.. But the Savile thing is the icing on the cake!
...and a very pervy, mouldy, old rotten cake it is too, mate. But, yes I do tend to persistently loiter hang around BBC radio "like a tarnished medallion around a scrawny chavvy neck"... now where did I put that didgeridoo? Yours, in desperation, Marmalade Pussycanya tell what it is yet, matey??
I had some bees in my youth, and put them to work making honey
- UpThe Cherry People
Ah, what a gem. Practice resurrections - I had almost forgotten. That Chris Morris is a bit rude, though, isn't he? Like a red rag to a Bishop. As for those erect Muslims, that's very useful to know. I hope we can expect to see that on our front page very soon indeed, dead Prime Ministers permitting, of course. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:13, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
you can never have too many bees in your mouth, I always say, well I sometimes say, obviously, when I have no bees, or only a few, or even one, perhaps, anyway...
'ere mate - I 'ad one of them "wikypeeja-editors-wot-eats-babies" in the back of me cab the uvva nite! Strike a light! It turns out 'e's one of them "resurrectionist" types wot gets themsleves buried by their fellow wikypeejans and 'en comes back to life as a giant spooky sock, or summat. Scary stuff mate! yours, dial-a-hearse minicabs .. and very rude too.. never paid his fare... and told me I "didn't know me hearse from me elbow"!!
"Ever since as I can remember, people have been calling me "bossy and opinionated"... maybe that's because I am", Barbra Star Strand
Arrghh! Please stop shattering my preconceptions.. While I like classical music (and Debussy especially) I am of the South Park generation and we're not supposed to like Mecha-Streisand! - Morrissey?
"lolness" (true, tho)... a classic episode, it seems. But, let's face it, "bossy and opinionated" - bound to do well at wikipedia! But remember - "Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana".
Ello ello ello, what 'ave we 'ere then? Quite flagrant breaking of the Vegetable Hate Act of 1912.. You're nicked my sahn! - the ever vigilant Nite Owl
Good Evans..! I had to dig an old mite-ridden book of the shelf to chip in to old Christmas Humphreys. I read Buddhism at an impressionable age - mere months before going to The Eavisian Fields, wherein I indulged in some strange magical potion that opened up a few new perspectives, probably some of Nimoy's finest now I look back on it.. - Farmer Giles [26]
Ahhhagagagaga! Inspired! Funnily enough as a wannabe cartoonist in m'yoot, by the age of ten I'd built up a big stack of Gilesses, which me dear old mum later "accidentally" took to a carboot, selling em all for a fiver to (quote): "a man with trembling hands".. - worzl gummij
Are these all ex-BBC employees? Wiki obviously needs a "has been tagged" feature, for all its pictures, like Facebook. Thanks for the invite there, HillBills, but I'll pass for now, thanks. -- Sandy, not Julian
"Well I've decided to come clean, after all these years. My real name is, in fact, Gustave Courbet but like everyone else here I had to choose a username that would allow me to be taunted for being Welsh. So for better or worse I chose this stupid one with numbers in it. I make this statement because I don't want to hide behind a pretend shield of anonymity. If you know me in real life, please join me for a quiet liver and nice Chianti. (But how I still dearly wish I had a anonymous obscure but classical Latin name that people could really admire....)" ... well done, "MF"! - that's a wonderfully civil gesture and a now see you in a completely new light, .. yours, "in the box", Father Ted Crilly
Haha, thanks Gerda. I was only moving fullstops around there because I was intrigued over the question of the origin of the name, which you seem to have answered im Nu! How amazing - that Bach himself never even gave it a "name" as such! I wish, in a way, that es hätte einen deutschen Namen even on English wikipedia! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ngunalik (talk) 23:30, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Hi Martin, I am still editing the article on Kony. Most of the information found are outdated and majority of the information found is false. For instance, Kony or LRA did not begin in 1986. Please try to check the references that I put in and say whether you agree with it or not.Ngunalik (talk) 23:30, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. If you are going to make large-scale changes or replacements at that article, then may I suggest that you always use edit summaries, and/or open a discussion thread on the Talk Page, to explain your rationale? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:35, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin, thanks for your kind words on my talk. I wish I could tidy things up more in the article when I have time. There are many inconsistencies making it difficult to reconcile the article with other related articles. However, I think we are all getting more organized especially when we are keeping upto date with facts. Kind regards to you. Ngunalik (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your advice about using the edit summary when making large-scale changes is noted. I made no writing in the article yesterday 17 April. Only noticed that a reference at 21 has one curly bracket therefore I added the missing curly bracket. I noticed that you undid this and the reason you stated is that I had not used edit summary. Please could you not undo my edits on the basis of none use of edit summary. I do not appreciate this your move and it is not a regulation on wiki that an editor should just go around reversing writings on the basis of non entry on edit summaries. Regards Ngunalik (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad that I've have managed to get your attention around to "regulations". I do not appreciate your making 30 edits to an article without a single edit summary. Adding a curly bracket is not really a contentious edit. Taking a curly bracket away is not really contentious. But making large-scale deletions of fully sourced material, without any form of explanation, certainly is contentious. Could you kindly sign your Talk Page edits at the end of your text? Could you kindly not open a discussion about Joseph Kony in a section about Dylan Thomas? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:39, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Martin could you stop intimidating me. You are being unprofessional and sarcastic. Do not expect me to run before I can walk. I do not wish to receive this unfriendly communication from you. Ngunalik (talk) 12:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm being plain. Could you possibly indent your comments and sign them, just once, at the end? Please do not feel obliged to come to my Talk Page again. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if you have been following the "stream-of-random-offensive-drivel-that-passes-for-conversation" on this page... but this recent contribution, from a fellow acolyte of St Peter, puts most of wikipedia into sharp perspective, I feel. Yours The Runcible Spooner.
I followed the stream for some of its course, though became cast adrift when it became - as a publishing house once commented in a rejection of a submission of mine - "too esoteric" for my eddicated brain to follow.... My lack of pc sound results in my having a somewhat poor grasp of the thrust of the youtube link, unfortunately. Was Mr Cook not a fan of Wikipedia then, I wonder? Robertally yours, "Smuggins"
ahh yes, you need sound. And I strongly advise you to get it, to enjoy the best videos YT has to offer, "lol". But then again, let's just say Why Bother?, eh Schmugsy? (a true classic of its genre)
On 24 April 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lord Flea, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that mento artist Lord Flea helped start the calypso craze, was covered by Harry Belafonte, and wrote a song about a monkey who followed him around? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lord Flea. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Apologies for the random oddness of the Talk Page discussions. Big ups to the evil Dr. Blofeld for getting this one off the ground (as per usual). Martinevans123 (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, please edit the opening para of Jeffrey Dahmer to read that he killed 'a minimum of 17 men and boys" as no serial killer is ever caught or admits to all his victims. Thank you. Hailypaige (talk) 06:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. The article was expanded massively over Easter by another editor, who then asked me to look at it. The more we start editing it the more problems we are identifying. I would say change it to what the sources say.— Rodtalk19:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I could understand that as an easy mistake. Unfortunately, on that score, the source provided says nothing! My official NT guidebook, by Francis Greenacre, (substantially revised by Stephen Ponder, 2005), explains that he worked for his father-in-law (p. 10), but makes no mention of him ever working for his own father. Obviously he inherited only on his father's death, and would probably not have organised great works on the house before then.
I am quite surprised that the excellent NT guide (41 pages) is not used as the primary source for this article. In fact, it's not used once. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just created a new mento-bio for Lord Messam — only a few sources for this chap unfortunately, and one of them went off-line just as I was putting the finishing touches to it. Without birth and death dates, do you think it needs a infobox? and would you mind checking it for errors? Cheers! Hillbillyholidaytalk21:04, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, just had a quick first go. Not sure if we need his or His to satisfy WP:MOS? Are any of the sources very clear? All we need now is a sample ..! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:20, 2 May 2013 (UTC) "Rhodri?" - you'll need to ask Dr Blofeld about that one...! [reply]
Hi Martinevans123. I replied to Biker Biker as follows: Thanks for message, Biker Biker. The book is a first novel, which is why the novelist is not notable--yet. The book has the endorsement of the Edward Thomas estate, extracts have been published in the Edward Thomas Fellowship newsletter and it was reviewed in the Times Literary Supplement last week. Author Linda Newbery, referred to later in the Edward Thomas Wikipedia article, has said of the book, '[Margaret Keeping's] writing is very assured and she has the necessary eye for place, detail, weather and seasons to write about Edward Thomas...I hope the book will reach the wide audience it deserves and feel sure that many others will enjoy it as much as I have.' She has also given permission for this quote to be used. I have removed the link, which I accept could be seen as promotional, and reworded the text. I think it would be great if some mention of the work was made on the Wikipedia Edward Thomas page. I would add that the author studied Thomas at post-graduate level. Springfever2013 (talk) 10:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I am quite vell up here, Herr Untermensch. The King zends his regards, ve get on rather grandly if you must know — His music is not exactly up mein strasse, but its just the right side of entartete Kunst — our Schweinhund postman keeps us quite informed of events.. —Adolf (nr. Mare Crisium, Luna)
Elvis? A hero to most but he never meant shit to me, you see straight out racist that sucker was, simple and plain. muddyfudge him.. — Carlton Ridenhour
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 19:06, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is copied directly. But I have tried to paraphrase. These are mostly chronological facts. They just need paraphrasing less closely, but without destroying the chronology, if that is possible. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But who shall stalk the stalkers? Guess that'll be me. "User contributions" is such a fertile area for someone like me, Here's a book source from the Catalogue of the British Section: Paris Universal Exhibition of 1867 which gives honourable mention to Howell James & Co. Hope it helps. Hillbillyholidaytalk19:47, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also a description of an exhibit (but no pic unfortunately) from the Official Descriptive and Illustrated Catalogue of the Great Exhibition[28] click 'next' mention maybe - it's page 397.
Feel; free to add all you want! MadManBot must find it more difficult to fight two separate editors? In fact... add loads more and get yourself a DYK! Those 140 women would be a good hook. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:00, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A sensible hookline? Never again! The one I did for Ken Khouri was my first innuendo-free hook and only got a few hundred views.. I'll keep hunting down stuff though, and will add if you don't get round to it. Is this worthy? Report from Select Committee on the Silk Trade (1832), Howell James & Co. protesting about some restrictions (I think) [29]
Not sure about this snappily titled book, did they do the binding for it maybe? National Shakespeare Tercentenary. The Shakespeare Memorial Bust, by Felix M. Miller, (Professor of Sculpture, Government School of Art,) Published Under the Special and Exclusive Sanction of the 'National Shakespeare' and 'Stratford-on-Avon Tercentenary Committees, ' by Howell, James, & Co., Goldsmiths (1864) [30]Hillbillyholidaytalk20:15, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
SSICA (Stick Sensor and Interfacee Control Assembly) is the acronym for the "centre stick" as it is properly known. Sorry I used American spelling. Thank you for your corrections.Languid Scientist (talk) 20:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I see that it's also called that in the image caption - although most people would probably just call it "the stick top"! (and the bit that connects it to the avionics, the SSICA). I know that BritEng conventions are sometimes debatable for German sources. I see DIEHL use "central"!: [31]Martinevans123 (talk) 20:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[32] You know, Paris, Peru, you know, I mean
Iraq, Iran, Eurasia, you know what am talkin' about.. what a genius
Yes! My parents weren't too into music and as a kid there were only a few random LPs in the house, but Innervisions was one of them, and that one is permanently in my imaginary "top-ten". I can even play and just about sing it. Altogether now..
"..When you get oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh off that trip.."
—The Golden Wonder
sorry, was just "blissing out" to those hand claps on "He's Mistra Know-It-All".. one of the finest albums of all time.
Miss Vans, please could you assist in sorting the categories out on this rather interesting article?
Rev. Stuart Campbell This guy was probably my first hero, and definitely shaped my writing style, it was only after getting online that I discovered he's now a famous cybernat(!) involved with the Scottish Independence debate. It's nearly done, though I could venture up into the loft and hunt down some old Amiga Power magazines for a few juicy quotes. I seem to remember him comparing one game to the Sarajevo atrocities. I've been working on it since midnight and my eyes are going a bit squiff. Hillbillyholidaytalk12:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Crivvens, that’s awfully kind, but I had to ask for one Wiki entry to be deleted ages ago because it came under sustained attacks from vandals/stalkers, so I wouldn’t hold out hopes of it lasting too long unmolested…
That's very intriguing. I wonder when and how long it lasted. There's quite a few article writers about these days who actually crave the odd hapless vandal or stalker! Al's bro, Marti Nevins (talk) 18:47, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't it? He's way more (in)famous nowadays, but I don't think he minds courting a bit of controversy. This article [33] is pretty strong stuff, I wouldn't touch it with yours! He already has a dedicated unitroll called Longshanker who calls the Rev's site "Wangs Over Skintland" and he baited some forum nerds with this post (3rd down).. Hillbillyholidaytalk19:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
aah yes... "hope your cancer gets AIDS"... bless, I miss the lively "blog mentality" at such a refined website as our own, don't you?
It would seem that 83.67.217.135 is taking an keen interest for a good reason! (most recent edit!) Some choice quotes from 83.67 are "Oh, not this cobblers again." and "I'm in no way absolving myself of involvement in an edit war, I'm equally guilty and I openly described it as such." It's looks like User:Dreaded Walrus might have sussed out what's happening. Walrus then mentions: "It should also be noted that I used to edit the article myself, but took it off my watchlist in late 2007 after getting frustrated with it taking time away from other WP activities, and receiving an email from Stuart Campbell himself that was filled with ad hominem attacks on myself, Wikipedia administrators, and Wikipedia itself."
ThenUser:Stuart Campbell appears and lays it down smooth brother, it's worth taking a look, but here is a good one: "Wikipedia's dispute-resolution procedures seem to be as biased, hypocritical and generally unsatisfactory as they've always been, and it would save a lot of trouble all round if the entry simply disappeared altogether. It'd certainly make ME happier, but who the hell cares what I think? I'm just the poor bastard it's about, after all." and this is nice: "Nevertheless, I expect no sympathy or reason, because in my experience Wikipedia is staffed by arrogant jobsworths drunk on the power they wield over the encyclopaedia's hapless subjects." Another issue was that there was a murderer called Stuart Campbell unfortunately, as Rev. Stu notes: "It took a quite //extraordinary// amount of time and effort to get myself distinguished from the rapist and murderer Stuart Campbell, for example, with people re-inserting links to his entry from references to me several times even after the difference had been pointed out."Hillbillyholidaytalk01:47, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good golly gosh this is a rather naughty (and perhaps the best ever) request for an unblock, from another likely Campbell ip — Hillbillyholidaytalk
This chap seemingly causes controversy wherever he goes. Quite marvelous. Not only did I need to wikilink him to 24 games, I discovered he’s been discussed on WP again and again (oh, and again:) [37][38][39][40][41] (and mentioned in a few discussions more besides. eg. [42])
My word, you like to work the late-shift, don't you! Like a dog with a bone. Yes, it seems Mr Campbell, shrinking violet that he is, is no stranger to wikipedia. A lovely quote there about how this place works. And a very subtle reason for unblock. your mate Moggy
Indeedy. My sleeping patterns are somewhat erratic to say the least. Probably a remnant from my mis-spent youth. My record is 125 hours without kip (very long story), I used to do 100+ regularly. And as for the dog with a bone, I thought I was the most unpigeonholeable person going, but Wikipedia:WikiWolfcub pretty much nails it.. What a lovely morning! Might cycle down to old Hengles to take some photos. Hillbillyholidaytalk08:56, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh it is a lovely place. The article is about 80% my work, it was in a rather poor state and it involved (gasp!) trips to the library. Another thing I learnt during my research, was that that Reverend prefers the company of lesbians as they the only ones that can outdrink him. This is something I have long observed, (my ex for instance! again!) I find them to be barkingly brilliant company on the whole. Coupled with his collection of traditional 'dad' presents, I think we'd all get on like a house on fire. — Lady Marchpane
Isn't it though? Eh? Do you remember? Small boys down the park.. Cor, Ryan Giggs, you know? Giggsy Wiggsy. Marvelous! You know? Uncategorizable! Is that a word? It is now! — Ron Manager[43]
Soft southern fairy? Ooo are you Pancho or summat? I thought I mentioned on Blofeld's page that I (Pinched — Ed) a policeman once? Not as good as the time my brother got nicked for "swearing at a police-dog" (verdict: Laughed out of court). He's quite the performer. If he keeps it up, he'll warrant a WP entry one day: A beat boxer with more originality than a squirrel playing chess. Pete can create the most thrilling, head bopping music, a beatboxing mastermind accompanied by trusty loop pedal and raw talent. Famous for his 'Rum'n'Bass'; RePete's stage presence and Pure genius for music always leaves the crowd screaming for more.[44]
So must I. He won't thank me for posting this link [46], the sound quality is atrocious, and it's a mere fraction of the live experience (where he might lurch from Korn to Benny Goodman to MC Skibadee in the space of 4 bars, or run into the crowd to nick some drinks and then drum (and smash) the glasses before his equipment falls over:) But it's a wee taster Hillbillyholidaytalk10:42, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Great lyrics... no, seriously, very good. Looks like he's almost as "driven" as you?
Despite busking (duetting with tramps and toddlers, whilst wearing a horse's head, outside Lidl's, during the horsemeat hoohah) he isn't so keen on self-promotion online, so I'm gonna have to "manage" him a tad, if I ever move there..
The spirit of Ron Manager lives on! 'ere mate, that Book of Cameron looks like a right good read, beats that 'opeless "Book of Moron" by miles, ma sahn.
The wonderful Swannij. An odd place, they must be one of the few places left with a Wimpy Bar (they point-blank refuse to even countenance a McDonalds), where on NYE all the yokels dress up (and sometimes "fight the powers that be" if necessary) It's a 1¾ cycle ride from mine, there have been some incredible barndances in the old quarries, and I stayed the night in Tilly Whim Cave[47] with my ex once (she later said it was a ploy to put bats and adders in her head, damn! foiled again!).. ..However it's not a patch on my home turf..viva bos vegas!
The delightful explorer Eric Newby moved near there, and recounts a 1930s childhood holiday that he had there. He walked the exact same route we walked to the caves (quite a slog). Here is the story :) [48]
I don't care what you say about boozy lesbians, you won't catch me in any Tilly Quim Cave!! But have got a few of Eric's very good books.
(Sir Frederick Treves described Tilly Whim Cave as "reputed to be a smugglers cave, but in plain fact a disused quarry. It is approached by a dark, sloping tunnel, in the descent of which the women scream, while the men support them copiously. [Copiously?] Every available surface in this smugglers' haunt is carved with the names or initials of steamer people, while the ground is littered with their bottles, their egg-shells, and their paper bags." Obviously he wrote this while in his role as ambassador for Dorset Tourism..... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:51, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! Me n'all. I only went abroad once (twenty year ago) so quench my wonderlust with travel books. My first article was one. In Secret Tibet a fanciful Theosophical folly. My ex's sister ran the only club in Swanage, she used to get semi-locals like wossy and willy in there regularly.
Zoinks! I remember her! She actually looks a bit like the Reverend! stu versus huffty
I'd spot that turban anywhere...
That poor Tottie, it was a Postgate production (as cynical a program aimed at five year olds as you'll ever see, he must have been mighty peeved about something) that the BBC somehow lost the final tapes for. Good thing to. It culminates with Marchpane making a circle of fire around the innocent baby of the house, knowing full well that his plastic and ditzy mum will run in and save him. Which she does only to catch fire, exclaiming "ooh look at the pretty colours as she melts. The house then burns down with all in it. The closing credits rolling over the dollhouse-inferno. This rare clip [49](from 5:45 on) is just like Thatcher interrogating a young Charles Kennedy. Crazy.
My word, quite disturbing. Postgate sounds quite menacing at times. It seems to have had quite a effect on you, Billy. Still, psychiatry's loss is Wikipedia's gain, I'm glad to say. I'm a Pogle's Wood man myself. But another Peter Firmin masterpiece here, it seems.
Must have had an effect. Perhaps it wasn't (quite) as bad an ending as i just misremembered. The original Moomins scared the willies out of me as well. Especially that bizarre tune.
Ah, yes, Moomins. You'll need to (discretely) ask PCW about them, especially the ones in disguise. [50] - sounds better in the original Swedish!!
Mmm? How cryptic. You menace! That version is THE MOST FAVOURED PROGENY OF THE HORNED ONETM I was referring to this bjorky number: [51]
Hmm, yes, see what you mean... Father Abrahams goes ethnic maybe?
[Hurriedly searches own 'work'...] "Those mind-bending ethnic gremlins need never-ending ethnic cleansing"
Been creating a couple of entries for some old mates. here and here. Not sure if they quite meet the standards. I've calculated that at the current rate, by next week my sensible contributions will have dropped to zero, and by next month I'll be actively vandalizing the place. Hurrah!
That's not chronological!! You can get indeffed for that!! Rochdale??
Just a note about the eBook publishing date. My original entry was based on his official website but was written in the past tense based on the assumption that they hit the predicted publishing date, some two weeks later. They may have delayed publishing for some reason and the two corrections made by the unregistered user may indeed be correct. However there appears to be no current evidence either way. Incidentally I met Rosko in 1997 or 1998 in the London studios of Country Music Radio. Merlin Network One used the studios for four hours on a Wednesday evening to broadcast a mix of vintage 60s (R Caroline) and rock (the late Tommy Vance) on satellite radio and shortwave radio; also sometimes streamed on the internet and rebroadcast on FM. Rosko was without his trademark fur coat, dressed head to toe in denim, and talked briefly before leaving. I'm sure I jabbered inanely as you do when you meet a hero. Keomike (talk) 16:03, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted because (a) anon ip (b) no edit summary, and (c) I could see no visible evidence, at the source linked, to show a change of date. Provided there is evidence, then I guess there is no problem, although I am still unsure as to what has changed in terms of content. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It was the last thing I was looking into before joining WP, imho Peter Dale Scott is getting warm, on paper LHO was clearly a "barium meal" for US intel leaks,[55] but irl, well there were quite a few LHOs knocking about it would seem (besides yourself Paul), like MMM. But I am quite sick to death of the subject (for now).. Me? Hardly Oswald!
'ere mate, I 'ad that jazz legend Earl "Fatha" Hines in the back of me cab last night.... he kept wanting to take me for a "good old Ruby", what a krayzee kat!!!
You ever see the Bush clip? where he laughs as he says "lone gunman"... ... at a president's funeral no less! [56]
well, he was probably so amused that he'd managed to read all the words on his paper, in the right order. Amazing logic there about the "final and definitive say". Yours, still chewing it over, The President's Friend.
Oo, err, missus, you have so many dogs in the fire, don't ya dearie.
True Boscumite. That video I linked is all filmed within two hundred yards of my house. The bit from 1:35 on is typical Bostralian behaviour. The area has a unique "flavour"[57], all the fault of that Percy Shelley who's son owned most of it, requesting that his lands be used only for public good, which means a lot of rehabs, the place has been notorious since the mid 80s. Murder and mentalist capital of the south. I've had a few scrapes believe me! (no doubt you'll be hearing of them before too long (probably via email)) :)
Yes, Florence is quite an odd name for a guy, isn't it, especially for a sheriff!!
I may have a slight Conflict of Interest with this article. A while back, in a rare drunken moment, my mum let on that I was conceived in one of them beach-huts on the spit. In light of this revelation, I now consider myself to be the uncrowned King of Hengistbury Head, and indeed I can be found there on the night of a full moon, restaking my rightful claim to this territory. -- Smiley
Your Mum should have given you one of them fashionable sleb names - like the Becksprogs - maybe Hengey? Gisty? who knows, maybe even Doggie? yours in the ce-ment pond, Hill-Billy Beverley
I'm a little confused by your edit and summary here: [58]. Not only do you provide no source for it, but you imply that it may possibly not even have happened. Why are you adding it at all? AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:11, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are easily found in a minute (sorry, the chilled Moscato was beckoning). They both certainly happened. Aspel's selective amnesia arose when interviewed on morning TV by Phillip Schofield after the scandal broke. Few slebs get two cracks at TIYL in UK - it's a rite of passage that marks Savile out as an especially loved media icon. If you think it's unnecessary chuck it out and I won't bother with the refs. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 11 May 2013 (UTC) shame this one's a blog :[59], but this one is slightly better [60][reply]
If you've heard of this band already, well, I'd be a little surprised and if you've heard this song then I'd be most impressed. Fifteen years ago, I had to ring Rough Trade and get them to post me the remaining copy they had of the album this song is off. Great band, think a Velvet Underground who learnt as they went. Stick with it, it veers all over the place (in a nice way).. Hillbillyholidaytalk09:19, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well orrrllriiiighh.. Stones rock, natch, 'ere Keef where's them tins of peaches? That Raincoats started off all punky, that tune was off their 2nd, and by the third LP they were quite, quite glorious world fusion pioneers. Rotten, Cobain, and the magnificent Sonic Youth were all fans. This one is magic And to think when I first heard them, I thought the lead singer must be deaf!! Hillbillyholidaytalk12:48, 12 May 2013 (UTC) (Aphex Twin, of course, is the greatest genius these islands have ever produced music-wise. And anyone who says otherwise is will be called outside for a shin-kicking)[reply]
Just added Cobain's quote to the Raincoats article the rest reads: "They're playing their music for themselves. It's not as sacred as wire-tapping a Buddhist monk's telephone or something because if The Raincoats really did catch me, they would probably just ask me if I wanted some tea. I would comply, then they would finish playing their songs and I would say thank you very much for making me feel good." Cubby Broccoli
Stunning vid, I'd say. Ah yes, Lanner's finest.. well, Limerick's anyway, apart from Mr Eurovision obviously.... yours, over-the-cliffs-and-far-away, Vera Limp
p.s. have seen this fine band many times [66] probably too twee for you hardrocker, (sorry, no Vera's, but you're welcome to a hit off me Lebanese oil...)
I thought TDC were very good, until I saw them live. Then I realised how brilliant they really were. Got all the albums, Hannon a genius, etc., etc. and that reminds me, "Father Jackum" has been mercifully quiet of late I must say [67]
Awarded by a very charitable serious editor who wishes to remain anonymous:
The full citation reads:
"Experimental researchers in 2001 did indeed fail to successfully use a chocolate teapot they had made. Later research, however, by The Naked Scientists in 2008, showed that such a teapot could be used to make tea, provided that the walls of the teapot were more then one centimetre thick." A great honour indeed. Fruit-and-Nut (talk) 14:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Users are advised that watching BBC4 or listening to BBC Radio4 in order to assist in their contributions is frowned upon. It is far too easy, and our American cousins do not have access to such resources. Please stick to ITV in the future. Thank you. BeebBot
On the subject, I insist everyone in the world checks out the totes amaze docu-film Genghis Blues about Paul Pena, it features Richard Feynman shaman footage, plus a lot of incredible Tuvan Throat singing combined with the blues. Magic. Hillbillyholidaytalk19:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, ya schmuck! Now the mind-reader already!! I remember watching those "Horizon"s and thinking, "jeez", this American-guy-of-Jewish-ancestry, is actually quite cool. It was only later I discovered Jackie Mason and so became an actual convert. These days I even converse here with St Dennis. I'll certainly check out that blues. I-player is so painfully useful, n'est ce pas? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
They can be. That BBC Writers' Guide 'basket' sentence and the 'donkey' bit, were early humorous additions of mine Lo and behold, t'other day old Mark Corrigan himself quoted them on Radio4's The Unbelievable Truth getting a big laugh... The bastard. Hillbillyholidaytalk
"Yo nigs. Is that a donkey in your basket, or are you just pleased to see me, vicar?" fnaar.. fnaar... I am obviouisly frequently guilty of trying to tart up wiki-rubbish to make it grammatically correct wiki-rubbish, Unless one has a copy of the "The Green Book", one should be banned from editing that article... or do I sound like I'm ranting again? "go-on, go-on, go-on, go-on...." .. yours, Martha Conan Doyle the Barbarian
What you talkin' about? The Undertones are all well and good, but the overtones is where it's at.."Yo nigs. Is that a donkey in your basket, or are you just pleased to see me, vicar?" — Whassat? A Zappa lyric or summat? :)
.... this album suddenly springs to mind, for some unknown reason...
Hmm, hmm, hmm. Sweet daddy-oh... that sure do sizzle. "When it comes down to love you're a horse". (allegedly)
I love Frank Sinatra. You love Frank Sinatra. We all love Frank Sinatra. And why do we love Frank Sinatra..? Because he’d kill us if we didn't.. — Jackie Mason
"I only saw him in the audience when he started to interrupt my act calling me Jew this and Jew that. I put him down and the audience started applauding me because they thought he was being obnoxious." Later that night, three bullets were pumped into Mason's Vegas hotel room, shattering the glass doors and lodging in the mattress of his bed. But naturally, the police saw no reason to pursue an investigation. "I knew that Sinatra owned Las Vegas when the detectives there made me the prime suspect and asked that I take a lie-detector test," said Mason, adding, "I have no idea who it was who tried to shoot me. After the shots were fired, all I heard was someone singing, Doobie, doobie, doo.."
Now that is funny. And that looks like a very useful addition to a certain wiki article. Although I'm sure someone would claim WP:UNDUE... and you wouldn't weant to argue with them, would you? I was driving on the motorway last year when Mason came on the radio in an interview. I had to pull onto the hard-shoulder I was laughing so much. I find his humour utterly predictable and yet still utterly hilarious... yours, honest, officer
He's probably been out "on the lash" all night, fnaar, fnaar. And listen here sonny - GrannyCrackJacks is a very talented editor and I will not hear a word said against her! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You already know that roads and motorways are all on my watchlist. I have just reverted you lady friend on the M62 page with this edit summary ... Undid revision 555244265 by J3Mrs (talk) IP editor is correct ... you are muddling with your easterly and westerly orientations. ... wait for the proverbial to hit the fan in my Talk page office! – – Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard|— 20:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, you've corrected it ... my last doesn't make any sense now. But just had a premonition that she will be watching all of this now that the "echo" system throws up any mention of your user name onto your topline – – Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard|— 21:59, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A momentous day. "Maybe we're seeing another side to Father Jack, a more caring and considerate..." [72]. But everyone is pleased, I think. And rightly so. Thanks to the ingenious Mad King Dennis and his crafty new account name regulations, we mere hod-carriers can all now benefit... no more "Full Manchester Stretchers", but instead just much smaller blocks.... we hope. Yours, building for the future, and Keeping Government Local.
B'Gorrah, 'tis a miracle, I tell ya! And those charming rural weekend breaks can be very appealing at this time of the year, even without any phantom canoeing accidents...
If you keep reverting my changes you will be in violation of the 3RR rule. I don't want to get drawn into an edit war with you, but you should seriously consider whether Duvitski's latest TV appearance (on a minor digital channel) really warrants a separate paragraph and extra 'context'. Why is it more important than any of her other TV work - much of which is far higher profile (e.g. One Foot in the Grave), but only included as part of a list? Smurfmeister (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I’m not sure that I “keep” reverting your edits. Your first edit removed the films and the only current source. Your second edit restored the source but again removed the films. I would argue that the latest TV appearance warrants slightly more detail because of its recency. But I am not opposed to a bit of trimming it a little. Why do think that the films are worth no mention at all, in such a small article as this? Surely as you made the first edit here you will violate 3RR before I do? I am trying to preserve the status quo until a consensus can be reached. If you feel that strongly, perhaps you could open a discussion thread on the article Talk Page? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And I have commented there. Most actor/actess articles group TV in one place and film in an other, so that would be a very good idea. I think we ought to try and find a few more sources also. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:46, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
John Peel and Michael Palin, schoolmates in Shrewsbury School
Thank you, Martin. Another good reference, indeed. I have an old discussion with MarnetteD about Palin and Peel being friends at Shrewsbury. If you see "John Peel's Record Box" all the people there are members of his family or people form the radio and music business. Michael Palin is there for being friend of him as a child or even longer. I want to state that: they were schoolmates. Even Palin describes John at his room listening records. Regards, --190.45.86.154 (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's just my interpretation of Peel's narration. I quoted the full extent of his reporting of Palin in his book. Peel was three years older than Palin, although, as he admits, Palin was a good deal brighter. (My word, judging by your ip address, you are a long way away! It would be a good idea for you to create a username maybe?) Regards, Martinevans123 (talk) 23:09, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I live in Chile. That's right. And I use an IP because I speak spanish and I think I can not do a great job collaborating with the English Wikipedia. If in spanish discussions about articles are long, in english would be worst. Arguing in english is not easy for me. But I found that relation and I thought it would be nice to state it in both articles (Palin and Peel). The relation did exist. Many wikipedians think IP collaborators and vandals or pirates or such. Not me. Thank you, anyway. Bye, --190.45.86.154 (talk) 23:46, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's clear that you are no vandal! And that's your choice entirely. But some editors are very suspicious of ip edits and are not always tolerant of mistakes in the written English. You might find that you'd have an easier time with a user name? I'm sure you would be a very useful resource for articles about Chile. I personally think there is far too little interchange, on a day-to-day basis, between en.wiki and the other language variants. By the way, your written English is quite excellent and much better than that of many British people! Adiós y los mejores deseos. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So sorry to have trampled in hobnailed boots through your recent additions. Incompetence rather than malice, you know. I'll be sure to check the accidental deletions before I've finished my overhaul of the bio section. Tim riley (talk) 19:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Thanks for your note. I just thought the sooner the fikm got a mention, the better. Petroc T was on about it the other morning. Cheers. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:17, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
People above 300 article edits are not immune from anything, nor are people below 300 article edits. You may comment on me all you like, but it would behoove you to not misrepresent my words. People with less than 300 article edits don't get to tell at least three admins what they can and cannot do, since they don't know what admins can and should and might do. It's like an adult taking advice on anything from a kid that can't wipe their own ass yet. And note the "like": simile. And if such editors keep taunting and taunting, and do little else but rant and rave about "abusive admins", then at some point the atmosphere is too toxic for collaboration. Personally, I don't care what DanielTom has to say about me--I have taught freshman comp for over a decade, I've heard it all before. What you find worthy of your time and effort there, I don't know and I won't presume, but I think you know very well why they were blocked. Guantanamo? Please. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 00:23, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, "like". But not that much like I'm afraid. Perhaps punishment works better when it's unannounced? I'll get my orange suit ready, just in case. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Am also trying to fathom this edit [73] which was made afterUser:DanielTom's access to his own Talk Page was revoked, and what was the evidence to support that edit summary? I don't think that kind of "justification" is really appropriate, do you? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
({unblock}) I'm sorry. This is Kafkaesque. -- Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name. — Sandahl
'ere mate, I 'ad this travelin' salesman fella in the back of me cab last nite, a Gregory Samson, or summat... said 'e was late for work. Wouldn't pay 'is fare neither - reckons 'e was transformin' into a giant "admin" or summat. Used up a whole can of "insecto-kill" on him, too. Or maybe it was a dung-beetle. These crazy Czechs, eh? you just can't trust 'em, can ya!
and as if by magic... [74] it's all here... "brown German cockroaches" (just like that Kafka guy!)... " sweet-laced traps" (sounds like WP:GA to me)... and even Dennis's back yard. Omg| It all fits! chilling
"..ancient leprosy-ridden priests whose blessing he needs before the Spartan council will authorize going to war." .... sounds like another RfC brewing to me!
.. good luck, y'all, in reeling in Daniel Tom to a tasty RFC/U. Yes, you certainly put him in his place there already, didn't you. And got your point straight across, no mistake. A great potential... now lost. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:26, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
... I've never been so behooven in all my life, or even behoven, or is that maybe behoofen??
What a surprise! And it's only 11.40 pm here. Criticise away. An anonymous ip editor has led to believe that I may be blocked. I have no problem with that. Thanks. But should I leave an obligatory ":p"? Does that also feature in WP:BLP? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:24, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The idea that you "may be blocked" is very amusing, but I don't lend it a lot of credence. I'm not sure exactly where unregistered editors like this come from... but I have a few opinions I won't repeat here :) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:23, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Let's all live in lovely Wiki-Narnia land, where no-one is guilty until they get sentenced in court. But, if you happen to drop off in a timely fashion, like good old Uncle Jim you'll always be innocent in Wiki-land. Yay!!Martinevans123 (talk) 23:29, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This particular IP editor comes from Cleveland, OH. Hum...looks like much to do about nothing...sometimes the best response is no response.--MONGO00:09, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, MONGO. Yes, you're right, very wise words. Not sure I should have even bothered really. But it is still quite an interesting (and very broad) issue, isn't it. It seems that ip editor has some deep inner conflict going on over this, as they are making some very self-contradictory statements. (But a clever way by Bbb23 to close a fruitless and awkward thread, I thought. Big up to him. (who said that?) Martinevans123 (talk) 00:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks to be an IP here for the purposes of drama. I don't know what more can be said...the guy is standing there in the street, confessed to the crime, his hands covered in blood with what appears to be the weapons used in the crime. The only thing that isn't available is someone actually capturing the entire incident on digital...or has one turned up?--MONGO00:21, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I guess they must have sacked their camerman at the last minute. Or maybe he ran off when he realised what he was doing? I'm glad for the family that such footage does not seem to exist. What we have is horrendous enough. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:27, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree 100%...we already know what happened. The reactionary approach that this IP coward used trying to drag you to various noticeboards is one of the things that makes this website stink sometimes. Even worse is the number of clueless admins that don't seem to know what a ban evading IP troll looks like.--MONGO00:44, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Now now. 76.189.109.155 could be a very quick learner. Lots of people leave edit summaries like this on their first day: (removed all POV and promotional language and condensed to encylopedic summary and tone. WP:COPYVIO - the content removed was a copy and pasted PR release. Corrected cite formatting and EL link) -- Hillbillyholidaytalk00:58, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am amazed by Bbb23's patience and civiity. If you look at Bbb23's talk page, you'll see he's now being asked to remove hurtful comments posted at the wrong time by MONGO. I'm afraid any respect I had for that ip editor had now dropped to zero. Martinevans123 (talk) 01:02, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I shall have to be more careful how I disseminate the facts. Luckily, such users have a plethora of clueless admins to aide and abet their disruptiveness (either that or they're too kind as might be the case with Bbb23). Tis best I never become an admin again...I was always well known for typing the obvious, regardless of the consequences.--MONGO01:05, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems only a few days between efforts to get someone sanctioned...somewhere...a cursory glance at the editing history indicates trouble.--MONGO01:56, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Mongo, even though I don't know you and have never crossed paths with you prior to this evening, it appears that you are obsessed with me for some inexplicable reason. I base this on the fact that almost all of your past 10 edits have been personal attacks about me on several different pages, even though I've made no such comments to you. My wife wanted me to let you know that it appears that the maturity level of our toddlers now exceeds yours. But if you are proud of your behavior and this is how you choose to spend your time, we'll let your comments speak for themselves. We have little doubt that you will continue hurling your insults and accusations, and wish you the best of luck with that. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 02:46, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes wonderful, isn't it. And talking of "hurling insults and accusations" can the ip please show us all where he made two requests for me not to post on his Talk Page? And also explain why? It seems that polite and legitinate questions, that I post at his Talk Page, about what he has said about me, must be rapidly deleted. But the ip feels at liberty to come to my Talk page and start arguing with you. Maybe his wife should take over? I'm sure she could not be any more provocative patronising. Hang on a minute.... maybe she has. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:54, 27 May 2013 (UTC) p.s. I have nothing against anon ip editors, but I do have a problem with those who pretend to be new users.[reply]
Ah, so, you admit it! Half of those ref formats are in strict contravention of BLP!! It's time for you to become an anon ip editor from Ohio and tell us about your toddlers. But I'd advise against posting any pictures on Commons. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That IP is nothing but a drama magnet....I used to never engage those without a username unless I was warning them or blocking them. I'll have to remember that old personal policy of mine.--MONGO20:39, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A wise policy. Yes, it seems to me that some ip editors are no more than a complete and utter waste of time and dressed up as loyal defenders of wiki policy. All-in-all, they are simply trouble-making trolls. But, of course, to give such a frank opinion, risks the bizarre accusation of being "a bully". What a shame. Perhaps our friend from Ohio would like to add the disgusting murder of Lee Rigby to this article, in case we infringe the precious "human" rights of the sick animals responsible? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So for Jeebus sake, obey roolz even if teh mods awr bad cuz this Ceiling Cat does want, dat yu pwn trolls, cuz youer teh paws of Ceiling Cat. Has hugs teim wit every1 and listen to Ceiling Cat. -- 1 Peter 2 LOLcat Bible
"Listen to ppl who are less n00b than u". I find cultural exchange so incredibly sort of, you know, spiritually enriching - don't you, Camilla? Why bless you, my good man.
And there's me thinking it was just a hive of knuck-dragging malice. We're all big fans of thedailymash.co.uk here. But I think you'll find that bumfunking is a very severe contravention of WP:Biography of Funking Persons. Yours, "always watching", The Troll-Central Scrutinizer.
I have pretty much finished my contributions to the biographical section. User:Sjones23 has undertaken to overhaul the music section so that we can get the whole article up to FAC level in time for the centenary. Meanwhile, if you care to look in and amend or add to anything I've written, please dive in. Tim riley (talk) 17:30, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
G'day! I'm glad to see you're on the Woolwich thing! Keep an eye on it for a few days, will you? I'm going "up the country" as they say.... My Reverend Sister is being inducted into a new parish. Amandajm (talk) 23:13, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's lovely news and I hope it all goes well. Of course, I can make no promises and I can accept no brief. But the article seems to be going largely along the right lines. I'll certainly keep an eye on it. I was wondering, is this anything like our Father Ted? lol Martinevans123 (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Love Divine, All Loves Excelling, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brethren (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.
I think it is best we avoid the "M" word for those m*&%$rous now charged subjects of extreme concern. The US is so violent a place, even the mighty MONGO is timid about going into some areas...and my impression of the UK is that everyone there deplores violence so much that its a rarity. Admittedly, this action was particularly violent anywhere, even in the US. In perspective, we just finished the saga regarding the Murder of Travis Alexander, which has that nasty "M" word in the title! Anyway...check out the talk page archives if you're bored to see discussions about whether the article title should include that word.--MONGO23:59, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Very good advice, thanks. And from a surprising source. Good job my rhetorical quesions are only retrospective, eh? Don't worry, never bored. Just drowning in the sub-judice niceties of our mid-Atlantic jurisdiction. And nowhere near Ohio socks, funnily enough. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:11, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if it's just who is editing what page, or if the fact the reporting in the US is more free to use some terms. I was checking the page history of the Murder of Travis Alexander article and it appears the "M" word(!) was in the title long before the jury had rendered a verdict, as the talkpage discussions would also show. I would defer to what someone such as you felt was best for an article in your country as that is the proper way to do it. If the mainstream press in the UK is caling the act "M" or the perpetrators "M"-ers, then I don't see why they can't be called that in the article body and title as well. I'm thinking there may be some over cautious reasons to not speak plainly.--MONGO00:21, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That all sounds very sensible. The BBC has been plainly reporting about an act of murder for some time. But they are careful to refer to the two men as "killers". This strikes me, as I suggested on the Talk Page, as a lingusitic nicety. If you go to that article and you see the 17 examples of the word "murder", even though it's not in the title, you very quickly come to a reasonable conclusion as to the identity of those responsible for that act. I'm very surprised that no policies - even simplistic ones - have been agreed on this, e.g. once proceedings have started, the word murder can be used only in an article title if it is qualified with "alleged" or "supposed", or whatever. The addition of the sub-judice template would act as a fair warning. Or else a blanket use of "The killing of", which allows for wrongful conviction and later appeal. Yet I think we like to accord these pages a little more weight that they really deserve. I'd imagine any prosecution counsel in the UK would very easily persuade a jury that our wonderful objective rule-bound encyclopeadia consists of nothing more than a series of slightly hoity-toity chat rooms, only half of which are meant to be on public display. Or maybe I'm just being cynical. Lucky we have a wonderful "collegiate community" here and that none of us ever feel like this guy. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:45, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You must be from Wales as you seemed to know Welsh words that as an American I did not. Pass the article onto your Welshmen / Welshwomen.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:21, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Forget KW's outrageous accusations of "grooming", it's stalking you'd better start worrying about. Apparently there are some new articles that are strictly off limits to any other editor. Or just me anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:44, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
....or, maybe not. Arhhh! Saint Jon Herington strikes again:[85], Owchhhh, that one's tight. "Clean this mess up else we'll all end up in jail." just utter class
I think it is pretty much the long established wording - I haven't checked back thoroughly, but here is the wording from last year. It seems to me reasonable to say that the Pennines "separate", broadly, the NW of the country not just from the NE (that is, Northumberland and Durham) but from Yorkshire - which is really a region unto itself, not part of the NE. Anyway, much of the Pennines is (are?) administratively in the NW and the NE regions, as well as in Yorkshire. So, yes, that part of the IP's edit looked OK to me. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:48, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. The simpler the better, as far as I'm concerned. It can be tricky describing a geographical feature in administrative terms. I had thought it might be better simply to state which counties include part of the Pennines. By the way, still no response to my request at the picture lab about the lead image. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:01, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Got a wee problem. I was just about to create an article on Wimborne Minster Astronomical Clock, when another user came along and started the entry (really badly). I checked his contribs. and he's been going crazy starting astro-clock articles (which needed to be done) but the articles are simply atrocious (poor spelling, punc, factual errors, etc.) The worst thing has been that in several cases, I found whole paragraphs copy-and-pasted from websites, which have then been mis-attributed to offline sources. I left a message with some examples on his talkpage but I very much doubt he will respond.
It's extra worrying given that he's been here for over seven years, and I'm almost frightened to go further back through his history (mainly churches and trams). I'd hate to report him, but I think it's getting beyond what I can sort out myself. -- Hillbillyholidaytalk17:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
How curious. He's worse at dab links than I am! Obviously editing in good faith. You could try emailing perhaps? But difficult to be tactful. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:43, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll just plough on and keep fixing the articles up. Gives me something to do I guess. At least astronomical clocks is a relatively interesting area, but as for the 'Bus-route Brigade', someone at the 'Hive of Knuckle-dragging Malice'TM said that they were worse than Scientologists, and that one should avoid them like the William Hague! -- Hillbillyholidaytalk18:25, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
lmfao. "Turns out, no relation at all... so I just head-butted him and he got taken away." I'm sure any blood relation would be just that, quite soon. You never know who's out there, do ya, now? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I smiled at your comment about being "a bit previous". I've tied myself in knots trying to write about "Britten 100" events yet to come as though they had already taken place, which they will (mostly) have done by the time this article gets to FAC. Honestly, I don't know what month we are in any more! Regards. Tim riley (talk) 19:25, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Those brave souls on the shingle are probably hoping it's June (perhaps!) haha.
"O pity those who try to bring
"A shadowed life into the sun." ? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:30, 17 June 2013 (UT
Yes, thanks to Nikkimaria and Tim, matching the pic on top of this page nicely. - It would make a good DYK, "shouting male chorus" / "first composition by Britten for Peter Pears", - but now I discovered too late that it was started, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:12, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I only found thissy here site last night, but it already looks like I've got a lot of transliteritating ahead.. Grab yerself a spade and get diggin' boyo!! -- Hillbillyhighwayman
How very dare you!! I've known a few fine bosons in my time, I can tell you!! And if I do ever visit, I hope I notice it. I guess "small" is a bit subjective. But putting it in South Dorset seemed a bit much!!
Their removal of cited content is also a bit aggravating. I left a friendly?instructive? slightly bossy note on the talk page of their most recent IP address, suggesting that the article's talk page might be a better venue for discussing changes. Something tells me however that the chances of them heeding or even reading it (they use different IP addresses) are rather, ahem, small. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 12:52, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Arh, yes the well-known "Shepherd’s Shemozzle" - wasn't that the famous Dorset Jazz Club where "Python" Lee Hornblower and Artie "Gonad" Jackowitz and the Jazz Jackaroos used to hang out? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:28, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
yes indeed, as well as Bill "Scrotie" Williams on French horn and Benny "Big Boy" Henderson (who could "swing his bag" with the best of them, I seem to recall). Also the inventive Jimmy "Jewels" Johnson on bongos (very popular with the ladies) and the very lively "T-Bag" Smith on maracas. Ah, those were the days! Martinevans123 (talk) 14:24, 24 July 2013 (UTC) p.s. I still often like to sink my teeth into a nice juicy Vicar of Winkfield now and then.[reply]
There once was a mason named Mullions Who lived with near permanent "fullie-on"s When asked how this was, He said, "It's because Of these lovely warm hands round me cullions". Vicar of Portesham ("'e's not small!)
I also see that your User page has a note, dated 3 April 2013, which says: "This User is no longer active due to aggressively unfriendly editors / admins with serious WP:OWN issues." But it seems that you are quite active, so you might like to review that advice.
Is that a threat of some kind? A suggestion that if I don't clam up, you'll do something? How unkind, ungentlemanly, and really, uncivilized. Clearly the idea of Wikipedia being inclusive is something that you do not embrace. =//= Johnny Squeaky22:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
After giving up on trying to find an accurate location for the Dog and Duck I've stumbled into the ideal web site. I haven't really understood how it works but use http://www.locatinglondon.org/index.html and type "Dog and Duck" into "Quick place search" and you'll get a marker very near the tavern on John Rocque's 1746 map. Drag and enlarge. Then use the drop down menu at the top right of the map to select, say, Map or Satellite. They seem to have gone to a lot of trouble to line up the maps to GIS by removing distortions in Rocque's map. It's magic! And the answer? I'll leave that to you! Thincat (talk) 16:22, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
How amazing. And very useful! So that's where it was. I guess we can now update the article to relfect that. It just shows how far modern roads are from their 1746 pre-cursors. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good idea, but I don't know who's who. Right now I'm busy in Photoshop editing more pics from Billboard, but I guess I can look for them on Google Images later. --viniciusmc22:08, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you have time, that would be great. But the addition of an image there is a great improvenment. Looks like you have found a good source there. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:11, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I just begun to search and it looks like I hit a goldmine... lots of pictures from "forgotten" acts. Thanks, glad you liked my userpage (that painting used to scare me as kid). --viniciusmc22:33, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Now I'm sure you will agree that Mr Pilkington is a highly respected and totally trustworthy source, and that the story deserves a place in everyone's favourite list. Unfortunately, I have yet to uncover any corroborative evidence for this bizarre tale. -- Hillbillyholidaytalk01:57, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
An excellent source - with the advantage that we get two entries for the price of one. But I can imagine the response from RedPilkingtonOfDoom: "Very commonplace. Siamese twins get run over all the time". Martinevans123 (talk) 09:07, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Any article which has: "Primate fan Brian Clowes, who along with wife Beryl keeps two macaques at his Crewe, Cheshire, home.." deserves a place at Wikipedia, obviously. But apparently the monkey survived his ordeal with the "Poltergeist Prince of Pop". Not sure this one would get past old RedPen. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Britten article is now at peer review. Following our recent fruitful exchanges I hope you have time and inclination to look in at the PR. All comments gratefully received. Tim riley (talk) 17:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Love for a Stranger. Thanks for the disambiguation (mea culpa). As for the date it's the usual dilemma between date of writing/composing/filming and date of release. Happy to stick with 1937, though. Tim riley (talk) 20:19, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I certainly will. I rely on manual archiving. Thanks for the prompt. Sorry about the silly edits. I just can't take our wonderful encyclopedia seriously (any more)! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:56, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is a possibility, but I am not sure - I am wondering at the moment whether instruments and genre should be linked, or whether this is WP:OVERLINK. Best, --Smerus (talk) 13:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm not sure either, especially (and usually, I suspect) if they are linked in the article main body. I also notice that some lists link every instance (e.g. of genre, record label, other artists, etc.) while some link only the first. If the lost is in a sortable table, of course, there is more argument for linking every instance, as you never know what will be on top. And with a long table like this one you might have to navigate off the page to see a link. But I'll leave it entirely up to you. By all means add a rationale at the top while you have it still in your sandbox, if you want - and then the hoards of drive-by-Moschelites will know what to do! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He is one of the great heros in my own I-Spy book. If you are so inclined and have any spare time do consider jotting down any thoughts here, which seems to have gone to sleep after an early flourish. Best, --Smerus (talk) 04:40, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just recently added "in use" (see this version) because I'm making additions/edits that cross multiple sections.
Would you like to take control for a bit? Or, have me let you know when I switch back to "under construction" because I'm not crossing multiple sections?--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Either way is fine for me. To avoid edit conflicts, I'm holding off on editing for a bit. I can keep researching.
No, I don't need control of anything, thanks. I was just making the odd minor edit as invited by the "under construction" template. Sorry I had not realised it was now "in use" - we should have a different colour for that one! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
p.s.I am still a bit stumped by the note "It is accessible by A4042, A48, A468 and M4". Is this some kind of handy route? There any many other roads by which it may be reached, but I don't see how one puts them in order of significance, or in geographical order, or whatever. I mean, very simply, one needs to just get to Newport, by whatever roads are appropriate, and then one will find the castle next to the A4042!? Do you see what I mean? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:48, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I agree "in use" and "under construction" look alike!
You're very welcome. I've always felt a little protective of the little castle in my home town. Or the fragments that are left of it, at least. Compared with the other, much more magnificent, castles of Wales, she always gets rather over-looked and forgotten. Like a very elderly and infirm great-aunt who can no longer even remember herself how grand she must once have been. It's a wonder she hasn't been washed away by the Usk, after all these years. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks. Yes, I was pleasantly surprised to see the edits, too. I hadn't thought about a DYK, but that's a good idea. A tag line doesn't immediately come to mind, but I'll think about it.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Did you know.... that a few bits of crumbly old Newport Castle have stood for over 600 years without being conveniently washed away by the murky River Usk?" A. P. Hilistine, Newport City Planning Dept.
On a quiet day, the template which someone's added to the first sentence of this page could cause small ripples of mirth amongst fellow pleb editors.... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 02:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC) (Though I see someone else has since removed the template, so obviously not everyone experienced the ripples....) PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 08:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may have also missed “arsehole-gate”. But you’re not allowed to slip back until 31st July, Gareth!! You’re safer off out of it!! Martinevans123 (talk) 08:33, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin, I saw your note on talk:Newport Castle that you uploaded some new photos of the castle. It's still nearly six weeks off, but in September the UK is participating in Wiki Loves Monuments. Would you be interesting taking lots and lots of photos (and then a few more) and uploading them to Commons during the competition? The focus is one Grade II and II* listed buildings, and as you can see from Grade I listed buildings in Monmouthshire and Grade II* listed buildings in Monmouthshire, Monmouth has its fair share, and even if a building already has photos on Commons, the more the merrier. Nev1 (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
They certainly are, and I particularly like those of the watergate. The amount of detail you can make out in this photo is excellent, and we didn't have anything at all from this angle before. That new angle makes the pyramidal buttresses at the base of the tower next to the watergate clearer, so that you can see their similarity to buttresses at Goodrich Castle. A similarity I hadn't noticed before, but which has been noted in reliable sources.
Anyway, if that's not put you to sleep: if you're at a loose end come September it would be great to have you taking more photographs. Nev1 (talk) 20:41, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, as if I was looking for compliments! I'll see what I can do. But, as you know, I am extremely self-serving and unreliable when it comes to wiki-edits and especially uploads! Especially after all my prized outdoor studies were mercilessly geworfen auf die Müllhalde by the seething porno-fest that Commons has now become... rant, rant...Martinevans123 (talk) 20:52, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes. I wouldn't hold your comment "You're saying that ILS is of no benefit to anyone in VMC?" against you. I think we all agree that ILS has no relevance to this specific crash even though it is of benefit to many in VMC. But if you inject irrelevant questions such as "Are you saying that ALPA should never back pilots?" or "Are you saying that ALPA should not criticize the NTSB?", I might call you a troll. The question that needs to be answered is whether the premature "controversy" started by ALPA has any encyclopedic value to the article. 75.208.16.211 (talk) 21:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Here you interjected the "troll" topic which is relevant only if you admit that the hypothetical questions I gave as examples of trolling are in fact pretty much the basis of your support for the current text in the crash article. 75.208.16.211 (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Must be that one, he never wrote an opera himself, I think. Sorry to have been absent, I am in the thralls of a very tedious arb com.--Smerus (talk) 14:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I thought not. Yes, The Opthalmologist - what a curious name for an opera! No worries about your absence. ArbCom, really? How exciting! lol... I must catch up on the latest dramah. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[96] The original and best - wow, Paul Martinez looks like he just got back from a stint with this bunch!! Shockingly good brass section middle 8 here, with ace sax and trumpet riffs. A gem.
Strike a light, me ol' china! Looks like the "In popular culture" section of a certain article is about to get a "major uplift." Mind you, I'd rather be grinding darn at Sainsies than signing-on darn the bleedin dole, mate) Martinevans123 (talk) 11:39, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
... and news just in from the Icke channel ... apparently, Prime Minister Ted Heath abused school-boys supplied to him by Sir Jimmy Savile, and then murdered them by throwing them overboard from his yacht "Morning Cloud", or at least according to secret-service cognoscenti Barrister Michael Shrimpton (see YouTube, passim) ... (... not that you are interested in this kind of crazy MI5 conspiracy-theory stuff.) Martinevans123 (talk) 09:50, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm, hotter than hell and half of Georgia! One of my desert island discs is a lovely live slice of vintage speedcore-jazz that's pretty much one long solo.. -- Lino Hampton]
Welcome back Gareth! Only joking, as usual. I hope you had a good break. Six weeks a year ought to made mandatory. I'll certainly try and go for a quick tramp in the woods, as they say. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:20, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick note to say "thank you" for your encouragement and support. BTW, I agree with your position on the ALPA comments controversy. EditorASC (talk) 17:56, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was just reading through some old discussion on talk page of John Demjanjuk and wanted to recognize you for your amazing civility (at least in the segment of discussion that I viewed). Wow! Azx205:12, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gareth Griffith-Jones, I'm delighted to learn of another admirer of Michele Merkin, though I imagine there must be many thousands of us! And with respect to the civility of User:Martinevans123, the discussion I was reading tonight was well over a year old! So I can't speak for current civility, or lack thereof! lol... Azx205:59, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
LOL! Tough crowd in here! "Take my wife—please!" (With apologies to Henny Youngman.) Speaking of my wife though, have you seen this lovely of Michelle Merkin? She's divine (or at least she was, like six years ago. Not sure now...)! Azx215:35, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Martinevans123. You have new messages at Ghmyrtle's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hehe. I like the cartoon. That may be Darwinbish's slow-witted brother, fourth from the left. Mutatis mutandis it made me think of a New Yorker cartoon somebody sent me the other day (on paper). It shows a couple sitting in a restaurant, regarding — without enthusiasm — a fish with a broad smile on its face. Caption: "They say it's all the antidepressants in the water." Bishonen | talk21:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Sorry to disappoint you on this one. For what it is worth, I immediately phoned my GP, one Dr. Johnny Feelgood, who confirmed that he always uses a full stop. After every sentence and abbreviation. Pretty conclusive, don't you think ?! Tsk. I really must stop being frivolous - this is an encyclopaedia for Pete's sake. Cheers,
It might be argued that, since the weather played such a decisive role in forcing at least a draw, this Ashes series result should be seen as less significant than in other years. That question can only really be answered by considering the quality of play in the remaining matches. Of course, England could still win the series 4-0, or 3-1, couldn't they?”
You could argue that, but you would be wrong. And I know the players and true fans won't see it that way.
... useful advice? Mmmm yes. Rather a strangled voice ... and no picture sync. "I liked the backing." "Oil give it two" "Oh, I say. That is rather good." — TheWelsh Critic— 06:46, 17 August 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Strangled voice?!! Surely you mean lilting Lancashire soft-rock balladeering?? But hey, this YouTube clip should interest you more.... [107].. amazed there is no article yet for Dog narcolpesy!!
Hi Martin. We seem to be misunderstanding each other on the Northern Sky page. Are you suggesting that Drake was not a seminal influence on UK 80s indie, on labels such as Sarah and the cassette movement, and that his weapy morosness did not underpin the whole c86 thing? I'm not asking this as a challenge bty, more interested in what you might have to say. Ceoil (talk) 11:16, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Am sure that's quite accurate. And if you have a source for that statement that's fine. I only reverted two of your three edits as the edit changes, in the light of your edit summaries, made no sense to me - what does "get top fuck with ref ask" mean? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And I see that you have removed "The song was included on the soundtracks to the romantic comediesSerendipity (2000) and Fever Pitch (2005)." with the edit summary "no". And that you removed the new para about the quartet that played at the Nick Drake Gathering with the edit summary "rm". I'm wondering if other editors might find it tricky to guess what your reasons were for those deletions. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:54, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if you think asking for a source for an opinion is "being pissy". Yes, I hope I'm lucky with your edit summaries too. A secondary source might be found for that quartet? (e.g. here's one from the Worcester Music Festival: [108]) I think a whole group named after a song may be as notable as a song partly named after another song, especially if that group is closely connected to the Nick Drake "community". By the way, it's a Middle 8 not a middle 8th...
Your on the verge of saying actually! Thats the word that make me think...whaever makes you happy! Continue! In the delight of you! By the way, I poo poo you web sources, do not stoop to that level. Books, dear. Ceoil (talk) 12:56, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
... please remind me, if I ever read a book that has in it the phrase: "the finest ... to which Nick Drake ever lended his name", to take to back to the charity shop, thanks. lol Martinevans123 (talk) 20:56, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Phew. Yes, this is Britain and everything's altight. Thank gawd for that truly uplifting boost, Billy. By jove!! I feel the point of deep crisis may have passed.... And, I'd like to just point out to everyone... "NO-ONE IS SHOUTING!!!"ALRIGHT??? GOT THAT??!!
This crap and that above is (which I've just read) is facetious, mean-spirited, and wholly unwarranted. What's the point? I mean really, does it make you feel better? The reason I have a retired tag is that it's impossible to work here without a fight, and all this does is prove a point that's really not necessary to prove. Can't you understand that not everyone spells well! Does the reason really need to be spelled out? Thoroughly disgusted seeing editors making fun of other editors! Victoria (talk) 21:59, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Very sorry, Victoria, but you'l have to be a bit more specific - that whole edit history is crap? Or just my bits? This thread was started by Ceoil - is that crap too? I have no problem with bad spelling - mine's certainly bad enough - but not when I can't even understand what it means. But maybe it's secret code, yeah? p.s. I thought you had retired? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Martin, check yourself. Least we forget, this started with a blind revert, then descented into baiting with snarky edit summaries, cruel talk page and highly personalised *shit* from you, and just rubbish from there. Dunno, its not your area, but still you wandered in and picked a fight. It would be appreciated if you just went away from the page; your contributions have been either confused or wrong, apart from the spelouing thing, which bots can look after, thank you very much. Ceoil (talk) 01:27, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Ceoil, I initially reverted two of your three edits because they did not appear to make sense to me. But could you please explain why this is "not my area" and how exactly bots can look after "the spelouing thing". Sorry that it's too late for me to just "go away" from the page. But I'm not sure why I should have to do that. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:43, 23 August 2013 (UTC) p.s. I asked Victoria, by email, to pass on my best wishes to you and to say I had no disrespect for your work. I do hope she did that.[reply]
Yes, same here - I do exactly the same. I only questioned that deletion edit because it hadn't reappeared after 17 whole minutes! Sorry for being a bit trigger happy there. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:11, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Does the article/lede look ok now? I am a huge Clapton fan but admit my ignorance when it comes to mr. Cale. I will be checking him out. I saw the neil young quote, who I also think is a g#d, so very impressed. --Malerooster (talk) 18:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Mr. Young is quite divine, isn't he. Most of JJ's stuff is so laid-back that, compared to Neil, he's practically asleep. I think the JJ Cale article is looking pretty good. Maybe it would benefit from the addition of some appraisals/ tributes that must have appeared in the obituaries after his death. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for asking. You kind of do it at the same time. Have a look here. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC) but don't forget to sign as well, lol! but yes, I've always found jack a bit hard to grasp as well, I must admit, sob.[reply]
So take Derrida, one of the grand old men. I thought I ought to at least be able to understand his Grammatology, so tried to read it...I found the scholarship appalling, based on pathetic misreading; and the argument, such as it was, failed to come close to the kinds of standards I've been familiar with since virtually childhood. Well, maybe I missed something: could be, but suspicions remain, as noted.--Noam Chomsky
(watching) revert, inspiration ... - today I was inspired to collect the typical myths about the unspeakable things we aren't supposed to mention for a month: what do you think? (Far from finished, but I am tired.) I come here, because wherever I looked I found nice bits from you, Martin ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, what a great sortable list is that! Although am dismayed that none of the arguments are deemed to be both stupid AND ignorant!! And I thought I tended to be a bit subjective.... Martinevans123 (talk) 22:14, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You lucky lad. What a "corker", as they say... always more of SuperFurries and a Phonics man myself, but the Manics had some bangin' choooooooonz init (particularly fond of Stole the Sun, even the pop versions, lol). Martinevans123 (talk) 21:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You have great taste Gareth. I'm sure you're not to old, at all. What's more, you're never to old to be a gentleman. And I am very grateful that you are indeed one! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:03, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You've not just reverted me, you deleted the whole discussion. You deleted everyone's discussion. I didn't realise that you WP:OWNed that article. I'm really not sure that you are keen on collaborating. You've been incredibly rude and insulting. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:50, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the tip off, Ghm. I'll certainly try. Public pages like wiki articles are obviously an easy target for those who want to vent their (probably well justified) anger. We've seen it all before, of course, with celebrity DJs, disgraced pop-stars, etc., etc., I can't see the council coming out of this mess at all well. People feel betrayed. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:56, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
...yes, another hot potato. I guess tube trains are also things of beauty - especially in Watford. Thankyou, Gareth. I think an enforced month or two, away from Wiki, every year, would do many editors (like me) a lot of good. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, it was reasonable grounds for stop and search, allegedly. But I actually got let off with a verbal caution, since (unlike po' Lightnin') I'm not black.
Done a bit of tidying at Alexander Carse. But any idea why the YourPaintings there link gives me an error, when it seems fine in other artist's articles? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the revert at Acomb. This looks like another incarnation of a suspected sockpuppet that is under investigation here. There is another suspect calling themselves York information displaying similar behaviour. However, they never do enough under the same name for long enough to provide quality evidence.Rimmer1993 (talk) 21:07, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The NSA spying-on-allies story really should go into ITN, but the current article, 2013 mass surveillance disclosures, runs to something like 19,000 words — which in hoary old newspaper terms would equate to more than 500 column-inches of type! Way, way too long and unwieldy.
Needed, a separate, much shorter article dealing mainly with the October reports of surveillance of heads of state, esp. Merkel — who at least according to some reports is really truly genuinely upset & not just engaged in "outrage theater," as some NSA apologists have smugly asserted. Sca (talk) 16:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the message, Sca. Yes, I must admit I had thought exactly the same thing. Sounds an interesting little project, but I'm not sure I'm best placed to create such, as have no previous input to this subject. Any idea what the article should be called? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:02, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the Germans call it the Handyüberwachungsskandal[116] — but I suspect that won't fly on English Wiki (Dass geht nicht, as Merkel said about spying on friends). I guess you'd have to go with something wooden like "NSA surveillance of foreign leaders." Sca (talk) 17:17, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Handyüberwachungsskandal translates as "Cell-phone surveillance scandal" — Handy being an adjective borrowed from English and used in German as a slang noun for cell- or smart-phone. Sca (talk) 18:08, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
SCA brought this to my attention, and I agree with the criticism and that separating out an article might be the perfect solution. As it stands we have the nom resting on the one sentence bullet point in the list. I cannot think of a useful title, but there were worldwide protests yesterday, including one in Washington attended by people across the political spectrum. This three minute news clip about the US and foregn protests might give you some good ideas. μηδείς (talk) 17:12, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Enough. If I weren't involved in the AFD, I'd be stripping your "contributions" out and considering a block. Another Easter Egg link or surreal comment and I'll take it to ANI, where I'm quite confident that another admin will be happy to do the same.—Kww(talk) 01:23, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the impartial advice. Which one were you thinking of? Happy Easter to you too. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:40, 31 October 2013 (UTC) ".. motivated solely to make this AFD so long.."? What's my percentage of contributed bytes over there? And I've suggested that it's about time it was ended. These endlessly repeated AfDs are quite surreal aren't they.[reply]
How very heartwarming to discover that even being surreal is now considered by some to be a sanctionable offence. Strewth. Welcome to Wikipedia, Martin - we hope you enjoy making contributions and decide to stay. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 10:39, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've now adjusted my comment and left a translation for Kww. This may be seen as more disruption and trying to lengthen the RfD, of course. (Well by non-naive admins who can see I am the sole spokesman for the "keep camp" anyway (allegedly)). Martinevans123 (talk) 12:22, 31 October 2013 (UTC) p.s. if I get blocked, could I please request a naive admin to unblock me?[reply]
Thanks for the tip, Gareth. Unlike yours, of course, much if not all of my pathetic "humour" is quite ungentlenmanly and relies partly on the shock value of a double-take. I like to flatter myself that some editors might take my surreal rantings as serious comment. Such a ploy often seriously backfires, alas. And I immensely admire editors who are simply consistently sincere and trustworthy. I guess, ideally, we'd all use "emotion markers" like we do with font: <sarc>, <irony>, <pity>, <disgust> etc. Smileys can be so unbecoming. I blame User:Hillbillyholiday, of course who has led me astray so diligently and now disappears, leaving me "like a patsy at the heist". Regardilons, Martinevans123 (talk) 15:14, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Happy November! I emailed you a Reuters story about Snowden meeting with German MP Hans-Christian Stroebele. Here's the BBC on the same topic. [117] And here's Spiegel (English). [118]
I added a mention with the BBC source as a ref, but am just adding to the size problem of course! Do'h. But I wasn't sure if it was better added into "Chronology" or in "Reaction > Europe" (Governments or Public am not sure). Martinevans123 (talk) 09:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I thought you were working on a separate, shorter article.
"Germany and Brazil have asked the UN General Assembly to adopt a draft resolution calling for the right to privacy in the digital age." [119]
The batphone seems not to have left a message on your page Martin, which seems a bit remiss. As it's getting a bit late now for authentic vampire greetings, here's a nice autumn pic instead. Enjoy! PinkClouded-Light
Thanks, Coffee. I have posted a comment on your Talk Page. Was a deadline advertised? I see that the template was there for an hour. (In some cases a template is there only for 30 minutes?) I do hope other contributors don't feel cheated. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:15, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The stated deadline per policy is after seven days of the creation of the discussion (this of course depends on the backlog). This can be found at WP:GD#Overview of the AFD deletion process, WP:GD#Closure and WP:DPAFD. The {{closing}} tag, does not state the tag should be ignored after an hour in longer cases: "If this page has not been edited for more than an hour, it is usually safe to remove this template. However, closing discussions involves weighing up and balancing evidence, Wikipedia's standards and policies, and editor consensus. If the debate is long, involves complex issues, or was acrimonious, please allow slightly more time." It's a matter of courtesy, if you feel that the administrator has left the tag there and does not intend on closing the debate, then it is usually best to leave a note on the admin's talk page inquiring about it before you edit the page. I understand not everyone is completely familiar with this process, so once again I'm not very concerned with it. But this is more for future reference. — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 14:29, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the extra info - that's very useful for future reference. (I probably knew all that once!) Well, you gave yourself 1 hour and 9 minutes, which must be amazingly quick for such a long and convoluted discussion. I think part of the problem with the template wording is that it addresses two different groups - one editors (some of whom may feel that they still have more to say), the other admins who are concerned with getting it closed in a timely manner (especially if there is backlog)? But it isn't 100% clear as to which part applies to each. That's (one of) my excuse(s), anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why, how very kind. Thank you so much. But no, evidently I'm not the preservation expert there. I had non-naive admins on the brink of "stripping my "contributions" out and considering a block." (apparently) As well you must know by now, "Sloppy Pie", death by block is far from unusual in these parts. And as for the "underworld" ... that particular week of debate reminded me more of the Northern Line in November (- just call me Jack-far-too-Often-Back.)
Ha-ha yourself! Shoe throwing incidents? Wish I could throw a shoe on somebody on Wiki sometimes... But the question is - how do these people get home after they throw their shoes away... barefooted? Or do they have some spare ones? Or do they rush to the nearest shop... and by some new ones? and why aren't you in your bed? It is one o'clock, do you know that?
As for the "underworld"... Yes, how do they ever get home!? A tricky question...I don't think Muntadhar al-Zaidi ever had the chance off getting home anyway, that day. But there is always a solution... Dash it all, I forgot that you are in Great Britain, and I am in Sweden... that makes a difference of one hour. Your time was 00:21, not 01:21! Hafspajen (talk) 13:18, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hej Sloppy Pie, hur mår du?! How amazing ... now's there's O.C.D. I can understand, especially with the sensible Brown Scapulars (and even on the end of a (non-Indian) rope, without a dead monkey). You are indeed an hour ahead of us. But when will this habit ever be discarded, I wonder?! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
... apparently, it's "a modest dwelling for rural workers" (or so all of my Victorian Gay Mates tell me). Unless, of course, you're Swiss, or you're feeling a little industrious, or you like a bit of Sloppy Pie. But don't take my word for it - you need to ask a real cottager.
Look, anybody from either side of the "unusual" AfD debates who wants to topic ban somebody from the other side primarily on their positions held in those debates should be trout-slapped. I don't support Kww topic banning you from AfDs like this. Likewise, I don't support Warden trying to topic ban me, Kww or TenPoundHammer. pbp
Martin, thank you. As you can imagine, I'm ridiculously pleased he made it to the front page. The collaborative efforts of a number of us created an article worthy of TFA and worthy of him. I really think that's something. Now to my fifth Balvenie. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 22:55, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"'ere O'Khazi, mate. Blimey! I 'ad that Ron Carnegie in the back of my mobile cab-library last week. Just got out of "Bookwormwood Scrubs" 'e 'ad, an' all!" Nobby Kray (the lesser-known third Kray twin) (talk) 15:08, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[121] ou, peut-être, "la foulée de l'or"!! mais aussi ... le Baltimore maître de boogie-woogie !! (a real gem)
"... you been diggin ma potatoes, throwin them peelins in ma yard..."
Could it be it's those birds of yours that have been diggin yo taties and throwin them peelins, hmm? I bet they're always hungry. Now, don't put your head in the sand, Mr 'eavens, you know it's best if you 'fess up. PC White
Thank you! Did you know that I mentioned one of the singers in a DYK? And have enlightenment*Note 1 linked under "Reformation" on my user page? (... linking to a user who has now 100 FA - you read it in the Signpost) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
texts from the Christmas Story: "der uns durch seine Geburt hat erleuchtet" (who enlightened us by his birth") and "singen, singen --- Preis sei Gott" (singing, singing --- praise to God), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But it does sounds like that! And it is not my fault. It is Martinevans emanations, it has to be. Otherwise I am extremely proper and modest everywhere - except probably at the doctor’s page... Hafspajen (talk) 14:36, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! How to get to such a fine infobox is not easy under the restrictions of the soon passed committee: Andy is not allowed to add one (not even to his own articles), I am not allowed to add on to an article not my own, I asked a few arbs ... - I hope things will get more reasonable with the new committee ;) - I added the figures of support to my table and like the correlation of support and Precious! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:37, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For works without opus I suppose we should try to find dates and put in date order. Compliments of the season and all that - --Smerus (talk) 15:38, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected your edit. Don't worry: I misunderstood what happened, if you have any questions, you can leave a message on : Hafspajens talk page. List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: none.
Hafspajen (talk) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Christmas dinnerMachinima of Santa Claus's reindeer filmed in Second life Imploring that Martin enjoys a sumptuous Christmas holiday and a naughty New Year! First play this → → →
Now play this! I dare you to tell me that you did not smile.
This is me, the DPL bot, the saucy rascal! tee-hee!! The Bracketbot look-alike. Kiss me...This is me, the DPL bots little cusin.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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.
We want you, we want you to like us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hmm, goodness me Hafspagen, it seems you know about something even David Icke doesn't yet ...
Yes indeedy. I mean what kind of username is DPL bot....? Sounds like some nasty tasting cough medicine...I mean, when that edit tries to make a serious contribution, no one is going to take it seriously like they do with a username like MONGO. IF I saw this DPL bot character post a complaint about another user at a noticeboard, I'd dismiss it as trolling...!--MONGO18:57, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anybody called my name? And do you have some remedy for my problems? The bot.
Sorry about that. Because it is embarrassing f****** in the bushes on Facebook
Not as embarrassing as it was for 1970 Isle of Wight...
That was also very embarrassing too. But you have no idea how many poeople chech daily at the doctor's. Please don't let me interrupt your fun at Paley's.
I got a lovely "thanks" from the good Doctor Bacon for so lavishly expanding the boundaries of his musical appreciation. I trust any passers by were also suitably titilated. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:56, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. You have a new message at Gareth_Griffith-Jones#You_might_like_to_watch_this's talk page.11:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to English Electric Lightning may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 2 "[]"s. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:05, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
It's like "rampant box mania" over there!! Martinevans123 (talk) 17:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
,_Psychologist_and_Biologist_(2575987702)_crop.jpg)
![[11]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Funk_me_til_i_fart_lp_cover_by_hillbillyholiday.jpg){kind=link}
![[57]](http://theasianedition.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/kk-apple-vinegar.jpg){kind=link}
![[80]](http://i.imgur.com/EQzLePf.jpg){kind=link}
![[105]](https://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/shr0966l.jpg){kind=link}
![[113]](https://25.media.tumblr.com/80367ba7411dfaa34e1b38ca95d8da4b/tumblr_mtrr5jLJe11qzqyc6o1_500.jpg){kind=link}
Happy Yuletides! 
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg)
Hafspajen (talk) 19:37, 31 December 2013 (UTC)