I feel honored to have been banned by Smallbones and Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales from the co-founder’s talk page for raising issues to do with Kazakhstan, the UAE, China, and Wales. It might amuse you to check out some relevant history at Wales's talk page [1] ("Kazakhstan Firewall" section et seq.), [2] (“Some may find this interesting” section),
[3] (“Congratulations” section); also at mine [4],[5]; and also at WP:AN/I [6] ("Personal attack in user space") and WP:BLP/N [7] ("Jimmy Wales").
“If you seek the removal of freedoms from an opponent simply on the grounds that they have offended you, you have crossed a line to stand alongside tyrants who imprison, torture and kill on exactly the same justifications.” — JK Rowling (who says more interesting things than she writes, IMO)
* * * If I opened a new topic on your talk page, please reply there * * *
'Anything posted here by pompous prats who shout at other users like this or LIKE THIS on talk pages or edit summaries will be summarily deleted. And if you are in the habit of wheedling, stonewalling, editing tendentiously, and misrepresenting policies and other users' comments to further your agendas of whitewashing, POV-pushing, and self-aggrandisement, go away.
'This is a spam-free zone. Don't deliver any here. I reserve the right to be extremely abusive—and even to use four-letter words, e.g. "drat"and "toe rag"—towards anyone who does.
This user is innumerate.
I welcome your comments and updates—for the vast majority of editors I have an open door policy.
In the words of one of Wikipedia's co-founders, Jimmy "Jimbo" Wales:
"I do not consider alerting me to any topic to be canvassing."
"My understanding of feminism is that it requires the cooperation of males and females to ensure that both
sexes have equal rights and equal opportunities,
it's not a war between the sexes."
—Borrowed from editor Gandydancer
This editor has joined the opposition to the targeting of editors by the politically-correct and ideology-driven so that we can keep this the encyclopedia anyone can edit, not just the one that only those who haven't yet done something unacceptable to the easily-offended can edit. Don't let the octopus of the easily-offended bring down the entire project! —Also borrowed from editor Gandydancer
I am a proud member of what the hilariously named user Rationalobserver terms “the EC Fan Club, who have so thoroughly frightened everyone, including most admins, into submission they are in themselves a more pressing issue than EC.” Wikipedia has over 26 million users, including administrators, and I am grateful to RO for letting it be known that I have thoroughly frightened every one of them into submission.
Beguiled by the terrible incantations and your ambiguous undulations in the grip of eccentric propositions and distant miseries from afar, I beseech you to reconsider...Anonomous
Disraeli's dead? He hasn't been answering my letters so I thought he was on strike. Interesting coinkidink: my fourth wife's name was Lysistrata. Boy, did she know how to get her own way.Writegeist (talk) 00:17, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This page clocked up a massive total of 19 views on September 27 and 28. An awesome level of interest, particularly in a living person, as I think you'll agree—the number is so high that not even the prodigious Stephen Hawking has enough fingers to calculate it. Yet it was exceeded by the gargantuan total of 21 at my user page on September 28. This easily tops the number of people (12) who paid their respects to the body of well-known dead person Vladimir Lenin (famous quote: "A lie told often enough becomes truth") between 10:15 a.m. and 10:16 a.m. on September 28 1970—the same day, incidentally, that Gamal Abdel Nasser (famous quote: "When I met Lenin I was struck by his remarkable, almost eerie, stillness") became another well-known dead person. Anyway I was immensely flattered by the attention, natch; particularly when Twitter lit up and the TV news led with the story of my sudden celebrity. Later when I recovered my composure—not that I had been decomposing, you understand—I began to wonder why the sudden surge in interest? And who exactly were these new fans? Then Lysistrata told me: zombies. Which would account for the lingering smell. Writegeist (talk) 17:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! And accounts for the stray appendages littering your front yard. At first, I thought you had left one of the promised refrigerated mouse morsels, but then realized that the morsel was a digit finger. It had most likely been waved/wagged too vigorously in your direction by a visiting zombie and had fallen off. ```Buster Seven Talk18:52, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Police are combing the neighborhood for zombies with fingers missing (some index, some middle). Neighborhood is large, police-issue combs are small (budget cutbacks). Don't hold your breath. Writegeist (talk) 04:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Police are looking for this man, now believed to be missing the nose According to a document released to me by a friendly NSA contractor currently on vacation in Russia, visits to my user page spiked at 34 (the truly monstrous size of this number becomes apparent when you consider it's also the distance in miles to the outer reaches of the known universe) on September 10. Yours shot up to 19 on the same day. A contemporaneous report by an NSA analyst conjectured that a September 10 comment I posted to your talk page and deleted a few minutes later may have piqued the interest of a nosey parker who then made repeated intrusions. Which would explain the very large nose I found in the Acme Trap-a-Schnozz nose trap ($4.99 from Walmart, dependable, washable, reusable, and worth every cent) in my underwear drawer when I got home. I'm drying it, with a view to using it for nose art. Writegeist (talk) 18:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Update! In an encrypted communication which I recovered from a famous dead person's crypt in [location redacted] last night, my NSA contact says surveillance of my talk page rocketed to a stupendoud total of 43* separate instances of eavesdropping in one day, specifically November 7, 2013—the day after Tim Berners-Lee reportedly described as "appalling and foolish" the decisions by GCHQ and the NSA to break the online encryption software that hundreds of millions of users rely on to protect their private data. Clearly the spooks mistook me for Mr. Berners-Lee. To be fair, this was an understandable mistake for intelligence operatives to make, as Mr. Berners-Lee invented the world-wide web and I didn't.
*Yes, 43. The immensity of this figure becomes apparent when you consider it's greater than the total number of stars in the known universe [source: Wikipedia]. Writegeist (talk) 08:54, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A user defended a condescending comment to another user with the novel argument that s/he was quoting a dead author. I think the idea that any words attributable to dead authors are wikipermissible because they have intrinsic literary merit is really rather witty. The purveyor of the gem in question promised to leave the project if this argument isn't allowed to prevail. I share the hope that it wins the day. Then we can all start condescending to each other with literary quotes of unimpeachable provenance and high merit—e.g. "You're an asshole" (from Norman Mailer's The Executioner's Song, for anyone who didn't instantly recognize it); not to mention Shakespeare's "Thou misshapen dick!" or "You are a tedious fool." Or Vonnegut's "If your brains were dynamite there wouldn’t be enough to blow your hat off." Or Hemingway's "I misjudged you. You’re not a moron. You’re only a case of arrested development.” Or... Well, you get the idea. A glorious new frontier of literary wikidiscourse!
Oh and—how could I forget?—there's Lewis Carroll's dear little Snark, of "intellect small", known for being "meager and hollow " and for its "slowness in taking a jest."
The talk page of Collect* is dignified by one of my trenchant observations. (Famous of course for trenchant observations, I tend to be the go-to resource.) Appended is an admiring comment that my wit “speaks for itself”. In all modesty I have to agree. Just as, say, the genius that's unmistakably that of Van Gogh speaks for itself in his work, so does each of my aperçus bear the hallmark of my own creative brilliance (let's not beat about the bush). People have only to read the words and they clap hands in delighted recognition: "Oh the wit! The wisdom! It's a Writegeist!" Therefore Collect recognizes it would be superfluous to credit me by name for a quote that's so obviously mine. For several months now (I've checked), my words have been given pride of place—above his own essays, even—as his “Quote of the day”. I would be flattered were I not so accustomed to public acclaim. All the same, it's nice to be appreciated.
*Courtesy ping, not an invitation to tea
It will come as no surprise to you that as advisers to the First Lady on all matters relating to tea-time etiquette, Lysistrata and I are invited to tea by all kinds of people. We would of course decline an invitation from Mr. DeMint. We would offer a diplomatic excuse such as "We have a previous engagement with the Capitol Earl Grey Appreciation Society" or "We are on teastrike." But you never know when you might run into the gentleman at a tea party hosted by someone else. Tips: Do say: Mr. DeMint, would you please make a long arm for the fairy cakes? Don't say: Mr. DeMint, are you a closet teabagger? Writegeist (talk) 17:20, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My kind of bamboozle! Thank you my friend. I hereby drink to your health. Any time you'd care to join me, help yourself to the comfy chair by the fire and put your feet up on Santa Claws the stuffed cat. (Given my talk page's astronomical number of visitors, there's a chance that someone with nothing better to do than to snuffle around in its darker recesses will seize on "stuffed cat" as a reference to him- or herself. Oh well. I'm a hospitable fellow. Be my guest, I say. Carpe cattum!) Writegeist (talk) 21:35, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First, I wanted to thank you, Jimbo, for your concerns with paid advocacy. I think you've taken a very helpful stance. I just wanted to follow with some thoughts; I'm sure others have written all this before, but anyway:
In academic publishing, if the author of a paper has received or will receive tangible benefits from someone who has a financial interest in the subject of the paper, this conflict of interest is supposed to be noted clearly within the paper. Not to do so is academic fraud. For encyclopedias this is not even an issue: Authors of entries are always supposed to be independent of conflict of interest for the subject of their entries. This is because encyclopedias are not supposed to be position or argumentative papers, but general, neutral accounts. Conflicts of interest have always been recognized in the academic world as undermining this neutrality to such an extent that it is rigorously avoided. For example, if it was discovered that Robert Duce accepted money from the aerosol industry in order to write the entry "Aerosols" in the Springer Encyclopedia of World Climatology, he would be rightly scandalized, and his department at Texas A&M would try to remove him as best as they could. We should keep this encyclopedia at the same high standard.
Paid advocacy editors have responded that Wikipedia already has policies to keep things neutral and that their edits— or those of the responsible ones among them at least —are kept within these policies. This response is a non-starter. Every academic encyclopedia has neutrality as an editorial standard, but their editors still do not accept authors with a conflict of interest. We should not fail to learn from the best practices of the academic world.
Paid advocacy editors cannot produce even a single example where an effective paid editor has produced an overall negative impression for the firm or a client of the firm which pays this editor. Of course this is the case: If such a paid editor is going to produce a negative impression of the benefactor, then the benefactor has no interest in paying out money for such a service. Overall unbiased editing from such paid editors is a contradiction. A necessary condition for the continued practice of paying editors to produce content about oneself or one's clients is that there be a systemic bias in the production of content. Neutral editors have no effective mechanism for dealing with this biased production apart from banning it: Neutral editors are volunteers who can only act in their free time, the paid editors have as much time as their pay can afford them.
Claims that the community here is divided on whether to maintain the high standards of academic publishing are suspicious. The community is that body of neutral editors who are here to write an encyclopedia collaboratively. The editors who are paid to produce content concerning a benefactor, insofar as they take that role, are not part of this community. As such they are not here to work collaboratively, but are rather here to benefit themselves. What percentage of those who want to allow, and indeed expand the number of, encyclopedia articles written with a conflict of interest are actually part of the community, and what percentage are themselves paid editors? That is hard to answer. Instead of counting votes on what practices to take up, we should look to the academic world, which has soundly rejected conflict-of-interest writing. Thanks for reading. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 18:59, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Buster for bringing this to my (admittedly short-spanned) attention. A voice of reason that rather reminds me of yours. How very different from the dimwitted defenders of the bamboozlers. Writegeist (talk) 21:37, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I note that a certain user, one I consider a problematic editor whose contributions really needs watching by admins—his history here includes dismissive behaviour towards other users, misrepresention of others' comments, wikilawyering, false acccusation, crass name-calling (calling me a bastard! My mother would blush!), and solidly supporting (and therefore encouraging) another user who persistently showered me in really quite vile abuse—is troubled by me making good-naturedly humorous reference to any of his wiki-antics in my posts here and on my user page, even though I'm at pains to grant him total anonymity. I am loath to cause him (or any other living creature) distress. After all, for all I know, he may be a thoroughly decent, highly sensitive chap in real life, and quite unlike his wikipersona. Therefore, as I am a considerate fellow, (1) I've decided not to post any further references or allusions to his behaviour on "my" pages. I hope this will afford him relief from his agitation, and that (2) he will do me the courtesy of refraining from any further malign engagement with me. I bear him no ill will—the person behind the user name is of absolutely no interest to me, and his wikibehaviour has only ever amused me. That is all. Writegeist (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have now changed my mind about (1) because my hope for (2) has been unpleasantly disappointed. On the upside: gratuitously toxic comments, devoid of wit, often provide the greatest amusement.
Hey there. First, thanks for your kind comments on my user talk page. Second, I don't know who you're referring to above but I do notice that you've been keel-hauled recently by one of the members of what I would describe as the Paid Editing Lobby. Obviously paid editing is not engaged in simply by hare-brained losers and slack-jawed corporate ninnies but is a sophisticated form of riding the Wikipedia gravy train. There are two forms of paid editors: the dummies and the smart ones. The smart ones play by the rules, and of course, notoriously, include administrators who are supposed to be living examples of best practices. But they also work the hardest and therefore are most likely to feel resentful and put-upon, and therefore most likely to want to cash in on their Wikipedia experience. That's basically what you're up against in this paid editing brouhaha, as paid editing is institutionalized, and has become a kind of moonlighting thing for the Wikipedia elite. They can be teenagers or wage slaves in real life, or pushed around by the big boss, but here they are Princes of Wikipedia, used to being kow-towed to and having their rumps kissed for all their selfless service to the Project, while of course you are a lesser being, and God forbid you should imply that they have the ethics of a lampshade. That's why you're coughing up salt water and that is why the Paid Editing Lobby is quite so strong. Hang in there. Coretheapple (talk) 20:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(friendly stalker)@ Writegeist. I just wanted you to know that Core is an admittedly older geezer . This may explain future lapses in memory, typing errors (probably caused by shaggy-beard droppings), that unmistakable odor of "old fartedness", etc. I bear him no ill-will. He is a quality editor with a sharp (while admittedly old) head on his shoulders. You are my best wiki-friend so I felt obligated to inform you. If, sometimes, Core doesn't respond....he's probably napping. ```Buster Seven Talk15:46, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Encounters with strangers around the 'pedia can be be quite instructive about the particles of differing perspective, passionate agenda, and idiosyncratic judgment that are floating around in the wikiatmosphere. I'll share one with you, gentle reader.
Two years and almost one month after the above user’s visit, I conversed with him again on the talk page of the Wikipediocracy (WO) article. (The page's history from this edit through to, say, this edit provides context for what followed.)
On that talk page, on December 8, 2015, after some amusing back and forth, my friend’s friend wrote:
“How odd it is, that the self-declared conflicted editors find such "humor" in a subject that, by all visible indications, makes them purple with rage.”
Which sparked a flicker of interest along a neural pathway in my somnolent brain. Which in turn led to a brief exchange (it doesn't really deserve to be called a dialogue) at his own talk page :
At a rough count you've peppered the WO talk page dialogue with two accusations of “well-poisoning”, one of “poisoning the well” (yay, variation on a theme!), one disparaging "WP:DONTYOUDARECHANGEIT contingent”, one contemptuous “bull arguments”, one general accusation of “genuine user misconduct” one of “perpetrators thereof”, one really rather precious “underwear in a twist”, and one foot-stamping “a hell of a time”. And now also a presumption of “purple with rage”? Please. Projection much? Incidentally I don’t mind being on the receiving end of ad hominems, but I do prefer them to be at least slightly witty. (Nevertheless they give me a laugh either way, so no harm done.) Further, your deep personal animus towards WO is beyond doubt. I rather thought you'd be big enough to admit it when called on it at the article talk page, but as far as I can tell you didn't. (Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.) Which would appear to fall well short of the honesty, as you term it, of the WO members who declared a connection. That said, I have no desire for further conflict with the wikifriend of a very good wikifriend who holds you in high esteem. Here’s hoping you reach a comfortable accommodation with your underwear, at least :) . All the best, Writegeist (talk) 19:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Well based on a skim of the above I'd say you're annoyed! Have you considered counseling? Coretheapple (talk) 19:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Have you considered these? I'm sorry, I can't help you any further and I'm not interested in any more dialogue with you on these topics. Happy editing! Writegeist (talk) 20:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Look, did I ask you to come here and shower me with your prose? No. If you don't like the reception, don't turn on the TV. You guys are taking the article super-seriously and reacting hysterically over routine talk page posts because you are conflicted. It happens in COI situations. That's why you declared your COI, assuming you did it in good faith and not for "dramuh." and that why we have COI rules. And speaking of "honesty" I'd like to see one of the defenders of this article have the honesty to admit that they really are conflicted, and that if it was any other article they would be all over a situation like this like a cheap suit. Have a nice day. Coretheapple (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I've started to pay attention to the many Walmart articles. Specifically the Family wealth mentions and making sure they are kept up-to-date. Heck, just a few days ago there was $40 Billion dollars missing. A billion here, a billion there...pretty soon you're talkin' about some real money! While investigating, I ran across this...[9]...which reminded me so much of what we are afraid of regarding paid advocates/editors/operatives. Love your user page. Hope you had a splendid Thanksgiving. TRA!```Buster Seven Talk20:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you kind Sir. When my own $40 billion went missing I realized too late I shouldn't have kept it under the mattress. Looking on the positive side, the bed felt a lot less lumpy after it had gone. Writegeist (talk) 18:27, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Vega's recently arrived single-purpose anon editor 24.191.190.85 exhibits the same distinctive practice (multiple quick-fire edits) as blocked Vegavairbob/Barnstarbob, and geolocates to within 9 miles of Vegavairbob's blocked sock IP 71.167.61.206. Hm. Are you thinking what I'm thinking? I haven't checked back through the article history for other Vegavairbob sock IPs timestamped after his indef, but I wouldn't be surprised if . . . Writegeist (talk) 05:04, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Wolf of Wall Street uses animals including a four-year-old chimpanzee, Chance, who spent time with actor Leonardo DiCaprio and learned to roller skate over the course of three weeks. In December of 2013, just prior to the film's premiere, the organization Friends of Animals criticized the use of the chimpanzee and organized a boycott of the film. Variety reported, "Friends of Animals thinks the chimp...suffered irreversible psychological damage after being forced to watch the 3 hour movie that depicts the sordid behaviors of his fellow "actors". Chance, who was subject to cruel circus-trainer teaching methods early in his life, could suffer from neurotic behaviors and sleep deprevation, ultimately becoming incapable of socially interacting with other chimps, due to his watching of the movie." I know the feeling!!! Best 2 U. ```Buster Seven Talk21:45, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that, as a general rule, when an article becomes increasingly politically charged, the likelihood also increases that experienced and ruthless users with a habitual POV agenda may seize on whatever technicality comes to hand as a means to rid the article of contributions from users they see as opponents.
Indeed. In these circumstances, the best path is to ask for third opinions and get uninvolved editors to weigh in by posting in the various noticeboards. Having said that, one needs a thick skin to edit this pedia... Cwobeel (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for a genuinely pleasant surprise! I appreciate the appreciation. Incidentally, we armadillos have the advantage of unusually low body (and head) temperature. Writegeist (talk) 22:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm crap at working out reverts. That said, I think these may possibly be the ones they got you on, as they are all reverts within (just) a 24-hour period:
[10], [11] (a revert, it seems to me, as it reinserted content removed by another user), [12], [13]
I do think the block was rather uncalled-for as you have no history (as far as I know) of edit-warring, and you didn't show any intent to keep ignoring 3RR; you might have just misunderstood what constitutes a revert. So it looks more punitive than preventative.
Thanks Writegeist. My tolerance for interminable BS is lower than most people's, I guess. It was very nice of you to join in, and it will make me feel better for a long time.Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:57, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mine is right down there with yours, believe me :-) . It seems the new lot are resolved to live down to the expectations we had of the old. Plus ça change... I'm glad to know my 2¢ provided a degree of consolation, and only wish it had helped bring about an equitable outcome. (Even a banana republic needs better than a bunch of bananas to run it.) I share your sense of frustration. And while Acton's dictum obviously holds true, I very much hope you won't let the consequences in this instance drive you off. Best wishes, Writegeist (talk) 06:34, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Singing along with you two precious. My scream about a missed user is on the Main page again, - I screamed only the first time, and the sad list is too long already. Look for "consolation" on my user page. I escaped to a red category, - feel free to join me ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:25, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings, Trident13. As an avid collector of tales of Wales, I dug out the Weiss/Daily Mail thread linked at your user page ("I will be the first to admit I don't always get it right - and the typed internet is not sometimes the best medium through which to have clear communication. But I hope the contribution I make is useful and valued ... even though Jimbo Walesdoesn't think so, and made a personal attack on me." — Emphasis added in the link, for clarity.) It's a long and rather chaotic thread, and I didn't find the personal attack; I must have missed it in the to and fro. Doubtless you can go straight to it, so please would you do me a favour and quote it, at least partially, for me (on my talk page if you prefer) so that I can find it when I search again? Then I can add it to my precious (off-wiki) collection of quotes from our revered founding father, who is now also of course a world-renowned champion of free speech. The page is archived, so here is a working link to it for your convenience: [14]. Many thanks. Writegeist (talk) 16:57, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your message - I hope that I find you well! I don't seek a 1on1 confrontation with Jimmy Wales, nor do I wish that to be the outcome of the post on my FP. My great disappointment with Jimmy Wales choice on that occasion - and on numerous occasions since - was that it cut straight across the rules and accept practises of Wikipedia, something which Jimmy claims to live by. The reality is clearly different, in that (1) he thinks he can cut across any Wiki rules, for what ever reasoning, and that (2) a series of underlings hence go forth and do his work, in the vain hope that they may drink from the same table. Jimmy's upset with my edit was further fuelled in that I had chosen to reference the Daily Mail, which as he is someone who is presently married to a Blairite-Labour insider, he considers a sacrosanct sin (if you follow the mentioned above underlings, you will note that they hate the DM even more as part of their commitment/pledge to the JW cause. The DM also on an at least annual basis heavily critic's Wikipedia, most often on accuracy. But the depth of hate between the two organisations goes beyond the public evidence). I fully accept that I made an error in this particular edit, but then so did the newspapers who printed the story (DM, Telegraph, Observer - I have copies of them all), as it was based on a "revenge"-powered false press release pointed towards the victim, who was later compensated by all of the above media outlets. However, does my following of the Wiki rules and quoting references (which I fully accept turned out to be false) justify Jimmy's choice to (1) cut across the rules of Wiki, and (2) send out judgements on others? As personally the rules of Wikipedia are written on a far more collaborative principles - possibly even with socialist aroma's - Jimmy's chosen action illustrated to me the duplicity of the rules here: hence my warning to others, that however you may view the rules here, the "popular/powerful" consider themselves above and beyond them. I have soft and hard copies of all of the above mentioned documents and the exchange on Jimmy's talkpage, but as I said I don't seek a confrontation with Jimmy or anyone here - much as though he broke the rules. So on this occasion I hope that you will understand my choice not to presently provide you with copies of the requested items. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 13:22, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking the trouble to respond. I appreciate you're not seeking confrontation with Wales, but I don't quite see how pointing out his alleged attack on you to a third party would constitute a confrontation. Anyway that's not really important. I've revisited the thread. Unless I'm still missing something, your accusation doesn't seem at all justified to me, and if I'm correct (I'm often wrong!), such an accusation itself constitutes a personal attack under WP:NPA if it's unjustified. I wonder if you're alluding to this reference to you from Wales: "[A]n editor in good standing added an outrageous and false statement from a notoriously salacious and unreliable tabloid." Surely describing you as "an editor in good standing" can't possibly be construed as a personal attack? Whereas your describing another user as Wales's "yelping lap dog" surely can be? I just don't get what it was that led you to accuse Wales of making a personal attack on you, so I'll just leave it at that. Again, thanks for the response. Writegeist (talk) 20:13, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So glad to see this go up—and sure the same will be true for everyone who's ever spent time with this courageous, mischievous, conscientious, exasperating, and lovable fellow. Risking life and limb for coffee and bonbons with the Assads encapsulates him perfectly :~) . Thank you! I have another shot of him in Sarajevo, microphone in hand, interviewing a defender in the street. When I find it I'll add it. Writegeist (talk) 18:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I found a different one—the one I had in mind turned out to be a profile shot; I'd forgotten. Please feel free to move it or whatever. Writegeist (talk) 06:17, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User Talk Page . . . (I'm so sick of the Wikipedia alphabet soup, yet there I am dispensing it myself.) Actually I mistyped. I should have written UP or "user page", because that's where I commend your articles. I didn't see any twattishness to your comments. (And my Twat-O-Meter is set to super-sensitive.) I couldn't be happier that you've jumped in. My work there during the conflict was strongly focused on crimes against women; particularly rape, and the rape-death camps, and the stories of the survivors. Nuff said :~) Writegeist (talk) 21:09, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed the cat below. Are you from the area? Is that why you do not edit it? You know I will do my best there, as I do on all such articles. Cheers. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:19, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not from there, but was running around in BiH, Croatia, and RSK (lol, what a crock that was) during the war—freelance reporter/photojournalist. (My first-hand knowledge is too deep, memories too vivid, views too well-informed to be unbiased, sense of connection still too visceral, and associated emotions too volatile, for me to risk tangling with revisionists in editing that article.) How about you? I feel gratitude for your work here. Writegeist (talk) 23:11, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings dear friend. Your editor retention project is laudable and I wonder if you might consider diversifying into memory retention? Incidentally, studies by scientists whose names I've forgotten working in universities whose names I've forgotten have proved that caffeine improves the memory, or maybe that it doesn't, I can't remember which. After a cup of coffee this morning I did remember the name of one of my children, whose names (and number) usually elude me, but that might have been helped by Mrs. W slapping me upside the head.
I had a sizeable aunt who suffered from a painful bowel obstruction and her life was only saved by (1) a doctor's diagnosis of acute editor retention and (2) a skilled surgeon's incision that released fourteen sizable editors, including my uncle, himself an editor (of Trouser Gusset Quarterly) who had gone missing six weeks earlier.
I do in fact remember #7, and rather wish I didn't. I fear the award would only encourage him, so in all seriousness it's best I don't get involved in this one. All the best, Writegeist (talk)
Not a problem. I remembered (a year ago) you chatting over the back fence with some auto guy. Must be someone else. Coincidently, I also had a sizable aunt. During gall bladder surgery, the doctor found a plastic army man with parachute, a frisbee, a balsa wood gyroscope, a Lady GaGa CD, a superball, a lawn dart, a ref's whistle, a slinky, a giant gummy worm, some confetti and a dozen water balloons. The surprising thing was that not a single member of the family knew that she was a Lady GaGa fan. Beers! ```Buster Seven Talk22:46, 30 June 2014 (UTC) [reply]
Long time no see. I just wanted to stop by and wish you a happy 4th of July. One thing I really miss about the old days at SP is coming in every day to see what you'd written. Thanks for all the fun and good times. Zaereth (talk) 23:22, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Zeitgeist
Thank you for capturing the movement of the Zeitgeist in precise wording, realising that "Wikipedia is a humorous parody of Uncyclopedia and Conservapedia" to be edited "boldly, satirically and immediately", for doing so, for knowing about Fucking and Socks, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
Here again, second anniversary of confirmed awesomeness, - and thank you for wearing the sapphire, and using tape to not make the internet leak. Would you have a bold, satirical and immediate term for a category which would be in plain English "Victims of Arbitration"? (example pictured) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:30, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
First, that's quite a collection of Signposts you have on your front porch. I don't know why but it makes my remember a quote by Ms. Nussbaum, TV critic for the NewYorker Magazine...
If I have but one rule, it's that critics shouldn't opine on subjects they know nothing about, or use the word 'opine'. (www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture)
. . . of User:Collect's departure—"I am out of here, barring an unblock",[15] "Adieu",[16] "my last post if the folks get the noose out",[17] "adieu"[18]—and wishing him well in whatever online activities he decides to pursue elsewhere. I'd have preferred to put this farewell message for Collect on his talk page, but we have long refrained from posting on each other's pages and I don't think even his departure is sufficient reason to break with this time-honored tradition. Email? Too secretive and limiting. By contrast, publication on this talk page exposes its untold millions of watchers to the message's good, good, good, good vibrations which—who knows?—might spread like a virus (not Ebola; a nice one) throughout Wikipedia and the world at large. Writegeist (talk) 00:27, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Similarly, I met a case of wanting to say "precious" today and not able because of page protection, which made me post on an admin's page - where perhaps more people see it than on the redirected talk of an admirable user who left in 2012. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:48, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you dear Gerda. As you may know, I have advocated quite vigorously for Collect in the past (for which he has expressed surprise and delight, albeit not on this page of course), and I can see that you empathize with my slight frustration at not being able to address my good wishes to him directly even under these exceptional circumstances. The frozen treat article is indeed precious! I wonder, incidentally, if the alleged sole founder of Wikipedia will name AF as one of the many editors (none identified yet) whom he says were driven off by a particularly outstanding one whose renowned excellence as a content creator he repeatedly demeans as "alleged"? By the way, I am frequently impressed, as I know you and many others are, by the extent of the alleged sole founder's commitment to the love, kindness, thoughtfulness, and moral ambitiousness that he preaches. It will only require one more miracle (in addition to Wikipedia; sadly I don't think Bomis counts) for the pope to issue a Bull of Canonization commanding his veneration as a saint when he eventually ascends to the great encyclopedia in the sky.Writegeist (talk) 18:10, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, a misunderstanding: I was writing about J. Wales ("the alleged sole founder" of Wikipedia) being sanctified, not Eric, whom I respect, and whose work Wales demeans. I'll revisit the flower question later. Writegeist (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Drats!!! And I was just going to nominate him for Editor of the Weak. Through it all, I have great faith in the Wikipedia community's resilience. s ```Buster Seven Talk17:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings dear Buster. Might it be time to institute a post-departure (I balk at "posthumous") version of EoW for contributors who missed it during their wikilifetimes? For sure, the dear old 'pedia will never be quite the same. End of an era. (Cue Nimrod etc.) Oh dear, I seem to be using up my dwindling supply of the word "dear". Could you lend me a few until next week? Writegeist (talk) 18:10, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I case you need a topic for a play Ermutigung, the author just played it himself. Highly provoking, something that translates to "You cannot go into hiding / you need us and we need / your cheerfulness right now" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:37, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I always appreciate being quoted, and frankly, I really enjoy your writing style. That said, I feel compelled to point out that the comment in question was made in November 2014, rather than in 2011. Of course, the observation does have a certain timeless quality to it, so perhaps it's truthier to keep the 2011 date.
On a related note, I've often marveled at the sheer magnitude and ubiquity of hypocrisy on Wikipedia. Do you think that Wikipedians are actually more hypocritical than the average person? Or does it have something to do with the fact that one's every utterance is preserved in perpetuity here, making it much easier to identify hypocrisy?
On a much more serious note, thank you for the pictures of Sarajevo on your userpage. They're a stark reminder of a horrifying (and apparently nearly forgotten, at least in the US) episode in recent history. I can't imagine what it must have been like to be present during the siege, but thank you for sharing the photos. MastCellTalk18:58, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for catching that. I've corrected it. Re. hypocrisy, I think Laurence Sterne had it right with "Of all the cants which are canted in this canting world . . . the cant of hypocrites may be the worst . . ." It's a trap we all fall into from time to time. It takes determination, great strength of character, and exceptionally vigilant self-awareness to avoid it, and who among us is in possession of all three together at all times? In RL interactions I encounter it (and probably practise it) less than in WP. Also I think you're right that the permanent preservation of written comments makes hypocrisy, like all our traits perhaps, easier to identify. Many thanks also for acknowledging the Sarajevo photographs. "Never again" we say say each time it happens again . . .
As apparently your chosen method of ad hominem is to fuck with a username and ping the user to let him/her know, please do at least try to make your variations witty. Yes I know, it may be asking too much (noting you refer to people who incur your displeasure as "retard" and "dipshit"). Nevertheless it would be amusing to see you try.
So be my guest. Feel free to use this page to practise on! (My username only, please. And please note this is not an invitation to use this page for anything else.)
Please stop making personal attacks on Jimmy Wales as you have recently and repeatedly done on his talk page. Although he's a founder of Wikipedia, this does not mean he ceded his entitlement to civility, especially on his own talk page. JehochmanTalk17:00, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm seconding Jehochman's message to you. I came here to tell you to immediately stop. Your repetitive messages are trolling and are now disrupting discussions. WifioneMessage17:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Priorities differ. Writegeist has been making obnoxious comments on User talk:Jimbo Wales and continues to do so even after the host made clear that the comments were obnoxious (and thus unwelcomed).[19] Please don't post there again, Writegeist, about this issue. You made your point very well; there's no need to belabor the point just to irritate Jimmy. Thank you. And no, I haven't threatened to block you. JehochmanTalk22:40, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Jimbo is quite capable of stating explicitly he doesn't wish an editor to continue posting on his page, and has done in the past. While I disagree with the opinions Writegeist is expressing, I don't see any policy violations in their doing so. NE Ent23:21, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not a personal attack, nor is it abusive or obnoxious. It's merely an opinion that it's hard to square Jimbo's decision to accept $500K from an oppressive regime with his other positions and that while he has pledged to donate the money to human rights causes, he apparently hasn't yet done that nor has he identified the organizations to which he's going to give it Jimbo may find all of this quite inconvenient and wish it would go away but he's a public figure, he chose to accept the $500K, it's a legitimate question and it's one that's being asked in the media. NE Ent really hit this on the head: Jimbo is a big boy and I think if he's unhappy and wishes to respond, he can do that himself. Or he may decide to ignore it completely. What I don't think is appropriate is for an admin to start making questionable charges of personal attacks (I remind you that making a false charge is also a personal attack) nor do I find it particularly credible that if admin posts a warning about personal attacks on an user's talk page that it doesn't come with an implicit threat of a block. Msnicki (talk) 01:13, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are you following me around too? Yes, it's abusive and obnoxious, and it's incredibly unhelpful for you both to be flying around in formation providing cover for every editor who has confused Wikipedia with Reddit. Just because I'm an admin doesn't mean I need to grin and bear it when witnessing one editor abusing another. You should feel a little empathy for that situation. JehochmanTalk01:16, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am not following you around. But I did see Writegeist's complaint on Jimbo's talk page about your "visit" and decided to read all his recent contributions to see if I agreed with you. I read them all and I don't. I held off making any comment to see how you'd respond to the criticism I was sure you'd get. You've rejected it and I decided to say something. Msnicki (talk) 01:29, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Msnicki, Sluzzelin and NE Ent: thank you for the refreshing level-headedness and rationality of your insights here.
Wifione and Jehochman: I appreciate surrealism and generally welcome it on this page. Unfortunately your overwrought accusations (i.e. of personal attacks, incivility, trolling, disruption, obnoxiousness, abusiveness, intention "just to irritate Jimmy", confusion of Wikipedia with Reddit, etc.) are not just out there, which would be OK. They're devoid of any merit, which is not. As administrators, you should get that. I also note that one of you continued to argue the toss even after the errors in your comments had been pointed out to you. You both need to raise your game if you're to be welcomed here in future.
Thank you too my good friend. Yes, the conversation pit is living, or at least comfortably upholstered, proof that those who mocked and said it would only attract dimwits like me were just talking out of their backsides.
Admittedly one or two guests have been known to say stuff that's out of place in an intellectual salon whose lofty standards are the toast of the world's intellectual elite. So it's just as well that the salon in question sets the bar at about the height of a midget's kneecap. Ya gotta start somewhere, right? And—because I know you'll ask—the answer is yes, I do keep a midget handy for routine checks on the calibration. There's an unexpected bonus in the dexterity of his tiny hands. They're, well, handy for the challenging task of milking my pedigree herd of basmati rice grains. (Rice milk for one's morning coffee is so expensive in the stores.) Feel free to borrow him when you visit. His name is Elvis. He also pours generous measures of Maker's Mark, by the way. I just wish he wouldn't drink them. Last Monday he passed out on the floor and a friend of Lysistrata's tripped over him and sustained a painful Pott's fracture. Up until then I had thought she was from a respectable family but my god, the language. Turns out both her parents are lawyers. Happy holidays Buster! See you on the other side. Writegeist (talk) 00:06, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes quite interesting, the people who turn up here. Take administrator Wikione, for example, who has graced us with his/her presence in this thread. Questions were raised about him/her in the course of an investigation at Wikipediocracy. There was a Wikipedia editor review. Wikione quietly withdrew from activity here, and cofounder Wales expressed a wish for him/her to stay away. Apparently (s)he chose to disregard it.
Also interesting are the comments in this thread from a vigilant IP. Wikione deleted them as being from a "banned user". They are preserved in the page history. Writegeist (talk) 20:01, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both for this sage advice. I've dropped it now (on my toe as it happens, but I have others). I have also walked or rather limped away, and taken the chill pill. Quite a stressful time of year! Writegeist (talk) 21:37, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wishing you a jolly season too. During my break, I have been chasing after the intelligence explosion which I anticipate will give me absolute power over the entire universe (bwahahahahaha), if the programming is written just right to keep the computers from doing their own thing. My newly and successfully tested high beta fusion reactor should rapidly propel us toward implementation of that happy intelligence explosion, or at least will stop this disgusting flood of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Take the inverse of all those thrills and chills, and you quantify the happiness of my dealings with admins and arbcom. Cheers, Anythingyouwant (talk) 08:49, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Some editor gave me one of those mushy Wiki-Love messages
To give a Dobos Torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Let me take this opportunity to invite you and the lovely missus Geist to join me on the poop deck of the good ship HMS Wikipedia.
Careful! There are sharks nearby! We are currently docked at my talk page awaiting proper documentation for Starr, the cat, and a herd of 300 American Bison. I hope the papers get here soon since the porters I have hired refuse to clean up after the bison. What can I say----UNIONS!!! The reason for this hurried decision is a 3 day holiday to honor a fellow collaborator that has lost his ability to ply his trade for 2 days.[20] Another fellow traveler may have his license rescinded for a month!!! I should know soon if I take a 2 day trip to Savannah, Georgia where I have some land or a full month in which we head for the Golden Opportunities in CUBA. Can you imagine? Buffalo burgers, Cuban Rum and a good Havana cigar. Free Enterprise, I love it! TRA! Buster Seven Talk01:29, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Beware, O Men-of-War! The king fixes upon you with his gloomy eye. Let not his ill-tempered cannons roar. He rings his bell, calling forth his emissaries to rout your pirated enterprise. A great many fifes and drums echo over the land. From fortifications high on the edifice his cannons are pointed toward you. Set well your lanyards should a blow strike you broadside. Godspeed, dear friend. The Flying Dutchman AKA Buster Seven Talk22:42, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for unhatting this discussion. This is the third discussion in the last several months (I'm sure there's many more) where I've directly observed questionable judgment and action from Jehochman (I'm not pinging him because he has a habit of making wild accusations, and if I do ping him, I'm sure he'll invent something like "ping harassment"). My question to you is simple: can anything be done about Jehochman's increasingly erratic behavior? Viriditas (talk) 03:17, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I detest hatting. It's so anti-editor no matter what is being said. Are we little children that need protection? I came here looking a quick answer for who the hatter was rather than looking in the history. I know who the editor protector was!!. TY. . Buster Seven Talk17:57, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Viriditas: Thank you for dropping by. Excellent question. It's been three weeks and I still haven't come up with an answer. RfC/Us are useless; Arbcom, ditto. I don't know. Ridicule? His actions and utterances certainly are ridiculous. Contributions that convey a totally unwarranted sense of self-importance overlaying gravely limited comprehension skills are always good for a laugh—unlike their tedious consequences. How about a new category: Erratic users we don't know what to do about?
Buster: Greetings, dear friend. This is wonderful. You were curious about the identity of The Hatter, and where was it revealed to you? Here on my humble page! Wikipedia really IS the sum of all human knowledge. On a more serious note (if notes can be any more serious than the sum of all human knowledge), and this is absolutely true: Lysistrata and I took delivery of a new sofa on the very day that you so generously donated your garage sale bargain. Spooky. They're very different, but we have eclectic tastes so your gift works well at Disorderly Manor, where nothing really goes with anything else. Thank you. It was a comfortable perch from which to view some unfortunate but curiously satisfying goings-on at the 'pedia while nursing a Maker's Mark or three and fondling the stuffed cat (I allow it onto the sofa because it doesn't shed, although now, in its dotage, there's the occasional dribble of stuffing from its left ear, sometimes accompanied by a spider). Writegeist (talk) 03:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, thank you for expanding on your thoughts and needs. I have a fuller understanding of your point of view. (And incidentally I have experienced—in fact, am still experiencing—grievous losses similar to your own.) I'd hoped my post at your UTP would clarify that the reference was not intended as a joke or a throwaway line, but rather as a serious comment that characterizes behavior like C's as a scourge on the project. I do appreciate now that the choice of metaphor is not one that works for you in this context. Rest assured I shall bear that in mind in future interactions between us. Best wishes, Writegeist (talk) 19:19, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Writegeist, as far as I'm concerned we're good, I think we were good already since you were kind enough to come to my talk page and leave me a note. So rock on, and keep doing the work we should be doing. If it weren't for you AMC Pacer would look terrible--the article, not the car (it can't be saved). Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 01:08, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I just spotted the reply on your talk page message at the top of the page. It was not my intention to ignore your request for reply, I just got caught up in reading all the other material on your talk page and missed the one liner proclamation. I offer no excuse, and will be more careful about that in the future. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:36, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to see you Buster. Alas, I don’t think Lysistrata and I can save him this time—not even if we summon all seven of the magical powers we learned during those ghastly years in India as students of Maharishi Heypresto. And as fate would have it, we solemnly swore never to use them. Oh god, the prickly heat we suffered in our Donegal thornproof tweeds. And poor L, there wasn’t a single stick or whatever you call it of her Max Factor Harem Scarlet lipstick to be had in the bazars of le tout Delhi (I flew her down in my little Dragon Moth, sure we’d find a branch of Harrod’s or something). But I must say she’s wonderfully brave in the face of adversity. We shall pray, of course, just as we did for dear old Wotsisname when the crocodile took his leg. What was his name? Friend of Ernest and Martha’s. Anyway, a fat lot of good it did him. I fear we really do reap what we sow. Rather Biblical, eh? Or perhaps I mean agricultural. I get confused. It’s the Martinis. But anyway the arbs, like God, work in mysterious ways their wonders to perform. So who knows? Sic transit gloria mundi. 'Gloria was sick in the bus on Monday'—the only Latin my mother ever taught me so I use it at every opportunity, kind of in her memory. Although she's still alive. Writegeist (talk) 07:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And now, at the gentleman's talk page, in yet another diverting twist to the discussion there about the Arbcom case against him, he regurgitates chunks of dialogue I had with a sysop seven years ago. Given that (1) I’m not a party to the case, (2) I very specifically told the Arbcom clerk to remove me (which (s)he did) and that I wanted no part it, and (3) I have presented not one byte of evidence, I find it rather creepy that my ancient prose is being used as a diversionary tactic. On the other hand, it should come as no surprise because—oh look, a squirrel! Writegeist (talk)
Oh, and following the regurgitation he writes: “I keep no enemies list, nor would I ever keep one . . . Writegeist does . . .” — a personal attack so wildly absurd that it's given me the best laugh of the day (well OK, not much of a day so far but we live in hope) :) . He couldn’t possibly—and obviously doesn’t—know what he's talking about. As a matter of fact I don’t regard Collect or any other avatar on en.wiki as an enemy—the very thought of it is absurd—although there are some whose repellant modus operandi (e.g. wikilawyering, economy with the truth, misrepresenting others’ comments, misunderstanding and aggressively misapplying policies, bullying and self-pity, deviousness, incompetence, refusal and/or inability to follow the reasoning in others’ comments let alone collaborate, lousy signal-to-noise ratio, and argument until the heat death of the universe etc., all of which I've seen here over the years) makes their presence, in my view, such a pain in the ass that any reasonable person might regard their participation as a net negative. Writegeist (talk) 20:16, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pursuant to facts presented above and in light of recent events to numerous to mention and considering that I could switch to Africaans so that you understanding is minimalized, in spite of the fact the High Holy Days are upon us which will restrict the available editing time to provide evidence in either case to but a meager few hours my question for you is....did the squirrel have a golden tail or a rusty brown tail (black is also a possibility)??? Happy Easter (which, if you remember a Mothers Day wish from the past, is code for Happy Easter. . Buster Seven Talk20:36, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pursuant to the squirrel: Definitely a rusty brown tail. And rusty everything else as it was a yard-art squirrel, made from the left front fender of a junked 1949 Chevrolet pickup by the renowned fender bender artist Chevy Fender (I know how you like coincidinks). I spotted the little oxidized critter just as thieves made off with it around the corner of my talk page. Turns out they didn't know the stupendous value of a Chevy Fender creation. They only took it as a diversionary tactic to draw the heat away from a nearby bank heist so that their partners in crime would have enough time for it—them needing more than the usual amount of time allocated to bank heists on account of being elderly midgets who’d need several attempts to vault the counter. Sure, they were short in stature and weak of limb, but they were strong on planning.
And now of course, at the eleventh hour, having pretended he would not participate in the case, suddenly presents a screed, obviously long in the making, on the evidence page.The closing—"for here I stand; I can do no other"—tempts me to paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen with something like: "User, you are no Martin Luther." Writegeist (talk) 06:59, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What a coincidence that you mention song in the same thread as Chevy Fender. If I remember correctly, Chevy's second uncle on his fathers side was Freddy Fender whose biggest hit was Wasted Days and Wasted Nights. How appropriate don't ya think? The closing makes me think of the old adage, "Here I sit, broken-hearted, tried to ......". I think you know the rest. . Buster Seven Talk09:13, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Matching: Tristis est anima mea, but I also remember "Whatever gets you through the night ...". I am in the middle of writing another FA, - that also helps. DYK? Luther was mentioned in two hooks on Maundy Thursday, btw. For resurrection, see the top of my user page. For a new play, see the talk of an actor whose name I may not mention, remembered by me as actor/director of Hamlet in film, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:14, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
ps: The mysterious ways of the arbs: I truly love my restriction of 2 comments per discussion - why I may not say the name of the actor. - I learned Tristis when my mother died but wrote Geh aus, mein Herz in her memory, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know and work with Editor Li235 over at WER/Eddy. He is congenial and very competent. I wish him well in the face of what may turn into a fiasco if the Main party to the troubles, the main instigator to the troubles, does his usual "I can't be bothered. I leave my minions to answer any accusations of conduct." We have seen this before. Where was it? I wish I had kept my notes but they were lost at sea on my recent trip to Cuba which did not go well, I must say. Upon arrival at Porto de Fidel in Havana Harbor, the bison were spooked during off-loading and escaped into the hills. They sent a message by proxy (Attorney Alice de Vunderlangdt) that they would only communicate by posting responses on the Cathedral Door. TRA! . Buster Seven Talk12:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You said pretty much what I would have said had I been allowed to say what I wanted to say when I wanted to say it but now its too late 'cause you already said it. Drats! I missed my chance! My little Webster's Pocket Dictionary isn't too clear on whether minion and proxy are the same thing. I think they are pretty close...like mirage and illusion....or forboding and melted cheese. I've been chastised for using the word "minion" so I want to be very careful not to over-step. The reference to ESandL is right on the money...a foreshadowing perhaps. Best to the stuffed cat. Starr sends his love. . Buster Seven Talk06:02, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dangerous humor? Ah, the creeping fundamentalist Iranification of Wikipedia. It took a while to get started here. For example, way back in 2006 Iran arrested Mana Neyestani for his humorous cartoon in the newspaper Iran that showed a little boy and a cockroach conversing in Farsi. There are more ancient precedents, of course. In 443, Attila the Hun reportedly killed ninety-odd Roman soldiers in a battle for Constantinople while dressed as Attila the Nun. The Huns, although not widely known for their sense of humour, apparently thought it very funny at the time. By the way isn't "minion" a rather expensive filet of steak? Fyi a proxy is someone who is simultaneously afflicted with dropsy and the pox. Writegeist (talk) 18:49, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think you mean "medallion" which is always a convincing addition to your made-up definition when playing the game of Pictionary...my grandkids are easily fooled when I use big 25¢ words like "recalcitrant" or "complicity" or "provocateur". As stroll down memory lane reminds me that my eighth grade BVM sister was nicknamed "Attila the Nun". She looked like Babe Didrikson but with an attitude. Corporal punishment was not just expected as a part of a parochial upbringing; it was a requirement.. Buster Seven Talk19:19, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, both. And variously also, from time to time, Mrs. Malaprop, the Hatter, Billy Bunter, and (not so literary but no less analogous), Hyacinth Bucket. Writegeist (talk) 19:12, 30 March 2015 (UTC) Rats, I forgot Violet Elizabeth Bott—"I will thcweam and thcweam until I am thick!" Writegeist (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have been nominated for EotW at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Nominations#Editor Buster 7. Of course, I can't accept and have opined as such. But it is nice to hear (from the multitude) how wonderful I am. And....thats the rub! So far the "multitude" counts about 5 (if you count the nominator). I wonder if you have any thoughts on the matter that you would like to share with the huddled masses. I can pay you 5¢ a word for up to 100 words and 3¢ a word for anything over 100. (The Koch Brothers aren't the only ones that can buy votes!!!) Buster Seven Talk00:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are you holding out for more cash? Is that what the Bravo means? I'm a little short right now. The deal with Trump to build an island in the middle of Lake Michigan (Trump Island, of course) fell thru but I still had to pay all the fees for holding the rights to the landfill (actually just NYC garbage) in barges along the St. Lawrence Seaway. Not sure what I'll do with it now. Maybe Detroit Michigan is in the market. TRA! . Buster Seven Talk17:34, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article Rainbow Body informs us that for peeps who complete “the four visions before death” and focus on “the lights that surround their fingers,” the following happens: their “physical body self-liberates into a nonmaterial body of light . . . with the ability to exist and abide wherever and whenever as pointed by one’s compassion.” Their bodies shrink instead of decomposing, until all that’s left is hair and nails. A template* says “This article may be too technical for most readers to understand.” (“Technical” is used here in its lesser-known sense of “batshit crazy.”)
The article lists seven people “reported to have attained the rainbow body.” They probably attained it at the Rainbow Body Shop. It’s in California, in a town called Eureka. Writegeist (talk) 16:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
*Removed in June 2015. But not replaced by one stating "This topic is batshit crazy."
Hi Writegeist. I got your name from the list of editors that signed up at WikiProject Cooperation a while back. I feel that there is consensus here to remove a lot of primary sources from the MarkMonitor page that were used to create an original analysis. The primary sources are published by people with a financial connection to MarkMonitor and/or political advocacy groups. However, since at least one editor (the original author of the content) supports the content's inclusion, I cannot remove it myself due to WP:COI (it is a controversial edit if even one editor opposes it). Do you have a minute to take a look? CorporateM (Talk) 18:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hot off the presses... [21] Lindsey Graham promises to have ‘a rotating first lady’ if elected president.
As of yet, there has been no information provided to answer the three most obvious questions:
1) How many "Rotating First Ladies" will be required?
2) How long will they rotate?
3) Where will the rotating take place? The White House? The Oval Office? Air Force One?
Quite the coinkidink. Lysistrata (i.e. Mrs Geist, my fourth First Lady) was in an almost perpetual state of rotation, being descended from a long (and rotating) line of whirling dervishes. I was never quite sure whether she was spinning to the right or the left, as you will see from this little film I made of her with my phone. Her current husband says bits have begun to fly off her, although fortunately nothing crucial so far—a finger here, an eyeball there. No worries, I told him, it’s just part of the aging process, and bits can fall off even when we’re standing still. The other day as I left Tiffany’s a vigilant employee handed me my own left ear. He'd seen it quietly drop off while I was examining a selection of diamond-encrusted oven thermometers, one of which I bought for Lysistrata. (I like to give her something that's at least faintly romantic on our divorce anniversary.) The thermometer is analogue of course. Not as accurate as digital, but I have it on good authority, from the Tiffany's salesman actually, that the digital ones have a "back door" for the NSA to collect data on who cooks what, for how long, and at what temperature. Writegeist (talk) 18:27, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Even though I'm normally 'against' userspace on principle, I like your userspace. :-) I made a suggestion to User:Stabila711 that "new" bangvotes be moved into the multi-bangvote area that I (attempted) to set up, so that people can mark more than one option as "support" and/or "oppose". Are you comfy with moving your bangvote, and at your option, multi-voting or otherwise commenting? See greenboxen at User_talk:Stabila711#presidential_candidate_bangvotes, thanks. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 13:41, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree that being cool-looking is not the criterion we should bangvote, based upon. But that is what a lot of the bangvotes that were already in place, when I happened along, seemed to be using as their rationale. "Wikipedia needs to look modern" is just coded language for "Wikipedia needs to keep up with the kewl kids". As you say, WP:NOTFACEBOOK applies. I'm against the circles, and I'm also against looking 'cool' whenever it conflicts with maximal ease-of-editing, ease-of-reading, ease-of-access, and ease-of-mobile-device-usage, among other things. But where those things are not at stake, I see no reason not to let people work on improving aesthetics, since after all, that's one of the pillars.
I don't care if wikipedia is cool, in the eyes of Justin Bieber or whatever, but I do think that there is room for wikipedia to let people do stuff that is only tangentially encyclopedic, but which makes the place more enjoyable for them, to remain editors -- e.g. userspace, e.g. IRC channels, e.g. graphic layout redesign efforts. Often there is little encyclopedic ROI from such things, but every so often we get good stuff out as a result. Not sure if this RfC will result in such an outcome, but we'll see. I definitely REALLY dislike the jarring aesthetic differential between old-school and cool-school, which to me looks like an aesthetically-motivated POV fork, that ought to be merged into the main comparative-article. Or at least, we need to settle on a style, and apply it uniformly. Time will tell. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 18:28, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Let’s say...You like to mow the golf-course fairway
- but some pesky kids keep throwing water balloons at you.
You get discouraged because the balloons hurt and the water chills you to the core and your glasses get all fogged up and you can’t see where you are going and so you drive off the fairway and into the rough and you hit a tree and you fall off the riding mower and you land in a ditch filled with brackish water and your clothes get all smelly and you have to walk home along a dirt road and some rabid white-tailed deer attack you and you try to leap over a barbed wire fence but you are not really athletic and so you land straddling the fence.
Apparently Mr. Trump wants to build an “impenetrable” 2,000-mile wall between Americky and Mexico. He expects the Mexican government to pay. Surely there’d be a better chance of persuading Mexico to fund construction of an impenetrable wall around Mr. Trump? As for aliens, sure they may look a bit funny but I don’t see why they should be illegal. (Is Mr. Trump an alien?) Writegeist (talk) 20:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See my Q&A for the background note, for extra enjoyment of the absurd, - perhaps write another play, now that your former hero doesn't need theater any more, producing it himself, act one: mass email about the enormous importance of arbcom ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The one that talks about misrepresenting policies and other users' comments blah, blah, blah. I've hung it up high on my User Page so no one pisses on it or rips it down or anything. I've un-retired but I've come back a little narly. I'm taking meds for the condition which should improve over time in which case I'll return to my warm cuddly self. TRA! Buster Seven Talk08:18, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Gnarly or warm and cuddly, I don’t care—I’m just delighted to see you’re back. Hope you got the banner tied down securely. It whipped around quite viciously the other day when one of the cords broke in a storm. Almost took my eye out. Well I think it just broke but there's always the possibility of sabotage. Or squirrels.Writegeist (talk) 20:06, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
..ran across an IP that was looking for his "testarticles". He claims they were missing when he woke the next morning and cannot be found. Have you seen them anywhere around here? 173.15.103.65 (talk) 01:39, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have hired Chance, the chimp, to help me fix some of the recent articles that got me in trouble with The Plaigerism Police. It's slow work because Chance's attention span is limited. If he sees anything yellow he right away assumes it's a banana. And then, when he finds its just a yellow maple leaf that has been blown in from outside, he sulks for hours. But, he's a Republican so he's not really too concerned about the minimum hourly wage...so it all averages out. A Happy Thankful Holiday to All. Buster Seven Talk21:51, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A few years ago I had jaundice really badly. There was a heatwave, and the aircon was on the fritz. I was walking around the house stark naked. Ever since, I've thanked my lucky stars that I hadn't hired Chance to fix any articles for me. By the way, should't he be running for president? Writegeist (talk) 03:35, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting to see Kevin Gorman—outstanding for poor judgment and dismal conduct when under pressure IMO—put himself up for election to Arcom. Of all the so-called "voter guides", Boing! said Zebedee’s is the one with the the most incisive appraisal of this individual's candidacy:
Kevin Gorman My existing impression of Kevin was that he is very much an agenda-driven person who holds grudges, and someone who can never accept the possibility that he might be wrong. At heart he seems to see himself as an honest champion of equality, and that is to be admired, so he certainly deserves a fair evaluation. But unfortunately, the more I look the more I see an example of "When you only have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail", and I see Kevin looking for gender fights and helping stir them up even where they really don't exist.
Instead of listening to criticism and learning from it, Kevin has been railing against it, haranguing those who dare criticize him, and drawing on every threat he can think of to try to shut them up - even asking other admins to redact their contributions, dragging them to the drama board of ANI to try to get them blocked, and removing their interactions from his candidate question page. If this is the battlefield way he deals with the relatively mild election process, how could he possibly cope with the serious challenges that he would face as an Arb?
Despite Kevin's claims that he subsequently got support for his actions, I think his violation of WP:OUTING policy (which he continues to defend in the apparent belief that his own values are superior to policy) was fundamentally wrong and not something I want to see, ever, in an Arbcom candidate. This is not someone who should be allowed access to private information.
In total, I see someone who has a very poor sense of self-awareness, an overblown sense of his own infallibility, zero ability to empathise with those with different opinions to his own, and someone who would be severely destructive to the collaborative environment that is essential to the running of Arbcom.
To you personally, Kevin, I'm genuinely sorry to have to be this harsh - I think you're a genuinely nice guy, but you are unsuited to this kind of collaborative role.
|| Oppose
And these observations very politely expose the falsehoods in a self-serving narrative written by Gorman.
I wonder what extravagant gifts I’ll receive from Mrs. Geist this Christmas. Prominent among last year’s was one that had a sticker with gratuitous advice to “keep out of reach of children,” which is almost impossible at Christmas, when they’re super-sticky and ultra sugar-charged, and even more demented than usual. I’ve become fond of the word “bodacious” (I know you noticed it) and I’ll try to work it into Wikipedia articles from now on. Have a bodacious Christmas, Hanukkah (just in time I hope), or what
You notice how the more evidence you present to Jimbo, the more he just goes into "short, pithy denial" mode? I wonder if that works effectively on a sufficient number of people who observe it (i.e., sort of like Donald Trump), or if he's viewed practically speaking as more of a joke (i.e., sort of like Joe Isuzu or Tommy Flanagan). What do you think? - 2001:558:1400:10:495E:95BF:1941:D3F9 (talk) 16:30, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes he can get really very pithy when anyone challenges the bluster. I'd have thought it was counter-productive but, as you point out, getting pithy seems to work for Trump.. That said, the vast majority of teh communiteh at WP are serious-minded and tremendously highly educated peeps who are well up in Greek mythology, as any fule kno. So they might think that although Jimbo touts himself as a Titan of free speech activism he’s really a kind of hapless trickster, a latter-day Prometheus to the community's all-seeing Zeus, vainly proclaiming himself the sole bearer of the (stolen) fire that forged Wikipedia for the benefit of humankind, and also dressing up the bones and offal of worthless utterances as the hearty meat of truth (the trick endlessly repeated and repeatedly exposed), and suffering the eternal punishment of never regaining a semblance of truthiness with anyone who's paying attention. Something along those lines.
To me he’s more of a Dud (an American version), particularly Dud in the “Bloody Greta Garbo” skit, only less endearing. Thank you for introducing me to Joe Isuzu (wish I’d seen the ads) and Tommy Flanagan (I never saw SNL in the eighties). Off to YouTube now. Writegeist (talk) 20:14, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Christmas! Christmas, everywhere, on every talk page, I do dispair Seasons being greeted and Wikibreaks told, but still time for a little more editing, for being WP:BOLD! So go on, go forth and enjoy beyond concern Your Wiki will be waiting for when you return.
Have a great Holiday Season. As is usually the case, I have sent my first Holiday Greetings card to you. Many might say it is because you are my most loyal and true Wiki-Friend. Truth is, rather than start with User:Aardvaark, I invert the alphabet and begin with "W". Fair warning: I plagiarized this card from another editor...I don't know who. But...it's not like I copied a Hallmark card. Or is it????? Buster Seven Talk23:56, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(The designer of the card is User:Samtar)
Dear Buster, thank you, I'm honored you start at W. My darling Lysistrata, who always dispenses oodles of good cheer at Christmas, has done a very clever animated card this year. She's such a multi-talented gal! As you're my reciprocally loyal and true Wikifriend I'm sending it to you first: [23] Happy, happy Christmas to you and yours! Writegeist (talk) 00:15, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In appreciation of your diligence, resilience, integrity, patience and civility.
I found this in the back yard. I think you dropped it. My only question is "what were 'ya doin' in my back yard and why didn't my pit-bull, Killer,
bite you in the ass?". Buster Seven Talk02:12, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've had too much egg nog! Plus I may have added a little too much Tangueray gin. ...turns out it wasn't you but The Donald. Two things: 1) I don't think you will see Donald sitting down for the next few months, and 2) I gave Killer an extra bog biscuit. Buster Seven Talk03:15, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Gee thanks! Myself, I've had too little egg nog. (The chickens are on strike. Lord, don't chickens know the price of corn these days? No way I can afford it. And anyway what's wrong with rotting veggie scraps? More than enough vitamins. I'm negotiating with a fox to go and negotiate with the chickens.)
Ah, Killer. That's the kind of service dog I need around the place. Let me know when Killer sires or gives birth to puppies. Sometimes when I venture into the gulags of the 'pedia I arm myself with Santa Claws the cat in case I run into trouble but he's not much use, mainly (as you know) on account of being stuffed. Nevertheless the stuffing is quite hard, so when I run into really big assholes I tend to give them a slap upside the head with him. Of course the heads are always up the asses, so it's not a pretty business. I put the cat in a strong plastic bag. Only after business is concluded do I let the cat out of the bag. (Did you know that's how the saying came about?) Then I throw it away. (Bag not cat.) May you have a happy, prosperous, stress-free, Trump-free new year, my friend. Writegeist (talk) 05:38, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As promised, I'm now assuming that you are not welcome on Jimbo Wale's talk page, and will remove all your new comments there (with one exception). I'll guess that you'll challenge my right to do this. Please just check with arbcom - this has been decided twice before by them. The one exception to me removing all your new comments on Jimbo's talk page will be if you want to ask Jimbo whether this fits his rules for his talk-page. I'll allow something short and to the point like: "Smallbone's tells me that I am no longer welcome on your talk-page. Is this correct?" Of course, if he doesn't answer, then that's all there is. Smallbones(smalltalk)20:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm now assuming... and I'll allow something short..... How presumptuous. Jimbo's talk page has historically been an open forum page that allowed freedom of expression and provided a "Speakers Corner" where debate and discussion and disagreement was allowed. I guess not anymore. As far as I know, no specific editor has been appointed Protector of the Page. User:Smallbones seems to have elevated himself to a preferred status among equals...someone who can identify a "speech crime" and protect the rest of us "innocents' from being harmed by it. The nice thing about open forums in RL is they are protected from police interference. Not a good beginning to a new year. Buster Seven Talk
Didn't you know that Smallbones is one of the cabal? His slavish support for Jimbo's weirder notions would seem to confirm it, eg: comments made at the DC conference late last year as reported elsewhere. Jimbo consistently puts his foot in his mouth but, thanks to facilitators such as Smallbones, he gets away with it. You have some examples of the foot-in-mouth disease on your user page, although I think you've missed his failed promise to fund a fork of WP for those of us who are fed up of his antics. - Sitush (talk) 04:06, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wales is also quick to plant a daisy root (with the sedulous assistance of Smallbones, of course) in any mouth that has the temerity to question what comes out of his own. “Respect my authoritah!”
Akin to the Wikipedians who are not a Wikipedian cat, which also stemmed from Jimbo's actions? Of course, that was deleted eventually. - Sitush (talk) 07:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've heard it said that as the guards were rather dim the most effective diversionary tactic was to point and say: “Schau mal da hinten, Kleineknochen! Ein Eichhörnchen!” I bet that's how your Dad did it both times. Incidentally my grandfather was a guest of the Japanese in Singapore in WWII and although he knew the Japanese for squirrel he didn't survive their hospitality. Writegeist (talk) 06:50, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Merge. Thank you for your words of support. Over $760 million was spent on those little devils (and other Computer hard and soft ware) and over 175000 HHC's were used. It would have been a travesty for the units not to get mentioned somewhere when Syennesis of Cyprus just got an article and he hasn't been seen since the fourth century BCE. Buster Seven Talk01:52, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The right result, I think.
So many pricks!
Knowing how you like coinkidinks: barefoot, I accidentally kicked a sea urchin once (you don’t do that twice) and I was treated by an ancient Greek physician.
But to be fair, even though he was extremely ancient I can’t be absolutely certain it was your man Syennesis.
BTW, the good thing is that getting banned from the founders page is like being told to stay away from Love Canal. Harriet, , my pet tarantula, once flicked some of her urticating bristles my way. Not sure what made her mad but it was like a hundred little pricks all at once.... so I can understand your discomfort. Buster Seven Talk06:24, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support and minutes of silence, - thanks with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! Click on "bell" for moar. "Burla" - compare the history and talk of that article with Joseph (opera), and you have the plot for another play. I would so much love to say "Long live Viva-Verdi" if he had not died. - Verdi's wisdom: take nothing too seriuz, especially not yourself. A great way to start a new year! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:57, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you dear Gerda. I hadn't seen that he'd died. I'm shocked; one forgets that even the gods are mortal. I will add him. There are also men, of course, who can't believe what they have to see :) . Writegeist (talk) 18:16, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the silence, dear Gerda. (I always welcome your visits here.) Unforeseen circumstance rendered me mute. The shadow of a crocotta falling across a dog comes to mind. :) It'll take me a while to get back up to speed. Sorry about the mixed metaphors. I'm going to add PB to The Minutes. Writegeist (talk) 22:34, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Your response was splendid. You may not get to personally see a positive result but I think he will consider the important world effecting topics you put in front of him and, perhaps, be more outspoken and forthright the next time. We can only hope. Buster Seven Talk21:12, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It’s a nice thought, but in any cult or dictatorship the more heavily the regime represses voices that challenge the propaganda narratives, the less forthright the regime needs to be. Which is of course the intention. In this, the Democratic People’s Republic of Jimboland is developing along the lines of a familiar model. Writegeist (talk) 01:11, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For saying the right thing, at the right time, in the right place, to the right people. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows your question to the hierarchy was not an exercise in futility but an honest challenge for him to be forthright. The fact that he abdicated his responsibility gives editors on the scene an awareness of who they are working for. You educated his audience to his folly. Buster Seven Talk05:39, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that you are angry, but Wikipedia is not a free web host or platform for attacking other Wikipedians. Take it to your blog, if you have one. If you persist in using your user page as a platform for attacking other users, you will likely end up banned. Your commentary shows a clear assumption of bad faith. Guy (Help!) 09:52, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that is with good reason. Why do you not act when Jimbo comes out with nonsense, such as that I mentioned at BLPN? The man, and in particular his talk page, need to be reined-in. - Sitush (talk) 09:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In my view the bad faith is well founded—rooted as it is in evidence. (AGF not being a suicide pact and all that.) The “I understand that you are angry” is classic projection, written as it is, and in this significant context, by a Walesian devotee who clearly doesn't understand me at all. (I trust he won't try; I actually much prefer it this way.) For sure, I do sometimes feel a slight shudder of revulsion at the actions and utterances of our figurehead; not least at his tactics when asked important but uncomfortable questions to which anyone with more than half a brain would like to see truthful answers. More often than not I’m just wryly amused by the sad, predictable spectacle of it all. Why would I be angry? It’s not like Wales represents any kind of threat to, say, the reputation of one of my loved ones. But I do understand that any Dear Leader's followers see it as their happy duty to protect him (it's always a him, right?) from close scrutiny by the proletariat, for fear that cracks might appear in the immaculate, laboriously constructed edifice. Writegeist (talk) 19:08, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have a friend in Carmel-by-the-Sea. He's well-known in the film industry and local politics. I've made arrangements to have this vehicle, , available to you. It's parked in his driveway...behind the Bentley. The keys are in a Hello Kitty vinyl coin purse on top of the passenger side tire. I suggest you head for the hills until the heat blows over. Buster Seven Talk13:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I picked it up. Damn, it's slow for a getaway car! But as it's on free loan I won't complain. Can I keep the purse? It's cute and it matches my Hello Kitty socks. Writegeist (talk) 19:12, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Writegeist:. Clint wants his Beetle back and he says it better be in the same condition as when he "loaned" it to you. He's usually a sweetheart but he has this alter-ego that can appear at a moments notice. He told me to ask you if "...you feel lucky. Do 'ya punk?". He kind of scowled when he said it and pretended to be mean. He said to leave the keys where you got them and that you can keep the hello kitty key chain. Buster Seven Talk21:47, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
of Stupidity. "If you are stupid, you don't know you are stupid". The skills needed to produce the correct answer to the question, "Are you stupid?" are exactly the same skills needed to be able to recognize what the correct answer is. [1]
Hello, Writegeist. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Your recent uncomfortable remarks and pressuring requests for responses have been deemed Acts of High Treason against the illustrious and most excellent King Jimmy I by various Barons and Editors in high regard of the King. Having no fear in your heart of the consequences of your dire acts and being moved and seduced by your devilish and insidious intentions, you have failed in the commonly held Love of Due Obedience toward the King and have moved to disturb the tranquility of the community and the pages therein. and to stir up war and insurrection, in an effort to dispose of said King of all title, honor and the regal name of the Imperial Crown and the throne on which he, himself, created and now sits. It is imperative that you control your "rascally mouth" in any future dealing with or comments about our industrious and most excellent King. The validity of your claims will continue to be disregarded and you are hereby threatened with imprisonment in "The Tower" should your verbiage continue to display perdition and malice toward "the esteemed one'. Should you have a revision of conscience and wish to return to your humble place among the masses of human chattel volunteers, you will be required to prostate yourself before a committee of your peers and ask for a "Royal Clemency" which will, in all likely-hood, be denied. Have a nice day! Buster Seven Talk14:18, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Peter. It concerns AHC’s two-part inquiry here. The second question in particular may be on many minds now, given how seriously Hurricane James and Hurricane Arnnon--to name just two ongoing storms--have already eroded trust in the WMF board. Writegeist (talk) 20:15, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please, click around! These easily navigable links should be indepesensable to the new user or an old user that has come under suspicion for insurrection and potential treacherous behavior.
Special arrangements have been made to provide for your well-being pursuant to your inevitable mental health issues. Special safe rooms have been prepared for you and your co-horts by The Foundation. They are just down the hall, the series of doors on the left side. A palm print scanner will ONLY allow access by yourself and necessary personnel. Egress is not possible. (Foundation Personnel are the folks you see with the white lab coats and the golden shoulder epillettes; the folks without the epillettes are Foundation Security). Your use of the room is completely self-determined and, once you enter, assistance will be provided within 24 hours (Recent Board decisions have left them a bit short-staffed). Just make yourself comfortable in the middle of the room. The padding and the lack of furniture are for your protection. Someone will be with you shortly. Have a nice day! O! I almost forgot. Cheers! Buster Seven Talk14:45, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My friend, I understand your frustration. It's incredibly tiresome for you.
Here's what I see.
He seems to think that he can disregard the longstanding disinvitation from my talk page when it suits him to come here to bait you—a pointless discourtesy really, as I regard his comments as trash to be removed post haste (as happened yesterday with his, er, Valentine's Day messages). By contrast, I have always complied with his reciprocal prohibition on posting to his talk.
At MRG’s talk his comments continue the MO of obfuscation, misrepresentation, lies, and claimed victimhood. I doubt it will pull the wool over the eyes of someone with MRG’s smarts; someone who is presumably also aware of his habitual tactics, as they've been on display for many years now.
He clearly implied the IP was “tickled pink” about the “dying relative” when in fact the rest of the IP’s post shows the source of their amusement is not cancer itself but rather the various cancer stories which the IP obviously doesn’t believe for one moment: “It's interesting how your family members seem to come down with horrible diseases every time you get in trouble here.”
He clearly implied the IP was you, when it wasn’t.
He clearly implied the Wales/Consigliere comment was related to him, when it wasn’t.
He clearly implied the “hundred little pricks” comment was about him, when it wasn’t.
He clearly implied he added a useful NYT reference for content in a racing driver bio that had no references, whereas in fact, having followed me there, he slapped the reference on a piece of content without bothering to check whether the source supported it; it didn’t; I had to clean up after him.
He clearly implied the “narcissistic assholes” comment was from you, when it wasn’t (it was from me).
He clearly implied, with the story about an IP making AE complaints about him, that you were harassing him, when in fact the IP wasn’t you. Yet he omitted of course (having dragged me into his rant) that he made vexatious notice board complaints about my own comments on my own talk page (comments that had nothing to do with him), and received short shrift.
When comments and tactics on WP evince IDHT, intransigence, tendentiousness, misrepresentation, evasion, flat-out untruth, overinflated sense of self-importance, Pooterism, groundless authoritarianism, policy manipulation, gaming the system, victim narrative, narcissistic tropes, bully behavior, running-to-Mommy, and stalking, etc., many users on the receiving end find it intensely frustrating and dispiriting, and it greatly detracts from their enjoyment of the WP user experience. I do feel for them. When I find myself the target, I just laugh. But then, being rather weird myself, I do tend to laugh at weird stuff, and I take the positive view that it can inspire surreal comedic scenarios to lighten the day.
I appreciate that as you do more on WP than I do, your contributions expose you to greater risk of becoming a target for a user who gets it into their head to go after you and try to run you off the project. When someone like that runs to Mommy with some cockamamie story, it's probably wise to listen outside the door rather than going in—at least until Mommy asks you. Mommy's no fool in these situations. She's empathetic and insightful, and she usually knows best! Writegeist (talk) 20:38, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Coinkidinkally Clarence and I are related (and share the same surname), so maybe the Gregory Peckitude is inherited. My first name is so unusual that I’ve lost count of the times I’ve had to explain that it was given me in memory of a common ancestor who came to grief on a trip through South America (or maybe it was South Carolina, I forget) hunting small game—namely the wily, fleet-footed pygmies that scurried around the countryside in considerable numbers in those days. Oh yes, this ancestor was far from politically correct. He’d have preferred to hunt big game—dropping an elephant in Kenya, for instance, carried greater social cachet—but we Darrows all suffer from a genetic weakness in the shoulders and elephant guns have an almighty recoil. Anyway the pygmies got him eventually, with a flurry of poison-tipped arrows. And that, my friend, is why I’m Curare “Tip” Darrow. Oh well, we all have our crosses to bear. I once crossed a bear in the pet department of Harrods—an intern had ordered it by mistake—but that’s another story. Writegeist (talk) 00:46, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Very interesting. Not sure why, but it reminds me of a story my mother told us of a distant relative of mine who was the engineer of the C & A's 2 p.m. train (a railway that used wooden rails and haulage rope made of hemp and was operated by human power) out of Naples. On February 30, 1816 he inadvertently a missed a stop sign and ran his train loaded with bon-bons off an open draw bridge somewhere between modern-day Sicily and the former (and little known) Duchy of Napoleondia somewhere in the lower boot part (near the buckle) of Italy. Fortunately, except for the 10,000 boxes of fresh desserts that were splattered everywhere, there were no fatalities. He claimed that a small pygmy-like creature caught his attention as it frolicked alongside the tracks. Smearzz. Buster Seven Talk03:33, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Different article, Hana Blažíková, was stubbed as unsourced, - so I expanded it (yesterday) sourced. Only then did I understand why it was stubbed - looking at the creator who had done nothing but translating. Anyway, she's better than ever now ;) Wikipedia ways are strange, more often than not, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:14, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Great work on that article, Gerda. One Wikipedia way that's very strange indeed is following an editor to an article just to add a cite to a source that doesn't support the content. Come to think of it, there are so many strange Wikipedia ways that compiling a list might be fun. Or writing a play. Writegeist (talk) 16:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't everyone interested in FrenchCheckoslovokianMonesgaque race car drivers from the '50's? I think I saw him race in Monaco back in 1951 when I was 5 yrs old and visiting my Aunt Grace. I must admit I spent more time gazing at my beautiful aunt than at the race. She taught me some very interesting things that have served me well all these many years. One memorable piece of advice----"If you pay attention to the murmurs of the common rabble, you will have wrinkles by the time your 50." Not exactly Mark Twain, but timely none the less. Beers!. Buster Seven Talk19:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also form last months Signpost which quoted Ian Fleming from Goldfinger, "Once is happenstance. Twice is a coincidence. Three times is a pattern" ("Three times is enemy action" is the actual quote but that would sound much more like battle mentality and we know the definitive claims of "No Enemies List Here" make that impossible). Jeers! Buster Seven Talk20:23, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weren’t the Grimaldis wonderful? I once received an impromptu invitation to tea (I was very young) when the pilot taking me to Cap d’Antibes in my mother’s flying-boat got lost and landed in the harbor at Monaco to ask for directions. Louis Chiron drove me to the palace in his Bugatti. Then a rather odd little fellow scuttled into the palace behind us and had to be ejected. Turned out he’d followed me to the departure dock—for reasons known only to himself—and stowed away in the tail of the plane, which explained its nose-up attitude en route. He was badly winded, evidently from running after the Bugatti, yet claimed he’d been on an afternoon stroll past the palace and entered on a whim. Your aunt Grace kept her famously cool composure; all she said was, “It’s amazing how some people really do expect us to believe six impossible things before breakfast. Earl Grey or Lapsang Souchong, Writegeist?” Her scent was glorious, by the way—a heady blend of Chanel No. 5 and casino revenues. Chiron gave off manly aromas of high-octane fuel and Gauloises. I half expected him to burst into flame each time he lit one.. Writegeist (talk) 07:05, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
When I was a little boy we used to whizz down to the French Riviera in summer for family vacations in Bandol, and we'd always make a pilgrimage to Monaco, about 100 miles away. (My parents didn't have a Bugatti but they had bucketloads of chutzpah.) I still possess a souvenir—a little figure of a palace guardsman in his snazzy white uniform. All true! Little did I know that one day I would need the guards’ protection. As they say in Monaco, “Quelle coinkidink!” Also, whenever we had Champagne and foie gras with Prince Rainier my mother was saddened by the loneliness of his life, rattling around in that ridiculous palace with nothing but flunkies, goldfish, and fat-livered geese for company, so she introduced him to your aunt Grace. OK I made that bit up. But hey, you know the Wikipedia motto: "The encyclopedia anyone can make stuff up in.” Writegeist (talk) 23:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
is an old lithograph I found in one of those old steamer trunks that my great grandmother, The Duchess of Downton, left to me in her will. She was a good and loyal friend of Princess Charlotte, Duchess of Valentinois, who, by chance and proper upbringing, was the mother of Rainier III, Prince of Monaco. I have no way of verifying but, the lady in the back maybe a relative of yours. Paper-clipped to the photo is a note...A group of Right Guests at a party. Or maybe you relative is the bass violin player. Not sure! The lady in the foreground is most likely María Cayetana de Silva, 13th Duchess of Alba, the famous "Naked Maja". I know the time frames don't quite jive but its kind of like Russian History. I think I remember Stalin once saying, "Who cares if we re-write history? The peasants can't read anyway!!!" Buster Seven Talk21:17, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It’s a little-known fact that Goya’s model sued her surgeon for the ludicrously gravity-defying breast implants. The right one in particular, she said, was totally out of control and forever “straining heavenward.” The judge said the surgeon was to be commended for instilling such religious fervor into anatomy that had hitherto been, in the judge's words, "merely a comfort for suckling infants and a plaything of boys and men,” and he found against her. However her procedure was the last time helium balloons were used. It’s been good old heavier-than-air silicone ever since. (Discovered by the great Neopolitan discoverer Giovanni Silicone in 1799. He also discovered Neopolitan ice cream. There should be an article on him.) The best is now mined in Silicone Valley.
Headlines:Senate Republicans quick to indicate refusal of any Obama nomination. One high ranking former Republican politician privately tweeted, "Mr Obama could nominate Jesus Fuckin' Christ and he would not get confirmed." Buster Seven Talk07:41, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Article in The Onion, "Justice Scalia Dead Following 30-Year Battle With Social Progress"
Thank you! Another timely headline caught my attention there: "Romantic comedies normalize stalker behavior" [27]
There is a conspiracy theory floating around the Internet that a former VP was in Texas and he mis-took Scalia for a Quayle. Dan Quayle to be exact. The more recent VP still felt that the older VP, Quayle, was responsible for the republican loss to Clinton in '92. Being drunk, the more recent VP shoots at the person he thinks is Quayle, misses his targets face {a previous Texas shooting incident had resulted in a shot to the face of a nearby lawyer) and the shot hits him in the chest. No autopsy was necessary since the cause of death is determined to be "Heart Attack". Buster Seven Talk22:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In acccord with Sen Grassely's statement-unstatement-restatement of his original statement regarding whether his Judiciary Committee to Reject the Appointments of the Sitting President will convene, along comes former Fox News host Glenn Beck who claims God, president of everything in existence, "removed" the 79-year-old conservative Supreme Court justice from the bench in order to help Ted Cruz in his quest to become the next president. I hope Mario doesn't find out. My guess is that eventually a WP article will develop over the controversy. Let me know if you see one. Buster Seven Talk12:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Because then their lives are going to be ruined."
68 million Americans have arrest records. Trump wants to improve those figures by getting more protesters arrested for disrupting his events. [28]. He wants to ruin peoples lives because they had the tenacity to stand up and be counted as among those that oppose him and his campaign of hate and fear. How dare they display their constitutional right to Free Speech and the right to Gather. Those that don't see the potential for a dictator as president are blind to what is obvious. Buster Seven Talk14:10, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What a strange corollary is made in this article. Now...I live in Chicago so it's not unusual to see the dead rise from their crypts and vote for the incumbent democrat. But this is the dead convincing their living relatives, friends and neighbors to vote against their common sense. (AGF, my friend, AGF). Hmmmm. Maybe it's like a disgruntled tenant who trashes the place before they leave. "I'm goin to hell so what do I care." This political season gets stranger and stranger. Buster Seven Talk18:52, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for patiently asking if a clarification would harm an article. In 2013, I was told that an infobox for Wagner would "damage the artice". I am not so sure ;) - More concerns: did Bach write a cycle 0? I see no source, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
At a recent RfA a term was used to descibe editors that fix or "polish" articles that have been left behind by COI editors---Turd Polisher. It was not meant as a derogatory or slanderous term as it relates to the polisher. The malapropism, turd, is used to describe the article that was left behind to rot in the field like last years potato crop. Polish away, my good friend. What you smell has nothing to do with potatoes (spelling in honor of Dan Quayle from the neighboring state of Indiana) or turds but more to do with the residue on your stalkers footwear. Buster Seven Talk14:28, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I know it might seem as tho I gave you the Turd-polisher Award to butter you up for a favor...but that is not the case. There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention about possibly finding a way to salvage Single-purpose editors and transforming them into positive WP collaborators in the general mainspace. Your personal insight and experience would be appreciated. WP:WER has become a relative ghost town (and I may be the only ghost left in town) and User:Robert's idea may be just the boost the Project needs to revitalize. Thanks, Buster Seven Talk06:39, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
Don't forget to record a Support or Oppose to the move at the relevant talk page. Yes, I have been gone for years, made the mistake of socking to try to avoid wikistalking editors (inter alia). Now I know it's better just to face them head on. Live and learn. Ratel (talk) 02:08, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Having suffered the Wrath Of Khan Collect, I run for the hills at the mere thought of him. Thanks for informing me of my opportunity to comment, but its such a silly little piece of business that is a time waste for any one that reads it. Buster Seven Talk04:05, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I quite understand the urge to run for the hills. Fortunately I’m reaching the age at which many urges become less urgent, and the one to run anywhere at all, let alone for the hills, which exhausts me just to think about it, has given way to asking Lysistrata to drive me there. I’m hoping this urge will diminish also, as she tends to drive on the wrong side of the road, laughing her carefree, silvery laugh as the trucks swerve out of her—our, for God’s sake—path. She says it's "more Russian." They really are a mystery, aren’t they? She has the radio in the Bugatti permanently tuned to a crackly station that blasts Mussorgsky, Khachaturian and Rimsky-Korsakov out of the old Bakelite speaker, and conducts with both hands while she steers with her perfectly formed knees, mostly at 100 mph. I think I might walk to the hills next time. By the way, as I'm sure you know, Bakelite is made of polyoxybenzylmethylenglycolanhydride. Imagine having to say that every time. Writegeist (talk) 14:34, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Your intuitiveness always surprises me. Chemist Leo Baekeland was the first Belgian-American relative in my family to prosper in the USA. His discovery of Bake-Lite in 1907 was directly correlated with the last CHGO Cubs WORLD series championship. What is not generally know by plastic historians is that Bake-Lite was preceded by Bake-Regular, a by-product of Leo chewing his fingernails in anticipation of the Cubs eventual demise and the century long tailspin that was to follow. His use of his own "clippings" as the genesis for one of the early plastics made everything we know and love today possible. Bake-Reular was initially used as a pipe cleaner for those large Bavarian pipes, jewelry for pets and assorted bicycle parts (the Wright Brothers were good cutomers), lamination, and many many more objects that delighted and enriched the lives of those living in the early 20th Century. The Buster families collection of Bake-Regular merchandise is stored in a warehouse in an un-named desert near one of Elan Musk's new Gigafactories. There are discussions underway to harness Bake-Regulars conductive and heat-resistant properties into the production of Tesla car batteries. Should the negotiations be successful, the financial rewards that are possible should surpass the Walton Families riches, and the only reason I would head for the hills is because I owned them. One of the truly special items in the warehouse is a crysilis-like, life size capsule that contains the turn of the century remains of an unimportant and pestering nemisis of Leos. As the dull eyes of the victim look out at you from his plastic-like tomb, one might wonder, "Will McDonalds ever change the Big Mac." I for one, hope not. TRA! Buster Seven Talk15:31, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What an inspiring story! As you probably know, Ettore Bugatti experimented with the short-lived Bake-Heavy formulation, as he thought using it for Bugatti bodies would protect the occupants in an accident. Only one prototype was built. Nobody ever got in and test-drove it—the driver’s door was too heavy to open. In the end, the remaining stocks of Bake-Heavy were sold to the Soviet Union for the ill-fated Ilyushin Augerin Intercontinental People’s Airliner No. 8—of which, confusingly, three were built. None could get airborne from the purpose-built eight--mile runway. The pilots were all sent to Siberia, and the fuselages were dragged to Moscow and repurposed as Gum department stores (the weight of the doors being no problem to the burly Soviets)—they eventually doubled as nuclear shelters for the Politburo, where they could safely shop for vodka and shapeless suits while B-52s flattened everything else for thousands of miles around. Writegeist (talk) 21:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The papers that Uncle Leo (my father called him Uncle but he was actually a much older cousin) left in the family archives make only slight mention of Bake-Heavy...and then to only hint at its existence. He said it was "heavy" but we all assumed that he was a jet-setter and was 'hip" to the latest language idioms. We never suspected density. I wonder now if Nikita ever paid for the product. Buster Seven Talk21:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Urban Dictionary defines it as: A way of saying "shut the fuck up", instead of actually typing it. Has less meaning than actually typing "shut the fuck up", and is often said by people that are losing an argument or can't think of a comeback. I wonder what Mom would say. Buster Seven Talk20:52, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"What a harsh thread title!", you must be saying to yourself. Explanation: It has come to my attention via one of your friendly page stalkers that one of your "other" page stalkers has stated somewhere that;..."He hates me" or words to that effect. As you might know, my old and dearest Wikifriend, it is against my religion to hate any human being, even their Internet personna. I save my hate for more important things like War, Poverty, prejudice, Guns, child molestation, bribe-able politicians, my neighbors pit bull, savagery, animal cruelty, and a host of other things that are quite normal for a normal person like myself to hate. I'm not going to pretend that I like the individual but I don't hate him. Since, contrary to statements he has made all over WikiLand that "never stalks", we both know that is a fallacy. He has stalked us for years. The only way he can respond to some of the mistakes I make is if he stalks me. So I know he will read this at some point. I have made many peace offerings to him over the too many years so, one more attempt to have a normal editor to editor relationship is worth the effort. Thanks for your time which, in the end, is our most precious gift. Buster Seven Talk14:13, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My dear friend, look at it from the other fellow’s point of view: how’s he going to bait you, needle you, denigrate you, misrepresent you, and try to undermine your widespread and well-deserved reputation as one of the good guys around here if he can’t stalk you? What if stalking you is one of very few pleasures in an otherwise miserable life? Are you made of stone?*
As the article states, Michelangelo never married a rock, but he did have a vivid, although short-lived, relationship with one of his favorite foods: a snail. It is clear that his compassion and angst was displayed in his belief that he could hear his beloved, a lowly snail, cry out at gastropodic oppression. He preferred the delicate flavor of snails harvested from the waters around Knokke. In one of his greatest discoveries, while harvesting his supper one day, he found a snail with a "syrinx" or voicebox. He is said to have carried the crustacean in a small leather pouch that was always with him during his years at the Vatican. Snail vocalizations are all about meaningful communication and Michaelangelo's lover was no different. They would often share lively conversations on the scaffolds of the Sistine Chapel. One observer noted, "The Masters voice echoed through the Great Room, while his companions voice was a watery cough like a never-ending effort to clear his throat." The Snail, known as Gerard of Knokke, passed away in a failed attempt to emerge from his shell "like a soul trying to be born from the chrysalis of his species." To commemorate their love, Michaelangelo ground Gerards little body into a paste that he used for one of the angels faces just to the left of God the Father. Curators of The Chapel since have used the story to explain the powerful smell of fish paste that fills the chamber. Buster Seven Talk10:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
at work. Had to answer a distress call. One of he patrons, having suffered thru a viewing of a DVD of the newly released movie, The Lobster, was thrashing about on the floor of the computer room moaning, "I am a swan....I am a swan." A sharp kick to the stomach brought him back to his senses. Buster Seven Talk19:45, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I want to thank you for saving my Planet. I was watching the other day as you were weeding your garden. Not a can of Round-Up in sight. I know your back must be acting up and your fingers feel like gnarled stumps . Father Nature made those dandelion roots long, didn't he! It gives me pleasure to know that at least one person cares. Mother Nature Talk11:03, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When considering structural hypotheses that can be aligned along cases of narcissism, I have found a level of mystery and misery that pervaded many a consultation. The constant agitation and stress seems to emulate from low (almost non-existent) levels of proper maternal soothing as a child. I suppose one could surmise that any narcissistic patients inner conflict and lack of emotional development synthesizes their self-representation and limits the capacity to understand others feelings. Its a dilemma for sure and often leads to catastrophes that can not be foreseen or predicted. The repetitive compulsion component sidetracks all attempts to mediate a resolution and twitching, screaming and kicking are displayed as the usual aggressive anxiety reaction. Pardon my rant. One to many Sapphire Gin and tonics. The recent Cincinnati Zoo incident reminds me of a story about my Great-uncle Luc de Kinde and a great silverback in the jungles of the Congo. Buster Seven Talk05:32, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it wasnt a Silverback but one of the rare Goldenbacks of the Belgian Congo. Uncle Luc was the ringmaster for a travelling circus that accompanied Stanley as he explored the Congo basin. While relieving himself in the jungle one evening, Luc was mistaken for a gorilla female and dragged into his lair by a large Goldenback. Luc was discovered weeks later swinging in a hammock in an elaborate treehouse and, when brought back to camp, demanded to be called "Lucy". Not much is known of his travels from that point but family rumor has it that he became a dancer at the "Follies" in Paris. The Goldenback also moved on with his life and found work as a stunt-double in the movie Mighty Joe Young. Buster Seven Talk12:11, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Dear oh dear. Once again I find myself moved to defend an old friend. Some say, apparently, that the facts of the matter speak for themselves—i.e. my friend's part in promoting an article to GA was negligible (and even, to an extent, counterproductive, considering his removal of reliably sourced material that others then had to reinstate)—and that therefore his claim to a significant role in the article's promotion is simply him taking credit for other people’s work. God what balderdash. As we've learned from the statements of no less an authority than an acclaimed US presidential contender—e.g. that Scotland voted to leave the EU, that “nobody respects women more” than he does, and that Hillary Clinton “murdered” US Ambassador Christopher Stevens—facts are not at all what we thought they were in 2015. In today’s new world facts are whatever we say they are. So an old friend need only say he promoted an article to GA status, and that’s good enough for me—as it should be for everyone else.
Oh and while we’re on the subject: it’s a fact that I wrote “Much Ado About Nothing”. (See this section heading.)
I see that others have said about him, "... you try and claim other people's credit for your own!" Would that not be Plagiarism? Would that not mean that he has committed the sin that I am burdened with...O! Say it's not true. Would that not be an offense of the utmost and dire fact. Has the great one sinned in the manner of a mere mortal. NO! I say, loudly, to defend him! There must be some mistake. Some unscrupulous editors have mis-interpreted the facts and have misjudged his innocent intentions to improve an article. His edits were obviously of the highest quality. How can they question an editor with over 44K edits? . The reality of this "shaming campaign" must be some right wing plot to dis-credit another liberal leaning friend. What a Shame! I gave one of the challenging editors an Editor of the Week award back in 2014...not to long ago. Should I ask for it back? Of all the nerve. Buster Seven Talk00:52, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Watching: well, credits are normally given, not taken. I would not want to take any credit for the article, started a thread on its talk about what I miss, - hatted. Am I not supposed to miss or what? Collect is right: longer is not always better. (All participants received Precious, I know that feeling, Buster.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Buster: Cornell University notes that “according to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to ‘plagiarize’ means to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own.” Also, "Knowingly representing the work of others as one’s own” [my emphasis] violates the University’s silly old Code of Academic Integrity. Of course none of this applies any more, and anyone is at liberty to claim the work of others as their own. The claim alone is sufficient to establish its substance as an incontrovertible fact, and therefore doesn’t constitute plagiarism. Thus it turns out that my great aunt Lydia Gruntfuttock was in fact Lewis Carroll, as she claimed to be, and should never have been put in a lunatic asylum.
@Gerda: "Honey, longer is always better.” —Mae West
“больше всегда лучше.”—Leo Tolstoy
“The longer the better.”—John Cage
"When an actress did her first scene with John Holmes, this was the time when she discovered if longer was better or not. There was no other test."—The Life & Times of John C. Holmes, (1998)
Gerda Arendt. Just so there is no misunderstanding...most of what I say here (on Write's talk) is said in jest, in sarcasm, and, on rare occasions, approaches humor. I would never ask for an EotW award to be returned. The editor I kid about asking, "We hope", was deserving back in 2014 and is still a deserving quality editor. The same can not be said for everyone in the conversation you refer to at Cary Grant. Buster Seven Talk16:27, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
“Like so many bullies, [name redacted] has skin of gossamer. He thinks nothing of saying the most hurtful thing about someone else, but when he hears a whisper that runs counter to his own vainglorious self-image, he coils like a caged ferret.” —Graydon Carter
Chuck Weevil, a hitherto unsung hero, who happened to be rather deaf and also one sandwich short of a picnic, bluffed his way onto a construction crew building a bridge. Yelling “Less is more!”† he undid the bolts almost as fast as his co-workers screwed them in, so that eventually, for the good of all, he was relegated to making the tea (which by all accounts was weak). People laughed when he said in his dotage that he was responsible for the undeniable beauty of the bridge. In today’s world of course we know better, and I hereby pay tribute to his outstanding contribution. The bridge’s name should be changed from the Golden Gate to the Chuck Weevil, and there should be a Wikipedia article on him.
†Pained cries of “Fewer, you buffoon!” from educated members of the crew fell on deaf ears.
My Grandfather was a participant. He ran a sub 4 minute mile, setting a new record. Of course, as we all know, minutes were longer then by a good 9 seconds so his record is not mentioned in any Olympic statistics. Another reason for his exclusion may be that he ran the race counter-clockwise much to the chagrin of the other runners. (Or was it that he ran clockwise while the others ran counter-clockwise? I get it confused with the movie Midnight Express. Anyway, he ran opposite the other runners). Always the contrarian, he also wore his wooden shoes while running: he claimed it gave him better traction than his bedroom slippers. Buster Seven Talk01:36, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I used to have a copy but lent it to someone long ago, never got it back, and never got around to replacing it. Thank you for this generous offer, I'd love to have it again! Writegeist (talk) 13:40, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Todays Trump quotes are troubling. And the fact that no editor (except for that silly troll) has touched this Second amendment story, leads me to believe that its troubling for alot of us. Where do we start? Is it the “dishonest media” for distorting his words or is it my lying ears that hear a real unmistakable call to action...violent action. I'm reminded of the Sarah Palin article and the March crosshairs on a map "targeting" legislators who voted for Obama's health care bill. Months later, some raving lunatic tried to assassinate Gabby Giffords (one of the legislators in the crosshairs). Where do we start? It is numbing trying to help create a fair and impartial article about this guy.....
said by the Trumpster just yesterday. I knew I had heard it somewhere before. Sure enough, it came back to me......Popeye said it first. "I yam who I yam. First Melania plagiarizes Mrs. Obama. Now Trump plagiarizes the most famous sailor in history. Is there No Justice?Are there no rules?Can the jester become King?
I went out and had this tattooed to my right bicep. "MOM", of course, is on the left
BTW....we'll be sure to stay away from neighborhoods described as "Poverty. Rejection. Horrible education. No housing, no homes, no ownership. Crime at levels that nobody has seen. You can go to war zones in countries that we are fighting and it’s safer than living in some of our inner cities that are run by the Democrats." Now that's gonna be hard to do since Chicago is a city "run by the Democrats"...but I think we can take our chances. Buster Seven Talk05:17, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You might remember Donald Trump had a primary rally in The Windy City at The University of Illinois-Chicago campus. Do you remember? Here's Corey Lewandowki's comment to the press at the time: It was so chaotic and it was so out-of-control that the Secret Service and the Chicago Police Department told him you could not get in and out of the facility safely. And that rally was cancelled. Remember? That was the rally when Trump claimed, after the rally, that officials of the Chicago Police advised him to cancel the rally, which turned out to be what some mean-spirited Liberals might call "A lie" since the CPD claimed it never had a discussion with Trump or his campaign about cancelling. "We were prepared to handle any contingencies" to paraphrase the Police Commander. We can always visit the University of Chicago which is in Hyde Park which is NOT one of the "war zones". Buster Seven Talk05:59, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'll happily take you up on the invitation. I like cities, I like wind, I like universities, and I'm OK with war zones :) . Lewandowski's economy with the truth doesn't surprise me. Odd Trump fired him, you'd have thought he fitted right in. Perhaps he wasn't sufficiently eonomical with it for his boss's liking. BTW, Anything at Trump soo reminds me of Ferry at Palin :) He's so persistently transparent about his agenda, and his devotion to the cause regardless of the quality of the candidate, that I've grown to find the honesty (in that respect) amusing. What bores me is the relentless stonewalling—which is the intention, I guess. Writegeist (talk) 22:53, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You realize that the "we" in "We're the only ones dumb enough" can easily refer to the small number of countries that have birthright citizenship, right? In context, that's the only thing that makes sense, since he had just acknowledged that the US is not the only country that has it.Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:10, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's anything you want :) "Trump’s supporters seem to break down into three camps: the True Believers . . . the Alt-Right Machiavellians [...] who know Trump is lying but just don’t care . . . and the Burn-It-All-Down Crowd..." The Daily Wire.Writegeist (talk) 20:10, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
accept this wallet-sized photo of the candidate on behalf of surrogates and lackeys everywhere. In the words of Trump, "You are Tremendous. Really. Beleive (sic) Me!". It was nice of you to drop by. Buster Seven Talk06:39, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Photo is titled Donald Trump speaking to supporters at an immigration policy speech at the Phoenix Convention Center in Phoenix, Arizona and is attributed to Gage Skidmore. Buster Seven Talk05:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Writegeist. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.— Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
Good luck with all in "Jolly Olde England". My prayers are with you. Here's a funny little co-ink-a-dink:
After Trump left the stage after smugly and red-faced giving up on the birther issue, the structure holding up the curtain that had provided a backdrop for his remarks collapsed, sending American flags toppling to the ground. No one was hurt.
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa.05:00, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Writegeist. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235·t·c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Writegeist. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
And a Happy New Year. Long time no see, Writegeist. Thanks for all you do around Wikipedia. I hope your holiday season is a joyous one and the coming year brings many days of happiness and wonder. (By the way, if you don't celebrate Christmas then please take it as a Happy Hanukkah, Merry Makar Sankranti, Enlightening Bodhi Day, Merry Yule, Happy Tenno no tanjobi, or fill in whatever holiday is your preference.)Zaereth (talk) 00:54, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension.
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. I love your collection of old Signposts. Not quite the Saturday Evening Post but interesting in their own way. I know The Great Orange One has bragged about returning to "Merry Christmas" but I havent been a Christian for 40 years. So Happy Holidays! ―Buster7☎
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, people's rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. I hope you still visit these pages every once in a while. A recent gathering of editors has sent me into a time-travel loop to revisit the distant past where I stumbled upon our playful sharing's of long ago. What a Joy. What fun it was. For me, your page was an oasis. Life is GOOD. Hope the same for you. ―Buster7☎
Hello, Writegeist. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Personal attacks need to be redacted. Thank you. v/r - TP 21:44, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
s ```Buster Seven Talk 15:40, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and yours. ```Buster Seven Talk 14:54, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
s ```Buster Seven Talk 17:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
or a full month in which we head for the Golden Opportunities in CUBA. Can you imagine? Buffalo burgers, Cuban Rum and a good Havana cigar. Free Enterprise, I love it! TRA! Buster Seven Talk 01:29, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
to help me fix some of the recent articles that got me in trouble with The Plaigerism Police. It's slow work because Chance's attention span is limited. If he sees anything yellow he right away assumes it's a banana. And then, when he finds its just a yellow maple leaf that has been blown in from outside, he sulks for hours. But, he's a Republican so he's not really too concerned about the minimum hourly wage...so it all averages out. A Happy Thankful Holiday to All. Buster Seven Talk 21:51, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
. I just now got the jaundice+naked+Chance the chimp+article=joke. Buster Seven Talk 21:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Oppose
. Buster Seven Talk
.png)
Tank
Ewe
Berry
Muff
.jpg)
_and_Echinometra_viridis_(Reef_Urchin_-_bottom).jpg)
, my pet tarantula, once flicked some of her urticating bristles my way. Not sure what made her mad but it was like a hundred little pricks all at once.... so I can understand your discomfort. Buster Seven Talk 06:24, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Writegeist (talk) 04:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
_which_never_got_past_the_prototype_stage.JPG){kind=small}
, available to you. It's parked in his driveway...behind the Bentley. The keys are in a Hello Kitty vinyl coin purse on top of the passenger side tire. I suggest you head for the hills until the heat blows over. Buster Seven Talk 13:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Getting re- Started on 
is an old lithograph I found in one of those old steamer trunks that my great grandmother, The Duchess of Downton, left to me in her will. She was a good and loyal friend of Princess Charlotte, Duchess of Valentinois, who, by chance and proper upbringing, was the mother of Rainier III, Prince of Monaco. I have no way of verifying but, the lady in the back maybe a relative of yours. Paper-clipped to the photo is a note...A group of Right Guests at a party. Or maybe you relative is the bass violin player. Not sure! The lady in the foreground is most likely María Cayetana de Silva, 13th Duchess of Alba, the famous "Naked Maja". I know the time frames don't quite jive but its kind of like Russian History. I think I remember Stalin once saying, "Who cares if we re-write history? The peasants can't read anyway!!!" Buster Seven Talk 21:17, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
. Father Nature made those dandelion roots long, didn't he! It gives me pleasure to know that at least one person cares. Mother Nature Talk 11:03, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Done Buster Seven Talk
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Cropped.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
