Congratulations on reaching 100,000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work! – From: Northamerica1000(talk)07:55, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would if I knew one. We learned it from scratch, I didn't listen to any. Perhaps ask project classical music. Andreas Scholl sang "He was despised" for us, if you find a recording with him it should be good. Yesterday we sang Barber's Agnus Dei, borderline to what we can do, but it was great! See my user for the link. Did you know that I wrote "he was despised" when BarkingMoon left, and someone commented "how appropriate to the situation at hand it is"? I still miss him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Does this mean they will finally let you out of your cell? Just remember, the big yellow thing in the sky is the Sun, don't look directly into it. Dennis Brown (talk) 12:52, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of parent of the year, my son just learned to say "Jesus Christ", fortunately he is using it in the correct context, and since it is Easter weekend, I think it is appropriate. --kelapstick(bainuu) 14:28, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My daughter has loved Jesus for years now, as an intended consequence of the US public school system. When we saw one of those life-size Christs in the Trier Cathedral she was practically in tears. Drmies (talk) 14:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
LMFAO .. ahhhh ... the good old days. You guys crack me up. And yea .. some folks are very much missed. Hey Kelapstick .. we raised him well. :-) ... cheers all. — Ched : ? 16:02, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've actually been having a hard time stopping my oldest from singing "Jesus Christ Pose" in inappropriate circumstances, such as in public. Ched, thanks for your note. Can you be a good parent and beat the crankiness out of me? BTW, someone just gave me a bottle of Rogue Bacon Maple Ale. Y'all come by tomorrow, noonish, when the water is nice and the beer cold. Drmies (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just back from doing a show in Brattleboro, Vermont, during which I did almost no Wiki-editing, so I'm a bit late on the 100k-congrats, but "well done" anyway. (Not to be too competitive, but between User:Before My Ken, User:Between My Ken and User:Beyond My Ken, I've got 101,603 -- but, of course, I'm not as beloved as you are so...) Anyway, I'm really quite pleased to have gotten to know you, a little bit, here on Wikipedia. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:38, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Shit, you're right. There was a mistake in a formula in the spreadsheet I use to track my edits, so I must bow to your superior editcount achievement! I probably won't hit 100k for a month or so. (Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got to clean the egg off my face.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, bow to the master/mistress. And did you know I made all those edits with one hand, while collecting maidenheads, teaching class, raising children, and building a hot rod with my other appendages? Drmies (talk) 04:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, much of it is still the same, with minor tweaks. The newer version has a few more references (I wouldn't say they're from RS). I personally would decline G4, but keep in mind, Bongo, this is not my field of expertise. Maybe a more knowledgeable admin will see right through the differences. Sorry for my tardiness. Drmies (talk) 02:25, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'd love to be able to see deleted material but no other tools would be of interest to me. No way I'd make admin, anyway. But thanks for the thought. Bongomatic06:36, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ya know, I was just (two weeks ago) going to suggest Bongo run the gauntlet. I would love to see the two of you block each other. Just think of all the authority you could flex when you remove {{recent death}} from articles, not to mention the additional street cred that the cabal would get.--kelapstick(bainuu) 05:41, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
New Friends
Almost stepped on this guy walking by the kitchen.I frequently almost step on these guys. They are about six inches long.
Hey K, thanks for stopping by and dropping all these creepy animals off. I hope you're doing well. Is your pool temp going down now? Ours hasn't gone over 76 yet, but it's good enough for me. Been working in the yard--Lady, next time you come by there will be a lawn and other luxuries, perhaps even an outdoor shower (that's kind of a dream of mine). Haha K, six inches? Drmies (talk) 02:52, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pool is down to 73, although we had the cover off for a couple nights, and winter is coming. Trying to get it back up, but it's nice and refreshing. --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:58, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
History of British fascism since 1945 edits
Why do you guys behave like this? ( http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_British_fascism_since_1945&action=history ) That sort of adminnish behaviour is why people get turned off Wikipedia. The edits in question where minor, and it'd be a waste of everyones time to push it, so your view gets through. And I can't understand why anyone would have that view. You want a particular article to be a random list of names rather than a "history", as the article's title implies. I was adding a little bit of extra information to that history. You took offense to it, first because i didn't reference it, and then when i did reference it, you somehow took offense again, for reasons I cannot understand. Why do you care so much about removing a particular line of information from a history article? It just makes no sense. I don't understand why admins who act like this are the way they are. It lends a really petty, poisonous culture to Wikipedia. I stopped using this site for many years after encountering this culture (though in that case, it led to me being stalked and harrassed by the admin in question, which is more serious), and it's great to come back and find that nothing has changed. I just don't understand why people like you seek to create this sort of environment. What motivates such petty squabbling over inoffensive (and on-topic) encyclopeadic article additions? 130.194.160.4 (talk) 02:58, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That information is excessive, redundant. The party has a main article. Why, in a brief paragraph on the party, you'd want to say something as trivial as "they had a newsletter and this is what it was called" is not clear to me. What's even more incomprehensible is that you didn't add it to the main article, National Party (UK, 1976), from which I can only conclude that it must not have been that important. Drmies (talk) 04:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
User:HammerFilmFan
Hello! I saw you warned User:HammerFilmFan for removing talk page comments. But it seems he is unwilling to understand the talk page guideline as he not only changed your warning message but also continue to remove talk page comments by other users. Can you please look into the issue? Thanks! --SMSTalk11:27, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Baz, I have learned recently that knowledge of WP's rules is rarely enough to win such an argument. You can try all the different resolution processes, and I wish you good luck with that. More to the point, I see that the talk page is being used, and now that the article is protected that's the only way out of this. Someone backed you up already, and I'll weigh in as well. Drmies (talk) 04:05, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dispute resolution survey
Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite
Hello Drmies. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.
Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.
Seriously, I'm getting a bit irritated with an IP and a SPA editor (perhaps the same person) at Bharath Sriraman. Being the cranky old Calvinist that I am (I grudgingly admit that there may be some truth somewhere in that assertion), I'm perhaps being too purist. The article looks decent, but there is a tendency to put everything that the guy ever has done in there, every seminar, trip, published note, etc. The article is also being overcategorized (in my opinion). Could you perhaps have a look and tell me whether I'm being unreasonably Calvinistic? Thanks. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 16:06, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, not another Indian article...I assume you already tried Boing, Sitush, Regentspark, Matthewvanitas, and all the others who are attempting to blackball editor X's caste and hometown? ;) Drmies (talk) 22:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I saw it. May I? I am carrying a very blunt axe and an update copy of BLP and the associated acronyms. What was that term--vanispampuffery? Drmies (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One IP blocked for warring on the talk page. Someone besides the IP had listed the article as B-class, which is not an accurate assessment: I have downgraded to C. Does the subject even pass WP:PROF? I see no indication that he passes the GNG. Drmies (talk) 22:25, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help here. I wonder who the IPs are (WHOIS says some of them are from Argentina...) Anyway... My estimation is that he passes WP:PROF, but barely. This based on being EIC of The Mathematics Enthusiast, a journal that itself just makes the cut (based on being indexed in PsycINFO). So it's borderline, but I don't think that an AfD either for him or for the journal would fly, so I haven't even tried. BTW, I saw your remark about maple ale above, which reminded me of an experience I once had in Halifax, NS: one Sunday morning I went with a friend (who seemed to know every single person there) to the farmers market for breakfast. By 11 am, I had had coffee, cookies (the breakfast, I guess), the local white wine (Jost wineries, recommended), a locally-distilled whiskey, and locally-brewed jalapeño beer... When I subsequently asked whether there were people who actually would drink the latter (my advice: don't even try!), the vendor told me people would use it to marinate meat... As for beers in the US Northwest, I recommend two from Montana: Moose Drool and Pig's Ass Porter (seriously, they're pretty good!)... --Guillaume2303 (talk) 10:32, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Moose Drool...well, that's a treat. I would drink a jalapeno beer, though. Hey, on a hot day, try a lager (no Heineken, please--Grolsch is OK) with a shot of hot sauce in it (Louisiana-style, not Tabasco). Salut, Drmies (talk) 23:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Joy Romero
Hiya Doc, I see we are working in parallel, I had just removed the speedy template from Joy Romero, I thought that director of whatever for big oil, and chair of something at Athabasca University was sufficient indication of importance, I was just going to ask you if the press release was enough for BLPPROD, but you deleted me to it. Cheers, and happy Easter. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:54, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that, yes, on the nominator's talk page, where I left a note of a different color. I don't think being a chair of such a council qualifies--it's not the same as being a school president or so and that ref won't change it for me. Feel free to prove me wrong and recreate it...maybe there's more to be found, but I didn't see it. Thanks K, Drmies (talk) 05:01, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You know what, I restored it. See what you want to do. No, I didn't know that, though for some reason I've visited that talk page before a few times. Oh, now I see. Drmies (talk) 05:13, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've only nominated the articles from this user that I thought were problematic. There ae some others that are borderline, but I left them alone. West Eddy (talk) 05:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing. Yes, they did; I hope the Kelapsticks did as well. Do they have an Easter kangaroo down there? My girls would love that, I'm sure. Drmies (talk) 13:58, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh it was crazy, my son doesn't eat chocolate, so we stuff plastic eggs with gummie bears/worms, he ran around saying "look what you found!" both kids crashed from a sugar high by 10:00. And the girl had another nap in the arvo (that's a word here). Spent the rest of the day in the pool. Great way to spend Easter, as I am sure you did too. No kangaroo though, but we will take the girls to the zoo to roam free with them when you come visit. --kelapstick(bainuu) 14:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's wonderful. An easter bibly...but what does Christ have to do with marsupials? I mean, the bunny is obvious, that's in scripture! Drmies (talk) 17:35, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jill Kenton until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JoeSperrazza (talk) 21:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Zuckerberg
I don't like making appositives - upsets my stomach - I prefer making pastries. On the religion issue, an elegant solution, but don't expect it to stay that way. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 00:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I never edit celebrity articles. Too many people with opinions. Pastries....hmm....I had sashimi for dinner, so there's still room. Drmies (talk) 01:04, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note. My advice: don't edit war...Collect made edits and gave edit summaries; they've been here a long time and they know more than I'll ever forget. Continuing to edit-war will only lead to a block. Ask them on the article talk page or on their own talk page what the best way forward is. Also, please don't assume that I'm of the male persuasion... Good luck, Drmies (talk) 05:05, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dammit Willem, I thought there was nothing to identify me. OK, my apologies. K is right, by the way. Just to make that point clear I'm going to pee sitting down, right now. Drmies (talk) 15:46, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can only speak for myself. woof. :-) — Ched : ? 10:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC) and if someone infers a reference to my userpage - I won't confirm or deny an implication. — Ched : ? 10:24, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar
Sir. I wont add any more info in the short term... Discopgraphy page is a List of all Songs sung by the singer, and it appears in all singer s Wikipage... Thanks for considering.... Much regards Vithurgod (talk) 05:16, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wont add any info in the short term... The Discography is the Main Table of Content for a Singer/ Musician and hence the data is very important as it describes and lists the songs sung by the Singer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vithurgod (talk • contribs) 05:26, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Drmies, Sorry to keep coming back to you with the odd issue, but I would like your imput. Since the last time we spoke (when Pankaj Oswal page subjected to vandalism) there have been a couple of other editors making contributions to page. Fair enough. For the most part I have simply corrected very minor aspects of those particular edits. Recently I added extra text of my own & it would seem that one of those editors disagrees with the content. At this point I have not changed anything, but I feel the latest new edits give a very unbalanced view of the (living) subject. Suspect there is relationship between this editor & previous vandal..the aim is the same to change page substantially. I would like a neutral person, ie. yourself, to have a look. Happy if you could find the time. Thankyou so much. A fair go (talk) 10:44, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No bother--but what you need to do, I think, is drop a note explaining the matter at WP:BLPN. I've reverted the latest edit and left the editor a note. Drmies (talk) 15:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou Drmies, Much appreciated. I will just keep an eye on it next few days, if any more issues I will follow through with your suggestion. Again many thanks. A fair go (talk) 16:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
U-KISS
The protection time is over, and there's been no editing in about a week. Feel free to start charging through it with a great big red editor's pen. I'm not going to edit the article directly, but I say--if it's not verified, either throw it out, or, if not terribly controversial, tag it and then throw it out later. If IP editors start interfering with unsourced changes, I'll semi-protect again. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Qwyrxian. I have to say, the desire to clean this stuff up has dissipated a bit. And the other day I ran into some anime article--holy moly. But thanks again; I appreciate your help. Drmies (talk) 14:13, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, whenever I go to a KPOP (and, to a lesser extent, JPOP) article, looking for some actual information (i.e., reading rather than writing Wikipedia), I usually have to scan really fast to see if the info is there then close the article as fast as possible. There's just so much junk in them, and such devoted fans, that trying to make them into decent articles just isn't worth the effort. Probably some of the info even can be sourced, and isn't to trivial, but more often than not it's not in English. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are again users, and other IP users who keep on adding birthdays and trivias again in the Members section of U-KISS. I am deleting them from time to time but it keeps on coming back. I need your help please. jmarkfrancia (talk) 06:32, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I know; there isn't a whole lot I can do about it. We both need to be wary that we don't get involved in edit-warring. I've left a few notes on user pages and article talk pages; at some point I want to get the Korea WikiProject involved and I've alerted them already in relation to the GA reassessment of Shinee: see Talk:Shinee and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Korea. Thank you so much for your help. I'm glad you realize that what we're doing is not hating on the groups, but improving their Wikipedia articles according to Wiki's guidelines. Drmies (talk) 16:18, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Drmies. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Koolakamba, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not blatantly vandalism or a hoax. Thank you. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Building on the default twinkle message: I just removed a significant chunk of copyvio from the article, but the topic itself might be notable - at least enough to pass the speedy test. Gotta admit it, though, my first instinct was to just delete the whole thing. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, so was mine, but I Googled it and left it for someone else to decide, haha. I may have another look, and occasionally editors with strange interests visit this page. Drmies (talk) 03:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See, strange interests. I'm biting my tongue, Lady, so I won't be making GI tract jokes. Only five more eggs left--I don't think I can eat them all. Drmies (talk) 03:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Strange? No, just varied. I'm getting no help eating ours. There's only one other person here who will eat deviled eggs, and she's otherwise occupied right now.... speaking of which, have you been on FB and seen the news? LadyofShalott03:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Yes they are, but mom is exhausted of course. Claudia wanted to go "take care of Mommy"; Chloë wanted to keep holding the baby and said "her is beautiful" several times. :D LadyofShalott03:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The references in this section appear to be more opinion than based on cited sources, and is probably not quite NPOV. I added a {{cn}} on one of them but citing on a cite note seems to be a little redundant. I figured I'd bring it to your attention as a slightly more experienced editor, given you may have a more appropriate way to deal with this. PuppyOnTheRadiotalk04:07, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. 71 and 73 aren't references per se--they're commentary. Proper secondary sourcing is necessary, moving well beyond the primary reference of the Manifesto. I'm no expert on the subject matter; User:Soman is my go-to editor for socialist matters; perhaps you can drop him a line? Wiki workers of the world, unite. Drmies (talk) 04:16, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at [[User talk:Ost316#Game character|Ost316's talk page]]. Message added 18:23, 11 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Oh, that guy! I remember him--interesting character. The credit is all yours, Crisco--you are racking up a very impressive resume here. Congratulations! Drmies (talk) 23:37, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
...slowly and deeply..before you pop a blood vessel or something like that. :)
I rather gather that you might be more upset about something that scales beyond that particular thread. It isn't worth getting that upset over, you know?
They are asking because they are frustrated and don't know what else to do...and they are following the standard procedures with the templates. This is what they know. For some, the human touch might turn it into a botched job so they would prefer to fall back on crafted language to avoid errors (and trouble!).
Oh, I'm fine, haha. Things will start popping when I start putting the kids to bed, haha. I get your point--but what I don't see is the jump from an AIV report to an ANI report with the request for a year-long block. To paraphrase, I've never seen such a request at ANI before; it's ridiculous. A ban, that's something else, but it requires a lot more evidence. What these editors don't seem to understand is that admins (IMO) will not hand out blocks like that, and that it only backfires. If they leave a real note, make a real effort to communicate, and then the editor persists, then they typically will have a topic ban within a half an hour! Templated warnings, maybe--but who told them to run off to ANI and ask for the moon? If I'm getting frustrated, I ask someone what to do. (In fact, I may have asked you, a long time ago--too long to remember.) Ah well. Time to put the kids to bed. Thanks for your note, Berean. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 01:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WikiLove
Ah, see, I was wondering what the hell all those hearts on everyone's page were for! That's an interesting (if inevitable) development. I'm still trying to get a handle on policy...turns out that blocking vandals is like riding a bike, but closing contentious XfDs is most definitely NOT. *eep* Thanks for the e-beer! Keilana|Parlez ici01:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe, true dat. Yes, WikiLove is hot. There is a ranking of which editors have applied the most WL, and I ranked pretty high at one time. Call me a WikiSlut. Also, as you correctly pointed out, we still aren't supposed to hand out punitive blocks--thanks for weighing in there. Next up for you, to get you back in the swing of things, try a civility block. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 01:57, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's *excellent*. Yeah, I spent some time reviewing block policy whilst waiting for a 'crat to resysop me, which was quite handy. Though I'm not sure at all I want to start handing down civility blocks - I don't think I even stuck my hands in there back in the day, and I was on Medcom, for Pete's sake! Keilana|Parlez ici02:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
30 day block
I probably didn't make myself clear on that 30 day suggestion after first leaving a msg and seeing if he did it again. The guy edits so infrequently, I was thinking to make sure he was blocked when he came back (with a more personal block msg as well), again as a last resort, but not punitively. Been working on communicating more clearly and concisely, some days are better than others I suppose. Dennis Brown(talk)02:08, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Naaaa. Blocks should be escalating. Short of some really egregious actions (attacks, vandalism that's outrageous etc.) ... Just IMHO - but I would hate the place to become that unwelcoming. Clean block log right to 30 days? Not something I'd ever hope to see. — Ched : ? 02:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If he keeps editing like he has, a discerning admin will check the history of the talk page and block the next time he does it. The ANI report makes it sound like the wiki is about to break--it's not. Or, it's not much worse than it was before. Drmies (talk) 02:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. I've gained Ahem insight on what that other issue bothering you might be. At least I haven't templated you there. :P ...but I am laughing my ass off a bit... ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►03:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You were quick. Yes. I have to tell you, I learned something about why people get angry when they get templated. I'm trying to keep things separated though. Drmies (talk) 03:35, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least he is communicating, sort of. This is why I said someone needed to communicate outside of a template, to see if it was a lack of understanding of the policies, or a lack of concern for them. Now he has making it clear that he has an agenda and it's just a matter of time. Dennis Brown(talk)12:16, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies .. is there a full moon or something? ... I had an IP pushing things on the Spiderman movie today too. You would think when someone avoids being blocked, that they would appreciate it and kind of keep their head down for a bit huh? Maybe something in the water? <shrugs> — Ched : ? 03:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a brief subsection about the authors in the background section. I'm not averse to its being reworked, moved, or removed entirely as y'all see fit. LadyofShalott14:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Any relation to a dog that paints is to be inherently included per WP:DOGARTIST. In fact, I am starting to get suspicious of the dog itself. What if the dog drew the pictures, and not Cortes? How would they have turned out? Does the dog want to blow me up? Thank you to all who helped out, especially the Lady, who must have tweaked it at some ungodly hour (when I saw your edits, I thought ...shouldn't you be asleep?) Does anyone want to DYK it (Mandarax, if you did it, I would gladly add myself to Category:Worshipers of the Mandarax), I probably won't have time myself today, and I fly out this arvo, and likely won't be at a "real" computer again until Tuesday. I do have a request in for some free pictures (for it and the other articles), we shall see how that goes, but KAJ is a nice addition I think, it was a toss up between the head shot and him dunking in uniform.--kelapstick(bainuu) 22:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe.... Well, I must say that Drmies' talk page gets too much activity for me to properly stalk him them; I saw the start of this thread when that "copy edit" link was still blue, but I didn't notice your latest comment for a few days. Nominated. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM01:00, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Echoing Drmies statement, much thanks Mandarax. Take a look at the gem of a picture I got permission to use. OTRS request submitted. In other news, the circle of life was completed this weekend, Sunday, my daughter and I ate kangaroo, Monday, we fed kangaroos...--kelapstick(bainuu) 02:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You weren't being sarcastic, were you (ie, "congrats on your principled stance")? I truly hadn't encountered that abbreviation before (now that I know it, it's painfully obvious). Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 03:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm an admin. We have to leave irony and sarcasm behind. But yes, I thought it a bit odd that you would revert an edit because of the edit summary, when you didn't disagree with the edit itself. Anyways, the flag removal is indeed covered in the MOS; usually, though, editors leave an edit summary that says something like "rm per WP:FLAG" or so. I don't know why that editor didn't do that, since it wasn't really a copyedit. Drmies (talk) 03:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
From a purely aesthetic/non-MOS standpoint, I did not agree with the edit. Admittedly, this is not the best reason to revert, though I had never before encountered WP:MOSFLAG (and as you said, this was left out of the edit summary). Thanks for the tip and quick reply -- I'll be sure to limit my use of flag templates in infoboxes from now on. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 03:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The issue was handled, I was trying to contribute and apparently, misunderstood and violated "conflict of interest" rules. I have correct my errant ways and there is no need to keep that post up there as active as it's dead and handled per Hulu. Additionally I would not like to be archived as some evil entity here on the wiki as I am in full rule compliance now and have a better grasp of what is expected from editing here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeroyon01 (talk • contribs) 16:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I really am not sure what all you're talking about. What I do know is that it is not up to you to "archive" (that is, delete) talk page content, esp. content that is not written exclusively by you. That post will be archived automatically in a more useful way than through deletion. I am reverting your deletion, and if you delete it again I will block you. You should be aware of this by now. Drmies (talk) 16:35, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe Zeroyon01 is saying he does NOT want it archived; he wants it deleted because it casts him as "an evil entity." Since he has learned from the issue he wants it gone so no one can see it. The COI bit is from how the spam was presented both to him [1][2] and on the spam page [3]: COI, spam, and non-reliable source, all in one bundle.
On a side note, I am unsure Zeroyon01 understands why deleting the spam talk page section was a no-no, as most of his edits have been in mainspace, not talk/discussion. Dodo bird and I posted to Hu12's page (the admin handling the spam report that Zeroyon01 calls "Hulu"); I posted to WP:ANI; and you posted a comment confusing Zeroyon01's desire to delete the report with a desire to see it archived. No one has as yet showed Zeroyon01 the correct guideline. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 23:11, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!
Thanks for taking care of the Panathinaikos F.C. situation. I don't know if you read my message at WT:FOOTY, but recently there was a campaign by "Prasini" (a Panathinaikos fan newspaper) to make the Hellenic Football Federation recognise their team's pre-1928 championships as official, against all sources. A fan blog also urged their viewers to "restore Panathinaikos' lost titles" at the English Wikipedia [4], so a semi-protection was necessary. Cheers. – Kosm1fent16:51, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing. I think I protected it for a week; maybe by that time this will have blown over. If not, re-apply for protection and it shouldn't be a problem. Drmies (talk) 17:00, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whoa. I'm sorry to hear that, Vasco! Your leaving is a loss to FOOTY. Remember, I may still show up on your doorstep, one fine summer day, and I expect to be seated in your backyard and to be feasted on olives, Serra da Estrela, and port. Vaya con dios, Vasco! Drmies (talk) 18:14, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi
Hey you write on the A Smile from the Trenches page that you had a source for screamo, could you send it to me because the lead singer gave me the basic genres e.g Post-Hardcore, Metalcore, Alternative Rock, and Emo but i want to add screamo (i will also add Emocore) do you think you could send the link? can you also reply on my chat page because i might forget your user name 86.25.246.30 (talk) 21:57, 12 April 2012 (UTC)ericdeaththe2nd86.25.246.30 (talk) 21:57, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am just a tad concerned about a post left by 완젬스 on the talk page Talk:Occupy Wall Street[5] which makes a statement about "Eyeing his/her goal set for this weekend" that is linked to a youtube video of a physical fight. Don't know what to make of it. Seems very inappropriate.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:52, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's weird but I don't know what to make of that either. Drop a note at ANI; there are folks there who know what to do, if anything needs to be done. Sorry I'm of no help here. Drmies (talk) 03:45, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest to edit articles Albanians as accounts above (or related to the account) insists on having Gjeke Marinaj listed in the Albanians infobox (by removing James Belushi), Albanian Americans infobox and has also listed Gjeke Marinaj under Notable Albanians with description "the founder of Protonism - Eminent Albanian-American writer and literary critic." a description that is not objective, verifiable or realistic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.236.90.41 (talk) 01:03, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead and revert what edits seem inappropriate to you. I've added some names and IPs to the sockpuppet investigation for User:Festes. Thanks for your note: I thought this party was over already. Drmies (talk) 03:56, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm..there is an entire army of poppet accounts belonging to Gjeke Marinaj and Frederick Turner operating, they also made a tour together in the Balkans where F.Turner praised the works of Gjeke Marinaj on disruptive protonism, being presented as multiple Nobel prize candidate. User User:Empathictrust has made very positive edits on both Gjeke Marinaj and Frederick Turner(poet), I think it is the famous User:Festes behind account Empathictrust. 87.236.90.110 (talk) 23:44, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hindu Kush
The part I removed recently from the page of Hindu Kush which you reverted back, was removed because of its offensive nature to a community and its not even a true fact, its an opinion of the some extremists, the majorly accepted fact is just below which is not explained. Oldmonk7 (talk) 05:16, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Saturday night
Sounds like a Bay City Rollers song...anyway, very exciting night at casa del kelapstick. Assembling the new BBQ, 99 luftbaloons is on the radio, and I am assisting at IRC (quiet as it is there tonight). I know, I wish you were me. Pool temp is still holding, but we still can't convince the youngest to get in, she makes runs at the edge, then says "noooo" (in the manner that 2 year olds do). --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Awww--our three-year old said, when she was told to jump in the pool at swimming lessons, "but I'm just a little girl!" The teacher wouldn't have any of it. We'll toast you from the pool this afternoon. Oh, see if you can get "Saturday Night" by Herman Brood and his Wild Romance, the "original" version, not the cleaned-version from the US album Herman Brood & His Wild Romance (album). Essential Dutch rock and roll! Drmies (talk) 15:27, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm what I think is that this needs some more sources. You have to realize, I started my WP career hanging out at AfD so for years my one concern was whether something I wrote would survive AfD. With this one, in its current state, I'm not totally sure. More sources--what about this and this? And have you met User:MichaelQSchmidt? If anyone knows movies and the industry it's him. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 01:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen you put this whole segment away. Not that I am in any position to say that I am right after reviewing other kpop articles like TVXQ. But instead of putting the whole segment away and saying the language is poor etc. Why not you go an extra mile and tell me what went wrong and maybe I can edit it instead of just deleting the whole segment away?
I am keen in listening to opinions after which making the appropriate changes but by removing the whole section, it's just looking down at me. Using an analogy for example, I have dedicate my time doing a research that the teacher does not require me to do. However, when the teacher actually spot checked my research, instead of telling me where I gone wrong and making appropriate changes, the teacher throw back the research at me and say it's wrong. In this sense, how will I feel?
I felt unappreciated. Moreover, the endorsement section have been existing since YEAR 2010! I may sound like I am whining but in fact when b2st wiki was nominated for delete etc. I took my time off starting this article from scratch and re-organizing them.
I am not autocratic, I know I do make some mistake, I do understand why you remove b2st discograph as there is already an article on that. This make sense and I am alright with it.
However, I don't understand what's wrong with b2st endorsement. Those comments? It's on the article itself, it's even credited with reference, just click on the link and read. By deleting the whole section off, it only makes me even more puzzled since no one has deleted it since year 2010.
Maybe, you would like to explain in detail or probably edit a better section. Not simply deleting the whole section away.
Sorry for a long feedback section that demands an explanation.
PS : It's not like I am going back to find those articles again, since I don't understand hangul. It takes a very long time. So in the meantime, I will not touch the page till june holiday arrives. Nicky456 (talk) 04:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your note. You have to understand, I have spent hours on a great many of those articles, carefully pruning and leaving edit summaries--Beast (South Korean band), G.NA, Super Junior, Super Junior-M, EXO (band), Shinee, et cetera--to find that my edits inevitably get reversed with a simple "verified since 2008" or, usually, no explanation at all. These articles have been edited by what appear to be fans for years now, with the result that they are little more than long lists of announcements containing all kinds of missteps: poor grammar, overwikilinking, excessive detail, incomplete citations, capitalization errors, redundant lists of releases (when there are main articles for discographies), External links sections full of inappropriate links, descriptions and official colors of fan club websites--I could go on.
If you're referring specifically to this edit--sorry, but the language was first of all ungrammatical and not in accordance with encyclopedic style, and secondly, it reads like it came straight out of a press release advertising the band and the product: "On April 3, 2012, B2ST was selected as the newest models to promote ‘bodyART™’ in Korea which is said to be slow, but fast and smooth, yet strong. It is very dynamic almost like a dance, but also being a form of exercise." K-pop articles will have to start conforming to Wikipedia's guidelines; there is no nicer way to say it. Articles that appear to be a combination of fan sites and promotional efforts must be trimmed and revised to become encyclopedic in tone and content. I hope you will help in that effort: your favorite band is better served by a good encyclopedic article than by an article that lists everything but says nothing, and is constantly subjected to this edit-warring over unencyclopedic content (. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 13:56, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
RfA
I'm considering a run at RfA, and would like your input on my talk page about the issue. We haven't crossed paths extremely often, but you seem brutally honest, and I would like some objective opinions before I make a final decision. If you don't have the time or inclination to participate, no offense will be taken. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)17:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Brutally honest"? Well... I'll take that as a compliment. Just don't block me for civility if you get the mop. I haven't looked very closely at your edits but I have run into you, more than you think maybe, and I think that you are a viable candidate. I haven't looked at your article contributions, so I'd like to have a look before I support; I have noticed that you are much more helpful to new editors and IP editors than a whole bunch of other NPPers and RCPers. So for now I'll say "sure" but I'll get back to you with more specifics, if that's OK with you. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to mention that you have said something about this prior here [6], which was one of the reasons I waited a bit, and now holding a more formal discussion on my talk page. And yes, brutally honest is a compliment, I like to hear opinions with no ambiguity. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)17:28, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I remember that now. You have one of those CSD logs, and if that is complete you've really slowed down on them. Your block log is clear, you have plenty of edits and years on you, you make helpful contributions at the boards. The brutally honest part is that few people will be blown away by your article writing--Bob Timberlake (artist) is now a decent article, but it wasn't all that great when it went live, and without these edits it would have been problematic. I wouldn't oppose based on that, since at least you've been creating things and have added content, but other editors might.
There used to be an editor who'd drop homework assignments on RfAs, like "create Gibbons-Hawking space" (I just pulled that off article requests). I don't think that was very fair, but if you can show that you can create a decent article, that will help convince those who think that content is just as or more important than proper CSD tagging and an even-keeled temperament. (I'm one of them, though others feel more strongly than I do.) Drmies (talk) 17:41, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have always admitted that my authoring skills are not the finest that Wikipedia has to offer. I write commercial copy as a part of my living, and do quite well at that, but that isn't remotely the same thing. As to Bob Timberlake, I did start that in user space, and request help at Wikipedia:WikiProject North Carolina, with one actually helping me. I know my own limitations and I'm not afraid to ask for help or another opinion. I hope that would count for something by those who would be (justifiably) critical of my writing. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)18:05, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, but it's happened four times since December 2011, as far as I can tell. I don't consider that enough to warrant locking the article to IP editors. Tell you what, I'll remove the template so the case is open; perhaps another admin feels differently. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 19:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FYI I've declined it too. Rationale on RPP, but essentially the same as yours married to the fact this would be its first protection. Pending changes anyone? GedUK11:30, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Charles Brokaw
When I redirected this name after closing the AfD, I was surprised to find five incoming links from film articles referring to this guy who has evidently been a redlink up to now, though on the basis of these references is probably as notable as the pseudonymous author. I have turned him back into a redlink at Charles Brokaw (actor) to encourage somebody to write his article. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did indeed, sorry about that - I closed several AfDs last night, and confused this one with Protonism where you contributed. One of the socks re-created Protonism eight minutes after I deleted it - they are certainly persistent! JohnCD (talk) 10:13, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise. Honestly I thought it was more. I was wondering the other day if we ever disagreed and got into a tiff, and if maybe I should start disagreeing more with you. So far I find that difficult. I very much appreciate your BLP work. Drmies (talk) 13:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to have a tiff <g>. I suspect you are from the Netherlands? I had relatives who lived there a few centuries ago - I think I likely have relatives there still. Collect (talk) 14:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tiff attempt #1: Oh yeah? Well, the Dutch suck! Three finals, no cups! #2: Oh, so your ancestors weren't even good enough for the Dutch?? Peace attempt: do some digging and I'll see if I can look them up this summer and tighten up those family bonds. Who knows, they might be nice enough to send you some Nederwiet in the mail. [To the censor: joke! it's a joke!] Drmies (talk) 16:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Some mop action required methinks
Hi, our friend is back and at it again, [7], although he then removed the "football manager" bit, [8], which as I pointed out at ANI was vandalism added by an IP, but User:Whatever17 is obviously pasting the whole wikitext into Word and then just pasting it back in again whenever he adds something. Oh, and not too brightly, he's socking under a new name that's not very well chosen to conceal his identity, making the same edits to the same article. I would like to continue copyediting the article as, amongst other things, the Personal life section is atrocious, all that crap about the woman and the baby needs to go, but I can't see the point of spending my time on it if this user doesn't get a clue. I'm bringing the ANI post out of the archives and linking to this post, just in case you're not around for a while. Cheers! CaptainScreeboParley!15:36, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just adding that I did adress his reply on my talk page too (whilst checking info like the Serie A runs from May to December of the same year). Oh and I'm not a big football fan, I couldn't give a flying fanny (bird or ass?) about this guy, I just came across it Wiki knows how and saw that it was in a bit of a state, overlinked, effusive but poor writing, EL linkfarm and so on. CaptainScreeboParley!15:43, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, saw that just now. I will try and overhaul the Neymar bio to correct BLP standards over the week and obviously keep my eye out for any suspicious IP activity. We'll see what happens in a week's time. Cheers. CaptainScreeboParley!16:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would you please?.
Hi Drmies,nog work voor U, I have created a new page on Indian notable Urdu literary magazine Shair, but to avoid the :Disambiguation,I bit changed the magazine name with translation, actually right and famous name is only "Shair".Would you please help me to move it to Shair only rather than Shair (poet).Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 19:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can a stalker please accomodate Justice? I have to run to class, and after that I have a very important appointment at the carpet shop (I wish that were a joke). Thanks in advance! Drmies (talk) 19:03, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I noticed you removed the bulk of Mr.Yoo Young-Jin's credits. He is my favorite Kpop producer and I am determined to restore his page to include all the work that he should be rightfully credited so it serves as a reference point for anyone interested in Kpop to look up his compositions, lyrics and productions. Please kindly educate me on how I can do it so it is verifiable and not looking like a resume. Thank you.--RageX009 (talk) 00:02, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You can't do it by restoring every single song he wrote or adapted in a gigantic list. You can write about individual songs if there is something to say about them and if it is properly verified by reliable sources--not allkpop or some fan site. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 23:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, I'm not going to use fan sites as references. All of his work can be verified on printed credits of the albums and songs that were released, and most of the work post-2007 are listed on the label's website. But the website is flash-based making it almost impossible to hotlink. And his work prior to the mid-2000s are much harder to verify online, only on print form offline. How does one properly list a body of work by an artist or a creative individual on Wikipedia if it can't be done in a list? Thank you.--RageX009 (talk) 00:02, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Some kind of notability that would warrant inclusion can be established by reference to secondary sources. What you're talking about are primary sources. We typically don't (or shouldn't) include every single thing a person has done. Every novel by Melville, yes. Every hit by U2, sure. But there is no section in Rodgers and Hammerstein which lists every single on of their songs, and those are probably a lot more notable than those of most other songwriters in the world. Drmies (talk) 00:41, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so if it can't be done on the article itself can I create a separate article just to list his work? Film directors, for example, have "filmography" pages, most music artists have "discography" pages. And using U2 as an example, they even have a List of U2 songs article that lists most if not all of their songs. Thanks.--RageX009 (talk) 06:09, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I guess you can. But it's not totally parallel to a filmography: films are usually notable in their own right. The U2 songs, a rough estimate is that half of them are notable enough to have their own article, which isn't the same, I think, for your guy, and you have noted that I left his discography: WP:NSONG has guidelines for notability for songs. What this means, in my opinion, is that songs should be listed in the subject's article if they rise to some kind of notability and can at least be independently verified. A list article, that's a different kettle of fish, and one can find plenty of examples of lists with no verification and no notability for any of the individual items, sure. I guess consensus is that that's OK. In that case you can just copy the entire list from the history and paste it into List of Yoo Young-jin songs (but please remove that fancy formatting with the colors) and place a "See also" link in his article. My main concern is with the article itself which, when I looked at it, had 30,000 bytes and not single reliable reference. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:22, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hilary Rosen
I don't see why I have to set the table - I didn't do anything. Besides, I should get to eat the crumpets (the hell with the tea) for setting the stage for your decision. I agree with everything you said, and, frankly, I'm getting very tired of agreeing with you. (I commented on the Rosen Talk page to nudge things along.) --Bbb23 (talk) 23:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, you absolutely did. Only thing I missed in your comments, though (while I'm in a bad mood) is a comment on this running to ANI. Keep that in mind once you have that set of buttons, which really should be soon. Drmies (talk) 00:36, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure I follow you (you have to be very literal when you talk to me - must be related to being single-threaded). Who missed it? You wrote: "Hector, there was no need to run to ANI rightaway (REALLY--come on now)."--Bbb23 (talk) 01:14, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(beating a dead horse) I implied it in my opening post (wrong forum, other ways to deal with the problem) - I just wasn't as forceful as you were.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I want more bitchin'. Hey, will you run already? You, and Dennis Brown, and MikeWazowski, and Crisco 1492, and Sitush, and Sven Manguard, and maybe Berean Hunter, and TheRedPenOfDoom, and Eastmain, and Cunard, and Calabe1992, and SL93. Drmies (talk) 01:38, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, there's a fine line between bitching and nit-picking. Fortunately, I'm reasonably good at both and so don't have to worry about where to draw that line. Run for what? Admin? So I can be in a bad mood, too? And didn't Mike (whom I don't know) have his rollback rights taken away, not to mention a current block for edit-warring? And he didn't even have to become an admin to be sanctioned. Never a dull moment - would that there were.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:49, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I should read the news more regularly, yes. I've only seen Mike's good side, and while I need to look at it in more detail it's worthwhile noting that his opponent got blocked indefinitely. Sure, edit-warring is wrong even when you're right, that's true. But we forgive all kinds of crap. Drmies (talk) 14:22, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Remove what?
Hi. You said I should remove "that rather irksome warning from your user page". What warning? I didnt put it in there. Can I just remove it? I am really not sure what you are talking about. I have been the one staying on topic until another user, Hector, started all this complaining instead of staying on topic and discuss the issue at hand. Now why is any of this my doing or fault? CarrieBee (talk) 17:20, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. I had no idea the comment on your user page was put there by an IP and not by you. You control your user page and your Talk page and with limited exceptions can always remove material you don't like. Generally, no one but you should touch your user page. Editor Talk pages are for (appropriate) comments. In any event, I've removed the language from your user page for you.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:56, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you have completed that which I could not regarding redirects/moves etc. There was a comment on Talk:Arjun (Actor) - can that be moved over to Arjun (actor) also?
Yeah, not much for me to do there. If there was a valid (non-deleted) redirect in the history I could restore that and even protect it. As for the editor, they are headed toward excluding themselves but they're not quite there yet. Drmies (talk) 18:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've sent the Thiyyar article to AfD now. Completely fed up of those two contributors, who are letting heart rule head. I am pretty sure that they are returning users but cannot yet figure out which. - Sitush (talk) 18:34, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gibbons–Hawking space
Hello.
Please note my recent edits to this new article. It began like this:
A Gibbons–Hawking space is essentially a hyperkähler manifold with an extra U(1) symmetry.
The lay reader seeing that will not recognize it as being about mathematics or mathematical physics. I added an initial context-setting phrase:
In mathematical physics, a Gibbons–Hawking space is essentially a hyperkähler manifold with an extra U(1) symmetry.
It didn't say who Gibbons and Hawking are, so I added this:
In mathematical physics, a Gibbons–Hawking space, named after Gary Gibbons and Stephen Hawking, is essentially a hyperkähler manifold with an extra U(1) symmetry.
I changed the title from
Gibbons-Hawking space
to
Gibbons–Hawking space
because WP:MOS requires an en-dash rather than a hyphen in that context.
A remaining issue is that no other articles currently link to that article. You can find out which other articles link to it by clicking on "Toolbox", then on "What links here", and then under "namespace" choose "article" (that last will exclude talk pages link this present user-talk page that link to it, and various sorts of administrative pages that list new articles, etc.). Accordingly, I've added an "orphan" tag to the top of the article. I notice that there are several other articles that begin with the words "Gibbons-Hawking"; possibly some of those ought to link to it, and maybe the list of physics articles and some other physics and mathematics articles. Probably also the pages on Gary Gibbons and Stephen Hawking. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:31, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your helpful edits. I'll admit that math and geometry were never my strong points. I'm afraid I can not be of help de-orphaning the article. Drmies (talk) 18:34, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Big D - Kuwaiti Rapper
Hello Mr. Drmies,
Regarding my page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_D_Kuwait I have re-done it again and hopefully it will fulfill your requirements where as my biography can meet the music notability criteria and I have changed the look in which hopefully you would consider it is not promotional at all and personally I do not seek promotion at all. Please consider accepting it. I definitely do not intend in any way to be a part of any advertisement for myself. I have put reliable sources this time, I added it in my sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Big_D_Kuwaiti_Rapper/sandbox as well but I think its ready now that is why i posted it, I have worked with producers that are well known to pass the music notability guideline, and i guess this time the article will be overlooked as encyclopaedic. I have included reliable, independent secondary sources that I have had since 2001, and documents, official record deals, and verification's, and the tone of the way the article was written has been changed, I really believe I'm notable enough for a Wikipedia article and if you read my article you will see I have done many great accomplishments as a independent artist, and I hope you can accept my article.
Regards, Dhari Dhulaei - Big D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big D Kuwaiti Rapper (talk • contribs) 19:55, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Big D--it's not a promotional character that's the issue, rather notability per our guidelines. See WP:MUSICBIO. The references in the article are primary documents and what appear to be posts on music sites--not articles in reliable, authoritative sources. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 20:03, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
--Mr Drmies I included My "Record Deal Contract With Smile TV 1""Record Deal Contract With Smile TV 2" with a respected record label and TV Channel called "Smile TV" associated with http://www.aiwagulf.com/ that has over 7 million customers and worked with well known artist Massari my country is based on 1 million people only Kuwait is very small as you may already know sir, there are hardly any rappers I have started hip hop in my country, and you can see the date on this contract sir "Record Deal Contract With Yacoub_Al-Mohana 1""Record Deal Contract With Yacoub_Al-Mohana 2""Record Deal Contract With Yacoub_Al-Mohana 3" with "Gulf Records" in 2001, with well known producer in the middle east Yacoub Al-Mohana which worked with respected artist Rashed Al-Majed plus his father Yousif al Mohana was a icon in the arab music world, and the blogs you've seen in my references that posted me are the top in my country in which there are only few blogs in Kuwait, I'm willing to add more references in the future and upgrade the article but I have worked 3 sleepless nights on my article so far, in addition if you search all of wikipedia you will see there are no rappers in Kuwait except Big D the only rapper in Kuwait with a legitimate story and the only well known rapper in my country. since 1999-present. could you please reconsider my reason to be on wikipedia after knowing this information? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big D Kuwaiti Rapper (talk • contribs) 20:45, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@Big D Kuwait: The sources you provided do not qualify as reliable sources according to Wikipedia's rules. I just did a search on Google and Google News, and found nothing in the results which would qualify as a reliable source. Unfortunately, that means that, at this time, you are not notable according to our standards.
That can change, of course, so my advice would be to move the article into your userspace, where you can continue to update it as your career moves along, and if a time comes when you are written about in regularly-published newspapers or magazines, or in recognized sites online (but not in people's personal blogs, or YouTube or Facebook), you can move the article back into mainspace and see if it passes a review for notability then. I think that may be your only option, because it's likely that the article will be deleted at this point. Good luck. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:43, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Big D, I've been looking and looking but can't really find anything to help you. The photo of that contract won't help either, I'm afraid. I think there is no choice: you have to get bigger. I hope you do--Beyond My Ken and I are rooting for you. BMK, do you have any connections? Drmies (talk) 00:55, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, if I had connections, the two songwriters I used to work with would be big today. The closest we ever got was to place a song in the soundtrack of a really terrible Whoppi Goldberg film, and to release an album in Finland. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:58, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the fact you both looked into my case and tried to help furthermore I'm trying to get a reporter from daily news Arab Times to write a article about me and post it in http://www.arabtimesonline.com/, I hope if that works out my article would qualify your demands, hopefully I will have authoritative sources soon so I can earn your trust, but if you can offer anything positive regarding my case so far I would be very grateful and thankful, knowing I tried my best and I tried to be accepted, I regret to say I can't offer you much more then the sources I have right now, but if you trust me, I will have reliable sources in the future and hopefully my article would be legitimate and accepted, thank you both for everything, if you both ever decide to visit Kuwait and you need anything from here, don't hesitate to ask me. Thank you once again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big D Kuwaiti Rapper (talk • contribs) 05:58, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I had someone work so hard to make this page for me it took time. i thought i was deemed worthy of being looked up in an encyclopedia. i have been working hard writing everyone that tries to delete me to explain my case. i am not mainstream, and i plan on staying underground. i'm not using this as a way to help my career, im using this for proof; and a reliable source for me to be looked up in by Kuwait. im not in it for money or fame. that's how my small country recognizes me in public, but i needed an article of proof. even if it was a small paragraph. unfortunately at the moment i don't have the reliable source that you ask for. but i earned my fame mostly because i stayed underground. so i can have freedom of speech in cases such as this my Islamic country forbids profanity or even having a music career (if you want to know more about why my religion is against making money off of music i will explain more if you ask me). therefore i cant be true to myself if i was a signed artist because the media will never let me say what i want. they like my music because i am the only Kuwaiti that went this far on my own personal budget.
Im the only unsigned Kuwaiti artist that went this far. where as there is a signed group by the name of Army Of One, Kuwaiti rappers. but Kuwait media decides how there music should be and they can't rap with profanity, freedom, and self will. the songs they make are just for commercial purposes it's not what they truly want to release. i know this because they are my friends. but in my case i have the advantage of being underground and producing my own music. so i can talk about politics, religion, and middle eastern issues, and what the middle east really wants to hear.
Please look at this a article, it is about the band "Army of One" on a Kuwaiti news website "Army of one - Arab Times" what if I could get a article similar to the one I just posted. will that be enough reliable source? my question to you Mr. SmrtSE would I be accepted then. i hope my situation is more clear. thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big D Kuwaiti Rapper (talk • contribs) 13:52, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2nd try!
Drmies, Thank you again for the references, and for referring me to User:MichaelQSchmidt! Revisions have been made and references in addition to those that you provided have been added here. User:MichaelQSchmidt thinks that the article may be ready to go live, and we would both like your opinion on that. Thank you for another quick peek in advance. Doc2234 (talk) 00:16, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look, but if MQS says it's good, it's good. You know he's an admin too--strange things happen when nice editors also get power. Drmies (talk) 00:46, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the changes done to article based on such reasoning, but I disagree with the final edit... if information that isn't sourced is put on there, then adding the positions without source is just as trivial. Linking to the members pages solely would serve its purpose. The way it looks right now doesn't look very encyclopedia-like either. Chocolat ≈ Dubulge (Chat Me Up)17:03, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I may have looked at a few more encyclopedic articles than you have, and I disagree. If you want to remove these positions (which for the most part strike me as silly anyway--Lead and Main and whatnot), I'm all for that. Member's pages aren't sources: Wikipedia is not a reliable source for Wikipedia. Drmies (talk) 17:14, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I didn't realize it was vandalism; I didn't think it was a big deal at all (because I'm not really important and no one actually looks at my user page), otherwise I wouldn't have done so. Tboii99 ✉ 22:44, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if it was glitch or not, but I saw the administrator icon back on my user page, and I undid it immediately. But for some reason in the page history it says that I did it, but judging from the time, I don't even think I was online at the time. This is because I replied to your message as soon as I found it, which was as soon as I logged on. Strangest part is, when I first read your message, I checked my user page, and it was gone. This was after the mistaken undo and before my latest undo. Just giving you a heads up in case you kept my page in your watch-list, and it seemed suspicious. Tboii99 ✉ 23:23, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have a little thing going on at ANI [9]that you may or may not be able to help with. About an editor's contribs [10], new, all 14 are reverts of the same editor. Looking through the first few articles I see a lot of reverts from 4 or so editors, over time, and I noticed you doing some reverts as well. Thought you might be familiar with the back story on this. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)23:49, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
RFPP Predator Award
Slakr's RFPP Predator Award
For your work in helping to tear apart backlogs at requests for page protection by pouncing on requests, I hereby award you this deluxe, camouflaged, tiger-like padlock. Not sure why you'd necessarily need a deluxe, camouflaged, tiger-like padlock, but at least it's a nice conversation piece. :P
In response to your referral to me of User:Doc2234 and his article on Giulia Marletta, I did some work on his piece and then went ahead a spent a couple days creating the article Donkey Xote. As I sent it over to DYK, might you look in on it and check my spelling? And then perhaps offer an opinion on my hook? Thanks. Schmidt,MICHAEL Q.04:42, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, I may need sober eyes for that, but that's a very funny name already. Hey MQS, you should come down South sometime (CoM never did) and I'll buy you a beer. Drmies (talk) 05:15, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After our conversation in which you suggested I run for admin, I started looking at this guide, which, on the whole, I found remarkably well written. However, there was one point (in two places) I thought should be reworded. So, I looked back at the history, found the admin who had added the part that bothered me, opened a discussion on the Talk page, and left the admin a note. He's been very responsive and civil, but, per my last comment in our discussion, I think we've reached an impasse, an unsual impasse in my view, but nonetheless a point where further discussion would probably be futile.
Unfortunately, no one else has commented. In your view, what would be the best way to obtain more comments? WP:RFC? A post to WP:AN (although I would really like to get comments from non-admins as well as admins)? Something else?
The history of that talk page does not indicate that it's heavily trafficked. AN or ANI...I don't know. Isn't this the kind of thing that's often advertised on the Village Pump? That may be a good and friendly way to go. Drmies (talk) 15:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Pump sounds like a good place to start. I've never used it before, so it will be a first. I just looked at the user page of the admin I've been having the discussion with. Had no idea he was so active at WP:RFA. Probably just as well or I might have been mildly intimidated. Oh, well, I started challenging adults when I was five years old; some things don't change.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:22, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Sorry, no. Sock edits are not per definition bad edits, and since WLU isn't banned I don't see why I'd jump in. Feel free to find another admin or post a note on AN with a link to an explanation on a talk page--but this is a content matter, I can't judge either the content or the sources (which is the heart of the dispute, or it should be), and I have no desire to learn anything about this topic. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 17:42, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BitterGrey, you were both edit warring there. I couldn't care less who started when this time around. I suggested to you that you find an admin to look at the SPI. Let me suggest it again: find an admin to look at the SPI. I am obviously not interested in pursuing this, not on your behalf and not on behalf of Justice Everywhere. Drmies (talk) 19:23, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I read over the SPI last week and I'm a bit confused on something, namely whether the clerk found that the IPs were socks of WLU or socks of each other. Because policy prohibits us from linking an IP to an account, the clerk likely wouldn't say that they were his socks if they were, but here's the thing: if those were socks of WLU (which I'm holding out AGF that they weren't), then that was seriously problematic on behalf of WLU and a textbook socking violation. However, circumstantial evidence is likely not enough to tarnish a well respected and long time contributor, so if there isn't a technical link between WLU and the IPs then my guess is that we will err on the side of good faith. SÆdontalk20:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. I'd like to AGF that myself, but I have serious doubts. But I'm not going to block on this evidence, given WLU's lengthy tenure here--which is why I keep hoping that an admin with more experience will look at the SPI, and that one or more editors will jump in that cesspool. Drmies (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Noformation, please be aware that neutral editors apply limits to AGF. Here[16] you applied AGF to two obviously contradictory claims: WLU had first claimed that his login was the initials of his alma matter[17] and then that they were his own initials[18]. Assuming that WLU forgot what is login stood for is not AGF. Anyway, I thought you weren't "interested in being part of this dramafest anymore."[19]? In case it isn't clear, this is the more recent example of sockpuppeting, which makes my previous comment not "conjectural" as you previously claimed when dismissing it[20]. BitterGrey (talk) 21:11, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why you are talking to Noformation here as this is not his/her talk page, and I don't see that editor in this discussion. Drmies has said he's not interested in pursuing this. Please either drop it or, as Drmies has suggested, find another admin who does wish to pusue it (that would not be me). LadyofShalott21:57, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Noformation was my old account, though I'm not sure why BG refers to me as such since it's not my real name. Anyway, not getting roped into this argument, I'll just say that yes, I assume a lot of good faith, and I'll leave it at that. SÆdontalk22:05, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Noformation was the name on some of the diffs. Using the older name provoked a question like yours, LadyofShalott, in case this answer was needed. Hope this helps clarify things.BitterGrey (talk) 22:10, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
(Moved from MFD)My watchlist has more entries than your list of edits, probably--both yours and Noformation's, haha. I liked that name, BTW--why'd you get rid of it? This wouldn't be admin shopping. I can only speak for myself, but if something happened over a week ago and I don't still feel it in my wallet or my pants I have forgotten about it. Drmies (talk) 03:10, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have about 1400 pages on my watch list at the moment, which is around the point where I start cleaning it out because I can't keep track efficiently. If you seriously have over 7000 pages I'm impressed! Regarding Noformation, long story short I planned on taking a long break after a heated debate didn't go in my favor, so I created Saedon to use as a browsing account, maybe doing a little editing outside of my normal topic areas. Then I run into a bunch of POV EW on Mundane astrology by User:EagleEye and, to quote The Godfather, "just when I thought I was out... they pull me back in."
Regarding the admin shopping thing: I know it wouldn't be the type of thing that would have brought scrutiny, but I am considering an RFA sometime this year and so I am trying to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, as I know that A, a RFA is a fine tooth and comb over your contribs and B, being an admin is a heavy responsibility. Anyway, I'll definitely drop you a note in the future if something should come up again. SÆdontalk19:58, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't work too hard on it, but I jumped into a dispute here [21] and think I handled it properly, but wouldn't mind a quick review if you have the time. The guy filing was a 4 day new user and both parties screwed up, and I had to use a bit of a velvet hammer, and wanted to make sure I didn't overstep my authority as a lowly editor ;) Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)00:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I also added a few notes along the way on the editors talk page, trying to talk them off the cliff. I don't think this is how you would have done it, I only know how to do it my own way, which is why I would like your observations. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)00:31, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok smartass ;) I've been JUDGED a lot, perhaps, but this is about me as an editor, not an admin, and it was a different kind of dispute, and the first time I had to be this forceful and blunt. I was going to ask your opinion on your talk page but the other editor was already there, so I felt it was inappropriate. Drmies is just my backup this time. But your input is welcome, too. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)00:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If I am ever to be judged, Dennis, I hope I get as much praise and support as you have. Good job! As for your handling of the dispute, honestly, I didn't think you were forceful at all. I thought you were fairly diplomatic but direct. You made the key points without any great heat. Frankly, I'd rather hear from Drmies, not because his opinion is worth more than mine (no one's is, of course), but because most of the points you made, Dennis, were the points I made (I missed the one about Evlekis reverting on Hopelesscross's Talk page), so I'm hardly objective. And now back to your regular programming (whose Talk page is this, anyway?).--Bbb23 (talk) 00:54, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The doctor will see you both. Dennis, like Bbb said, the ANI stuff looks fine to me. I can tell you're practicing for your new job already: forget about telling people where it's at; now you must also try to guide editors and keep them. Your RfA is going well, so you will probably get to block Bbb first--but they may decide to run soon as well. Do y'all still write articles? Drmies (talk) 01:05, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Y'all"??? The south strikes again. If you mean me, too, there's no "still" as there's never been any (a potentially serious shortcoming, so they say). And, Dennis, if you're going to block me for being a smartass (clearly deserved), I'm changing my !vote.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:18, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Writing articles is for chumps. ;) I started Red slaw this week, which I think is consistent with your previous assessment of my writing ability. Made a short jog through AFD researching ignored discussions and earned an oppose at RfA with my 'keep' vote. I should be flattered I suppose. And B, unless you can get the DeLorean up to 88mph, you'll never know until it's too late. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)01:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously (for a change), with all this absurd talk about my becoming an admin, I started fretting over the fact that I've never written an article. As it happens, even before the admin stuff, I intended to write an article, just to see what it felt like, but fear of the unknown and laziness kept me from it. So, I've actually started putting together an article today and will continue to work on it until it's ready to be put out there. I gotta admit - it ain't easy. Might be easier if I just wrote a stub, but I'm diving into a full-blown article (not enormous, mind you, but not a stub). Do I really have to cite everything? :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 01:46, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Long as you have links to Facebook and Youtube, that should be fine. And if anyone tags it for speedy, just remove the tag, even if you have to do it 4 or 5 times. Moving on, keep in mind that I've only created 27 articles and was warned many times that it would be the death of me in RfA. No one has even mentioned it. I have a couple in sandboxes now, you can always jump in. The one on D.H. Griffin Companies needs some work. The last few I've written, I recruited others to help me on at projects, which really helped as I'm an ok copyrighter, but not an author. Work with others if you aren't confident yet. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)02:18, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible no one brought it up because it wasn't an issue, since you created a couple of them. I personally don't want admins who can't write and know nothing about content. There's already too many of them around. Drmies (talk) 02:31, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawal denied. You can learn how to write articles, helping on the one I'm working on in user space [22] is a good start, then I will return the favor. Seriously, if I can, you certainly can. And as Drmies points out, you don't need to be prolific, just experienced. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)14:01, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kind of you to offer, but I'm going to continue working on the article I always intended to write. After that, perhaps I'll write some shorter articles, time permitting. In addition, as long as I'm bringing the skeletons out of my closet, similar to the criticism leveled at you regarding CSD, my assumption is I would be criticized for some of my AfDs. God knows I've been beaten up at AfD. The rudeness at AfD used to bother me, but I've developed a self-righteous thick skin because the articles that were kept were of much better quality after my AfD than before. We really ought to have better quality control at article creation. Quality too often seems to take a back seat to numbers here. We could develop a new policy/guideline: "Any article that is still a piece of shit after 6 months is subject to deletion." Heh.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:28, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Let's go with ALT 2. How do we make it a doble DYK that will then appear on the talk page of Giulia Marletta as well as at Donkey Xote? Schmidt,MICHAEL Q.23:05, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Drmies, I have noticed your presence on most of the backspace of Wikipedia so I figure you are the guy to ask. Is it allowable for a normal editor (myself), to comment or contribute information to RFPP entries such as this one?. I know generally all editors are allowed to participate project wide, but I am concerned as to whether my input and contribution would be more of a hassle to admins working on RFPP than helpful. I find myself more interested in maintenance tasks and back processes including civility issues than mainspace work; I am trying to find a few places to help out without being a nuisance. Thanks in advance! Judicatus | Talk01:01, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've been hanging out there by default, really--RPP is a sucky job, though not as bad as the edit-warring board. I think I appreciate your note. Sometimes it's a lot to check. As you said, in this case it's pretty clear-cut vandalism (and the IP is already blocked) but sometimes it's more complicated than that and help can be welcome. If an admin doesn't like it they won't look at it, I imagine. You can always run for admin yourself... Thanks for your help! Drmies (talk) 01:19, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have thought about running and I think I will put up a nomination, at the least it could give me a good scope of where I am at as an editor (an editor review would do the same but I suspect a bit more heavy criticism of actions I may not even remember from my past in an RFA) considering the scrutiny and at the best level I could help out where needed (or where the moment strikes me to help in between work and college). Also, thanks for the help, I will do what I can to assist around the janitorial halls here. Judicatus | Talk01:43, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you've been here a while, and you're not a jerk from what I can tell, so that's all good. Your edit count is low, of course, but since you haven't signed in to that edit counter thingy I can't really see a distribution. Ha, I saw one of your links--GiantSnowman is now also an admin. Where do you have significant article/content contributions? That's not necessary for admins, but it may well be necessary to run successfully, if you're interested in that at all. But my good friend Mandarax does a lot of gnomish work and never complains about not having the tool. BTW, I think that the terror of RfA is overrated. Look at the two RfA links above, in the "Missed your comment" section. Happy editing, Drmies (talk) 02:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that just because I don't complain doesn't mean that I don't have complaints. It's natural, after the reception of your RfA, for you to think that the terror of them is overrated. The most recent RfRfA (I just invented that acronym – I like it!) which I received in my email echoed similar sentiments, but I remain leery. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM10:40, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, missed your comments prior to doing so but I happened to activate the distribution graph a little while ago and it makes me cringe...I have sporadic edits, that should not be an issue for an admin but I have seen it become a huge hangup for a lot of RFA commentators. I have very little content creation, I prefer to work on bits and pieces of article space over making massive edits; strange considering I am looking at possible massive impact tools yet I do not like the article end of that spectrum, I'll just chalk it up to preference for now. I was looking over the creation process for nominating myself for RFA and decided to avoid a waste of everyone's time and just go ahead with an Editor Review, thought you might like to comment if the mood strikes you. The review page. Judicatus | Talk03:00, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Man I was a prude of the prudes back then..."Such RUDE LANGUAGE (insert british accent)" [23]...embarassing considering I apparently did not understand NOTCENSORED.Judicatus | Talk03:28, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was clearly vulgar. Censorship doesn't apply to sticking a picture of a penis in Penis, but it shouldn't be stuck in Dick Cheney. So far so good, Judicatus (I like this better than your old name). Drmies (talk) 03:52, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I actually remember making that request for a name change due to my concerns people would interpret bias regionally and politically, considering Texas geographically and patriot per obvious. I believe User:Bibliomaniac15 made the change for me. Judicatus | Talk04:13, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I would not prod that. I haven't done any searching to look for potential references; however, I think at the least some of the content should be verifiable and could be merged to the Univeristy article, even if the library article can't stand alone. LadyofShalott15:14, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, but how can I determine notability on a library institute? I would suspect the 12,000 membership at first but all university libraries have a decent membership, and considering I cannot find much third party information on the library I would consider it non-notable. So would a merge as you mentioned be the most appropriate action? It could be merged with the notable Kursk State University. Judicatus | Talk21:14, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, its notability should be determined pretty much like anything else: are there reliable sources that discuss it? Try Google Books, and see if anything turns up about it. If after you look, you still don't find evidence of notability, then start thinking about a merger. Given the geographical location of this university and library, I'd want to make sure to look for non-English sources before deciding nothing exists - it might be a good idea to ask on the Russian WikiProject for help. LadyofShalott02:12, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And editor removed the tag I had previously put on there about single source, I reverted, we are discussing it. Am I correct in that any article with only one source, regardless of the quality, can have the tag on it? I've never been a discussion about it, and you are the only admin I know that is currently online, so a 3rd on my talk page would be helpful if you have the time. Dennis Brown(talk)(contrib)15:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Admin help
I've got a couple of musician articles that are not notable outside their band. I've tried to redirect to the band, but I get reverted by the creating editor.... reverted with no comment, saying I need to disprove his argument, name calling, etc... Where do I go/do next and trying to do a redirect? Bgwhite (talk) 00:29, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find what you were referring to amidst all those boring DEFAULTSORT edits you keep making. I did find BTOB (South Korean band). I guess you're a big K-pop fan? I hope you don't mind that I trimmed your Korean bush a little bit. Drmies (talk) 03:01, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Found Mr. Hall. It's probably best to come on less strong the first time you drop them a note on their talk page. ;) Drmies (talk) 03:04, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I didn't want you to get involved in the article itself. I was more interested in what is next when a redirect is in order. I didn't think it belonged at AfD because he is part of what looks like a notable band and had no problem with the band. There is a Redirects for discussion page, but that looks to be for redirects that should be deleted. I've never run into this before. Bgwhite (talk) 06:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pre-rise. These are no longer for breakfast; I hope they'll be done for elevensies.
Ever heard of Cholermus? Was tagged at CSD for no context and a hoax, clearly neither (it's no spaghettisburger!) Very little available, mainly people making it after watching an episode of The Big Bang Theory...Would probably go good with the strawberries...--kelapstick(bainuu) 05:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm making cardamom rolls this morning. Can you figure out these directions? "The fifth Cut a slit in each strip is nearly up to the hilt. Swirl the strips around each other and then around the fingers into balls. Attach the ends underneath. Add to bakpappersklädda sheets and let rise covered another 30 minutes. Preheat the oven to 250 °." Thank you Google! Drmies (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but all I can gather is, "I...Cut a slit...strip...Swirl...around the fingers into balls. Attach...underneath." Maybe I have been drinking too much, but it sounds like you are having a very exciting breakfast :| --kelapstick(bainuu) 13:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
::::::*They were quite tasty, thanks, though I don't understand why a dough with so much butter doesn't guarantee total freshness the day after. I agree with the reassessment, BTW. Sadie gives you a paw. Drmies (talk) 02:33, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
About a certain party's Wikipedia page--Eliane Karp
Hi Drmies,
You've overseen the Eliane Karp page from time to time. I kept an eye on the page because of mysterious information I came across as an Americanist, and because the claim of a doctorate is not true and language ability is exaggerated. I see two IP's who might be thought of as 'friends' of Ms. Karp, 128.113.140.89 (21 March 2011) and 66.117.137.195 (9 April 2010). I also see a 'non-friend' at 128.113.140.89 (21 March 2011) who accurately described claims (but did not cite) that are known and documentation does exist - but is obscure. For such a well-placed figure, these details are politically sensitive. One might find that the publications claimed are also obscure, non extant, or authored differently. I am not going to take the time to explore claims in Hebrew or French.
This Israeli item contains the following paragraph:
"A survey taken in Peru showed that she is seen as ambitious, power-hungry, a money-lover, arrogant, haughty, patronizing, vulgar, exploitative, domineering, a spendthrift, immoral, and ungrateful, and that’s only a partial list."
This YouTube item, titled: BIOGRAFIA DE LA DRA. ELIANE KARP - TOLEDO refers to her as Dr. Karp.
This is a work of unabashed propaganda.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ijw6Dm1Jp4
On a more positive note, she did successfully lead an initiative against Yale for artifacts from Machu Pichu.
I don't recommend re-stating the negative information, but this site has a history of 'fixes'. Unfortunately, I see claims of possession of a doctorate from Stanford are still made on the Spanish language Wikipedia, along with glorious claims to respectable banking and international NGO relationships. Well, one chooses one's battles, I won't be making additional changes, but the complex pattern of untruths, and/or extent of publicly-described untoward issues are not represented in this instance. I do see that the page is less aggrandizing than in the past. You may remove this message. KSRolph (talk) 21:13, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I hope she's not involved in editing the article since that's a horrible picture. I'll have a closer look at the article and your commentary. Now stop working Sundays: no one is paying you for it. Drmies (talk) 23:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My usual MO is to edit the article first so I look at the text knowing nothing about COIs among the editors. I started, but I'm not done yet, and it's dinner time. I'll look at it again, but I hate biographies, and it looks to me like this might be a matter for the pitbulls at WP:BLPN, and then, possibly, a matter for an WP:SPI or something like that. I suggest that unless I dig up something interesting you consider posting a note at the BLP noticeboard, and then we'll take it from there. Bon appetit, Drmies (talk) 00:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's a small world among some of us, seeing my user page, you will understand. I must exercise caution - we are not talking about humble people. In fact, I looked into this current matter because I see keynote speaker status at a coming Human Rights conference at SU. This is when there is also question of human rights abuses, so some people are missing some information, or have decided unpleasant information is conspiratorial. On über national's status, I don't know. But, ignorance of Quechua is revealed here, Ethnologue lists about 30 Quechuas in Peru alone, several of which are not mutually intelligible. I might add, Ethnologue contributors correspond with me about my view of the languages, varieties, and the numbers of speakers.
The party of interest is now teaching in the History Dep't. at Peru's top private university. One wonders if all believe she holds the doctorate from SU. Believe it or not, through certain channels at SU, the party managed to get appointments, without the usual doctorate, or rather... (nearly) all believed she had earned one there. Faculty who knew better, were tight-lipped. I figured it out looking for her dissertation which appeared nowhere. I saw a big poster of the 'first couple' in the Alumni Center that said M.A. I contacted them and told them they missed her Ph.D., but then learned she does not have one. A little slippery...
As for the former president, he DID earn one. He gave an infamous talk a couple years ago, for which he - appeared in front of others - to be drunk. This unit enjoys presidential immunity from possible criminal charges. With Peru becoming a key strategic country, leaders are becoming more important. To give credit where do, the Mister truly supports democracy, at least some form of it. I see the same non-friend had things to say about his scandals' toolkit also.
P.S. Historia de dos aventureros : Toledo y Karp, la política como engaño is by Umberto Jara, 2005. The translation is something like: The History of Two Adventurers: Toledo and Karp, politics of deception. I cannot comment on its credibility; the author is a controversial, well-known journalist. I find an honorary doctorate (Peru) awarded in 2011. But it makes this claim:
"La Dra. Karp obtuvo el grado de bachiller en Estudios Latinoamericanos y el doctorado en Antropología en la Universidad Hebrea de Jerusalén, Maestría en Humanidades y fue candidata al Doctorado de Finanzas y Economía de Desarrollo en la Universidad de Stanford, California, Estados Unidos."
This means the party claims she has a doctorate from Hebrew University and was a doctoral candidate in finance and economics at SU... I'm going to move on to other topics for a time. I've had enough of this!
Well, I don't know what to say. I've made some more edits and the article needs a rewrite, that's clear--but that's not for me. Someone who knows the area, the topic, and the language should get on it. Drmies (talk) 02:03, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Will you please give me your opinion on this? If you think it promising, I will try to master the arcane DYK procedures. Mrs. Cullen is almost done with her second article, by the way. Cullen328Let's discuss it00:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome back, friend. I always enjoy your company. Did you know I'm likely to go to Wikimania? I would love to see you there, and perhaps I can put my name on your better half's dance card.
I'm not sure I would describe them rules as "arcane"... BTW, both I and Mrs. Drmies love his style, so I'll be glad to have a look. Drmies (talk) 00:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your (plural) articles always make me feel good about the US--they touch on that optimism my former teacher described so well, that of the Greatest Generation to whom we owe so much. That is a wonderful house. I redid the deck behind our house to mimic such lines; the house itself is beyond beautification, I'm afraid. Drmies (talk) 00:49, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. What a nice article. I got nothing to say except thanks for contributing--you may notice that I'm a bit sentimental tonight, so much so that I won't even remove the Flickr link (I'm strict that way). I suggest you ask Malleus if he's up for a run-through to see if he thinks it's ready for GA, which it might well be. Go ahead and nominate the hook; I'd do it but my show is about to start and I still have a book to review. Please give my regards to Mrs. Cullen. Drmies (talk) 00:54, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you as always for your kind words. I still entertain hopes of attending Wikimania though my humble request for a scholarship was denied. My strategy of hanging out at the Wikimedia offices in San Francisco with a dopey grin on my face was unsuccessful. My guess is that that they had already filled their quota of 60 year old white male Americans, but that's OK. I favor diversity. So, I will be studying cheap airline flight websites and locations to pitch a tent or whatever.
Your offer to share a dance with Mrs. Cullen significantly improved the chances that she will loosen the purse strings that she controls so tightly, so I retain optimism that we will make the trip.
I am considering your advice to consult Malleus on GA matters though I fear his reputation for biting off and spitting out the heads of "editors" who do not live up to his lofty standards. And I do not feel that this particular article is my best by any means, though I am fond of it because it is so new. Among my true favorites are Harry Yount and Ethan Russell, the second of which may interest you since you are a rock and roller.
I navigated the DYK nomination process, and I hope I did it right. Now, I will have to review another nomination, and Mrs. Cullen is already gnawing away at the Chamber of the Holocaust. Such a pleasant topic. Two visits to Jerusalem, and we had never heard of it. But nearly four million articles in, all the famous stuff has been taken. Cullen328Let's discuss it04:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No need to fear the Malleus: you aren't a fool, mean-spirited, or an overzealous admin. I've never seen him act untoward toward an editor of good will, certainly not one of such eminent good will as yourself. But I do think he's less active after the latest kerfuffle (which I think I have forgotten already--oh yes, a very silly block for incivility) than he was before. Anyway, pick a top ten of the best editors we have, he's in it, and most of the rest are acquaintances of his. Cullen, we have so many good people here; I prefer to see the glass as half-full. Wait--that Chamber article, I just moved that from AfC. It looked odd to begin with, but it was legit; another article that might have withered away in that category waiting to be reviewed with so many others. Off to work! (For a little bit.) Drmies (talk) 04:12, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When it comes to Wikipedia, Mr. Optimist in the corner over here in California sees the glass as 97% full, so perhaps I will summon up my courage and ask Malleus for his advice on two or three of my creations. Perhaps you might extend a word of introduction, in the 19th century fashion? Good manners never go out of style. Thank you for everything that you do here, friend. Cullen328Let's discuss it04:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply; if it's not too much of a waste of time, perhaps you could view mine. Big BigJoeRockHead (talk) 02:41, 24 April 2012 (UTC
I'm a Rush fan to the core, ever since my friend loaned me his 2112 album. I played that record for weeks while doing homework after school. I could hardly bare to give it back. Seen them many times, and plan to see them in Sept of this year. Rush is the greatest band in the universe. I appreciate the dialog. Big BigJoeRockHead (talk) 04:03, 24 April 2012 (UTC
I don't know. I lost my taste for Rush after Signals, I think, but Permanent Waves is still in rotation in the kitchen. Listen, if you want that guy in, you can produce some sources for his (brief) tenure and take it up on the article talk page: Featured Articles require extra care. Enjoy the show. Drmies (talk) 14:31, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Funny that you say that; I too lost my taste for Rush after Signals, Permanent Waves is also still in my rotation; as are any of their older work. There are a number of albums I still not heard very much of; Hold Your Fire, Presto, Test For Echo etc. My return to Rush happened after seeing the Rush in Rio DVD. No, I don't necessarly want to add Mitch; I just happened to do a little bit of research on him after the ip edit. I too agree that featured articles require extra care. I don't believe his addition really adds much, if any value. If he were too be added, then someone might try and make the case that Joe Perna and Lindy Young also need to be added. Both of whom had (brief) tenures. BigJoeRockHead (talk) 17:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hui
I dab'd Hui (secret society) because romanized 'Hui' is used for so many different words in so many different contexts. My concern began with the Haw wars, where "Haw" (or identically pronounces "Ho") refers to the Hui people, but the bandits themselves were in all likelihood not Hui people, though some of them could have been. --Pawyilee (talk) 01:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd previewed it before I saved it & the copy on my hard drive isn't missing any bits or bytes. I have no idea what went wrong. Thank you for fixing my FUBAR. I'll leave it to you to decide if and how Hui people need dab'ing (perhaps as an in-line not to be confused with evil-doers like such-and-so.) --Pawyilee (talk)
Radiodj1520 is back and still adding unnecessary, unsourced and unencyclopedic content to TV station pages. I have reverted all his edits to this point and added a Warn4IM warning. Looks like it is time to play whack-a-mole. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 09:05, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I left a note as well. I think a topic ban might be the way to go, and if needs be we'll follow that with an SPI. None was ever started, was it? Drmies (talk) 14:29, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not really cause they jump over multiple accounts and multiple IPs. Not really any way to ban someone who is on so many accounts, I guess was the reason one wasn't created. :( On a slightly unrelated topic, could you put your 2 cents in on the merge discussion at Talk:WNEM-DT2. Someone wants to merge the article from WNEM-DT2 (it's technical callsign and correct place, per MOS) to WNEM-TV. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Asked a CU to run a checkuser to see if there is any relation to the two accounts. The behavioral evidence is there and the DUCKs are a-quackin'. Will let you know what the CU finds. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 11:07, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Lots of things could explain this--that they're not the same person, for starters... 24 strikes me as a more positive user anyway. Still, though, it's strange. Thanks for looking into it, Homer. Drmies (talk) 18:54, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
TVFAN24 has had a couple indef blocks though, so not completely positive. No problem, glad I could help. Let me know if you see any other posts by RadioDJ1520 and I will be glad to revert them. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:06, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that looks interesting and notable enough. I'd cut the paragraph on New Hampshire (not necessary) and change the opening sentence: "was the first United States ambassador to Japan" or so. Drmies (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, if it all worked out your article is live. I've merged the AfC and the sandbox versions (you had worked on both at the same time...) and made some minor edits, but it needs work. See Edmund Roberts (diplomat). Good luck, and let me know if I can help. Drmies (talk) 15:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)t[reply]
Thanks, but I'm a scatterbrain and have trouble spinning threads together. The new article needs corrections as well as lots of additions. The opening lede is wrong. See e.g. Joseph Balestier. No doubt due to Roberts' NH family & political connections, merchant/shipper Edmund stole the thunder of one John Shillaber, who had been peppering State with petitions for the job Navy gave Roberts. Klik here and ask for page 30 {which goes to "John Shillaber, US Consul in Batavia" on book's page 17}. The site a few pages on has reproduced a draft-page presumably in Roberts' own hand that includes his signature.
As for the old NYT article claim that Roberts was first envoy to Japan, in checking on Peacock's commander David Geisinger, I found he sent Captain James Glynn to Japan, who in 1848 distinguished himself by being the first American to negotiate successfully with the Japanese during the "Closed Country" period. O! What a tangled WWWeb. --Pawyilee (talk) 02:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Duh. I peeked at article history and found you wrote, "punctuation goes before the note," (but inside the quote?) Before I do it all over, how is it looking now? Roberts' early biographer emphasized his NH origin was important, and in the treaty text he describes himself as a citizen of Portsmouth, in the State of New Hampshire, in the United States of America, but with no other treaty text to compare, I don't if that's the usual style, or not. Anyway, the 1904 seal version I used goes with the 1905 date of the NYT bio, as if anyone would notice.--Pawyilee (talk) 14:26, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree with your review. Both notoriety and reliable verifiable sources are satisfied. Review process should have intellectual rigour and not just be a lottery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacksoncowes (talk • contribs) 18:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for partial response - better to keep to the general. Did you check any of the citations - read or check out the book at 8? Jacksoncowes (talk) 19:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I accept that I will only get an answer if you want me to, I would be interested to know if you checked out the reference to the book before you rejected the article. I would quite understand if you didn't check it out. As with many book references it is likely to be difficult to do. That problem must exist with many citations of written published work. If the rejection came after you had checked out that reference the rejection seems perverse. If the rejection was made without checking out all the references it is, surely, whimsical? Jacksoncowes (talk) 12:29, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok; so, Tiles happens to be a band that I like. I was reading their page; I noticed that it requires much citation; as noted. While looking around the internet, I found that the wiki page appears to be a complete rip of this page Tiles - Biography. Is this acceptable? If citations were added to the page; they all would point to the same page (source). This doesn't seem appropriate. Suggestions... Thanks.BigJoeRockHead (talk) 23:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BigJoe, you may have gotten more than you bargained for. The first three edits were nothing but a list of albums; the fourth edit added the band's website. So I had to delete the lot as a copyvio--pretty drastic, and rather unusual after so many years. Ha. Anyway, it's gone. If you like, you can rewrite it from scratch. How about it? Drmies (talk) 00:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yea; much more than I had bargained for. Sheesh! As you pointed out with regards to my "100 edits"; I'm relatively new, but I do enjoy Wiki more and more. Goal is to make it right. We'll see. I'm not much of a writer. Thanks BigJoeRockHead (talk) 02:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we do what we can on a budget. Doesn't matter how much of a writer you think you are--it can't be much worse than what we have now, which is nothing! Is the band notable in the first place? Look at WP:BAND and see if they meet the criteria. And you already know a couple of things: you set me straight on that vandalism warning and you caught a copyvio. That's not bad for 100 edits. I doubt if I did many useful things in my first 100 edits. Drmies (talk) 02:32, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Well until it can be expanded to something a little more serious, the tag should stay, but if it gets expanded to something more grown up, by all means remove it. I just saw WP:fart referred to again today. So I got a jump start. --kelapstick(bainuu) 00:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Really? where? (As soon as I can stand to look at a K-pop article I'll be able to add a nice example--about announcements of pre-video single teaser announcements on the band's Facebook or the record company's cable channel.) Drmies (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
RE: Obama eats Dogs, see Obama’s Young Mother Abroad and see if it can be mined for some dog-eats-dog context. The NYT article is on a book that covers Obama's critical formative years age 6-10, that should raise some eyebrows and relegate the Kenyan connection to a mere footnote. Dog, BTW, is yummy, but my wife won't let me eat any of ours. --Pawyilee (talk) 02:19, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
AFC review comments
Hey, I don't know if this is something you're doing systematically, or if my random look at an AFC article you moved happened to get the one where you did this, but I movedyour comment to the article talk page instead of leaving it at the bottom of the article. LadyofShalott02:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed not too long ago that the template "appends" this. I thought they were comments for the contributor. So yes, I caught myself already, haha. Are you helping out? There's some 6-700 articles left to do. Look at my recent history: I'm trying! Drmies (talk) 02:52, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't done that at all. I just looked at your contribs (being nosy about what you were up to ;^) ) and looked at that one. I probably ought to look at helping out there some. LadyofShalott02:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. I'm really baffled, by the content but also by the lack of proper editing and writing. And it was already approved. Drmies (talk) 14:16, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please, Smartse. I've now commented in the merge discussion. I'm hoping someone will start the equivalent discussion on the Gaga Twitter thing. I now have both the Bieber article and the Bieber/Twitter article on my watchlist - someone shoot me now please. We have some trivial stuff on here, but I think these Twitter account articles are the most ridiculous thing I've seen. LadyofShalott02:27, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lady, such fire! I don't recall seeing you so outspoken on such an issue since Seminophagia. Is there an AfD? There's some big-wigs speaking for the article in the merge discussion. Perhaps we can get into an all-out edit war! Things have been quiet at ANI recently, especially since no one seems to be charging Malleus with stuff anymore. Boooring. Speaking of which: I'm going to have a look at AfC again. CSD, AfD, AIV, RPP, UAA, and K-pop will have to wait. I hope I don't break the wiki by my inability to be five or six people. Drmies (talk) 04:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Sir/Ma'am (reference), after reading this post and its relevant links, I regret to inform you that I will be bypassing the obvious Facepalm in favor of the *headdesk* option. I may feel the need to place "head to desk" multiple times while I attempt to remove the very thought of such obviously important topics. — Ched : ? 14:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you too. And you're right that they added references to Maryam Hassouni, it's just a pity they didn't source any of the negative commentary that they added too... 2 lines of K30322:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for assisting in the current misunderstanding at ANI. I have learnt something valuable from the outcome. As per your suggestion, I would like to offer this cup of tea, as a sign of gratitude. Wesley☀Mouse22:56, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate that, Wesley. Now, I have another suggestion: the IP is British or Irish. They love tea over there. Also, I saw your note for HandThatFeeds: if I can be of assistance, please do drop me a line. Drmies (talk) 23:28, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The IP's British/Irish? I'm British too, although I'm not sure if sending tea would spark them off even more. So I might just leave things be for now; and see if a civil discussion can take place - and then think about tea. As for the adoption question on HandThatFeeds page, if you don't mind assisting, then that would be highly appreciated. Wesley☀Mouse23:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm serious. It would be a good thing. And if they respond with a bad word, then you have "won". If they accept graciously, everybody wins. Later, Drmies (talk) 23:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cup of tea sent to the IP, like you suggested. Now this adoption thing. I have a rough idea how it works, and feel that I may benefit from it in the long-term. However, I have noticed some adopters tend to have a "strict timeline" in which the adoption process needs to be completed, and this concerns me slightly. As you may know, the 2012 Summer Olympics are coming to London this year, and I am a Games Maker Team Leader (aka volunteer) in the Accreditation Department for both the Olympics and Paralympic games. The rigorous training schedule plus the time working shifts during the games is more than likely to cause havoc with the timeline requirements for adoption on here. Is it possible to fit the adoption process around my hectic real-life schedule do to the upcoming responsibilities with LOCOG? Wesley☀Mouse23:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You know, I don't think you need much advice, seriously. I don't think you need some schedule with tests and stuff. You know now what those warnings stand for (I wish that information were more easily accessible--I knew it existed but had to search for it). You had said 'good faith' in your edit summary; the warnings didn't say what you thought they said. If that were to happen now, simply revert yourself and spend a minute explaining. If the other party is truly a vandal that will become clear soon enough. In the end, you had to explain it anyway at ANI, where you're under the microscope. And that's another thing: taking something to ANI should be a last resort. I wrote WP:Wikipedia does not need you and that's not entirely true--but it doesn't need everyone all the time. If you get in a conflict, consider doing something else first.
I've edited as an IP myself, and getting the vandalism warnings (I got them up to level 3 more than once) are really exasperating and it's hard to remain civil when you're accused of vandalism and threatened with a block--"impudent shit" is not civil, you're right, but I understand the feeling. Schedule and all: drop me a line any time. I'm sure the same goes for the Hand. Happy days! Drmies (talk) 00:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is some truly sound advice there Drmies; thank you ever so much. You're right in pointing out that at this present time, I don't really need to be subdued to a schedule of tests and stuff - its bad enough stressing out with all the Olympics stuff; so to stress out with Wiki stuff too would send me suicidal. The links you provided at ANI and the one above are very handy to know about, and I shall make a point of highlighting them on my main user page, just in case other users are not aware of them - I do like to be seen as helpful rather than a hindrance. The TW warning templates though could do with some sort of improvements though in my opinion. I know there is an option to "preview" before posting. But how many editors actually preview what they are about to post? Would it not be plausible for the preview to be automatic; that way an editor knows exactly what they are about to post, and they may think twice before posting it? Anyhow I shall leave that one with you to ponder over. Again, thank you for the help (that's 3 times this year if my memory serves me correctly). You are most certainly on my Christmas card list for helpful people I've met. Wesley☀Mouse00:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Following your advice, I have just created a template in my own userspace sandbox thing, with the useful links you suggested which can be viewed User:Wesley Mouse/Templates. Feel free to allow others to use it too, or implement it as an official template if you wish. Wesley☀Mouse01:05, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Twinkle
I noticed that you contributed to the recent thread at WT:TW regarding a software blip. Alas, whatever it was is still affecting me, & given the number of times that I need to restore to a previous version, well, it is a bit of a pain. I've purged etc, am using the vector skin and ... you name it, anything mentioned in that thread has been tried. My last resort was to disable TW in Preferences and then re-enable it. No joy.
Sitush, I honestly don't know. I'll delete anything you want (including Nair, of course), but I don't want to go break things without hearing from any helpful TPSers (hint hint) what the best course of action is here. I tell you, I'm completely baffled that I successfully added some WP:AFC line to my java superscript vector twitter skin tools. Drmies (talk)
Ok, I'd just written a reply to Drmies and then some smartarse twat from Manchester cuts in with a perfectly sensible suggestion <g> Give me a couple of minutes, and your beer count may be rising this weekend. - Sitush (talk) 00:14, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do I fucking care about your crappy admin hoity-toityness? Tried the suggestion and, alas, no joy. TW was disabled, so I blanked, purged, enabled and went somewhere (my most recent GA, if you must know ;p). Zilch except the same old "cannot parse twinkleoptions.js". As The Sage expected, the .js has been regenerated. - Sitush (talk) 00:23, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unless I can fix this, I suggest that you get mass rollback and revert all 50k+ of my edits. TW is soooo useful when dealing with India stuff. - Sitush (talk) 00:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[ec] You all are smart. I still don't know how Twitter works, though I bluffed somewhere that I read all Bieber's tweets. Sshh. Hey, Malleus, didn't I see you say something about WP:Articles for creation a while ago? I started playing around there. Holy moly, there were over 600 submissions. I installed some script-thing (by T.Canens, I believe) and am helping out a bit. When Chzz was doing his work there there were maybe 200 or 300 submissions at any one time. Of course, 3/4 of it is totally not right for one reason or another, but I passed some very decent articles on to main space. Drmies (talk) 00:18, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thought of that, but I am on FF 11.0/Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. I am off to bed soon, but I'll fire up one of my other 6 or 7 PCs tomorrow and try IE9. If that fails, I could always use one of my virtual machines through Ubuntu - I am one of those geeks that has every non-server version of Windows from 3.11 to 7 installed as a VM, Of course, there are also things such as Opera etc + upgrading Ubuntu, but even if something else works, it does not really explain why things have suddenly barfed. - Sitush (talk) 00:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Malleus. A completely irrelevant note, deliberately hidden away here because of current goings on. Do you (Drmies) remember this? I am trying to figure out the prices of my competition. - Sitush (talk) 01:08, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, here's a very strange thing. I've just copy and pasted your twinkleoptions.js file into User:Malleus Fatuorum/twinkleoptions.js and everything works fine. So it looks like whatever the problem is, it's nothing to do with your twinkleoptions.js. MalleusFatuorum01:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to butt in on this one. I have noticed that Firefox and Chrome are experiencing some really weird technical issues lately, not just with regards to Wikiepdia, but other sites such as Facebook, Twitter etc. For whatever reason (and more so with Chrome) neither browser appears to remember any actions that you told it to store; including passwords and personalized options. Could that technical issue also be the reason behind this twinkle thing? Wesley☀Mouse01:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No need to apologise. I need all the help I can get. And thanks, Malleus, for that latest report. I am going to shut everything down, go to bed & then tomorrow I'll backup my FF profile etc, uninstall and reinstall etc. Does Twinkle. twinkle, little star count as a lullaby? I cannot recall ever hearing it, but I need something to get me to sleep and I don't fancy amitryp or zopiclone right now. I'll report back in a few hours. - 01:39, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
I've just noticed that right at the top of the screen I'm now getting a message saying that "Could not parse twinkleoptions.js", so it looks like Twinkle is just ignoring twinkleoptions.js; Twinkle runs ran perfectly well without it anyway, I still get the error message even after I blank the file, so I'm going to request that my .js file is deleted - I didn't have one before I copied yours anyway. So it looks like there's some kind of problem with the Wikimedia/Twinkle JavaScript. MalleusFatuorum01:49, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not quite sure what to make of all this, but I've just recreated my twinkleoptions.js file after it was deleted, by setting my Twinkle preferences, and everything is now back to normal. MalleusFatuorum02:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. The "could not parse" message has now gone away, but TW still does not appear in the tab nor am I offered any options such as restore etc when looking at diffs. I shall have to ponder, I guess. Maybe I'll try starting FF in safe mode. - Sitush (talk) 10:58, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am now a happy chap. TW did not regenerate the .js on this occasion, after re-enabling the gadget & by-passing the cache. However, I could see the TW options control panel that previously had been missing, so I set that to default, saved it, by-passed again and all seems to be ok. Alas, I also commented out scripts in my common.js for debugging purposes - I'll reinstate those one-by-one and see if anything screws up again. - Sitush (talk) 11:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done - (after a minor glitch) and left redirect behind - let Drmies or me know if he wants the redirect deleted. Actually, I think any auto-confirmed user could have moved though. May want to let him know it's moved btw. — Ched : ? 12:46, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How so? As far as I know Malleus has had no interactions with the user and has no reason to have an opinion yet. I'm asking him if he has an opinion on what is possibly the one good thing the user has done: write an article. In other words, the audience is non-partisan, ergo, no canvassing. I also notified some of the blocking admins. I don't see the problem--and you're not giving any evidence either. Drmies (talk) 16:52, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Malleus non-partisan? Not sure how one could make that assertion. In any event, inviting a subset of editors to a page with 5,000 watchers, 2,000 active [25] seems unnecessary and inconsistent with the documented policy at canvass -- why those editors? A moot point in the big picture as the ban in question is heading for a snow close. Nobody Ent01:57, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Moot indeed--as moot as yours. I asked Malleus to evaluate an article. Not a lot of people at ANI can do that as well as he can. Nobody, I had no idea he even knew of this person, and you had no reason to suppose I did. So it's my turn to be mildly disappointed at having been falsely accused of something I take very seriously. I don't think I like this conversation anymore so I'll stop. Drmies (talk) 02:38, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, but I guess that's understandable: it was a copy of the ANI note I left for a couple of other editors, but with the addition of the link to the sandbox article. I wasn't interested so much in having him come visit ANI (though I mentioned the invitation but more in jest) as I wanted him to have a look at the article. My predicament was what to do with that article, and if MF were to have said "it's worth keeping" then I would keep it. In the end I kept it for other reasons, not his advice. I didn't know whether he knew the editor or not--but MF has a few more edits than I do, and if he would have said, for instance, "it's worth keeping but considering the ANI discussion it can't be kept", then I would have deleted it. I hope that clears this up. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 23:59, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm curious who the "subset" of editors is. If it's referring to me, I've been watching this for days because I have all the pages watched having been very deeply involved since last July. I certainly didn't see the message on Malleus' page until this popped up - and I've only tonight place Drmies' page on my watchlist. But having been quite spectacularly accused of lying recently, am not not sure that will be believed - though Modernist will vouch for my involvement in the Rinpoche matter. Truthkeeper (talk) 02:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Truthkeeper, I'm flattered. Thank you. With a bit more dramah I might approach Malleus' watcher count. I hope the larger issue will be closed quickly on ANI--not that a ban will do much good, of course. Some folks have nothing better to do and don't know when to quit. Which reminds me, I need to take a look at Tachash and the Cincinnati Zoo...ah, all is well. Drmies (talk) 16:38, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm glad. Thank you for adding to that article (I am sure you did; last time I looked you added something to the talk page). Drmies (talk) 02:38, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi again, I know you're roaming about, just decided to NPP before going off-wiki, saw this user Carlossuarez46 has gone bananas creating tons of stubs about remote, sparsely populated mountain villages in Iran, appears to have autoreviewer rights as the articles are all turning up as patrolled, err ... these locations do not appear notable and the user is also creating a ton of redirects. What to do? CaptainScreeboParley!18:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing at all. Places are inherently notable and Carlos has created a million of those stubs, though not everyone agrees with them. It's been taken up at AN or ANI a couple of times, though the last time may have been years ago. Here's one. Sorry, gotta go to class... Drmies (talk) 19:01, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, just a bit freaked by the rapidfire creation, wanted to check if there was any fire to put out ;-) I thought the name rang a bell, too. Cheers. CaptainScreeboParley!19:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
TheREALCableGuy's at it again
I found another account User_Talk:Marshcrazy that had very strangely similar editing patterns to Cable Guy. The sock puppet investigation was CU endorsed and it came back as 'Possible'. Since then, he has put up this notice on his page claiming free speech and has removed the templates regarding the investigation on his page.
Hey, this is not OK. I think you should lay off the CableGuy, period. He may present all sorts of issues, but the wiki won't break without your direct involvement. Note also what the closing admin said at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheREALCableGuy. Hghyux, I'm serious: you appear to be hounding the guy, and it should stop. If you want to run for admin again in the future, this kind of thing might weigh heavily. If you really want my advice, you will drop a note on CableGuy's talk page apologizing for the accusation (no doubt they'll remove it without comment...) and then leave him be. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 16:03, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. I wonder if the semi-protection on Falun Gong. Can the semi-protection be made semi-permanent? In aggregate that would save a lot of time over the long run. Every once in a while something like this, or some random troll comes along, and it burns up 30 minutes (in good scenarios) dealing with it. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if it happens again, you can just roll back to the current version; there's plenty of eyes on it, it seems. Then you can ask for longer protection. If you check the history you'll see it's actually not that heavily vandalized, and I did block the most recent disruptive IP. Drmies (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Drmies - I noticed the thread on AN/I but it's been closed. I've had experience (not good!) with Rinpoche as FightingMac and would like to see all the accounts linked to the sockmaster - I don't think that's been done yet. I have watches on the many accts that I'm aware of - most have been blocked but not all linked together. Anyway, just dropping this note, because I'm curious about where this has gone, and what, if anything, is being done about it. Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, okay. I noticed it in the morning but couldn't respond then & only found your closed one (because I haven't looked closely) now. Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I also forgot to sign my own "support ban", which I came to after further perusal of evidence--your comments, brief as they are, confirmed that. Drmies (talk) 21:09, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I know a lot about this user. The worst is what he does with his external website - I haven't checked recently but it was pretty bad last summer. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not familiar with it. As Malleus might have said, I'm a moron, albeit one of good faith. I can't find it anywhere either (and no need to post it here, I reckon). I did tag a few of the already blocked socks so they show up in the category. I wish all sock blocks were written up in the SPIs, that always makes it easier for Johnny-come-latelys such as myself. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 21:28, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to hear the website is down. I can find all the socks - might even have them in my watchlist, but otherwise I remember where they posted. Where should I link them? Truthkeeper (talk) 21:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've tagged three that are identified w/ Rinpoche: [26], [27], [28]. They're not showing up on the SPI but I think a category or something needs to be made for that the happen. Don't know if that's been done yet and the SPI is archived so I won't add these there. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:50, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is kind of funny; I don't mind at all. NPOVible isn't blocked--what's the link? As for the SPI, those IPs etc. can be listed there but CUs won't do anything about them; they can be tagged though with a "suspected" template (if you click on the sock category you'll see that "suspected" is still a red link). The way I see it, the SPI should sort of be a hub, but the category also has all those links in there. I leave that up to you all. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
NPOVible was also part of the van Gogh debacle, although can't remember what happened with that one. Should prob be checked, I think. I think there are more but I need to go through more pages. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:45, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about not notifying you about the ANI thread. I was just about to signoff for the night when I seen that post by Rinpoche and I posted to ANI. I am actually surprised it was coherent as tired as I was. :) Anywho, my apologizes, will definitely make sure all are notified in the future. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:08, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hey you did not revert the article to before the edit warring started. You forgot to re-add the Kennedy quote and personal motto that were on the page, check the talk page and edit history of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.240.218.45 (talk) 01:19, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Doc (and stalkers), I was wondering if anyone can take a look at Leningradartist (talk·contribs) for me? He has created many, many articles about artists from Leningrad, that are almost all sourced solely to a book that the user has written, called Unknown Socialist Realism, and primary sources (doesn't "unknown" = non-notable?). Whenever I've searched to try and find more sources, I can't find any. It's come up a couple of times at WP:COIN and elsewhere and I started twoAFDs ages ago (first no consensus, second keep), but the issue has never really been dealt with. This over at commons came up on my watchlist earlier, which is what reminded me about all this. I'm stuck as I'm fairly sure that few of the articles should be here unless more secondary sources can be found, but proving or disproving whether they exist is almost impossible. That said, I have a huge library at my disposal, so in theory, if they exist I should be able to find some. Has anyone got ideas as to how to track down possible sources, and what to do with the articles in general? (Hope this isn't tldr). Cheers! SmartSE (talk) 01:55, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You might ping Mandarax at his talk page to make sure he sees this discussion - articles about artists are right up his alley. You might also try WP:WikiProject Visual Arts. One question I'd want to have answered (and I have not yet looked at any of the relevant pages): how reliable a source is the book LA is citing? Did he self-publish it, is it from an academic press, or something in between those extremes? LadyofShalott02:15, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, not too long. I looked at the COIN discussions and while the frustration is understandable, Atama has a point. As much as I like JNW and want him to win, the COI by itself is probably not enough. BTW, that copyvio discussion, that goes over my head. I'll have a look at the book though if I can. Drmies (talk) 02:54, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I can find nothing on that book--this book--in JSTOR or EBSCO, neither for the ISBNs or the title. The book is not for sale anymore, suggesting it's not in print. Books in Print doesn't list anything either for ISBN or title. The LoC lists it--with a Russian title, which gives me no further hits in JSTOR or EBSCO. (JSTOR, EBSCO--that means in this case that I can find no reviews of the book, which would lend it credibility.) In other words, I have no evidence whatsoever that the book is notable or reliable. Of course it's possible that no English reviewers have paid attention to the book because it was in Russian, but even that is unlikely since Amazon appears to sell English-language version, and see the first link I placed here. My answer: not a reliable source; given the COI, highly dubious. Drmies (talk) 03:24, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, what all this means, I don't know. It doesn't mean that the long list of articles on the user page is full of automatically non-notable artists, of course, but they have too-big EL sections (like this), with an email address for book order inquiries. The book is a website and vice versa. Drmies (talk) 03:45, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your thoughts. I can get my hands on the book so I guess I should do that as a first step. It looks as if it is published by this company - it doesn't look like a standard RS publisher and could well be self published. I agree with your last point - some of the artists may well be N, but it's very difficult to tell. We should have really sorted it out ages ago one way or the other, but it is evidently tricky. SmartSE (talk) 16:48, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it does. Of course, your bucket doesn't so much have a hole as someone kicked it over and made sure the mess spread all out again. I couldn't think of a song that matched the spilled bucket analogy though. Maybe Bieber will sing one and Tweet about it. LadyofShalott03:23, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
G.I. Joe movie characters
First of all, I appreciate your efforts, in cleaning up the sock puppet edits that were made on the General Joseph Colton article. However, I disagree with your decision to remove the image from the infobox, for the section about the character in G.I. Joe: Retaliation.
The decision to include separate infoboxes for the movie characters was documented at Wikipedia:WikiProject G.I. Joe/Conventions, because some of the movie characters have different background information. The image in question File:GIJoeRetaliationColton.jpg is not so much promoting the film, as it is spotlighting that character specifically. Similar promotional images were released for the movie G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, and all of the articles for characters in that movie have separate infoboxes for the movie character, with the promotional image for that character in each infobox. I see no reason why we shouldn't do the same for the characters from the new movie, and therefore I believe that the fair use of the image is justified, because it is being used in the infobox properly. Fortdj33 (talk) 13:29, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think I understand. In looking at the other movie characters, almost all of them have images without any movie information on them, which makes them different from using an actual movie poster to promote a character. Thank you for the clarification, and I will see if I can find a more appropriate image for the infobox on that character. Fortdj33 (talk) 14:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked a copyright expert to weigh in; I may be wrong, of course. If you look at Cobra Commander, you'll find a screenshot (down the page); I think that such screenshots also may not be allowed. Let's wait and see what the expert has to say, and afterward maybe you can pass that on to the project with a note. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Been asked to input here from an WP:NFC side. In general, we have no immediate allowance for images of fictional characters (drawn, live-action, or otherwise), but typically one image in an infobox on a character page will be allowed for identification. When there are multiple renditions of a character, each new images has to be evaluated per WP:NFCC to determine if that additional pictures aids the reader in understanding and would be harmful to omit, among other points. That is, just because you add a second infobox to be for the live-action movie character doesn't make a second image automatically allowable. In this specific case, given what I've seen of the trailer for the film, Willis' character looks like Willis. While Willis certainly doesn't look like the comic character directly, the point is that unless there is critical discussion from reliable sources about how Willis appears in the film, there's no difference from a free image of Willis himself, and no need for a second picture. Note: this is not a direct copyright violation/problem - using the promo photo is a normal part of US Fair Use law, but WP has stricter requirements and hence why we are more restrictive of image use. --MASEM (t) 14:44, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I didn't even know (or remember, perhaps) that there was a bun in the oven. I'd send you another beer, but I don't think Mrs. Drmies would approve. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Possible addition for random remarks on your userpage
Timbits? That's cute. How time flies, K. My oldest daughter wants to drive (she's six). I was bat watching with the girls out on the deck a few nights ago. Sippy: 'Bats are cool. They make the night more beautiful.' Rosie: 'And they're pretty. One was a girl and had a necklace.'" Are you on Facebook? Drmies (talk) 15:54, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Small donuts = small children. After almost 5 years the oldest realized he could stall bedtime. It involved redirecting us and brushing his teeth 5 times. We went to Fremantle today, saw the USS Carl Vinson moored off shore. Thing of beauty. I will send you my details. --kelapstick(bainuu) 16:08, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very nice. You've got mail. I saw the J Beebs article, and I was astonished, I had actually heard wind of it coming to fruition, a question of "can this be DYK", prior to its nomination, my response was, god I hope not...--kelapstick(bainuu) 23:03, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I guess s/he didn't listen. Ha, brought to you by a fellow Aussie. Interesting winds you have. Oh, the pool is at 76, which, apparently, is almost warm enough for Southerners. Sippi and I have been in it since early March; the Lady could not be swayed back in November. I really think we should have a Southern Wiki meet at my house. Oh, apparently Mining in Canada doesn't exist yet--stop sitting on your hands, K-stick. Also, Mining in Canada on Twitter doesn't exist yet--what is wrong with you? I'm going to slap a warning on your talk, courtesy of Bongo. Drmies (talk) 04:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Remember the other day when you said I could "give you a shout" anytime I needed a bit of help? Well my friend, I think I could do with some assistance on a matter if possible. I stumbled onto an edit war between two other editors the other day on article Georgian Orthodox Church article; and swiftly acted by getting the two editors to sit down and discuss the POV dispute on the article talk page. Everything seemed to have run smoothly. One of the involved disputers has tendencies to be a bit bolshy and stomp around; but somehow (and I haven't the foggiest how) I managed to get that user to maintain a civil and calm communication from the start (that has to be worth an Olympic Gold Medal LOL).
Anyhow, I invited both users to write down their own interpretations of what the sources where portraying in regards to the disputed paragraph at the article's talk page; which they did; and another user also participated, as well as myself writing down how I interpreted sources. From that, I started to do a comparison between the 4 written thesis, and noticed 3 out of the 4 where basically covering the same understanding, while the remaining one didn't. That very user is now cyber-stomping there feet and throwing accusations that I am being partial, even though there are 2 other editors who have noted the same things as I have. Is there anything now that I need to be doing, as it seems that 3 people (a majority-ish) are in agreement of a rewording of the disputed paragraph, while 1 is kinda demanding their version should remain. Personally I think the dispute has reached its conclusion, but trying to get the one user to see that is proving to be harder than I anticipated. Wesley☀Mouse16:42, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. That is a lot to read. Try to avoid the word "poor"! You know what I mean (see "There you go again"). It's tricky to determine exactly what the consensus is, though I get a rough idea of it: perhaps the three parties can put forward, rather than a general thesis, a single sentence (or two) involving the disputed terms? This is about "breaking away", I gather, and there can be difference of opinion about how far a break extends: one can break from and still be in communion with, from what I understand (in Anglicanism, for instance). Meowy's contribution is helpful, I think, in a discussion of the sources, but the difficulty is coming to agreement even with not-so-great (since tertiary, and some possibly partial) sources. So far you've done well. Oh, I saw one editor make the "you're Armenian" (or "you're Georgian"?) card, but that didn't resurface again, and that's a good thing. Thanks for your efforts! Drmies (talk) 17:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking into that for me Drmies. Yes, there is a lot of input discussion there. I didn't like using the term "thesis", but couldn't think of a more suitable word, so stuck with my gut instinct. I suppose, thesis is correct, as those users were writing down their own understanding of the sources. With the nature of he topic, I expected it to get very heated from the start, but luckily it didn't; and as a reward I sent them a civility barnstar each, which could also be seen as an act of encouragement to continue the civility. The confusion from what I've noticed is the definition of the word "autocephalous" (or breaking away). While in the concept of a religious person its definition would mean "independent bishop". But in this case the concept is about a church and not a bishop; so therefore the definition changes to "a church which is governed by its own national synods". The one user (Aregakn) states its former definition, while Meowy and GeorgianJorjadze both agree its the latter definition; and as I have studied lexicography, I too know the latter definition is the correct one.
If that's the sticking point, then you can proceed. There is one however: you are not just the mediator, as was pointed out. That's not a big problem, IMO, but you will have to phrase carefully. If you are sure you are correct in your identification of the issue and the consensus thereon, make the appropriate edit, explaining yourself on the talk page and inviting scrutiny and tweaking. At some point a decision needs to be reached, after all, and no one benefits from an impasse. You invited opinions, you set up a scheme, and now you either wait for a third (fourth?) party to execute or you do it yourself. I say choose the latter. Good luck! Drmies (talk) 18:22, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm blabbering on too much here, and I appreciate you're a busy man. Well spotted on the one editor using the "you're Armenian" (or "you're Georgian"?) card; i noticed that too, and was ready to "slap wrists" if it reared up again. I am impressed with Meowy, I know he is a user on the Armenia-Azerbaijan sanction thing, and his civility is a complete turn-around in my opinion. If he maintains that good behavior, then I would personally recommend a review on his sanction. But for now, it is too early to tell. Wesley☀Mouse17:28, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I'm not so busy right now. The pool looks great. I have work to do, but I'm exercising my constitutional right to procrastinate. Drmies (talk) 18:22, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm liking the idea of procrastinating. I think I feel a Friday night beer sesh coming on. I'll have a couple for you while I'm at it. As for that other issue, I've posted an RfC tag, to see if others want to take part, but it is looking like the right time to just force closure, and be bold. 2 people agree that one word is being misinterpreted; they also agree the content is correct, with exception to that misleading word. As a lexicographer, I can agree that they those people have got the correct grasping of the word, while the other one hasn't. And looking at the article talk history, that same person has had this "bull in a glassware store" attitude every time that dispute is raised, and each time in the past everyone has pointed out the same things that have been mentioned in this latest dramatic episode. I felt talking part in the thesis exercise myself, would show to the others that I wasn't portraying myself as a mediator, but as one who is viewing the dispute as an outsider, and possibly be able to shed a fresh set of eyes on the matter. Will see what happens throughout the rest of today, and if nothing, then a bold edit at start of business tomorrow like you suggest, with a talk page explanation. Wesley☀Mouse18:36, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The beer I had was good, but the two I had on your behalf where even better; and I'm still sober which is a good thing. Anyhow, I returned to find false judgemental accusations being thrown at me on that dispute case; even though I have kept cool, calm, collective through it. In real-life situations like that I normally lose my temper, but thankfully that didn't happen there, and I am proud of myself for being so calm. To conclude, I have decided to close the case down, as it is going nowhere. 3 editors (2 if you discount myself) agree that the content needs to be rewritten, while 1 is having a hissy fit over it (for choice of phrase). So on my closing comments, I have mentioned that as a majority seems to have been reached, that a carefully worded re-write needs to be boldly carried out. I've done right there yeah? Personally I can't be arsed with it anymore. I noticed an edit war, intervened swiftly, got people who are known to be bad tempered, to discuss things calmly; got people to work cooperatively. And the thanks I got in return was a "blaahhh I don't care" attitude off one individual. I'm guessing that is the norm around here sometimes? Well, thanks for giving advice on things when I needed it most. One thing I learnt from that dispute - always say NO if someone asks me to help them resolve a matter LOL. Right now, I need sleep. G'night! Wesley☀Mouse01:09, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've been working on this page on and off for awhile. My current concern is with regards to this line: Some bands incorporate jazz fusion to their works which is often termed technical metal. [citation needed] in paragraph 1. I've not been able to find any sources to support this statement. Additionally, the "technical metal" page redirects to the "Progressive Metal" page. Seems kind of redundant. I could see if there were and actual technical metal page. Lastly, there's been a "citation needed" attached to the sentence since '09. May I remove it? Or, should I open it for discussion on the talk page? BigJoeRockHead (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, I think you can be bold here and remove that line--you can mark in your edit summary something like "uncited since 2009, with useless redirect". BTW, the expert in this field is User:Blackmetalbaz, who also knows a ton about what kinds of sources are acceptable. I don't know if he's still active; consider dropping by his talk page. Thanks, and good luck, Drmies (talk) 17:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unblock request on hold
Thanks for your message on my talk page about the unblock request at User talk:58.7.177.161, which both you and 7 drew to my attention. I have replied there to the unblock request. Maybe either you or 7 would like to go back and accept or decline the request. (As you will see from my comment there, my choice would be to decline, but I will leave it up to you.) JamesBWatson (talk) 19:28, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Drmies,
I would like to raise my concern that the issue and the opinions of the commenting editors were wrongly presented by Wesley on the discussed issue. The opinions were divided 2/2 (50%/50%) and drew his attention to it. The participants were also asked not to hurry as at least I have not enough time to edit several times a day. I also informed that I am going to involve 3rd party for additional opinion. This took place within the last several hours. Unfortunately Wesley disregarded these requests, paid little attention on my correction of his incorrect interpretation on the editors' opinions and closed the discussion within that very short time-frame.
Please suggest if this is a proper manner of resolving content disagreement and, if not, how should it be dealt with.
Regards Aregakn (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, Aregakn. There are no rules here except for the imperative to remain civil and seek consensus, as far as I'm concerned. That discussion--I read the whole thing--is interesting but now I'm not so sure anymore. I suggested that everyone write up one sentence or paragraph, maybe as it should appear in the article, for easy comparison. Because really, this is complicated. Can we even formulate what the basic question is, regardless of the answers proposed by the sources?
But another issue: it seems to me that you think that this is a process that has reached some sort of final conclusion, but that's not the case. Nothing yet is written in stone, and from what I can gather discussion here might be ongoing for a while. Anyway, beside continued talk page discussion, there's other options, such as dispute resolution. Drmies (talk) 02:29, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A few points I would like to raise here in regards to the opening comment. Firstly; I invited the two main parties (Aregakn and GeorgianJorjadze) to put forward their interpretations of the sources, and also add any personal opinions on the subject; and once both parties had done this, we'd compare them to look for differences and similarities - no timeline was given, nor did I instruct the pair "not to hurry". It was only when the debate got heated towards the end, did Aregkan bring to my attention that he wasn't always available to comment several times a day. If this was brought to my attention at the start, then the process would have gone much more slower. I'm not a mind reader. Secondly, 4 people (3 if you discount myself) put forward their interpretations; 3 of them resembled close to each other; 1 didn't - that gives a 3-1 (75%/25%) split (which again if my interpretation is to be disregarded, the result would still be 2:1 (66%/33%)). How can I be accused of disregarding requests, when the requests where only made after everyone had put forward their own thoughts on the sources? That doesn't make sense. The original request was to assist both parties in finding a mutual agreement; in an informal capacity without the need of mediatorship; this I complied to, and the fact that I self-participated in putting forward my own interpretation of the sources is a strong indication that I wasn't in a mediator role; but in an observational one.
As for "closing the discussion to early", again is a misconception of actual comments that have been said. I did inform Drmies above that I felt the debate was going nowhere, as one person seemed to be ignoring what others were pointing out; in a manner as if to state their own POV. That isn't the way of a collaborative and diplomatic person. A lot of my explanations on the topic used obvious metaphors; the fact I always stated "let's look at this in a different perspective" or "let's take for example if such and such happened" indicates a metaphoric outlook on a situation. The other factor that strikes me as odd, is that I always stated I wasn't an expert on the subject; and therefore any understanding that I did could play as an advantage to decision making, as it is being reviewed with a fresh set of eyes. At first I was swaying in favour of Aregakn's interpretations; however, as more and more people posted their understandings, then the facts started to make themselves clear, and I soon realised that maybe Aregkan was getting blurred by their own personal beliefs of the subject, rather than noticing that other statements where all bearing similarities in the actual facts. In my opinion, behaviour like that is one of a person trying to force their way of what should be written, rather than sitting back and going "you know what, maybe I was wrong".
I have been in a few similar situations as this on Wikipedia, over at Eurovision Project. The first was over how Austrian language should be listed; I demanded it should be "Austrian German"; yet a few said no it should be "German". I even went to extremes of finding any source I could to show that I was right, and the others were all wrong. In the end, I decided to be the better person and accept that "yeah I could be wrong" and went along with the majority anyway in accepting "German" should be the official language used. The second incident like this, and I'm sure Drmies will remember it, as he had some involvement too, is over Eurovision templates. I went absolutely crazy at the fact one user decided to make new template without checking with the project first to see if they were needed. What did I do first!? I nominated them for speedy deletion out of spite; and then reported the user to ANI. Drmies swiftly explained things to me, and I accepted defeat, and thought to myself (again) "yep Drmies has a point, instead of deleting them and reporting the user to ANI, I should step back; allow them to speak and work towards a compromise". After a very lengthy discussion involving the majority of the project members, it was decided in the end that those new templates had opened up a review of the original ones, and subsequently resulted in the old versions being re-formatted to included all details such as "years participated; songs; countries; and artists". Those new templates got a huge acceptance and where rolled out, with the older ones (including the ones I put down for speedy delete) became obsolete. If it wasn't for Drmies, I'd have been sulking over it for the rest of my life; but alas, I accepted that on two occasions now I have shown myself up by stomping my own ground to gain my own way, when in fact by working together as a team, problems solved themselves out much easier. Wesley☀Mouse18:25, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not going to conduct a dispute on this talkpage but rather to take it to a proper instance. For me an obvious behaviour of abusing wikipedia instruments to punishing somebody you did not like or to get your point going took place. Wesley was asked to slow down and I informed that a request for others to comment was made. Right after he deliberately stopped the on-going discussion and called for a bold edit on the article which he himself called on not to be edited before the discussion is over. His negative approach to me is clear from his assessments of the personal abilities and sarcasm.
As to an administrator, I would like to ask for guidance on who or what mechanism gave Wesley the right to conclude discussions he is a part of and what is the mechanism to reverse these rights that, as to me, were obviously abused. Instead of helping a dispute flow he made it even worse. Drmies, please shed light on how this works. Thank you. Aregakn (talk) 19:03, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
From what deductions can you conclude that I "abused instruments to punish somebody"? Who have I punished? Nobody, I have acted polite and reasonable throughout; which has been noted by others too. You only asked me to slow down after everyone had put forward their comments on the subject. If a person wishes something to go at a specific pace, they should express that request at the start, not at the end - very logical way to conduct a request. And how can you say I stopped something deliberately? Please give an example. A logical procedure to undergo, if one wishes to start a new debate, would be to closed down the discussion which was going nowhere, so that it wouldn't contaminate any future discussion thereafter. There have been no negative approach towards yourself, nor blatant assessments of personal abilities or sarcasm towards other editors. Sure the use of "poor" can be misconceived, and it was Drmies who noted that initially, to which I re-read the comment and noticed I mis-stated what I actually meant, and I did rectify that by re-wording what I meant to you afterwards. I informed you about my studies of lexicography and highlighted what that meant. That is perfectly reasonable, as not everyone knows what lexicography means, as it is a specialised area; and because of that I merely explained what it mean in good faith. If you took my context in the wrong way, then that is not a problem that I can be put to blame for. I did everything to be helpful and explain as simple as possible, providing wikilinks where I felt necessary, just in case. Anyhow, at the moment, I am slightly busy this evening working on some coursework for my next training session as a volunteer at London 2012 Olympics, which that alone is stressing enough to turn a person to alcoholism. Wesley☀Mouse19:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. It was I who invited others to add additional comments by posting an RfC tag to the top of the talk page thread, after I had noticed that things weren't making progress despite some editors covering the same issues in their own interpretations of sources, and yourself stating otherwise. Wesley☀Mouse19:42, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Aregakn, I can't tell if you're listening or not. A certain discussion may have been closed, but you're making it out like the case is closed forever, like this is some kind of legal situation. It's not. Wesley began a discussion and he closed it. I don't know what legal rights pertain here--I'm going to guess none. Whether you agree with the conclusion he drew or not, you should at least agree that a discussion is better than edit-warring. This talk of "abuse" and "punishment"--for the life of me, I don't know where you got that from. No one was abused and no one was punished. As for your last remark, there is no need to pout here. The proper place for a discussion on the topic is the article talk page. The proper place for a conversation with me is this page, right here. Wesley, thank you for commenting, but I think for the moment this is between Aregakn and me.
You asked "who or what mechanism gave Wesley the right to conclude discussions he is a part of and what is the mechanism to reverse these rights that, as to me, were obviously abused". As I suggested before, and now I'll be even more explicit, there is no "right" involved here. He started a discussion; he can close it. And you can unclose it, if you like. Or state that the conclusion is not correct. Or whatever. Again, you seem to think there is some sort of mechanism with rules and stuff in place, but there isn't. If you disagree, just say so--on the article talk page. I don't know what made you think that the results (if there were results) of a discussion were somehow binding, but as long as there isn't a clear consensus on the basic question, the evidence, and the majority opinion, there is nothing binding here. I have mentioned that I am not so sure anymore that there is a clear consensus on those issues, so why hammer on procedure when there is still a consensus to reach? You should ask Wesley what he considers the consensus is, and what evidence a proposed change or edit should be based on. On the article talk page. Drmies (talk) 20:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wow...easy on that, Sir :). You are just talking to an editor that does not really know all the "mechanisms" WP and editors use and what they are for so I'm asking for help to understand them. This is the reason I am (was) asking you for the second time, wanting to make sure I understood it correct. I don't discuss the content here or think it is a final decision either.
Think the second paragraph was what I wanted to hear. Thank you Drmies. So, to make it clear that I understood it right I will repeat it in my words, if I may:
1) The template Wesley used is a general template for any discussions on a content of an article and any editor can use it (or not) for A discussion. Right?
2) Concluding that template/discussion (whether resolved or not) can any editor at any time (s)he thinks is correct. Right? Or should it be the same editor that made the template?
3) If thought, that the discussion was not over yet on the subject, can that same "concluded" discussion be reopened by any editor right after (not long after) it was closed?
Hmm...well, this isn't really an area where there are hard rules. Wesley has, IMO, the right to close the discussion since he started it. You could have closed it as well, but I think common sense applies and that would suggest that he could unclose what you closed. For instance. So, as for 1), I would say "sure". For 2), I think that's probably the prerogative of the editor who opened the discussion, yes, but since this is not a formal process (it's really just a discussion on the talk page with a bigger heading) you could unclose it if you weren't happy. For 3), sure, I guess--but in this case, I think a better way forward is to start a new discussion (or discussions) on a limited question or set of questions, like "what does break away mean?" "what do we think the previous relationship was?" "what about the new one?" Another but related option is to lay out clearly what the reliable sources say as much as you all can agree on it, without (as yet) asking the difficult questions. If it turns out that there are no simple questions or answers there is more work to do.
Re-opening the discussion is perhaps not the best thing to do--not for any procedural reason, but because it's a complicated matter and not all partners are talking about the same things, which is why (I think) there is no consensus on what the consensus was. That editor who discussed the reliability of one source (a very useful contribution) wasn't really addressing a specific question, I think, and so maybe a good way to start is by asking one specific question, in a new section. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 17:25, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not anybody has yet been on WP as clear to me in explaining/guiding as you just were. You not only answered the questions I asked but also concluded with a guidance I, in a way, expected.
Thanks. I see your name there quite often, and I think I usually agree with you. Thanks again for helping keep the house clean. Drmies (talk) 02:55, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, thanks--I meant full protection. I've reverted you and me and changed to full. I'm afraid those socks are going to get smart and get auto-confirmed. If they're so determined, at some point they're going to learn. Thanks for pointing this out. Drmies (talk) 03:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was too good to let go. I would have done more, but various things got in the way. Now, bring that up to B-class in the next few hours and you might win some more votes. Cheers! Drmies (talk) 04:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Next few hours? I'm about to hit the sack. I better win some votes if I could bring that up to B-class while I'm asleep. Calabe199204:40, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that CSD Decline explanation on Sas Carey
I just wanted to say thanks for your decline explanation, it resolved a conflict in my brain about how to interpret the A7 guideline. The BLP Prod suggestion also clarified something for me too. Newmanoconnor (talk) 04:55, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to be of help. The claim of having founded Nomadicare (even though, as you know, that is of tenuous notability itself) is a believable claim to importance. Our standards for "importance" (a term used, as far as I know, only in CSD-context), are relatively low and I prefer to err on the side of caution. Thank you for participating in the project, and thank you especially for your diligence. Drmies (talk) 05:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh great, mighty admins and Drmies
Could one of you look at the deleted page of Gavin Mikhail. It was recreated and I'd like to know if anything changed. I'd like to do a CSD, but the past AfD was way back when. I've removed the myspace and blogs refs. I can't find any good refs. His albums include the acoustic version of both Justin Beiber and Lady Gaga. Hmmm, I wonder if he follows them on twitter. Bgwhite (talk) 07:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)Your heading seems to imply that Drmies is not a great mighty admin??? No, Gavin Mikhail is not a G4, it is much improved. The deleted article had no refs but his own website and Myspace, and was borderline spam: "He currently has two albums for sale... These CDs may be purchased through Gavin's MySpace page or through iTunes." This would need to go to AfD again. JohnCD (talk) 09:07, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One opinion of that sort is enough, but in case anyone cares for a second: I concur entirely with John's assessment. The new article is much better than the deleted one. LadyofShalott13:13, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah...thank you, thank you, and a big fat "fuck you" to Mr. Big over there. Bg, when you come to our Southern Wiki Meet-Up in my backyard, I'm going to push you in the pool. Ha! Hey, what does Mrs. Bgwhite think of your wiki hobby? I am still trying to argue that this is "scholarly" work. I don't know how much longer I can pull that off. Drmies (talk) 13:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, you need to watch your language. This has disturbed me greatly. Could you please stop your inappropriate plumbing service requests from a couple sections above. Inconceivable. I'm a night owl and the wife is not. I can also work on five hours of sleep... It's genetics as my Grandfather, Dad and Sister are the same way. When I was stupid and worked 60 hrs a week, my favorite time to work was from 11pm-3am. It was quiet and could work on machines or servers without bothering people. Now, I just play Wikipedia at night. My wife says 7pm-10pm is no Wikipedia and I have to have dinner ready by 7pm. Bgwhite (talk) 07:11, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, you have a no-Wikipedia time slot? That's hilarious! We were watching Law and Order last night and I felt guilty for having the netbook on my lap. I'll be better tonight. Sorry about the plumbing requests--you just can't get any good help these days. Wanna bet on what comes first, Distributor's indef block or my sysop review? Drmies (talk) 16:30, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comma question
Drmies and and other grammar/style gurus around (Malleus?), yesterday at work I proofread a flyer that a coworker was preparing. We hit upon a punctuation disagreement. She had used "so" as a conjuction for two independent clauses, with a comma preceding the "so". I didn't think that "so" was a proper conjunction, and said she needed a semi-colon. Well, she sent me this link which clearly supports her position, not mine. Now my followup question: is this one of those stylistic situations where different authorities have different views, or was I just flat-out wrong? LadyofShalott13:22, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, TK is correct. And your colleague was correct. This is the formal "rule" for American English; I wonder if Malleus would consider this overuse of commas, esp. in shorter sentences. I would never mandate this comma, though I would certainly explain that it's part of what my mother in law (who's right behind me!) would call "proper English". Drmies (talk) 13:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, shoot. ;-) I am still curious what Malleus will say (and have specifically requested his opinion as well). American English standards are definitely the relevant ones here though - looks like I owe my friend something good. Thanks, all, for chiming in. LadyofShalott13:41, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I side with your friend, though I would really need to see the actual sentence. One useful test is to read it aloud: compared to no-comma, a comma represents a slight pause, and a semi-colon a slightly longer pause, and you can see which sounds right. I may add that Fowler's Modern English Usage (3rd edn, ed. Burchfield) in its entry on "Comma", concludes "Warning. These rules apply now (1995) but wide variations can be seen in the work of many contemporary writers... " JohnCD (talk) 13:51, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's a very clear rule in American English that I believe may differ in British English. But I agree - it's difficult to say without seeing the sentence. Truthkeeper (talk) 14:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I found the file, and here's the sentence: "Some of these techniques look very manly, so don’t think this craft is just for the girls."LadyofShalott14:04, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I'd leave it out altogether. In this case "so" isn't functioning as a coordinating conjunction (at least I'd say it's not, but could be wrong). I wouldn't use a semi-colon either. Truthkeeper (talk) 14:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is a semicolon appropriate without the "so"? My curiosity. Personally I would rewrite the whole sentence, as it doesn't flow well, for me anyway. I would also add ninjas. Because ninjas make everything better. --kelapstick(bainuu) 14:12, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you mean here, Drmies. There is context in the rest of the paragraph - I just quoted the one sentence. Do you want the rest? LadyofShalott14:53, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Heavy Metal! We’re going to make some jewelry using bits and pieces from the hardware store in unexpected ways. Some of these techniques look very manly, so don’t think this craft is just for the girls. Limited to 15 teens.
Nothing wrong, it's punctuation to add emphasis, jewelry = girly, SO don't think etc. Haven't got the adequate terms ~(semantics=who cares?) to describe the distinction but compare "there are a lot of mosquitos so please bring adequate protection", to "Many people believe that mosquito bites are harmless, so please take adequate precautions". CaptainScreeboParley!18:44, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the version your coworker wrote is just fine LadyofShalott, and it definitely needs the comma before the "so". The only other realistic alternative would be to drop the "so" and replace the comma with a semicolon as in " Some of these techniques look very manly; don’t think this craft is just for the girls", but that seems a little forced to me. MalleusFatuorum19:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That medicine (actually, the website doesn't dare call it more than "a popular food supplement") looked even more marvellous before I removed from the draft claims of healing power against all known deadly viruses and bacteria sourced to this book. JohnCD (talk) 22:14, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. I wonder just what the FDA or any of its counterparts has to say about that. Meanwhile, I'll not be parting with any of my money for that. LadyofShalott22:53, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to give you this beer last night. I bought 4 when I was out in the pub, but only drank 3. I knew you'd appreciate the fourth, so here it is. Wesley☀Mouse18:35, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the Gap Theory (CONT)
DID YOU INDEED READ EVERYTHING THAT I POSTED, DID YOU EVEN BOTHER TO LOOK UP THE REFERENCES? OBVIOUSLY NOT IF YOU REVERTED THE PAGE BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL SO QUICKLY. IF YOU DON'T THINK THAT THE PAGE IS VERY "ENCYCLOPEDIC" PERHAPS YOU WOULD CONSIDER REDESIGNING IT BEFORE YOU WHIPE IT OUT ALL TOGETHER. I DON'T MIND THE DIFFERENCE IN OPINION, BUT I DO MIND THAT YOU HAVE NOT EVEN GIVEN THIS INFORMATION A CHANCE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xylon Draganthus (talk • contribs) 23:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the problem's been dealt with (for now) without a block. I'm sure a couple people have their eyes on that account now. SÆdontalk01:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let's not WP:BITE if we don't have to. New user, doesn't get WP, edit wars, socks, explained by me that it's inappropriate, stops. I'd say if they revert again it's an obvious block, but it's been a couple hours so no immediate protection of the pedia necessary in my opinion. SÆdontalk02:06, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't notify the users of the SPI for that purpose. However, I think it was made quite clear to him that edit warring was not allowed, though he had no knowledge of the prohibition against socking/meatpuppetry. Therefore, a 3RR block is justified in my opinion, although it should not be a socking block.--Jasper Deng(talk)02:10, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with that. Socking in such cases is usually a kind of emergency solution and more a mark of naivete than ill will. Thank you all. Drmies (talk) 02:23, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Shallow reasons" do not excuse going over the 3RR line which is a very bright line rule taken seriously here. Also, please take off your caps lock. LadyofShalott01:30, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, just in case you noticed and were wondering, the rollback of your edit to your talkpage was due to me browsing my watchlist on my droid. SÆdontalk07:06, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did notice and I was wondering, and then I checked your talk to see if anyone had warned or blocked you. No problem--but Mrs. Drmies thinks you're a blockhead for not having an iPhone (she thinks the same of me). Drmies (talk) 16:27, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Methinks Drmies should surprise Mrs. Drmies with a Samsung Infuse next Christmas. Faster processor (and lest we forget the Apple A4 chipset in the iphone is manufactured by Samsung :)), gorgeous 4.5 inch screen (3.5 for the iPhone. I essentially use the phone as a kindle), 2 cameras: one is 8 megapixels (vs. 5 for the iPhone) and a lower megapixel front facing camera for video conferencing, and it's only 9mm thick! Best phone I've ever owned. SÆdontalk20:40, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing Mrs. Drmies will be surprised with on Christmas morning is something we shouldn't discuss here. Also, she will not want a not-Apple. She has a Kindle. And an iPod. And an iPad. And an iMacBook, or whatever that is called. Me, I have a Sony Ericsson W508, which is way too fancy for me; I wish it didn't have buttons on the outside, and as far as I'm concerned I don't need the Walkman part either (anymore). My next phone should probably be a Jitterbug, though I would miss the camera. Your Samsung looks way too smart for me, and I'd probably break it the first time I sat down on it. But thanks for the suggestion! ;) Drmies (talk) 20:49, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
uss virginia pada 30 juli 2004 USS Virginia (SSN-774) adalah kapal selam nuklir Angkatan Laut Amerika Serikat, kapal memimpin kelasnya dan kapal kesepuluh Angkatan Laut untuk diberi nama untuk Negara Bagian Virginia Kontrak pembangunan nya diberikan kepada Divisi Electric Boat dari General Dynamics Corporation di Groton, Connecticut pada 30 September 1998 dan lunas kapal itu ditetapkan pada 2 September 1999. Dia diluncurkan pada 16 Agustus 2003 yang disponsori oleh Lynda Johnson Robb, istri m...
Program Surveyor adalah sebuah program NASA dari tahun 1966 sampai 1968, mengirimkan tujuh pesawat robot ruang angkasa ke permukaan Bulan. Tujuan utamanya adalah untuk menunjukkan kelayakan pendaratan lembut di Bulan. Misi menyerukan pesawat untuk perjalanan langsung ke Bulan pada dampak lintasan, pada sebuah perjalanan yang berlangsung 63-65 jam, dan berakhir dengan perlambatan lebih dari tiga menit untuk pendaratan-lunak. Program ini dilaksanakan oleh NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) u...
Cari artikel bahasa Cari berdasarkan kode ISO 639 (Uji coba) Kolom pencarian ini hanya didukung oleh beberapa antarmuka Halaman bahasa acak Bahasa Zimbris Zimbrisch Dituturkan diItaliaPenutur2.230 Rincian data penutur Jumlah penutur beserta (jika ada) metode pengambilan, jenis, tanggal, dan tempat.[1] 400 (Bahasa ibu, 2000) Rumpun bahasaIndo-Eropa JermanikJermanik BaratJerman TinggiJerman HuluBavariaZimbris Kode bahasaISO 639-3cim Status konservasi Punah EXSingkatan d...
Bagian dari seri tentangGereja KatolikBasilika Santo Petrus, Kota Vatikan Ikhtisar Paus (Fransiskus) Hierarki Sejarah (Lini Masa) Teologi Liturgi Sakramen Maria Latar Belakang Yesus Penyaliban Kebangkitan Kenaikan Gereja Perdana Petrus Paulus Bapa-Bapa Gereja Sejarah Gereja Katolik Sejarah Lembaga Kepausan Konsili Ekumene Magisterium Empat Ciri Gereja Satu Gereja Sejati Suksesi Apostolik Organisasi Takhta Suci Kuria Romawi Dewan Kardinal Konsili Ekumene Lembaga Keuskupan Gereja Latin Gereja-G...
Costume and fashion of the 1990s Example of 1990s men's and women's fashion, 1994 Bob cuts were favored by women. (Saffron, 1996) Fashion in the 1990s was defined by a return to minimalist fashion,[1] in contrast to the more elaborate and flashy trends of the 1980s. One notable shift was the mainstream adoption of tattoos,[2] body piercings aside from ear piercing[3] and, to a much lesser extent, other forms of body modification such as branding. In the early 1990s, se...
Latvian basketball player Dita KrūmbergaPersonal informationBorn (1984-03-30) 30 March 1984 (age 40)Riga, LatviaNationalityLatvianListed height6 ft 0 in (1.83 m)Listed weight149 lb (68 kg)Career informationPlaying career2004–2012Positionshooting guardNumber12 Dita Krūmberga (born 20 March 1984 in Riga)[1] is a retired Latvian women's basketball player. She joined TTT Rīga in 2008. Previously she had played for SK Cēsis, as well as several other loca...
Voce principale: Unione Sportiva Avellino. US AvellinoStagione 1980-1981 Sport calcio Squadra Avellino Allenatore Luís Vinício All. in seconda Romano Mattè Presidente Fausto Maria Sara Serie A10º Coppa ItaliaQuarti di finale Maggiori presenzeCampionato: Tacconi (30) Miglior marcatoreTotale: Vignola (6) StadioPartenio 1979-1980 1981-1982 Si invita a seguire il modello di voce Questa voce raccoglie le informazioni riguardanti l'Unione Sportiva Avellino nelle competizioni ufficiali...
2004 election for members of the European Parliament in the Czech Republic 2004 European Parliament election in the Czech Republic 11–12 June 2004 2009 → 24 seats in the European ParliamentTurnout28.32% First party Second party Third party Leader Jan Zahradil Miloslav Ransdorf Josef Zieleniec Party ODS KSČM SNK ED Alliance EPP–ED GUE/NGL EPP–ED Seats won 9 6 3 Popular vote 700,942 472,862 257,278 Percentage 30.05% 20.27% 11.03% Fourth party Fif...
The effect of downwash from a hovering Sikorsky Seahawk is clearly visible on the surface of water below. In aeronautics, downwash is the change in direction of air deflected by the aerodynamic action of an airfoil, wing, or helicopter rotor blade in motion, as part of the process of producing lift.[1] In helicopter aerodynamics discussions, it may be referred to as induced flow.[2] Lift on an airfoil is an example of the application of Newton's third law of motion – the for...
German playwright and poet Ludwig Anton Salomon FuldaBornJuly 7, 1862FrankfurtDiedMarch 7, 1939Berlin Ludwig Anton Salomon Fulda (July 7, 1862 – March 7, 1939) was a German playwright and poet, with a strong social commitment. He lived with Moritz Moszkowski's first wife Henriette, née Chaminade, younger sister of pianist and composer Cécile Chaminade.[1] Biography He was born in the Free City of Frankfurt. He was a member of the Prussian Academy of Arts and the first president of...
American general Thomas R. WilliamsCivil War General Thomas Williams (1815–1862) who died in the Battle of Baton RougeBorn(1815-01-16)January 16, 1815Albany, New York, USDiedAugust 5, 1862(1862-08-05) (aged 47)Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USPlace of burialElmwood Cemetery Detroit, MichiganAllegianceUnited StatesUnionService/branchUnited States ArmyUnion ArmyYears of service1832, 1837–1862RankBrigadier GeneralUnitDepartment of the GulfCommands heldWilliams' BrigadeBattles/warsBlack Ha...
Church building in Naples, Italy You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in Italian and French. (May 2024) Click [show] for important translation instructions. Machine translation, like DeepL or Google Translate, is a useful starting point for translations, but translators must revise errors as necessary and confirm that the translation is accurate, rather than simply copy-pasting machine-translated text into the English Wikipedia. Consider ad...
2016 novel by Margaret Atwood Hag-Seed First editionAuthorMargaret AtwoodCountryGreat BritainLanguageEnglishSeriesHogarth ShakespeareGenreTheatre-fictionPublisher Hogarth, 2016 Vintage Books, 2017 Media typePrint (Hardcover & Paperback)Pages289ISBN978-0-099-59402-4 Hag-Seed is a novel by Canadian writer Margaret Atwood, published in October 2016. A modern retelling of William Shakespeare's The Tempest, the novel was commissioned by Random House as part of its Hogarth Shakespeare seri...
المكتب الاتحادي لحماية الدستور المكتب الاتحادي لحماية الدستور المكتب الاتحادي لحماية الدستورختم تفاصيل الوكالة الحكومية البلد ألمانيا تأسست 7 نوفمبر 1950 المركز كولونيا51°01′10″N 6°53′29″E / 51.019444444444°N 6.8913888888889°E / 51.019444444444; 6.8913888888889 ، وكولونيا...
American abolitionist and school founder John OgdenPrincipal of Winona State UniversityIn office1860–1861Principal and President of Fisk UniversityIn office1866–18703rd North Dakota Superintendent of Public InstructionIn office1891–1892Preceded byWilliam J. ClappSucceeded byLaura J. Eisenhuth Personal detailsBorn(1824-02-12)February 12, 1824OhioDiedJuly 23, 1910(1910-07-23) (aged 86)Seattle, WashingtonSpouse(s)Mary Jane Mitchell, Anna Augusta BrewsterOccupationeducator, academic ad...
Nature reserve in Massachusetts, United States Hamlin Reservation Hamlin Reservation is a nature reserve located in Ipswich, Massachusetts. The reserve was established by The Trustees of Reservations in 1993.[1] References ^ Hamlin Reservation. The Trustees of Reservations. Retrieved July 2, 2021. External links The Trustees of Reservations: Hamlin Reservation Trail map vteProtected areas of MassachusettsFederalNational Historical Parks Adams Blackstone River Valley Boston Lowell Minu...
This article is about rugby union. For Scotland in the Rugby League World Cup, see Scotland national rugby league team § Rugby League World Cup. Scotland vs Italy at St Etienne, 2007 World Cup Map of nations best results, excluding nations which unsuccessfully participated in qualifying tournaments. Scotland have played in every Rugby World Cup since the inaugural tournament in 1987. Their best finish was fourth in 1991. In their semi-final on October 26, 1991, Scotland lost 6–9 ...
