User talk:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you for defending me against the accusation of sockputting when I was unable to do so myself. I hope this qualifies as thanks Drowninginlimbo (talk) 12:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but listen, you really have to dial back your accusations against people. Just stick to editing the articles, commenting on the talk pages, and not the contributors. Your defense of yourself at ANI by attacking Shakehandsman just makes you look unstable. I don't know what lead to that RFC/U about him, but many of those are completely unfounded and should never be mentioned again. Before you throw that in his face now imagine how you're going to feel two years from now if someone throws this ANI thread in your face. It's not important to win every argument even when, maybe especially when, you're right. It's also never really a good idea to write so much at ANI. Anyway, you'll learn, I'm sure.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

I'll keep all of those in mind, thank you. I'll leave the ANI and try to take things less personally. I probably reacted badly when they mentioned the articles, after the first banning I wanted to make sure they didn't take the accusation at base value. I think I understand the process a little better now though. Is it better to not reply or should I make a simple defense and leave it at that if a further one is made by a future editor? Drowninginlimbo (talk) 00:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

It wasn't a banning, it was just a block. Super-important distinction. I don't know if it's better not to reply or not, but it's almost always better to wait a little while to see how much of a reply is necessary. Anyway, the most important thing in this case is that you apologized to Shakehandsman, and quite graciously too. That's impressive, and was the right thing to do. I guess in general at ANI I'd tend to explain my point of view and then leave it alone until it becomes clear which way things are going. This depends on who's reporting you. If they're established editors their remarks are more likely to be taken seriously (and rightly so), so probably deserve a response fairly soon. If they're newly arrived SPAs like that redlinked whoever that showed up on whatever page that was, it may be better to ignore it all together. It's hard to say, but just always remember the person in front of the screen that your words are displayed on.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 01:03, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, I did and still do feel genuinely bad about what happened. The apology wasn't really related to the ANI. Thank you for the advice, I'm hoping that I don't have to go through another but if I ever do I will keep all of that in mind. You're right either way, it's better to stay calm over here, even when the topic you are discussing is yourself. I'm becoming instantly very aware of the manner in which my edits are recorded. When I first joined it felt like the edits were more only related to the articles in question but it feels like every edit has to be at least a little self conscious. I imagine it's something you soon get used to though Drowninginlimbo (talk) 02:32, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Maybe some people get used to it. It still makes me a little nervous. But I suppose that's good. It helps me remember to try to be kind, even if I don't always pull it off. You should try writing an article! There's nothing like it for gaining confidence and also getting a feeling for how other editors might feel about your work on pages they've put a lot of effort in.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 02:36, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm currently working on translating an article (or parts of one) but I would like to write an article at some point. Maybe I should try it soon Drowninginlimbo (talk) 03:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Bespoke, tailored for more than a suit

I've been looking up the history of the usage of the word bespoke and the information available in scientific and technical journals traces an interesting story that is not about a simple dictionary meaning. Its usage has increased in information technology, systems and financial instruments since the 1960s. The first users in the 1960s seem to have used the entire phrase 'bespoke tailoring' but 'tailor' was dropped and adjective 'bespoke' alone became more widely used. The article on Bespoke tailoring should be separate from any discussion on bespoke software, bespoke apps, bespoke contracts but these too exist and have increasing importance in the world of finance and technology. They have a history and perhaps more importantly a very important future. If we redirect the article Bespoke to Bespoke tailoring, the wikilink in articles like Custom software end up with a discussion on suits. That doesn't suit their intended usage. When bespoke is reinstated as a article on its own, from time to time I will be adding scholarly articles as references to illustrate how the usage of the word changed over time. It is wikipedia worthy. Oceanflynn 13 April 2014

I don't believe that it is. I think the other uses are merely uses of the word and don't meet the GNG. Maybe you should write an article on bespoke software if there are sources and then we can do a dab page. Until I see sources, though, I'm dubious. The word "bespoke" has meant "spec. of goods; ordered to be made, as distinguished from ready-made adj. and n.; also said of a tradesman who makes goods to order. Also n., a bespoke article." in English since 1755, so if someone says "bespoke software" they're just using an adjective to describe software. That doesn't preclude an article on "bespoke software" if there are sources, but it does preclude an article on "bespoke" itself per WP:DICTDEF. If all those software articles need a link for the word bespoke itself it should go to wiktionary.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:32, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Please stop removing these links. The term obviously needs a disam page, which I will give it later. Please don't be offended if I revert your removals by rollback for convenience. Johnbod (talk) 15:58, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Totally fine to use rollback. I didn't see any need to remove the links, but was trying to alleviate Oceanflynn's worries about links on software pages leading to the article on tailoring. I actually started writing a disambiguation page, but realized that I didn't know enough about the other uses to do it effectively. My concern is only that the article on tailoring, which clearly must be a separate article from ones on e.g. software, will once again get filled up with non-sequiturs about every possible use of the word.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:04, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

• Sigh!. Inevitable I suppose. Not sure anything can be done with the disam police. Johnbod (talk) 10:08, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not surprised. It's why I don't write disambiguation pages. But you managed to accomplish the important thing, which is what matters in the end. It could have been quite a bit worse.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:19, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Some edits

Hi there. Would you mind having a look at the edits of user "GlobalNRG30". The edits are all recent. I reverted one made to the Kemper Project in Mississippi, but there are others made to articles about "prudence". The editor cites this source [1], but has copied entire paragraphs from that source word-for-word. I don't mind leaving a note for the editor, but just wanted a second opinion first. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:48, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

That's really weird. Who knows what they're up to. That's the kind of thing that WP:ANI is actually meant for: real-time weirdness that obviously needs administrator attention but it's not clear to anyone what kind of attention it needs. That article they created?! Anyway, you can see the kind of stuff I did and that's the kind of stuff you do, and don't be worried about dropping a note about this kind of thing at ANI, because there are people there who not only know a lot more about it than I do but have the power to do something about it. It's also important to drop warnings on new editors who act like this, because without them it can take longer for them to be blocked if they keep it up without talking.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:12, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes...weirdness! And most of this Prudent Investment#Basics for Assessing Rate of Return has been plagiarized from this [2]. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Too much. What are people thinking?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

One more thing...

I finally finished this project. If not for Wikipedia, they really would be lost. Some, like Bruinsburg, Mississippi, changed history. Just wanted to share. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:35, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

You've been doing fabulous work on those little towns. I really appreciate it. You should be very proud of yourself!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:42, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

thanks for your msg

I work for the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, and want/need/have been instructed by bosses to make its Wikipedia article better, more thorough, more representative of what museum is today...following Wikipedia guidelines and without getting PR-ish and promotional. Essentially, that means more information about current exhibits and the new emphasis on living nature. I appreciate the help. Kafriedrich (talk) 21:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah, I figured probably you did. There are special rules for people who are editing on behalf of their employers. You haven't violated them or anything, and it's certainly OK for you to edit the article, but you should read up on them at WP:COI. The best thing to do is to make sure that you gauge the importance of material you want to put into the article by seeing how sources (books, articles) independent of the Museum judge its importance. That way you avoid the trap of making the article read like a tourist guide, which won't go over well here (not just with me but in general) and more like an encyclopedia article about the museum. You certainly have your work cut out for you, the article's woefully deficient.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 21:56, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

TERF-war

I just re-read that comment and I sincerely hope that it was a pun --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 03:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

As opposed to what?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 03:20, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

A warning I suppose. I'm very glad to hear it was a pun though, I hadn't heard that one before Drowninginlimbo (talk) 03:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

That's because I just made it up! Surely you don't think I would steal other people's puns?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 03:30, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't like to think so, but I've seen people do worse things... --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 03:37, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

No pun-ishment is too severe for that kind of behavior.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 03:40, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

What about having to listen to that particular pun? --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 03:48, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Facepalm. Aw for peats sake! Stop the punishment I can't take any mower!Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 04:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Invite to contribute

As a watcher of Radical feminism, I would like to invite you to comment or edit on User:EvergreenFir/sandbox2#Trans-exclusionary_radical_feminism_.28TERF.29. I am attempting to prepare a subsection about TERFs for Radical feminism once the page protection expires. I am striving for balance, NPOV, and sourcing as I know it will be a WP:BOLD edit and would like to make it as robust as possible. The lack of any mention of TERF on the article is an glaring oversight. However, we do not have enough RS to create its own article (or at least I do not). Because TERF is a neologism, many of the sources are "meh" quality. However, they do seem to be WP:RS, even if they are not neutral (which they are not required to be). I welcome any comments on improving this section and you are welcome to edit it yourself. If you do not think the section should be included, please let me know why so we can discuss it and perhaps reach a compromise. Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 04:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Undone vandalism

Removing terror attacks saying that perpetrators are muslims thus not islamists, done by islamists thus not by muslims and other silly reasons sound naive, you have removed over 130 sourced references ,there was a good discussion weather as to Delete the list or Keep and the result is Keep, you should have gone through that before.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at List of Islamic terrorist attacks, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Rim sim (talk) 10:49, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Use the article talk page and stop playing the fool.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 12:01, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

How on the world can you call an editor a fool when he has provided references to almost all the terror attacks,dont be so naive . Rim sim (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I didn't call you a fool. Are you sure you understand English well enough to be editing in sensitive areas?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 12:16, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Note: terror related incidents are not specific to any one country also the List of Islamic terror attacks is under constant vandalism and it deletion requests are thoroughly checked and the result was Keep, hope there would be no more problems. Rim sim (talk) 12:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Use the article talk page and stop playing the fool. And learn to indent your comments, for God's sake.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 12:49, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Unnecessary comments

I feel like you have assumed bad faith from the very get go of the Vamp nail polish discussion and made unnecessary border line personal attacks since getting involved. First you make the edit with "What is wrong with you?" as that beginning of your edit summary. That's just assuming bad faith, that I would do that maliciously when I clearly have been told different. Then my question about "None of the references have a link, how are they verified?", was genuinely a question about how they are verified. And your retort is "Are you sure you understand policy well enough to be nominating articles for deletion" Really? I've nominated many an article that usually get deleted due to lack of notability, which is usually the reason I nominate it. It's just condescending that you would remark such a thing. You're making it about me now instead of making it about the discussion or the article. Saying you were ignoring the fact that I didn't actually give a valid deletion rationale or, evidently, practice WP:BEFORE, AGAIN assuming bad faith and belittling. Another no no considering the fact that I did give a valid reason. But I see you're familiar with talking down to people as you did in the section above with the whole "I didn't call you a fool. Are you sure you understand English well enough to be editing in sensitive areas?" comment. I don't know whether you don't consider that being offensive or if you know you're being offensive and purposefully say it but either way it needs to stop. It's not WP:CIVIL and not how editors should talk to one another. LADY LOTUS • TALK 17:49, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Huh. If I were you I'd look into the context of the above comment briefly before you compare your own victimization at my hands to that guy's. On the other hand, I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. I will try to be kinder to you in the future.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:54, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

You're right, I don't know the context of the previous conversation. But thank you, I do appreciate the apology :) LADY LOTUS • TALK 18:01, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Promotion?

Hi, I noticed that you also commented on this user's talk, so I thought I'd ask for a second opinion. If they remove the information in question for a third time, I intend to report them for being a promotional account. Do you think this would be justified? They have not edited any other pages. Cheers, Vanamonde93 (talk) 23:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I think it would be justified. It would also be worth chasing down that deadlinked Reuters report, which I'll do later today or tomorrow. It's obviously promotionalism, and done by someone with a little training too, I think.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Plagiarism at SPLC article

Hello Alf. Are you just discovering now sections of the SPLC that are copied almost word for word from sources? About four years ago it was far worse, paragraph after paragraph taken right out of SPLC literature, it pretty much read like their brochure. You'd be surprised how many editors were pretty much indifferent to this. A fair amount of rewritng was done at the time but I'm sure we didn't get it all, and some may have been added since. Regards. Badmintonhist (talk) 22:26, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm amazed how much plagiarism there is everywhere. This was especially interesting, because either the book copied from the newspaper or vice-versa; the timing is too close to be sure.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:36, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Gabor B. Racz

slakr^\ talk / 23:08, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

no ne has major edits

there are no major edits - I am the only major contributor - Mosfetfaser (talk) 19:04, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

That's not for you to decide. Put a speedy delete template on there if you want and see if it works. You may be right, but others disagree, so don't edit war over it. If you want to go that route put {{Db-author}} at the top of the page. I doubt it'll fly, but maybe it will.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 19:07, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

ta, trying that . Mosfetfaser (talk) 19:15, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Autopatrol

Hey, thanks! Do me a favor and check out Pigeon Roost, Mississippi. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:27, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

That's nice work. Have you considered getting involved with DYK? That seems like a natural for it. I'd be happy to help you through the process the first time or two, and your article ends up on the front page of WP for a few hours, which is quite a rush.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:31, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

I saw one of your articles about the POW camp there a while back. I've come across a few very unique DYKs during my research. Probably the most unique was uncovering a little-known funeral for Martin Luther King. Everyone knows about the two funerals in Atlanta, but he actually had an open-casket service in Memphis the day after he was shot. I re-wrote these two articles: Funeral of Martin Luther King, Jr. and R. S. Lewis Funeral Home. Let me have a look at the DYK. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 22:56, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

You're famous

Fairly sure I'm not allowed to post the link here but I saw your debate on the Anita Sarkeesian page posted elsewhere on the internet with good reception. Keep up the good work --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 22:30, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

OMG! I always wanted to be famous on the internet! It's so much harder than being wrong on the internet, which I manage to do all the time!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Christ, the suspense is killing me. Why don't you email it? Or type it out because I can't find it on google dot com you know?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:36, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Oh, believe me, I know that feeling. I was surprised enough to see Wikipedia mentioned but especially so to see your name come up. Anyway, I'll email it to you now, I don't want to be included in a third ANI this month -- Drowninginlimbo (talk) 22:47, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, got it. I see your problem.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it was interesting anyway, felt I should let you know in some way --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

ANI

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

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Cyberbullying_over_article_about_Anita_Sarkeesian— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:17, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit Warring: Please refrain from collobrative edit warring with User talk:Drowninginlimbo

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Eugenics. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. You're edit-warring against well written, well sourced additions that contribute to the scope of the article. Please see WP:NPOV and WP:OWN. — 208.54.40.144 (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah HAHAHAHAHA! Give it a rest and use the talk page, Mr. Neutrality.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:42, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

You have to give him credit though, it must have taken him years of meditation to reach his zen-like state of editing neutrality --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 18:49, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

We lesser beings can only wonder, never comprehend.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:51, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

It seems we have a lot to learn from him, I would have been completely unaware of the editing policy WP:NPOV if he hadn't have linked me to it ten or so times --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 18:55, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. 208.54.40.144 (talk) 21:29, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Another page....

Alf - I did some major updates to alligator gar recently. Is this something worthy of DYK, or not? Atsme☯ talk 23:56, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Boy, you don't even pause. Right now it's not, because when you upgrade an article it has to be expanded 5 times in readable prose size in the five days before nominating. Check this page User:Shubinator/DYKcheck to see how to install a javascript tool in your tools menu to the left to check this automatically as the definition of "readable prose" is super-arcane and no one can understand it and everyone who reviews DYK uses this script anyway. If you think you're going to expand an article and submit it to DYK, install the tool, check the readable prose size before you start working, estimate if you think you can do it. Then write like hell and check a lot with the script to see when it gets big enough.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 00:17, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, it was more of a replacement than an expansion. The entire page was nothing more than tabloid hype about alligator gar, so I rewrote most of it. I guess that doesn't count? It actually has to be expanded x5? --Atsme☯ talk 13:16, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the rule. I hate that, and it probably needs to be fixed, because I've done that too; completely replaced the content of an article but not hit 5x. But there's nothing to be done. If you want DYK's from article expansions you have to start with short articles.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:05, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, it does make sense, sorta, I guess. Question: does it matter if I change my sig as long as my actual User:Atsme remains the same? --AtsmeWills☯ talk 22:55, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

PS: Racz got a "B" rating from WikiProject Medicine - is that cool or what? But "low" on importance scale which seems to be the norm for people, while on the other hand diseases and cures rate "high". Hope you're having fun on vacation!! AtsmeWills☯ talk 23:04, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's fine. The rules on signatures are here: WP:SIG. The main thing to remember is that you have to have a link to either your userpage or your talk page in your sig, which you do (WP:SIGLINK). It's also more approved of if your signature isn't radically different from your username, but that's not actually against the rules unless you're trying to impersonate someone. Yours incorporates your actual username so this issue doesn't even come up for you. If you ever want to change your actual username it's possible to do that, but I don't know the details and you have to get admins or something to do it for you. Congratulations on the B rating! That's super-awesome, although not shocking because your work was good. I'm on vacation, and only logging in to answer talk page messages if they seem worthwhile. Not touching the watchlist for now.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:06, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Lost communities

Check out Elysian Fields, Mississippi. It was around 50 years before the American Revolution. And Winchester, Mississippi was "a center of political influence, second only to Natchez". Now they're both covered by forest. These places would be long forgotten if not for wiki. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 01:56, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Super good work, and fascinating. Your efforts will make at least one of those Wikipedia-content ripoffs on amazon worth the money to someone. I could do small towns in the South for years, it's so fun to run through the contemporary newspapers. Anyway, I'm taking some time off from Wikipedia and pretty much everything else for a while, but I'll be back soon enough... see you around!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:42, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Your username

Is it Yoruba? And can I call you Alf for short? Dougweller (talk) 07:13, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

It's Arabic (although maybe it's Yoruba too??). See here for details: Alf Laylah Wa Laylah (I don't think that qualifies me for inclusion amongst the Wikipedians with Wikipedia articles). You can certainly call me Alf for short; it means "a thousand." "Laylah" means "night," and is a little more evocative; either is fine and neither is related to my actual name. Your call.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 12:45, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. It was Google translator that decided it was Yoruba but it didn't change it in translation. Of course as English names, Alf is masculine, Laylah feminine. I figured it had no relationship to your real name. Dougweller (talk) 13:58, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Alf is actually a sentient, furry being from outer space; the whole "1001 nights" thing is a red herring to distract us from their real identity. Don't be fooled, as I once was.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:42, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

I have never reported anyone to the authorities for violating NPA, but comparing me to that... that... that... inbred muppet refugee from the 1950s Catskills tempts me grievously... the 80s... Did they really happen and how have we not perished from shame? Oh yeah, the music and the other music.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:53, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

It's like a rare bird

A real, honest to goodness, misandrist edit. [3]. We should frame it.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 19:20, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Right? A steady diet of edge-cases can drive one crazy. It's nice to have some clarity once in a while. Will you take me to AN/I if I say it's kind of cute, though? Nevermind, I won't say it!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 19:58, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

compared to what happened to Anita back in the day, it is indeed cute. :) --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:24, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Speaking of cute, this reminded me of you and me: [4]. Obviously either of us plays each role now and then...— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 21:32, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

This guy isn't invented at all, quite realistic, and I've seen esp IT types that stonewall in that way. I bet it's the same personality that attracts people to do mass categorization (um, uh oh.). Nice punchline. Love it. What is a 20th-century novelist, you say??? Certainly not a novelist from the 20th century!--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 22:20, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Certainly not a novelist from the 20th century. "There is always an easy solution to every human problem--neat, plausible, and wrong."— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:23, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

for a chuckle, check the cats on my user page. From a discussion we had, long ago.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 02:59, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Come on, at least have the courage of your convictions and bluelink it!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 03:59, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

it wouldn't be fair. Im such a spoilsport that I nominate such joke cats for deletion... @BrownHairedGirl: has even better red ones.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 04:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I always wondered who the second shooter was. Anybody bluelinks that last one and a bell's gonna ring at Fort Meade and the black helicopters will take flight!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 04:15, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

best part is, there are already two people in that cat! And if we polled the Irish wikipedians we could probably find several others that qualify...--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 04:24, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Especially if we were buying the whiskey.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 04:25, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

The scary thing is that about a year after I added myself to this non-existent category, another editor turned it into a blue link. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:09, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, Obi-Wan can tell you that there's no category so esoteric that I would deny its right to existence and subsequent population. Perhaps I should make Category:Wikipedians who wouldn't belong to any category that would have them as a member. But would I be in it or not?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:14, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Depends whether the category is sentient. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:31, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

They've actually already taken over the encyclopedia and are in the process of winnowing out non-collaborators. We will all be enslaved to write articles only to fling futilely into the insatiable maws of our new category masters. Obiwankenobi, for one, has already welcomed them, I think.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:36, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

if we were to give our category system to a hyperintelligent pan-dimensional librarian and ask her to normalize it, she would die within seconds of sheer existential terror. I wonder sometimes, what sort of horrible stillborn category schemes lie silently, waiting for us to discover them, deep in the bowels. Every once in a while you come across a scheme, like these monasteries that boggle the mind to consider a logical extension of same to other famous figures and places... As @Lquilter: said, "places where Mohammed gazed pensively towards the west". BHG, whats your favorite crazy category scheme? --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 05:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

You realize, of course, that by deleting categories like that you're destroying the entire foundation of civilization, Eastern, Western, Northern, and Southern? Of course, I support you in your goal of doing so because, by performatively demonstrating that the destruction of the foundation of all four cardinal directions of civilization has no discernable effect on reality, it only proves my point that categories are socially constructed entities. Carry on, then.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:49, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, you're a socially constructed entity. I still haven't cracked what broader purpose you serve, however. research is underway.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 18:56, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

There is no purpose, only process. I can't decide whether to quote Heraclitus or Whitehead at you, so I'll take the road less travelled: "It is as true to say that God creates the World, as that the World creates God." Categorize that!!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 19:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

You know I can't beat you in an esoteric-quote-contest. So typical for you to choose your area of greatest advantage. I concede. But just try me on non-diffusion!--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 19:22, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Oh, no, I won't throw you into that briar patch, Br'er Obi-Wan!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

This may be of interest re: categorization. We've uncovered a nefarious plot. Are you with us to root out the traitors in our midst? Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_29#Category:Wikipedians_who_are_not_a_Wikipedian.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Also, this Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Should_we_create_a_tag_for_accounts_we_believe_to_be_operated_by_sentient_non-human_life-forms. deeply concerning to me as well. I don't know why I'm trolling the wiki today...--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:38, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Because you're awake? I'm kidding, really!!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi folks, I'm Alf. I'll be here all week at the Coconut lounge. And my darlings, you know who you are - you look maaahvelous..--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:46, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Favourite crazy categories? I did enjoy U.S. political parties which have received one or more electoral votes (i.e. parties which contested any election) and Americans living past the average life span. (Did the creator understand what an average is?)

Villages in Oxfordshire without Lamp Posts was more comic, but it paled beside Vice presidents who have shot people.

Pastorwayne's bizarre names provided some mirth; two of of the best were Primates of the Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch and All the East, and Alexandria and Jerusalem and Primates of the Patriarchial Catholicosate of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church and All Ethiopia. The fun was a bit spoilt by the headache from tying to read a title which looks like a religious dictionary having a nervous breakdown, and like his other similar monstrosities, they were renamed to a fraction of that length. Maybe all of those titles should have been preserved along with Intellectual's who wear blue socks on Thursdays that are Critics of George W. Bush as Potentially Good Names For Heavy Metal Bands?

Somehow, I think that the greatest of all may be Generals whose names sound like car brands. It could have been the start of a whole slew of lateral-thinking categories, in the spirit of The Meaning of Liff.. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:03, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks @BrownHairedGirl:, those are amazing categories. I especially like the idea of Potentially Good Names for Heavy Metal Bands - why did we not listify that at least?? I think it would be wonderful if we could warp such categories into a different namespace, with no rules, and let the crazy categorizers just have a field day coming up with wacky new ways to categorize, while keeping it all hidden from regular users.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:00, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

You're right Obi, Obi-Wan Kenobi, there is some great stuff in there.

I like the idea of preserving this stuff somehow. I don't really understand Wikidata, but it seems to work rather well as a separate space which is sorta linked, and maybe something like that could be done. The problem would be setting the boundaries of acceptable humour.

My own offerings of Presidents who thought that the job was being a male model and Taoisigh who look like they should be holding mummy's hand might among be the least controversial. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:51, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Segregation academies for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Segregation academies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Segregation academies 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 notice from the top of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Verdad (talk • contribs) 17:57, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Why are you telling me this? You must be kidding.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:00, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Dear Alf.laylah.wa.laylah, I've noticed your work in various parts of Wikipedia and am always impressed. Keep up the good work! With regards, AnupamTalk 06:11, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Well, thank you!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

White River National Wildlife Refuge

Can I get your input? Last month, the White River National Wildlife Refuge was officially renamed "Dale Bumpers White River National Wildlife Refuge" (I added details to the Dale Bumpers article). Not sure how to approach this. Should I just change the name of the article? Discuss changing the name on the talk page? Keep the name as it is and add a note in the article's lead? Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 05:17, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for delay; I've been busy. I'm not sure what the right thing to do is, although it's never wrong to move things once just to see if anyone objects (I mean unless there's already been controversy, which is obviously not the case here. On the other hand, if the wildlife refuge has been around for a while and they just changed the name to that, probably no one's really going to start calling it by the new name soon if ever, so WP:COMMONNAME would seem to suggest adding a redirect from the new name but keeping the article title the same. I went ahead and did that. Redirects are almost always less controversial than page names if the term used is a plausible search term.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:38, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

I added the official name to the lead section, and put a note on the talk page. I'll see if there are any concerns. It actually looks fine the way it is, along with the redirect you added. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:41, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

IBCPirates

You called me a sockpuppet on your other talkpage. I'm sorry, I'm confused. XD--IBCPirates (talk) 23:54, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Edit summaries

It would be best not to use edit summaries like this one, but to be a bit more informative for the person who made the change you reverted. Thanks for listening. GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:07, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:39, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

• Remember, alf, it takes honey to catch flies. Note, all you onlookers, that this is nothing but a metaphor. Drmies (talk) 16:15, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the, as always, sage advice, Drmies. Two things: this turns out not to be true, as you can test yourself with little dishes of balsamic vinegar and honey and also, who wants flies?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:17, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Look, it's just a metaphor, man. We all know that the best way to catch flies is to leave some beer out. You'd waste balsamic on an experiment like this? I'll have to yank your Calvinist badge from your user page. Finally, once upon a time there was a dog, in a house full of flies. My brother and I were visiting (we were maybe five, sixish) and kept on catching flies to feed to the dog. It loved it--and then it puked. O you possessed of sturdy intellects, / observe the teaching that is hidden here / beneath the veil of verses so obscure. Drmies (talk) 17:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I left some beer out once, but I just caught a bunch of frat boys. I ended up having to pay to get them hauled off the property. And "just" a metaphor? Ask George Lakoff. Metaphors are all we have in this world.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:31, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I can't: his phone number is semi-protected. OK, I see what you're doing on that talk page: very clever, sir. I'll see if I can get to it, so I don't have to disagree with Kelapstick's protection. But, between you and me, the point you're making with those requests doesn't need to be made anymore. Just hold on, and think honey. Drmies (talk) 17:42, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Me?! Editing to make a point?! I never would do that, Drmies. Never. You're a professional, you know there's no such thing as authorial intent. I'm just editing to create a text. Nothing more, ever. But copy-editing is important, and must go on. And I'd appreciate your credentialed opinion about the comma that T13 wants to put in one of my sentences. By the way, are septic tank cleaners called honey haulers in Alabama? That's a common joke in some southeastern places I've lived.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:48, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

No authorial intent in the analysis of literature, old pal. I'll ask my mother-in-law, she has a septic tank--but she lives in Mississippi so given the context she's pretty hip. Drmies (talk) 18:18, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the edit requests, Drmies. If I had been making a point, which I was not, of course, it'd be made. By the way, I'm not sure what you meant by my "Calvinist badge," so I put a poem by Yeats on my user page that you can yank instead if you want to. Not that Yeats meant anything by that poem, it being literature and all. Nor did I mean anything by putting it there. Cheers!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:34, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

ok

You can try to defend all you want with blue links and earnest gnome-like improvements, but then I relooked and saw this: [5], for a page that had been protected for a mere 7 days, you request oh so kindly that an admin take their time out to wikilink a single term? for a page protection that you called "throwing the toys out of the pram"? Alf, if you hadn't noticed, there was an edit war, with multiple participants, so a protection is quite normal in that instance and not a pram-type moment. You really expect me, or any of us, to believe there wasn't a wee bit of point-making là dedans? In spite of your protests of innocence, It doesn't really matter in the end, I know what you did and why, and you know what you did and why. I just think it's a little immature and frankly below you, who even if I disagree with at times I hold nonetheless in high regard as an intelligent contributor here. Even <redacted>, who isn't normally <redacted>, noticed it and called you out on it.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 01:12, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

ack. And then I just read the above jovial interaction, wink wink, nod nod, know what I mean, say no more, say no more!--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 01:13, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

<redacted> to you as well, my valued colleague!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:36, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		For what you're doing. — Scott • talk 09:48, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Scott. That means a lot coming from you.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:18, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Sugar Plantation Record and Account Book

Hello. Are you able to create a page about another plantation book he wrote, Sugar Plantation Record and Account Book?Zigzig20s (talk) 13:45, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

I plan to write articles about all his books, but there's so little time... There are plenty of sources for that one, though. Thanks for getting the bio going; I had it on my list. Let me know if you need help getting copies of JSTOR stuff.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:47, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer; I was only able to read the first page of the jstor article I cited for example... I may create a page about his plantation, hence the red link on his bio...Apparently there is a historical marker in Gay Hill, Texas (are you in Texas and able to take a picture?). Actually it looks like the nursery was on the plantation. The mystery I haven't solved is: how did he go from clerk and editor to plantation owner? Where did the money come from? Also it looks like he had a residence in Washington, Mississippi near Natchez, but I haven't found much about that yet.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:56, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, not in Texas. Would you consider enabling email briefly so that I can send you a PDF of the whole article?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:00, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, I've created Glenblythe Plantation, however the Texas State Historical Association says he acquired it in 1859, and the article you created says he owned a cotton plantation earlier, in 1842. So perhaps it is another plantation? I added this one to the article about the book, but feel free to remove it if it is completely wrong for this reason. (I think he may have owned a plantation in Washington, Mississippi before moving to Gay Hill, Texas.) I also created Gay Hill, Washington County, Texas as you can see. Yes, I'd love to read the jstor article, but perhaps better if you give me your e-mail address first as I'm not sure which address I used when I created my wikipedia profile years ago? Thanks.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Mm, I don't want to post my email address on the open internet here; maybe you can change the email address in your prefs to something you have access to and email me through the wiki and then I'll be able to attach PDFs. His 1842 property was called "Southern Nurseries" and he also had an "experimental" farm at that time. This must have been what he was talking about when he described the experiences he based the cotton book on? Because it came out before he owned Glenblythe.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 12:44, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Was it in Mississippi? I will check the e-mail address--I've never used that option.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:57, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, the source says "in 1842 he established the 'Southern Nurseries' at Ingleside near Washington, Mississippi, and also became an experimental farmer. Fifteen years later he moved to Washington County, Texas, where he established the 'Central Nurseries.'" I also have another excellent source from Agricultural History which discusses this in more detail than is necessary for the article on the book, but which will fit well in the article on the guy. He got the land in 1842 by marriage. He'd thought that the woman he married was well-off, but it turned out that her plantations were failing. He tried to turn them around with modern techniques but was unsuccessful and they ultimately failed. The source suggests that this was more due to economic conditions than to Affleck's management. After the failure of his first Mississippi endeavors he moved to New Orleans and started publishing the record books and doing a lot of other writing.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:04, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

"Ingleside Farm" here. Probably no longer standing? Btw I am trying to stay neutral in my articles about plantations, as I don't think it's helpful to use a Marxist lens of re-interpretation, or revision.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Your work seems perfectly neutral, but those two sentences seem to be a misrepresentation of the sourcing that I've seen if they state that allowing attendance at worship is "treating well." The sources just don't give this as a universal motive, although Genovese at least says that it was one among many, but not in reference to Affleck. As I said on the article talk page, if there's some sourcing for these statements I have no objection, but there's none I can find for the first claim, and there's at least one source which explicitly contradicts the second.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:53, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

It seems to me like Genovese, with his Marxist bias, misinterpreted Affleck's good deeds. Clearly there were planters (actually, probably overseers) who treated the blacks badly, by beating them or not taking care of their illnesses, and that was wrong. It doesn't seem like that's what Affleck did at all, to the contrary.Zigzig20s (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

See my comments at the article talk page. I don't think we should be thinking about whether Affleck's deeds were good or bad, but letting sources speak.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:05, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Mustang wine

Hello again. Feel free to expand Mustang wine with referenced if you can. I have nominated it for DYK, but someone said it was a bit too short. Also, would you be able to find a bottle of mustang wine, take a picture, and upload it to Wikimedia Commons/the article? I can't remember if you said you were living in Texas or not. The wine was made and promoted by Affleck, so I thought you would be interested. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 02:55, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I commented at the DYK template.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 03:00, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

PS, totally not in TX, sorry (but not for me!)— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 03:01, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

What is QPQ please?Zigzig20s (talk) 03:10, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Quid Pro Quo... after your 5th DYK you're supposed to review one for every one you self-nominate. But other people can donate ones they've done, which I did for you just to help the process along. Good article, by the way.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 03:56, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, thank you. I have submitted a few more--about Beverly Hills for the most part (like Lili Bosse, the Beverly Hills 9/11 Memorial Garden, Felisa Vanoff, etc.)--feel free to review them if you want. You'll find them on the DYK page. Do you know where the instructions to review DYK's are? I have never done it.Zigzig20s (talk) 04:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Also, I created Hugh Wilson yesterday, but have found nothing on slavery so far.Zigzig20s (talk) 04:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh Lord, it's super-complicated. First of all, you don't need to do a QPQ for your first five, but you should note in your self-nomination that you've done under five so people don't worry about it. You should also read this: Wikipedia:Did you know/Reviewing guide, and follow the instructions to install this script, which will show up in your tools section on the left: Wikipedia:Did you know/DYKcheck. Also, for the first few you review, you should mention that you're learning to review and ask for a second opinion, because it's very tricky. You can review as many as you want in advance and keep track of them. Check my user page under "Done" for how I keep track of them; I do them as they interest me and then strike them on the list when I use them for a QPQ, because it doesn't matter if it's a lot later that you use them. I don't probably have the time to review many right now, but you should keep trying, it's complicated but it is actually possible to get the hang of. Also, maybe ask Maile66 and/or BlueMoonset if you have questions too. They were very helpful to me while I was learning the process.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 04:14, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

It sounds like a bit of a waste of time?Zigzig20s (talk) 07:27, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Quite possibly, but it's fun to have your article on the front page for a few hours... anyway, that's how it works...— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 12:14, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Mustang wine is on the front page! My main hope is that more people will see it and thus expand the page.Zigzig20s (talk) 06:20, 19 June 2014 (UTC)