User talk:Drmies/Archive 23

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Request for fact check[edit]

Hi Drmies, I'm trying to bring 1740 Batavia massacre to FA status at the moment. However, I cannot read Dutch at all, so I'm working off of Google Translate (which, as we both know, is lame). Could you double check my additions from the Dutch language sources to ensure I'm not misrepresenting them? Also, if at all possible, could you find a copy of Batavia in 1740 by W.R. van Hoevell to aid with the expansion? I'm asking you because User:Materialscientist mentioned that you are a native speaker of Dutch. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:41, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure thing. I'm glad you're working on something important and worthwhile, although my understanding is that FA articles are generally on trivial and obscure matters. I'll be glad to help out, though it's bed time now. My bookshelves are, unfortunately, not heavily populated by Dutch history books, but I'll see what I can do. Please tell Scientist he owes me, but he can wire the bribe to User:Guillaume2303, another Dutchman, who has the number to my bank account in the Cayman Islands. Oh, if all else fails, and you want a nice and smart Dutch guy, User:Ucucha is da man, though he couldn't dance his way out of a paper bag. For tomorrow, then. Drmies (talk) 05:04, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, shame I'd need the SWIFT number to send your bribe... Thanks, I'll see if they can help with locating the sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:19, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is a fascinating article. I feel guilty reading these accounts. I've made some minor tweaks and left you a few notes on the talk page. I'm on van Hoevell (or, van Hoëvell). Drmies (talk) 15:07, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now you can link him: W.R. van Hoëvell. Drmies (talk) 15:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for taking a look. I think it is getting to the point where I won't be laughed out of WP:FAC, but I want to try and find Raffles History of Java first. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks a lot for your work yesterday as well. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:14, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Catholic Vandal[edit]

Thought I'd mention this here - your friendly Roman Catholic vandal is back! Looks like someone already updated the page about him. Calabe1992 05:06, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Gee whiz, the fun never stops. With any luck my good friend Beyond My Ken has taken care of business. I'm off to bed. Thanks Calabe! Drmies (talk) 05:10, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • He's been blocked by User:Thingg, but only for 24 hours. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:16, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Upped to 6 months after I pointed Thingg to your RCV page. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:19, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • I saw, both thinggs. Thanks BMK. This is messing up my bed time. Did you notice he is now calling himself a Carthusian? He's always been interested in those articles, of course, but such lateral shifting? I guess it's good to be shifty in a new country, and the comparison with Simon Suggs is more than apt. If you're unfamiliar with that, I suggest Philip Beidler, The Art of Fiction in the Heart of Dixie. Natti natti, and thanks for housekeeping, Drmies (talk) 05:22, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nellie Bly[edit]

I've never heard of Nelly Byl, but songwriters sometimes don't get a lot of notice while they're alive. Paul Vance was so obscure that the death of his impersonator fooled even the Associated Press! As for Nellie Bly, I've always loved that the journalist who exposed the horrible working conditions in American factories inherited the company that first made the 55-gallon oil drum, a common symbol in movies and fiction for "hazardous waste". --NellieBly (talk) 05:32, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Litigators[edit]

I see your point and have resolved it.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:59, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not trying to be a jerk on purpose. Drmies (talk) 05:08, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Take[edit]

Your Bribe
I may not have many dollars hanging around (and I've never seen a Euro), but evil geniuses like us need to have as many zeroes on our money as possible, eh? Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice! thanks! I have a ten euro-bill burning a hole in my pocket; I guess this one will join it. Much appreciated, Drmies (talk) 00:35, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, I finally got around to looking for that Batavia in 1740--turns out it was a journal article, in Hoevell's own journal, Tijdschrift voor Nederlandsch-Indië. You had it italicized so I thought it was a book. So, W.R. van Hoevell, "Batavia in 1740", Tijdschrift voor Neerlands Indie (1840) 3.1, pp. 447-557. Do you have access to ILL or its equivalent? Or you can shell out E 108. Oh, apparently the Chinese were referred to as the "Jews of Asia". Tell me if you want to bring this into the article--it's about the Netherlands as a multi-culti society, and says that the 1740 events was one of the few occasions of "ethnic violence." I'm going to browse some more. Drmies (talk) 00:59, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I put in a request with ILL. I have no idea if they can help--this is a bit esoteric. Maybe you can bribe Ucucha, he's got access to a better outfit. Drmies (talk) 01:05, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I want to try and bring this to FA, but not for the cost of two months groceries (life is fairly cheap here). I will contact Ucucha and see if he may have access to the article; I had thought it was a book, so I italicized it. As for ILL, if it were available receiving said article would take a couple months if it were sent from Europe... shame. Thanks a lot. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:23, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, can you see this page? I've written up Tropeninstituut and I'm browsing their holdings. I'm about to email their librarian for help. If they have the journal, I can get a copy, one way or another, even if I have to send a friend out there to make the copies. I'll keep you posted. Drmies (talk) 02:26, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I tried searching for 1740 in Batavia, but got "The page you are looking for cannot be displayed because an invalid method (HTTP verb) was used to attempt access. ". :-S Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:44, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't browse it on Hathitrust. It says digitized by google, but I'm having a hard time finding the link. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:50, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found the quote, or at least part of it, I think; it's on page 485. I'll cite a bit more than you had:

    Er is geen pen welke al de gruwelen kan beschrijven toen gepleegd. Al wat tot de Chineesche natie behoort, arm en rijk, oud en jong schuldig en onschuldig, al wat men ontmoet, wordt meedoogenloos vermoord. Zwangere vrouwen, zoogende moeders , argelooze kinderen, bevende grijsaards worden door het zwaard geveld. Den weerloozen gevangenen wordt als schapen de keel afgesneden. Het angstgeschrei der rampzalige slagtoffere eener blinde woede wordt verdoofd door het gejuich en gejubel der moordende menigte. Geen genade, geen mededogen, geen vergiffenis! Al heviger koken de hartstogten, al woedender vallen de slagen, naarmate de tegenstand minder is! Daaronder mengt zich het geknetter der brandende huizen, die de ongelukkigen, welke er een schuilplaats in zoeken, onder de puinhoopen verpletteren en vermorselen!

    Now you can copy and paste this to replace your note 15, and add van Hoevell to your Works Cited list. Keep in mind, though, that what he's giving you can hardly be called objective and neutral history: we know now that he was an activist, and that he had an obvious POV here (ha, one with which I agree, of course), and so maybe the quote needs an adjective anyway (which might come up in FAR in the current version anyway) or a modifier of some sort. Good luck Crisco--and thanks for bringing this important article and this important piece of our history to my attention. Drmies (talk) 02:59, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll take a look. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:03, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The remainder of the quote (about neighbours turning neighbours in) should hopefully be on the same page or close by. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:11, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, I didn't find it, and I read thirty more pages. What a massacre. And to restate/retract what I said earlier: van Hoevell writes with the appropriate amount of nineteenth-century drama and rhetoric, but I think he's actually quite fair, and after reading about a third of the account, I think his account is accurate though not written encyclopedically, of course. Drmies (talk) 04:18, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah. Do you have the PDF, or is it only available online? I think my copy of adobe will allow me to translate it into readable text, if I have the PDF. If you do, I'll email you and you can reply with it. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:25, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • So I can get these search results, but have no idea how to access the files. They all look good, but there is a suggestion to add "name="&lid=portal+download&lpos=659539">" to go to the source directly. Don't get the system. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:03, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What that link pulls up (for me, anyway) is their search engine. I went through that already; if you type in your title you get some seven hits, the second of which was our article. You can see "details" or something like that, which aren't informative at all, and you can request the article, which I did. Now, I imagine they'll email me when they have it, and then you have a day to fly to Amsterdam: they'll hold it for three days. ;) Drmies (talk) 04:20, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • After downloading the book and having my computer on all night to ensure I can copy and paste, I am sad to say that I cannot do so as the text and what is copied is completely different. Right now it looks like page 465 - 467 has some good stuff for the background, but I can barely type and translate fast enough. If you have the time, could you perhaps see what's useful there and put it in the article? If you have no problems with that, I'll try taking a look and finding more that could be used. Sorry to be a bother. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:57, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, pages 498 to 500 seem to have a list of expeditions outside the city walls and who led them. If possible, could you do a summary? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:47, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I'll get on it--probably later today. Glad to help, Drmies (talk) 15:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. I tried to do some stuff, but I got about 500 characters worth of information out of 4 hours of editing. I was focusing on dates and names, then translating around them. Not exactly the fastest or most sure way to do them. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fisting[edit]

If I read your edit summary correctly, didn't you "elevate" me? Heh. Thanks for removing the image.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh, oops, yes, ahem. Let me revdel that and replace it with "peon," haha. I hope someone follows up on the AN report quickly. My wife was wondering too what the hell I was looking at. Drmies (talk) 00:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BLP issue[edit]

Thanks Niteshift!

Ok, I confess up front that I don't like the user, he doesn't like me and we've sniped each other a ton. None of that has to do with the BLP material he posted that I removed from the talk page for Fox News Channel.After he reverted it, I took the matter to BLPN [1]. A couple of other editors chimed in, agreeing that he violated BLP and that I was correct in removing it. However, he has decided that since the matter has seen no "admin attention", it must not be a problem and he reinserted roughly the same material (which I've reverted). Rather than creating a whole new issue at ANI, would you mind taking a look at it and rendering an opinion? Niteshift36 (talk) 04:56, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's a lot of innocent electrons that died on this topic. It's clear that there is no excuse for such opinions in the mainspace. The question comes up often enough on ANI, and the answer is always the same: a. no, per BLP policy and b. please find some other avenue to express your personal opinions. Now, I don't know if your fellow editor will accept my word on this (and let me know if you want me to post this some other place), but if he doesn't, I guess the thing is to give him a clear warning and report any violation to ANI. The opinions on the BLPN were clear enough, though--it seems you're dealing with someone who doesn't know or understand that the place isn't run by admins but by consensus. Good luck, and let me know if I can be of further help, Drmies (talk) 05:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It might head off future violations to make it directly clear to him since he has tried it again tonight. I'd prefer to not have to do ANI thing if he can just be told directly. Apparently he doesn't think anything is binding unless an admin says it. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:20, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK: I'll tell him this. User:JamesMLane, stop expressing personal opinions on Wikipedia, including articles, talk pages, user pages, etc. In particular, these opinions you should keep to yourself. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 05:23, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your request is noted, but I decline to grant it.
There is no Wikipedia policy or guideline prohibiting users in general from expressing their own personal opinions on talk pages, user pages, etc., where those opinions are relevant to the goal of improving an article. (Indeed, if you look at the thread that sparked this, you'll see quite a few expressions of personal opinion, including those by NiteShift36, my accuser in this matter.) Wikipedia does permit, indeed encourages, the reporting of facts about personal opinions in articles under certain circumstances, although in general a user's own personal opinions would not qualify. (See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Explanation of the neutral point of view.) If you believe that my conduct has been so abominable that I should be singled out for a permanent blanket prohibition on the expression of personal opinions, that bolt will have to come from another quarter.
Your answer refers to prior AN/I discussions. Throughout this dispute, I have sought to have the discussion turn on neutral principles of general applicability, but NiteShift36 has steadfastly resisted that approach, denouncing me when I chose to "drag" in other examples in my effort to get beyond "I don't like it." To that end, I would greatly appreciate it if you would refer me to the discussions you have in mind. This particular posting on BLP/N attracted the attention of only one uninvolved user and no coherent explanation of any general principle. I'm open to being enlightened on the point. On the basis of the information that's been presented to me so far, I believe that my comment was perfectly proper.
Nevertheless, in yet another effort to stop the waste of time and the pointless slaughter of electrons on this, I will modify my comment to incorporate the precise wording urged upon me by NiteShift36. This is without prejudice to my continuing opinion that the objection is wholly without merit. If NiteShift36 objects to other comments on the basis of a similar nonexistent policy against the expression of personal opinions, then the issue will have to be dealt with down the road. JamesMLane t c 11:34, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agian, expressing an opinion is ok, as long as it is within policy. I'm acting within policy, thus I have no fear of ANI or any other ways you plan to "deal with" this. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:03, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the full text of your second post in the BLP/N thread you started:

Had you said that "in your opinion he was lying", that would be different and we wouldn't be here. You didn't. You said "he is lying...". You further went on to call his response a "lie", stated in a declarative sense. When it was edited, you had the opportunity to edit your words to make them reflective of an opinion. You chose to just revert. Pretending that you are being censored is a joke. State your opinion, just do it within the policies.

In response to your statement, I edited my post (although I thought my original was perfectly proper). I adopted your exact proposed wording. In my first comment that you objected to, I added the prefatory language "In my opinion" -- and this was after having already made the same point, in detail, in a parenthetical after the comment. As to my second comment, which you improperly edited by changing my chosen word "lie" to your chosen word "statement", I let your edit of my comment stand, again acquiescing to your unjustified desire in the hope that we could put this behind us. See cumulative diff here (the first couple paragraphs).
Your reaction was to delete my comment yet again (including, amusingly enough, your deletion of the language that I had inserted based on your own post here) -- see diff. As icing on the cake, you said I was "adding a NPA", by which you presumably meant that I was adding a PA, because I said that my specification that the comment was my own opinion was "for the benefit of anyone who was slow to comprehend that point." Of course, I cannot claim pride of authorship in that jibe -- your prior edit, one of your multiple deletions of part of my signed comment, was accompanied by the ES explanation that you were "fixing the error made by the slow to comprehend crowd", which could refer only to me.
So, to recap: You deleted my comment on the purported basis that I hadn't used the magic words "In my opinion" and you said that, with those words included, there would be no BLP issue; but when I included the exact phrase you demanded, you again deleted the comment that you evidently didn't like. Furthermore, when you refer to a slowness to comprehend, it's perfectly OK, but when I grow impatient with you and use your own phrase, it's a personal attack.
At this point there's clearly no reason for me to spend any time discussing with you. You and I are coming from completely different perspectives. I try to follow neutral principles of general applicability. Your approach is different. Neither of us has a hope of persuading the other.
Drmies has at least begun an effort to ground an objection on something beyond his temporary whim. Accordingly, I'll continue the discussion with him. JamesMLane t c 12:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know exactly what I said. I also know exactly what kind of silliness you are trying to pull. Go complain to anyone you want. One of us is on the right side of this policy and it's not you. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • JamesMLane, you may have a look at the case of User:Mindbunny, now indefinitely blocked because of various disruptions. I'm not saying that you are a disruptive editor at all, or that you are disruptive like Mindbunny (who set the bar really high), but it started with, basically, the cussing out of public living figures. Have a look at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive695#Mindbunny_making_attacks. But note also the opening sentences of our BLP policy: "Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page. Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the United States, to this policy, and to Wikipedia's three core content policies." In the opinion of a majority of editors, established by a number of cases on ANI, this includes cussing out (or "telling the truth," as some would call it). Happy editing, Drmies (talk) 15:15, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Mindbunny example[edit]

I appreciate your pointing me to the Mindbunny discussion. There's a daunting amount of material about that user. I've read some, skimmed some, and ignored some (i.e., not clicked on every link, and some of those that I did try to follow were broken). Just from what I read, though, here are the most important points in the current context:

1. Mindbunny made general statments about living persons -- for example, calling several Wikipedians "racists" and saying "Robert Mugabe is degenerate and corrupt." On my talk page, you attempted to analogize my conduct to this by saying that I had called a living person a liar. As I pointed out there, I did not call a living person a liar. I said that one particular statement was a lie. There is a huge difference. I made no general observations about Roger Ailes's character or lack thereof. Furthermore, to apply the BLP standard in a case like this would mean that Wikipedia editors would be improperly inhibited in discussing any proposition that had been asserted by a living person.

I think it was Aristotle who wrote, “To say, of that which is false, that it is false, is to say that which is true.” Editors on talk pages must be free to call out falsehoods. Analyzing a specific proposition doesn’t run afoul of BLP even if the person who voiced the proposition is still alive.

2. I'm not clear on the context in which most of Mindbunny's comments were made, but they appear to have come totally out of left field. Several editors mentioned WP:POINT, apparently concluding that Mindbunny was deliberately making provocative remarks for the sole purpose of inflaming a situation. One of Mindbunny's harshest critics, User Errant, wrote: "BLP is intended to discourage exactly those sorts of expressions of opinion as generally non-constructive. It is even explicit on this point: Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced and not related to making content choices, should be removed, deleted, or oversighted as appropriate." (Italics and boldfacing by Errant)

This is precisely the opposite of my comment, which was directly related to making content choices. The discussion was about how Wikipedia's article space -- specifically, the articles about Fox News Channel and Fox News Channel controversies -- should handle studies of the comparative information levels of Fox News viewers. Some editors were arguing that the summary of a study by Fairleigh Dickinson University should be deleted. Their arguments amounted to saying that they saw grounds for believing that the conclusion was inaccurate. In response, I argued that our standard is verifiability, not truth. As a handy example, I pointed out that the material already in article space included Roger Ailes's criticism of an earlier study, by the University of Maryland, as a "push poll". We could verify that Ailes made the comment but, far from verifying that it was accurate, we could readily determine that it was not.

Thus, my comment served two content-related purposes:

  • First, I thought it quite possible that some of the editors wanting to delete the FDU study were influenced by their affection for Fox News Channel and their antipathy toward any criticism of it. By putting the shoe on the other foot, I hoped to get them to see that the standard they were applying (let's take potshots at the FDU study) could be applied to pro-Fox material that they would want to see remain in article space (because the inaccuracy of Ailes's comment was even clearer than any of the criticisms being made of the FDU study's methodology). Consistent with my support for the policy of verifiability, my view was that both the FDU study and the Ailes statement -- the Ailes lie, in my personal opinion -- should be included, to give the reader the full picture.
  • Second, if the consensus ended up being to remove even the accurate report of the FDU study, on the (improper) ground that Wikipedia editors disagreed with it, then at least that standard might be applied neutrally, which would mean removing Ailes's comment if other editors joined me in disagreeing with it. We should judge pro-Fox and anti-Fox material by the same standard.

Whether or not you agree with my arguments about how the article space should handle this subject, I hope it's clear that my disputed comment was indeed "related to making content choices" and thus not prohibited by BLP.

3. Mindbunny appears to have been engaging in quite a few hit-and-run personal attacks -- expressing a negative opinion and moving on. In my case, however, I explained the basis for my conclusion that this particular statement was a lie. The FDU study was totally different from a push poll. The nature of the FDU study is described in the cited FDU report and in the cited secondary sources about it. The actual nature of a push poll is described in our article. There is no similarity. Furthermore, Roger Ailes is a longtime political operative, as our bio of him makes clear, who is now the head of Fox News and who therefore had a vested interest in criticizing any study that reflected badly on Fox News, as the FDU study did. You quote BLP that we "must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page" but there is no good-faith dispute about any of this information. Wade through all the different threads of this tempest in a teapot and you won't find a shred of a question on that score.

My conclusion from these facts was that not only was Ailes's statement false, but he must have known it to be false, and he was deliberately smearing a critic because he was pursuing an ideological agenda. That was the basis for my opinion that it was no innocent or inadvertent mistake, but was instead a lie. I voiced this opinion and used the word "lie" because it was relevant to the content issue of what kind of review editors should apply to statements from prominent persons that are quoted in Wikipedia. My point was that the Ailes comment was far "worse" than the FDU study, if we were going to get into the business of reviewing all the reliable sources and deciding which view our readers should adopt (a business I obviously don't think we should get into).

4. My opinion about a particular statement by Roger Ailes is not the type of "information" referred to in the BLP passage you quoted. From the context, it was clear that I was voicing a personal opinion. NiteShift36, who apparently brought you into this, implied that it wasn't clear, and said that if I had written "In my opinion" there would have been no BLP issue. I thought it was quite clear without that but I added the superfluous "In my opinion" to appease NiteShift36 -- who then reverted me again anyway.

What is the role of opinions here? On a controversial subject like Fox News, opinions will differ. The relevant information for the article space is what opinions have been voiced by prominent spokespersons. The subject is covered in WP:NPOV:

Avoid stating opinions as facts. Usually, articles will contain information about the significant opinions that have been expressed about their subjects. However, these opinions should not be stated in Wikipedia's voice. Rather, they should be attributed in the text to particular sources, or where justified, described as widespread views, etc.

This is why it would be a mistake to say that opinions, even negative opinions about living persons, must be excluded unless they can be shown to be correct.

By way of example, later in the thread on Talk:Fox News Channel I pointed out that we were quoting Ann Coulter's use of the word "hoax" in her criticism of the University of Maryland study. Most or all of the University of Maryland researchers, whose names appear in the footnote in the Wikipedia article where "hoax" is used about them, are probably still alive. Thus, the Coulter comment is negative and contentious about specific named living persons and is not sourced to anything. We're just reporting Ann Coulter's opinion. For purposes of the BLP policy, is there some principled distinction between my use of "lie" and her use of "hoax", such that BLP prohibits one but not the other? No one denouncing my comment has articulated any such principle. (Of course, one distinction is that she's prominent and I'm not, which is why it's proper for us to quote her in the article but it would not be proper to quote me. I never made a single article-space edit saying that Ailes lied.)

I appreciate your taking the trouble to give me the link to the Mindbunny discussion. Frankly, however, it doesn’t come close to persuading me that there was anything wrong with my original comment, the one repeatedly reverted by NiteShift36. JamesMLane t c 12:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JamesMLane, if you reinstate your December 2 comment "He is lying through his teeth to support a pre-determined ideological agenda" you may be blocked for violation of WP:BLP. Your comment is inconsistent with prevailing community standards. If anyone notices you adding that comment again I hope someone can nudge me so that I can issue a block. EdJohnston (talk) 15:48, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ed--I couldn't agree more. Thank you for keeping an eye on things. JamesMLane, thank you for responding, though I'd like to point out that brevity is the soul of wit and that EdJohnston is correct. Drmies (talk) 17:41, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Apropos Victor Hugo and his publishers: "?" ... "!" - Sitush (talk) 17:59, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thank you[edit]

Thank you for your support at my recent successful RFA. Being now the new fellow in the fraternity of administrators, I will do my best to live up to the confidence shown in me by others, will move slowly and carefully when using the mop, will seek input from others before any action of which I might be unsure, and will try not to break anything beyond repair. And note, we may be able to make an inclusionist of you yet... if you are not careful. Best, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:19, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Congrats, MQS. Honestly I had forgotten to check on the RfAs the last week; I don't know if I missed some excitement or not. But you have a mop now, and that's what counts: congratulations! BTW, I'd like for you to run that tool on my AfD contributions and tell me where I stand, and what my success rate is. I may be less deletionist than you think. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 21:30, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rumours[edit]

Hey, Professor...I've gotten three texts in the last hour quoting "reliable sources" alleging were gonna play Jan 9. The rumour mill is grinding away at light speed. Tiderolls 00:36, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've been so busy today I didn't even follow the Colts losing yet again. I never even read the sports pages today! Did you see the madness after the OK game? I sure hope you're right... Drmies (talk) 01:10, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright, it's happening! Drmies (talk) 01:29, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Now we have to wait a month. I hold some sympathy for those folks that decry the process. Being in the BCS championship makes it easy for me to be gracious, I know. Still, I've never thought the BCS was the answer to all concerns. NCAA football needs a playoff, full stop. Roll tide Tiderolls 02:20, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

You have more experience creating categories than I. Would you please look to make sure there's nothing weird about Category:Palacký University of Olomouc or its two subcats? I created all three tonight and have been populating them. LadyofShalott 00:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure, but I have to say I'm not that knowledgeable. Usually I find the same category for another country or another date and copy it... but I'll have a look. The master is Mandarax, as far as I'm concerned. BTW, thanks for your card: it made Sippi's day. Drmies (talk) 00:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, it looks fine, but I don't know if the category needs membership in more categories. I mean, Category:Harvard_University is member of a few more, but I guess you're not that acquainted with the Czech Republic, and I certainly am not... Mandarax? Drmies (talk) 01:04, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<--My dear Mandarax, could you have a look also at Category:Jacobite songs? Thank you! Drmies (talk) 17:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, I know nothing, but it seems fine to me. I did add "Hey, Johnnie Cope, Are Ye Waking Yet?" to the category (or vice versa). MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, Manuel. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 18:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, what is more painful to watch than this? Ha, he even throws in the old herring/Goehring... Drmies (talk) 18:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, when I wrote it, I was thinking of Sgt. Schultz, who would be the result if your two clips had a baby. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:24, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have you gotten around to watching The Princess Bride yet? LadyofShalott 23:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes! Have you? In two of my lit classes this term only a handful of students had. Drmies (talk) 23:41, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mandarax, she's calling you out[edit]

  • It's one of my absolute favorites! Last I knew though, Mandarax had not seen it. LadyofShalott 23:51, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same here. Wasn't he supposed to watch it after some condition were met? I'm sure it's met. Mandarax, report please. What brings people back to life? Who is the dread pirate Roberts? BTW, I'm writing this while a two-year old is sitting next to me belching like a grown man. Drmies (talk) 00:30, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • She's doing a bit more now, and, I quote, "I always give them shapes." Drmies (talk) 00:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • As far as I recall, the only condition was more or less "when I get around to it". Sadly, that condition has not yet been met. Another movie I haven't seen: Casablanca. This is not the first time you've reported your daughter exhibiting signs of advanced abstract thought. You may have a prodigy on your hands. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:19, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I've now seen part of it. It was accidental, and since I hadn't seen the movie, I didn't know I was seeing it, and I don't remember seeing it, and it was probably extremely brief. In the credits for Capitalism: A Love Story I noticed an acknowledgement for a clip from The Princess Bride. Yes, yes, I know. You're wondering, why am I watching a Michael Moore movie instead of The Princess Bride? Hey, stop badgering me! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 03:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, it was a bit disappointing. Very little Kandinsky (which is what I was hoping for), more simple pebble. Anyway, will you make some time, please? It will be the theme of our next Wiki Meetup, and we want you to be Max. Drmies (talk) 01:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It may have been more Kandinsky than you think. I thought I knew Kandinsky, then (years ago) I went to the Lenbachhaus. Their large collection of Kandinsky works included pieces in so many different styles; I had had no idea how versatile he was. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 11:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I must confess to never having seen Casablanca myself. Please tell me you've seen Monty Python and the Holy Grail though? Even if they are just spheroids, that is interesting that your daughter is visualising her burps in that manner. LadyofShalott 01:45, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, but it was so long ago that about all I remember is "bring out your dead" and the knights who say "Ni". MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 07:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ahem. a. I can't believe you've not seen that movie; b. it wasn't spherical burps. As I indicated, she was doing more, and I really don't want to to into too much detail; let me just say the visualized objects weren't coming from her mouth. Drmies (talk) 05:20, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh. I get the point now. lol Anyway... yeah someone leant me the DVD ages ago. I need just to sit down and watch it sometime. LadyofShalott 05:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Funny, just yesterday I was speeking with an Aussie who hadn't seen Casablanca or the Maltese Falcon (two of my favorites, have both on DVD). I like the "Hello my name is" sticker filled out with "Inigo Montoya, you killed my father. Prepare to die." --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:08, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Erm... I haven't seen The Maltese Falcon either. LadyofShalott 02:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2012 BCS National Championship Game[edit]

  • Was watching Selection Show live! Ucla90024 (talk) 01:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Gotcha. See your talk page. That OK State coach did not look happy. Drmies (talk) 01:34, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bonnie Charlie[edit]

Thanks for your very good work on this - the original article (look at the bottom of the history, before I found it) was absolutely woeful, so that I was moved to fix it a bit, in spite of not really being that interested. I do think we need to underline that it was written long after the event, and that it is not a "real" Jacobite song. It perhaps also needs to be said (although I shied away from doing so) that Jacobitism and Scottish independence are totally different things. Anyway - I have reinstated (with slightly different wording) one sentence of my deathless prose that you have seen fit to expunge - perhaps it still doesn't say quite what we mean - and in any case I'm not going to war over it, but you might think a bit about how we can say this (and even find a source to back us up?). On the whole, well done though! Most impressed. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 08:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks. Well done to you too. I've made some minor tweaks (with hopefully sufficient edit summaries). I think I've mined about as much as I can, but I'll keep looking for it--I'm hoping for some scholarly work. I'd like to get this up to GA status, if only to prove a point to the Wikimedia Foundation. Thanks again! Drmies (talk) 15:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

99.7.116.70[edit]

Hello! I noticed you previously blocked 99.7.116.70 on 26 NOV for vandalism. On 3 DEC, they posted this after I reverted an edit, then promptly removed it. Just keeping you in the loop on this, in case you keep your eye on this IP editor and find they quickly resort to disruptive activities. AzureCitizen (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the note. I left them a warning. Drmies (talk) 17:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011[edit]

Your recent editing history at Rick Santorum shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Drmies (talk) 01:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Talking to yourself again, Drmies? There are folks who can help you with that. LadyofShalott 01:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, I wanted to be fair. As you can see below from WillBeBack's unsigned message, apparently I have issues there. But I guess the other editor didn't stop, as you can see from another message below. Drmies (talk) 02:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

come on man[edit]

seriously? What's the issue? I know and you know that the info is there. There are two sources on that sentence. I want to have a discussion on why you want it deleted, because this is blatant editwarring.--Screwball23 talk 01:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes it is, as well as a BLP violation. See below. Drmies (talk) 02:39, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Screwball23: 3RR in 43 minutes, 4RR in 17 hours[edit]

Do you really think he learned his lesson from his vacation for disruptive editing? <g> Collect (talk) 02:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing and closing[edit]

Canvassing an editor for help, and then closing a long thread about him on ANI, gives an impression of inappropriate collusion. Please be more aware of the need to edit neutrally, especially when administrative issues are involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Will Beback (talk • contribs) 21:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the advice. I wasn't aware that I had canvassed, but OK. Or, you can judge the close for what it was worth: a neutral observation based on the facts. Thank you again. Drmies (talk) 02:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • BTW, you should know that every time I run into him I get shit--see my RfA, for instance. I have no reason to be lenient or friendly with him, but I do think it is important to be fair. Which makes me the most likely candidate to close that endless thread. Now, I appreciate your advice, don't get me wrong, and thank you for it. Drmies (talk) 02:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's nice to hear...I wonder, can you give Mindbunny a call as well? ;) BTW, I hope you have noted that I've tried to stay away from threads involving you, because, if I came down hard on you or even blocked you, the suspicion of payback would be all too easy. I aim to keep it that way: you and I have butted heads too often and I want to make sure I'm fair. You'll note that I just disagreed with you on an issue Talk:Rick Santorum--sorry about that. All the best, and keep the faith (and I'll keep mine, haha), Drmies (talk) 03:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, my apologies for reacting like that. There are a lot of negative ions in the air right now, but that's no excuse. Keep up the good work.   Will Beback  talk  09:13, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Will, no problem at all. BLPs do this, and I shouldn't have bitten back. I saw your work on the talk page and was duly impressed by your comprehensive overview; in fact, I was looking around to see if I could add to it from the Dutch papers, but their electronic archives are a pain in the ass. Oh, that Santa Ana reference--you know that article needs a ton of work... Drmies (talk) 14:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at DGaw's talk page.
Message added 03:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

DGaw (talk) 03:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC) Hi My name is Miranda And i was just wondering why Erika Fong was deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.15.232.164 (talk) 21:48, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the revert[edit]

I should wait for my watchlist to complete loading and Javascript rewriting before I revert vandalism. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 16:33, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Could not parse twinkleoptions.js". No worries. Hope you didn't block Crisco. Drmies (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for the block on 91.122.93.70‎! Is a sockpuppet investigation re Editor75439 (talk · contribs) indicated? Allens (talk) 19:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question is this really a place to?

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Teamwork Barnstar
For your uncomplaining help, freely given to the new students at Addictive personality. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:33, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, BTW, I think you meant WP:REFNAME rather than CITESHORT, in this edit summary. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know...[edit]

...That Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council just passed as a Good Article? How are things? I have been off the grid for a while, I see that you are up to your usual shenanigans. --kelapstick(bainuu) 21:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Excellent! Congrats, K! Hey, did you know the Lady came by for dinner last week? I was going to make chocolate-covered bacon but things were a bit hectic. You and the little k's doing well? and Mrs. K? Drmies (talk) 21:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yay, K, congrats! Yep, I had a good time visiting with the Family Mies. LadyofShalott 22:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I am glad I did it, and was surprised that it did not have many issues (much love for those who tweaked it for me before I nominated it). Next step is FA I suppose, I will have to look into what additional criteria there is, would be nice to get a picture, do you know anyone in Alaska? I didn't know you had such distinguished company for dinner, excellent. The family is doing well, gearing up for the big move. I leave Mongolia (for the last time) in 6 days, then Christmas at home, and heading to Australia at midnight on the 5th (via London and Dubai). Around the world in 21 days (literally)...be sure to come on down and see me some time! Crikey mates! (getting the Aussies here to bring me up to speed on the language).--kelapstick(bainuu) 00:02, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • What is it with you, the moment you sit down your butt protests? Good luck with everything, K. And no, I don't know anyone in Alaska, haha. Maybe you can suggest to CoM that he take a road trip. Drmies (talk) 16:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • No, when it gets to -20°C I protest! I submitted a request from the Army Corps of Engineers to see if they had anything, but thus far, no love. Maybe CoM can get one, he seems to be good at that sort of thing...or was good.--kelapstick(bainuu) 21:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Semiprotection[edit]

GorillaWarfare's talk page is receiving crude attention. Perhaps semi-protection is in order for the duration of this phase of the fundraising drive? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you're the best. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You know, it doesn't matter whether I was running a company of assassins or a school of accountancy, I'd want her on board. Drmies (talk) 23:33, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What sort of school do you teach at, precisely? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to know that myself. Apparently, next semester I'm teaching business writing. Drmies (talk) 03:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

198.161.203.6[edit]

There was some discussion at this user's talk page regarding your block, apparently the block reason was odd. On a side note, one of the comments left by the user was rather disparaging. Calabe1992 23:43, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's strange--it says "vandalism", clear for everyone to see. Of course it also says "and a one-two-three", in Dutch, but that's a minor matter. ;) Drmies (talk) 00:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Alpha Quadrant's talk page.
Message added 23:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 23:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per your suggestion [2]. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 00:51, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Probably should have read the article first. From Rosa foetida: "It has yellow flowers with a mild, sour scent many find objectionable, thus the species name." Rather, I just went by the look... Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 00:57, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, I have no doubt that GW, who is a literature buff, can find the appropriate allegory there. AlphaQuadrant, you are a total ladies' person. Drmies (talk) 01:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm...the statement is unsourced, I can slap up a [citation needed]. I did a google search on the subject. It does appear that some people dislike the musky scent. Then again, some people actually like the scent. There does appear to be a hybrid of the plant that has a sweet scent. Well, in any case, at least I didn't give her Tagetes. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 02:07, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

Thank you for the talk page protection and looking out for me! :] Hope things are well.

– GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:16, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're welcome, dear Gorilla. In the meantime, I got some good advice, and was able to give some as well. Thanks for sticking your neck out and getting your talk page fouled up, on behalf of us ugly folk. Drmies (talk) 01:20, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In W.R. van Hoëvell, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Groningen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Selena fans[edit]

I read your note posted at WP:AN, there's currently only five Selena fans on Wikipedia and one (being myself) who edits and expands her articles to GA class. BTW you may want to see this since you said you aren't familiar with her. Best and happy holidays, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 14:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome :-) Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 15:36, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

The son of God.

Hi there UEFA Euro 2012 foe (although i don't care much for the fate of my "national" team, with this guy and maybe this guy, and maybe some more...)!

Could you please try to retrieve some refs for the Theo Lucius article? Unfortunately, the ones there were DEAD, and my Dutch is close to none. If you manage to find stuff for the PERSONAL section and his work as a carpenter, i'll be (WP will be better said!) awfully pleased.

Attentively, thank you very much in advance - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 18:55, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Have already added some, feel free to make the due corrections. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 19:13, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see that the article for the 2012 cup already has the proper results, with us at the top and you at the bottom. Drmies (talk) 20:06, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Dude! Lucius is a PSVer! What is WRONG with you? Drmies (talk) 20:07, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK, I found one thing. How much more do you need? As much as possible? The man is incredibly boring. Do you know what his hobby is? It doesn't get more predictable than this: fishing. And not deep-sea fishing, no, he had a fishpond built in his backyard. Drmies (talk) 20:24, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What the hey? Indeed quite boring :) The first ref is amazing, thanks a million. If you could just find anything for the PERSONAL section (especially the second paragraph), i think it'd be more of less thorough. Ah, and please add a TRANS_TITLE to the ref you added, go the extra mile for the PSVer... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 21:22, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You know, your PSVer can kiss my 1995 Europa Cup 1! With the big ears! Drmies (talk) 21:32, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it me or you seem upset in that last remark? Don't hold any grudge against me my friend, i was only trying to be amusing, not even a PSV fan :( --Vasco Amaral (talk) 21:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, that's you, haha. I am not easily upset by soccer. Well, that awful, awful match we played against you guys a couple of years ago, that upset me. Hey, I got his fireworks covered. There's something else: once upon a time he did something with a woman, you know, with his own and her organs, and the result was, you know, ahem, another human, and it made the paper. It's touched upon in the carpenter article, but I prefer to leave such stuff out unless it is very well verified and relevant and all. That OK with you? Drmies (talk) 21:49, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I knew it had to be a misunderstanding on my part, you're as cool as they come! Me, i try not to get that upset by soccer, but i do more than often (and that not even being fan of any club, LOL!). After your additions, the article, in my modest opinion, is M-A-R-V-E-L-L-O-U-S (but i rephrased the "loses big" stuff in his poker bit, that was "cruel" Mies :)) Keep it up, dankiu vel - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 23:08, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hehe, I thought you might catch that. But it is true: they like playing with him because they usually win his money--that is what the article says. Take it easy Vasco! Drmies (talk) 23:26, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pilgrim at Tinker Creek update[edit]

Hey, Drmies, don't know if you saw but I've provided an update here. I think it's ready for another review, if you have time? María (yllosubmarine) 14:45, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested...[edit]

The illustrious McLobster will not be coming to a McDonalds near you.

in the discussion at WP:VPP#Change of policy towards Dutch (and other non EN-languages) Wikipedia's. (BTW, that apostrophe really bothers me.) LadyofShalott 09:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ha, I was going to rename it, but then links like this one won't work. Yes, Dutch uses -'s for plural, and -s for genitive. Very confusing sometimes. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 15:03, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah, I had assumed it was a greengrocer's apostrophe. It's interesting to learn that Dutch uses a pattern of noun-marking inverse to what English uses. Languages are fascinating! LadyofShalott 15:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I just read the article on Dunglish. Some of the examples sound to me like things said by native speakers of English. For example, I have an uncle, who I can guarantee doesn't know a word of Dutch, who pronounces "idea" like ID. Also, it isn't exactly identical to the usage as described in Dunglish, but "How goes it?" is a not uncommon way of asking how things are going. LadyofShalott 15:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In unrelated matters... see this. LadyofShalott 18:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ha, yes. I wonder how one tracks literally. I guess I tracked virtually? And found something as well. Drmies (talk) 18:31, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • BTW, good block; thank you. Policy: block as for vandalism, barring the establishment of open-proxy editing. YGM. Drmies (talk) 18:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • In related news: I ate a McRib the other day, for the first and last time in my life. This guy was correct. Drmies (talk) 18:38, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I only see a blank page with that link, but I think the URL gives me the idea. I don't think I've ever had, or wanted, a McRib. LadyofShalott 19:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • What about a McLobster? (directed at the lady, as I know that the good doctor has never eaten lobster)...--kelapstick(bainuu) 21:14, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Do those exist in some parts of the world? Or are you speaking tongue-in-cheek? LadyofShalott 21:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • They are available for a limited time (while lobster are in season) in the Maritime provinces, and (so I am told) the northeastern United States. In Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, you can even get a lobster sub at Subway (seasonally as well). A picture is on the way, but it is a very tedious process, download from Facebook for BlackBerry, email to self, upload to commons... :|--kelapstick(bainuu) 22:08, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • (ec) As far as I know, it's not available in my corner of the US. The idea of Mickey D's serving lobster does sound strange to me, though I have heard that at one time it was servant food, not what the hoity toity ate. LadyofShalott 22:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
                • List of McDonald's products shows it as available in New England, and as we all know, everything on The Wikipedia is correct. Proof of existance has been provided. It wasn't bad.--kelapstick(bainuu) 22:33, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
                  • OK, so this is our next DYK? I need to get to 175. K, that sandwich, it actually looks delicious. But that McRib, after it was talked up so much, it's vile. And that's not a BLP violation, or even a BDP violation, since apparently nothing died to make it. Drmies (talk) 00:03, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

←In case you need a source...[3]--kelapstick(bainuu) 02:08, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"McRice... It is normal rice." That made me chuckle. LadyofShalott 03:27, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will be in Beijing Tuesday, I think there is a McDonald's at the airport, I will for sure be craving a burger. I will see if they have it.--kelapstick(bainuu) 03:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, if you want a picture of McRice I could always use a reason to go to McDonald's... I don't usually order the fried chicken and rice though. Hehe. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:01, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fried chicken and rice from Mickey D...what is this world coming to. Hey, I read somewhere that McDonalds also serves salads. Speaking of crazy ideas! BTW, I'm slow-cooking an 8-pound Boston butt today. You can all come for dinner; Crisco, you'll have to make a run for the airport right now. Drmies (talk) 15:08, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I seem to remember five slices of bacon between two slices of chicken breast at a certain state-named restaurant... sounds delicious! I'd have had to leave yesterday to get there in time, LOL (time difference + 24 hour flight minimum... argh!) Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:31, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Batavia Massacre (again)[edit]

Hi Drmies, I think I'm about ready to send the article to the Guild for a pre-FAC copyedit, but I was wondering if you'd have a chance to add those early encounters I mentioned above. Also, if there is anything pertinent to quote in letter from Governor-General Adriaan Valckenier from page 493 to 496, that would be nice. Thanks for all your help! Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry, I may have gotten lost on my own talk page. I'll get on it in a bit. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:54, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, thanks! (Interesting threads, if I do say so myself. Having fried chicken be the most popular dish at McDonald's here seems tame in comparison). Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey Crisco, something occurred to me. I don't know where I read it, but I did: according to the source I read (a book, or something else that seemed reliable enough) the immediate cause was not just general hatred of Chinese or overpopulation or something, but sugar. (That is, tariffs on sugar to limit production in the Far East of sugar, the development of clandestine sugar trading channels, etc.). See what you can find. I'm on Batavia in 1740. Drmies (talk) 04:40, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It may be somewhere in the early pages of "Batavia in 1740" -- That would explain why they kept using sugar mills as strongholds. I will see what I can find. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Browsing several sources (Ricklefs, Raffles, and Kemasang), the poor Chinese mainly worked in sugar mills. Not sure if that is pertinent. No mention of taxation. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:46, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good addition, btw. Thanks for all this. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:53, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suiker[edit]

The Dutch wiki makes brief mention. In summary, the sugar economy had collapsed (the reasons for which are incredibly interesting, and a world-wide development) and thus the Chinese workers on those sugar plantations were out of a job. Translate this with Google--I think it is fairly accurate though, as usual, unsourced. Anyway, the article now moves from "economic prowess" immediately to the July deportation order. Somewhere in there should be a (short) paragraph on sugar (and it was the Chinese who lived outside the walls, without any of the rights that the ones inside enjoyed): all the sources I read agree that sugar matters here.

So, the sugar culture probably deserves its own article! But that's for another time. Its relevance, though, is clear: "The boiling of the sugar was exclusively done by the Chinese" (and that's what those sugar mills are, apparently--suikermolens), and "the industry reached its high point in 1710, when there were 130 mills, almost all of them owned by the Chinese." (BTW, the next sentence says there were already complaints about deforestation...a sad note...)

There are some Dutch sources to make this point, but to my surprise I quickly found a couple of English ones: this gives you "sugar millers" to add to the skilled artisans, and there's this snippet view, "basically an overreaction by Company administrators to the revolt of Chinese sugar mill workers in the Batavia environs." By the same token, the results of the massacre on the sugar industry deserves mention: it "dealt production a crushing blow" (this source has useful background information as well); somewhere in one of the sources you already have or maybe one that I just looked at recently I saw this expressed in numbers, how many mills were left. This is helpful and has numbers and context. Oh, this one to conclude with: there were 66 mills left--this source actually may be the best one, and the easiest to summarize (if I were teaching economic history I'd assign this book: it's fascinating, well-written, and full of real detail). Oh, where there's sugar, there's also arak...Cheers, Drmies (talk) 16:06, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh, since the mills were usually owned by the Chinese elite, they suffered from the violence economically as well--which can be covered in the "how many sugar mills were left" department. One more thing: the "at the same time" paragraph, at the end of background, that's not really at the same time, since that time is the evening of 1 October and what's mentioned in the paragraph is part of the background. That is the paragraph ("There were economic factors as well") that can cover sugar. Crisco, you may not like these comments...because it means that you (and I'll be glad to help) have to get this in the article to ensure that it is comprehensive and well-researched.... Drmies (talk) 16:13, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think I should be able to take care of some of the English sources, but would it be possible for you to deal with the Dutch ones? I don't mind if its a decently digitized PDF (copy and paste to Google Translate), but after "Batavia in 1740" I am a little wearisome of typing it word-by-word then double checking to make sure I didn't switch an e and o or something like that. 23:16, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
K, I think that should cover it (good idea to put the sugar information in the short paragraph in the background section). Do you have anything extra to add before I expand the lead and put the article up for a copyedit? Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't remember the taxation details--maybe I meant tariffs, and they were someplace else in the world anyway. I'll have a look today. Drmies (talk) 15:05, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Got it. The last one I added was the one I must have seen last week or so. I added some of the relevant information with ugly, bare URLs--I am not acquainted with your fancy formatting. I may look for some Dutch sources as well. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks a lot, I'll touch up those references (the SFN citation style takes a bit of work to learn, but I've never gone back since) Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that should be enough as well, thanks. These two can be worked into a single sentence. Afterwards, I will expand the lead a little (make sure sugar is mentioned, a couple of other things) then send it to the guild. Thanks a lot! Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:28, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does the Sugar entry have an author or article title? I can only see limited preview here. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:34, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<--August von Wachtel, "Development of the Sugar Industry." (Paper read before the New York Section of the Society of Chemical Industry, 24 March 1911. The American Sugar Industry and Beet Sugar Gazette Vol XIII.5. May 1911. pp. 200-203. Price in 1720: 29.76 per pound. In 1740, 14.91. Numbers on page 200. Sorry, that took a while--netbook screen issues. Drmies (talk) 04:23, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Okay, thanks. I understand... hate to bother you again, but are those prices in dollars, ducats, or...? Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:39, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, Smurkiaanse Foepies! Haha, I guess dollars--it didn't say (I looked), but it's an American publication. No bother, Crisco. Hey, I saw I misspelled your name in an edit summary--my apologies. Drmies (talk) 04:45, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright, in that case they won't be much use if inserted (already converted from whatever currency to 1911 dollars, then we'd have to convert to 2011 dollars... argh). No problem with the name. Some people here spell my given name with a T, so I've seen worse. I'm not the messiah! Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:52, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, but "half" is not subject to inflation! Drmies (talk) 05:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although it is subject to interest.... Indeed! Thanks for everything. Fingers crossed. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:20, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More vandalism[edit]

Raggi's doing it again. Mancini's Lasagne invite to Harry Talk 01:18, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you much, unfortunately. Drmies (talk) 01:29, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just as a heads-up, Raggi didn't violate WP:BLP policy this time around, although he has certainly been given plenty of rope since violating it multiple times in the past. This time out he just inserted himself into the MCFC Academy squad. I don't believe that's a violation of BLP policy per se ... although it's obviously vandalism of the same kind that he's been repeatedly warned about and requested not to do throughout his editing history. Just letting you know in case some other admin unblocks him because he feels your reason for blocking him was unjustified, thus allowing him to get off on a technicality. Thanks for taking care of the situation so quickly. Mancini's Lasagne invite to Harry Talk 03:42, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • It was a continuation of more of the same edits--in fact, I didn't even look at that, I looked at John Rooney (footballer), which they've been messing with since September. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:07, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A misdirected question[edit]

Please see User talk:LadyofShalott#Question. I think that should have been aimed at you. LadyofShalott 03:20, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK suggestion[edit]

I've written a new article Hotel Polen fire which I think might pass DYK. But the procedure seems very complicated to me. Since you got Van de koele meren des doods which I started on DYK (we talked about this on 28 June on my talk page) could you check this article and if possibly nominate it for DYK? I would be very grateful. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 03:26, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • No kidding. I thought of that the other day--I remember when it happened, and walked by the place when it was still smouldering. Sure, I'll have a look. Drmies (talk) 04:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nou SpeakFree, dat is een mooi stuk werk! I'll take care of the nomination, but in the meantime, copy editing must take place. All Dutchism must be removed, starting with the period in the times (replace with semicolon: "6.20 in the morning"-->"6:20"...and Lady, should we go with simple AM and PM throughout? SpeakEasy, I'm calling in outside help: the Lady is fascinated with Dutch culture and an expert copy editor; besides, she can't be as sleepy as I am. More tomorrow. Thanks for writing that article. Drmies (talk) 05:39, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm out of the door today, I can work on it later tonight. But feel free to make changes in the meantime. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 06:26, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think I was already in bed when you wrote that, Drmies. I'll go take a look at the article now. LadyofShalott 15:40, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Lady. Reading the narrative gave me the chills. Drmies (talk) 16:07, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's scary stuff indeed. I've done some copyediting, and requested some more citations. I am uncertain about the no direct line to the fire department bit. I've edited it as if it meant that physically, it was challenging for the FD to get there, because that's how that part sounded to me, but then later in the article, the parts about the porter running outside to ask people to call makes me think that it had something to do with the telephone lines. That needs to be clarified. Also, the part about the thing for people to jump on: one paragraph says that the street was too narrow for the FD to open it, but the next paragraph talks about people throwing their luggage onto it instead of people jumping out onto it; this seems contradictory and needs clarification. LadyofShalott 16:55, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed the phone thing too, yes. As for the jumping, I don't know--perhaps this has to do with the hotel having a front on het Rokin and a back on the Kalverstraat. I hope SpeakFree can clear this up. Alright, I gotta run. Hey, we're watching Pound Puppies, and it ends with "this was the begin of a long and beautiful friendship," right as I'm typing this: it's a sign, Lady, and you better watch that movie pronto. Drmies (talk) 17:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well people can act very irrational when confronted with a calamity. We don't know what went through his mind. We should write what the sources report (and I know that the media make a lot of mistakes but (unfortunately) it's not Wikipedia's role to second guess them, we can only replace their input with better sources). SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 02:37, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The hotel had two sides, one on the Rokin and one on the Kalverstraat. The Kalverstraat is a quite narrow pedestrian only shopping street. That was were they had difficulties deploying the life net and also where the fire engine was hit by debris. See the second image. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 19:45, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have sorted all the cn's using the official FD report from December 1977 (nicely typewritten, makes me feel all nostalgic). I could only not find out who the Polish businessman was who lived there around 1500 (ie 511 years ago). Does it really matter in the context of this article who he was? It would be a nice historical footnote if we would know but it really isn't essential. Thank you both for your efforts. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 01:55, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Could the article be nominated soon (if you think it's good enough)? DIY articles can't be older than 5 days. It is already 2 days old. I don't know how long it takes before it is approved. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 20:39, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did you sort out the direct line to the fire department bit that was confusing? I've missed it if so. LadyofShalott 20:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have rewritten some parts where the sources differ and I hope it is more clear now. Newspaper articles are often not very specific with details (journalists are generally more interested in people than in technical minutae[citation needed]) so I've given the fire department's report preference. I've also removed the part about the direct line which is common now, but this was 1977 back then we still had rotary dial phones (available in one color only: grey). SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 22:18, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's much less confusing now! LadyofShalott 22:44, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please tell me what you think could be changed further? BTW I also need a good "hook", can't think of anything good. Thank you! SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 23:36, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • DYK... that in the 1977 Hotel Polen fire, a lack of fire detection and fighting equipment led to the deaths of 33 people? -- possible hook (I have not counted characters at all) LadyofShalott 01:31, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • SpeakFree, don't worry about the time frame. We'll get it all in on time. Lady, thank you for your help, as usual. SpeakFree, will you allow me to give the Lady co-credit for the DYK? She's been most helpful. Drmies (talk) 02:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I gladly support that! Thanks LadyofShalott for all your efforts. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 02:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Y'all are generous. I don't know that my contributions merit that though. I just did a bit of gnoming. Cullen actually added to the contents. LadyofShalott 02:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well he should share in the credits as well. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 04:02, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BTW can you also help with the article classification? Up till now I've used a simple rule, main prose =< 500 words = stub; main prose > 500 words = start. Especially for WikiProject Netherlands (which is as dead as the dodo, about two months ago I made the first edit on Portal:Netherlands in nearly one year and no-one assesses Netherlands related articles any more, unless they also relate to other fields of interest). SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 02:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Done. BTW, thanks for helping improve our coverage of the motherland! Did you see Cullen's comments, below, on the artist who did the show Hotel Polen? Drmies (talk) 03:05, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I did. But if her article is to be included in the DYK shouldn't it be more than a stub? I googled her but apart from the already mentioned information there isn't anything useful to make it a proper BLP. She was active in the pre-public internet era (1980s) so information about her is probably only available off-line. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 04:08, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Jumping sail"[edit]

The device called a "jumping sail" in the Hotel Polen article is actually called a Life net, at least in American English. That currently redirects to a firefighting equipment glossary, but is probably worthy of an article of its own. I am particularly horrified by the lack of fire extinguishers and other emergency gear. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:21, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Dutch word is springzeil which literally means jumping sail. I was unsure of the word and couldn't find a proper translation. I agree about the horrifying lack of safety materials and emergency exits but this was in 1977 when the standards and protocols were not as high as today. Later in May 1977 the Beverly Hills Supper Club fire happened with an even deadlier death toll and there was a lot wrong there as well. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 19:11, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I had never seen that aerial photograph before. At least it didn't look like this. Drmies (talk) 20:10, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Those parts of Dresden weren't at least completely flattened. There was a morbid joke going the rounds at the time about a Frenchman and a German where the Frenchman said "If you stand on the top of the Eiffel Tower you will see the whole of Paris". The German said "That's nothing if you stand on a chair in Dresden you will see the whole city". SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 02:07, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, my word. That is a grim tale. The things that we do and say in war ... - Sitush (talk) 00:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Small world[edit]

Yesterday, I learned of the Hotel Polen fire on your talk page. That motivated me to look into the "jumping sail" which we call a Life net . I started scouring the web for more information about the fire, learned about a photographic art installation by Polish American Jew Ania Bien, who lives in Amsterdam. That art show drew an analogy between that fire and the Holocaust. The show was in San Francisco and Amsterdam. I knew her brother Richard very well. Ania was born in 1946 and Richard in 1948, in Kracow. Their parents were of the small surviving remnant of the Polish Jews. She married a physician and has lived in Amsterdam for decades. Richard was on a spritual quest in India in the 1970s, got very ill, and recuperated in Amsterdam. There, he too decided to become a physician. He settled in the Napa Valley roughly 20 years ago. Our Jewish community is very small, and everyone knows everyone. Richard was a quiet man of great dignity and modesty, a highly respected surgeon. A very thoughtful and kind person. He died two years ago after a valiant struggle with pancreatic cancer. I met his sister twice, once when he was in good health and also when she visited our synagogue after his death. It is a highly interconnected world. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:12, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure is... your comments highlight both how the Internet has increased the interconnecting strands of the web, and how many strands existed before the Internet. LadyofShalott 19:25, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, Cullen--that is quite a story. Can we connect more, with a double nomination? I'm not sure if Google Books has enough full text available here to create Ania Bien? Drmies (talk) 02:06, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm interpreting this correctly, (?) she's published a book of photos of children. It's having trouble pulling up the listings of libraries that hold the book though, so I can't tell if it's lots or none. LadyofShalott 03:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's a book on children in asielzoekercentra (nl:Asielzoekerscentrum, which I've just linked more correctly to Immigration detention rather than the earlier Refugee camp). I am finding some stuff on it. We're close to DYK numbers, so we could combine the two, if SpeakFree is OK with it... Drmies (talk) 03:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is that the more correct link? As far as I know people aren't actually detained in an azc; it's just a place for them to live. Ucucha (talk) 04:04, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • {ec)You may well be right. I wasn't thinking about legal detention so much as about the physical circumstances and the ghetto-ized setting of those places. Feel free to undo me there, U--and block me if appropriate. ;) Hey, we got some Dutchies together here. Did you know I made a cake today, an old-fashioned pound cake with just a bit of sogginess in the center? Even better than what you get at the HEMA... Let me make a pot of coffee. SpeakEasy, cream and sugar? Drmies (talk) 04:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • There is vreemdelingendetentie for illegal immigrants who are subject to extradition. AZC's are open institutions, the people in them can go where they please. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs)
        • Ja, maar je zou het toch geen "vluchtelingenkamp" noemen...of wel? Drmies (talk) 04:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • I wouldn't, but I think they are actually closer to refugee camps than to detention centers, because (as SpeakFree says) they are open institutions. I was going to say that they aren't actually quite like refugee camps either, but really I don't see much of a difference. If we may trust nl:Kamp Westerbork for example, the Dutch government was actually building an institution called a vluchtelingenkamp at Westerbork to house German Jewish asylum seekers. Ucucha (talk) 04:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm OK with it if the article is acceptable under the DYK criteria. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 04:14, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, it will meet those criteria, but you know I haven't even looked at the Lady's hook yet. Let's see. Drmies (talk) 04:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • My gosh, I take a break from editing Wikipedia for a few hours to make some chicken stew out of six chicken backs that had been in our freezer since Passover this past spring, and sit down to eat the stew from folding TV tables while drinking Two Buck Chuck and watching Barack Obama and Warren Buffett interviewed on 60 Minutes with my wife and my younger son. When I lazily pick up my Droid X to check my watchlist, what do I find but a brand spanking new article about Ania Bien? I am astonished, and my heart, previously warmed by the stew, is even warmer now. You people are all really wonderful, as is this project. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:34, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Note my first edit summary there, Cullen. Glad your stew was good; we had some pulled pork that was in the slow cooker all day today. BTW, I disagree on your edit summary "grammar"--you may well think that yours is better (I had it like that earlier), but it's not a matter of grammar, unless your real name is not in fact Cullen! Thanks for beefing up the article, and for that other edit summary--over 90,000 edits and I didn't know that suggestion about big, notable cities being able to stand alone. Speaking of notable: please give my regards to Mrs. Cullen. She'll be pleased to know that our living room looks very comfy now, and she is welcome to bring her knitting and sit in front of the fireplace. You and I will make like polar bears: the pool is about 50 degrees. Drmies (talk) 04:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • I am certain that I would enjoy the aroma of the pulled pork but would resist the flavor. I once knew a rabbi who said that we are not allowed to eat pork, but nothing forbids us from enjoying the performances of Hollywood pigs in films like Gordy. Have your children seen it? Mrs. Cullen notices on the calendar that Hanukkah and Christmas overlap this year, and she is determined to bake the best Suikerbrood in the Napa Valley for that occasion. Your suggestions regarding authenticity of recipe, shape and adornment would be appreciated, and she will photograph it in the hopes of improving on the current image in the article. Perhaps UPS might bring some your way as well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • Well, Ucucha is the expert on what it's supposed to look and taste like, I imagine. I am willing to bet that he will catch a flight home in the next week or two and will come back mid-January, twenty pounds heavier. Have we broached the topic? It is essential to get the nib sugar; I ordered mine from Amazon and it was ridiculously expensive, but necessary (next time I'm trying this). I made it in the bread machine. It was really, really delicious, esp. the little pieces of sugar on the outside, that burned a little bit. I think I used the recipe from the first link, with some modifications. Yes, that photograph looks a bit distasteful, and I think that it may have a light kind of whole wheat in it. Mine didn't look so great, and the cell phone photos didn't either. I'm sure Mrs. Cullen has a much gentler hand. Best, Drmies (talk) 05:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As for the name "Cullen", I have hinted at my real identity so often that I suppose it would do no harm to reveal that it was my grandfather's middle name, and he went by "Cullen" in everyday life. He died the year before I was born. It was also my father's middle name, and is my middle name and my oldest son's middle name. As for what constitutes "grammar", at least I did not spell it "grammer". Is that Dutch? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:07, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hotel Polen and Ania Bien DYK[edit]

OK, the DYK nom is up; please see Template:Did you know nominations/Hotel Polen fire. If you have suggestion for a better hook, place 'em there. SpeakFree, one of the hassles of a DYK nom is that you have to review another one; I had the good fortune of running into an easy one. Drmies (talk) 05:23, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me. I prefer your version but you could always add the words "and the Holocaust" to it. It may attract more attention then. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 11:36, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Lady modified it. Just to stay on the safe side I reviewed another nomination (since this is now double). Drmies (talk) 15:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at The ed17's talk page.
Message added 19:00, 12 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:00, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You were wrong[edit]

It wasn't the next edit; it was the one after that! Hehe, I didn't notice your edit summary until just now. The reason I finally saw it? I noticed that, after creating Template:Did you know nominations/The Kingdom of the Netherlands During World War II, you neglected to transclude it on Template talk:Did you know. I was curious if there were others, so I filtered your edits to show the ones in Template space, and I saw, in addition to the above-mentioned edit summary, two other nominations which were similarly untranscluded: Template:Did you know nominations/Hotel Polen fire and Template:Did you know nominations/W.R. van Hoëvell. I've added all three, but I'm afraid you can't always count on my diligence, so please remember to perform this important step; without it, no one is even aware that the nomination exists. I only checked recent nominations, so if there were any older nominations which never appeared, now you may know why. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 03:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Shoot, you are totally right--you have told me this before. Thanks so much! I don't think I have anything else laying around. Mandarax, where would I be without you. Man, you can filter edits? What can't you do? Oh, maybe you can help me with this: I accidentally bought a quadrophonic amp (the Sony SQ-100) instead of the regular stereo TA-88. Why don't you come by and see if you can hook it up with the ST-88 tuner? (And isn't that a nice little set-up, with us sitting in the middle listening to some Floyd or something?) Drmies (talk) 03:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • BTW, the "You were wrong" was only intended to refer to your semi-prophetic edit summary, which was off by one. The transclusion problem shouldn't be a problem for much longer, as a bot is in the works to check, and notify people if they forget.

    It seems to me that after I noticed your edits to Led Zepagain, I made a cryptic comment such as "I've seen them many times, although I've never gone to see them". Now I'm not certain whether I ever wrote that, or just thought it. In any case, the explanation is that I often went to see the Pink Floyd tribute band Which One's Pink, and it was often a double bill with Led Zepagain. Wow, Floyd in quadraphonic! Will there be a laser show? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 04:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ed, I'm glad you learned something from your grandfather. Off to bed, lad, and leave the weird music to the old folks. You can still make something of your life. Drmies (talk) 05:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pink Floyd is my favorite band. Just saying. Also, it's exam week, sleep is not allowed. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:28, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sure my Advanced English Grammar students feel the same way--and their exam is in eight hours. Shouldn't you be studying? Good luck, Drmies (talk) 05:33, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm getting there. ;-) Hope you didn't make it too hard! Those kids are going to be tired. I'm sure you see that every year, though. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pls do not change the content[edit]

Hi Drmies,

Pls do not change the content of Wire and Wireless India. Its a company page and facts has been reported without getting biased. --Anshul1703 (talk) 04:31, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, thank you. Are you saying you represent the company? And do you know that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not an advertising avenue? Drmies (talk) 05:00, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologize[edit]

Did not mean to do the last edit. I somehow missed the fact that I had reverted this person yesterday also and it hasn't been 24 hours. Again, an honest mistake. I have stopped reverting and let AIV do its job. Thanks. — Legolas (talk2me) 18:15, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I understand. I'm not about to take action on it, but neither am I going to block that editor (I did so yesterday already, I believe). Well, you've been around here long enough to now that it's edit warring even if you're right. Having said that, I'm sure your counterpart is about to run into an indef block, and then we can all get back to work (or lunch, as the case may be). Best, Drmies (talk) 18:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nicky Bell[edit]

Hello, I've created a page based on the actor Nicky Bell and the site is threatening to delete it as I don't have any sources to back up what I've written please could you help me keep this page open? Many thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carty1984 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry, if you have no sources to back it up you shouldn't put it in there--that's the essence of WP:V. We have strict guidelines: no biographies of living people without references to reliable sources. Sorry, but them's the shakes. There's this, but imdb does not count as a reliable source. I do, however, have one free ticket for you to go see the Patron Saint of Lost Causes in Film and Popular Culture: go ask for help on User:MichaelQSchmidt. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 19:45, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't that be User talk:MichaelQSchmidt? SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 21:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure--thanks. Drmies (talk) 23:57, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply! Well the funny thing is I am Nicky Bell so surely there can't be a better source than myself to back up my page? Sorry to keep mythering you on this one but I'm pretty dense when it comes to computer stuff! Only created the page on the request of people in the industry! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carty1984 (talk • contribs) 16:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, congratulations, and may you have a long and prosperous career. Who knows, you might get to have an affair with Jennifer Anniston! But that you are he makes you the worst possible person to edit the article, and an even worse source (if you pardon my saying so): Wikipedia articles require reliable sources. See WP:RS. As for he being you, PLEASE see Wikipedia:Autobiography--the first sentence is already worth the effort. Think about it this way: Wikipedia is not going to get you a job (or a call from Jen), and if you are notable, it will happen. Did you drop MQS a line? Good luck. Drmies (talk) 16:41, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

True it won't get me a job or a call from Jen, not that I want one anyway, but it means I would have a useful link to other wiki pages like Awaydays, which would give people who like the film and who are interested in knowing a bit more about the people involved, for example myself, a chance to see how they got into acting and got the part in the film. If I'm not the right person to write the bio then that's ok, just thought it would be a useful tool to utilize for myself and interested third parties. Who's MQS Thanks for the help Nick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carty1984 (talk • contribs) 13:36, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • "MQS" is MichaelQSchmidt, referenced above. BTW, I did get a call from Jen and we're having cocktails tomorrow. Good luck! Drmies (talk) 00:34, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Legitimate Sockpuppet[edit]

How do I register as a legitimate sockpuppet, used for reasons of privacy? I understand that I need to contact a "Checkuser" but am unsure how to do this in a secure manner that would not defeat the purpose of using a sockpuppet in the first place.Quasi Montana (talk) 21:11, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't know. I have a couple, and I got them approved by emailing ArbCom. There are instructions on WP:Arbitration Committee, I believe. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 00:00, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

McRice update[edit]

I had to start a new sections. Technical issues with the iPad. I haven't been to McDonalds to check on the McRice, but I did hit up a Starbucks this morning. Tastes just like home, but more Chinese. All my luggage got Checkrd through to Toronto, so I might have to go shopping, so I have some clean clothes. Also, the Great Firewall of China ain't got nothin on me. --kelapstick(bainuu) 23:59, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • K, we're all living vicariously through you. Exciting! What does something taste like if it tastes "more Chinese"? Drmies (talk) 00:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, I never told you there's a McKroket in the motherland. Never had one--I get mine from Kwekkeboom or Van Dobben. Drmies (talk) 00:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I love kroket (Indonesian spelling)... I'll see if I can get some pix of McRice and McCongee later. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:33, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow--rice porridge? Crisco, that's Dutch spelling too. Lady, these are among the most delicious things in the world. They also come in the shape of balls--bitterballen--a perfect snack with a beer. Drmies (talk) 02:37, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed. Yummy for breakfast. Ooh, bitterballen are nice too... just not as common here. Geez, I'm hungry now. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:42, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, after reading about bitterballen and kroketten, yum, I want some. My mother used to cook ham patties, which were basically a ham version of this and very tasty. LadyofShalott 04:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<--I have the most exciting fusion-cooked talk page on all of Wikipedia. Man, if we could throw a potlatch together... Malleus, what's your favorite food or snack? Drmies (talk) 05:25, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rice at McDonald's.jpg
  • I wouldn't mind a potlatch... if I received the gift of unlimited access to Jstor :-D Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Having run a hotel/restaurant/bar on Bonaire (part of the Netherlands Antilles when I lived there, just part of the Netherlands now), I have substantial experience with Dutch fast food. I always purchased bitterballen in giant cases that proudly proclaimed "10% VLEES!" on the outside, which means they were 10% meat. They never confessed the nature of the other 90%. The customers were very unhappy if they were fried to a nice golden brown in fresh oil: they had to be cooked until they were a rich chocolaty brown, preferably in oil that had already been used to make another ten or twenty thousand bitterballen. Kroketten weren't bad. We had one Dutch snackbar on the island that did its best to emulate all manner of Dutch fast food for people that got homesick for Holland. I ate part of a meal there once. I remember a dish named something like "Vlees Amerikaanse", which was basically pureed raw steak, but I had no idea why people thought it came from America. I must have that name wrong, because I can't find a trace of it on Google. Perhaps Drmies can remind me of the real name.—Kww(talk) 03:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • KWW, you are correct: we like 'em deep brown. As for that meat mixture--it's called Filet Americain, and I've never had it. As far as I understand, it's meat ground into a paste mixed with mayo. Whaddayaknow: Filet américain goes somewhere. Oh, and if I had to guess, I would guess that "Americain" means the kind of thing that "French" means in "French fries", or maybe how Florence in "Florentine" means the addition of spinach. BTW, sorry it took me a while to see your message. Drmies (talk) 22:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since you know guitars...[edit]

Squier Cyclone has been unreferenced since its creation in 2006, and says it's a "direct reproduction of the Fender Cyclone". Is a merger to the latter title appropriate? LadyofShalott 00:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Probably. Squier is just the knock-off brand for Fender. They were initially made in Japan and half the price of the US guitars, back in the 80s, and then they got cheaper and cheaper. I think they're out of Korea or Taiwan--those are the cheap Fenders you see in any pawn shop for $89. Anyway, what that means is that they're basically automatically not notable (a new category!), so please go ahead an merge it, yes. Did you see my new Tahash/Wyandanch? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:28, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I hadn't, but now I've looked. It's even worse though, as it's spammy. Thanks for the opinion. I'll go ahead and work on a merger in a bit. LadyofShalott 01:39, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Do you have any thoughts on a model that attracts us because we want to write about stuff that interests us, but instead traps us into defending stuff that by and large doesn't? Malleus Fatuorum 01:52, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • (talk page stalker) Not sure about a model, but that description certainly sounds like one side of the debate regarding inherent notability for secondary schools. - Sitush (talk) 01:57, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, plenty, and few of them good. Half the time I don't even understand what I'm doing here--explaining in edit summary after edit summary why a list of cruft is not encyclopedic, or protecting articles I don't give a flying fuck about. Is that what you had in mind? Look at the list of IPs I blocked this afternoon--like I don't have anything better to do. I guess I don't. But you know, every know and then Kelapstick walks by with some crazy idea and then it's fun again. And Hotel Polen fire, dropped off here courtesy of another Dutchie, was very interesting. W.R. van Hoevell and Chinezenmoord taught me a lot about my own history. I could go on... Drmies (talk) 02:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • The blocking stuff is one thing, but the truth is that most of the crap here is dealt with by peons like me, and not by the grandees like you. Malleus Fatuorum 02:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • Really, dear MF? The ongoing cleaning of Tachash? The piecemeal trimming of Wyandanch, Long Island? Ownership of Echoplex? And unlike you, I have to do all of this with grace and delicacy, since otherwise my grand status will be short-lived. Hey, I meant to check on Hamster's page; last time I looked you were taking care of it. I'll go have a look. Please tell him I said hi when you meet him at your weekly cabal in the pub. Drmies (talk) 02:33, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • We could always ignore the stuff we don't care about, but that can be hard to do if we care about the project as a whole. Then there's of course the damned if you do, damned if you don't phenomenon that comes into play. LadyofShalott 02:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see you've beaten me to the merger. :) LadyofShalott 02:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Somewhere in here I meant to say "I did it already"--may have gotten lost in an edit conflict. I don't care if you want to take this to AfD: it's an incredibly non-notable guitar. Not that I would turn one down... Drmies (talk) 02:40, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Fender Cyclone[edit]

The article Fender Cyclone has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This does not appear to be a notable instrument.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LadyofShalott 03:54, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey! Who's templating the regulars?? Drmies (talk) 03:59, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, I think some Squier fans are going to be angry at me. I've merged one or two more, trimmed all the other ones, adjusted the Fender guitars template... Those guitar articles, they have a tendency to be worse than awful. Even those wrestling articles have more oversight, they have standards. Drmies (talk) 05:28, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah well. I'm certainly no expert, but in this one pair of articles, we're talking about a guitar and its exact copy. If that's typical, then they certainly needed merging at the least. Even if A is notable, it's hard to imagine many scenarios where cheapo-copy-of-A is independently notable. I wonder if there's any music scholastic literature on these different guitars that could be used to improve the articles of the more notable models. (Of course, this is basically idle wondering, as the subject is not one I'm interested in enough to pursue.) LadyofShalott 03:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, you should be--it's a great topic, and most of those articles suck. You have a moral obligation, if only to prove MF wrong: it's peon's work. The problem is that the good magazines (Guitar Player and Vintage Guitar) has limited online access. I have a year's worth of the one and about two or three years of the other, but these guitars are older than that. I've worked on the overarching articles (Fender Musical Instruments Corporation, Fender Stratocaster, Gibson Guitar Corporation, Marshall Amplification, etc.) but you always run into the same stuff--on the one hand, the fans who stick in everything they find on the message boards (look at this), and on the other hand the sometimes difficult access to reliable sources. Drmies (talk) 03:36, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • The right sort of library (sorry, that does not include mine) would have physical archives of those magazines. LadyofShalott 03:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • And by scholastic literature, I was really wondering about any relevant academic journals. LadyofShalott 03:57, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • That article history looks painful... like you were doing some banging of your head against a wall there too. LadyofShalott 04:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Those walls seem to find me. Yeah, I don't think there are academic journals for this at all. Guitar Player actually is available through our JSTOR, so that's something. I got a weird page number for an article on the most expensive production guitar in the world (Mandarax pointed out this error out) so I went out and bought that book, a pretty comprehensive overview of marks and models. So there are sources; our guitarplaying contributors don't often care for them, though... Drmies (talk) 04:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • Well, poot. YGM, but reading your post immediately above, it might not contain anything useful you can't already get. LadyofShalott 04:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • You know, poot is a derogatory term in Dutch, the equivalent of "faggot." And I do have mail: "Do you need 100% Finance?? Contact us for your personal loan, debt consolidation loans, business loans,and Home Refinancing loan etc.The Offer Ranges from $5,000.00 Min.To $100,000,000.00 Max. at 2% INTEREST PER ANNUM." Thanks! Drmies (talk) 04:37, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • Hehe thanks Lady! Drmies (talk) 04:52, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't know that. I assure you meant it in the English-language sense of being mildly scatological. (Using it in the sense you mention would be a PA, not to mention kind of stupid. :p ) I'm glad you were able to make use of that article. I'm still annoyed though. LadyofShalott 05:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Franklin Library[edit]

Banging our collective heads against a brick wall. I've started a talk page section. LadyofShalott 03:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Pace Malleaus above, we seem to be running into this kind of stuff all the time. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, our fan is a perfect 100%. Drmies (talk) 04:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at LadyofShalott's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Not suiker[edit]

but Beer
Have a beer on me. Thanks for all the help in trying to expand Chinezenmoord to FA status; fingers crossed! Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:27, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hehe, thanks--the local brew? Yes, I'm keeping my fingers crossed. Good luck, and thanks again. I will have a look at the sequel (you linked it above). Drmies (talk) 05:38, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yep, one of the most common brands in the country. The sequel is already a GA too, and was a lot easier to research! (I had the references already from doing the Chinezenmoord). Alright, I've got an exam soon. Cheers. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Got it. I have it on my desktop at work, so I'll send it possibly tomorrow, certainly by Friday. Drmies (talk) 03:05, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, thanks a lot. With Christmas coming around I doubt my copyedit request will get picked up all that quickly, so it should give me time to add a bit more (I'm pretty busy IRL at the moment as well... exams and translating a website for Wikimedia Indonesia... argh) Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:56, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hi Drmies, appreciate the feedback. As the longtime moderator of all the new editors on the Star Pirates discussion, it goes against lots of years of training to let heated conversations flow without trying to cool it. But it's not my forum and thanks for the reminder on that.

I can clearly see the Star Pirates page is likely to be deleted which seems proper from what I've learned as it doesn't have the main stream press/scholarly citations. Thanks to the editors for clarifying that's the reason. Thanks too for giving the SP community the time to get a solid enough page up -- the initial speedy deletion request seemed strange.

It's always good to get insights on other models of managing community websites. The lack of hurdles to be a poster is interesting to watch in action. So too is the goal of just taking stated facts while ignoring the editors reasons for posting. It makes sense in an truly open environment here, but in our forums why one posts something is almost as important as what one posts. New "Keeping" oriented players and I imported the "why" standard, which is incorrect here - again sorry for that. At least those are the lessons I took, as I'll mull this. So thanks for the patience providing those lessons. Be well. StarBaby5 (talk) 17:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your note. That discussion got a bit out of hand, and arguments of very different validity came from both sides, that's all I'll say about it. We try to have these conversations based on policy and guidelines, so reasons don't really come into it (and certainly personal reasons don't), but sometimes the debate gets more heated than that. Anyway, I'm sorry if you haven't had the greatest Wiki experience yet--trust me, AfD is the least fun area of the project. Take care, and thanks again for dropping by, Drmies (talk) 19:12, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Yeah, it hasn't been the most enjoyable experience for anyone, I'm guessing. I have learned interesting things so thanks. One more thing is that the heat AfD thread was fairly low grade really. It could be a lot worse. In our forums, we try hard to work with occasionally unbalanced players, including trying to get them to seek help. If we can't, we eventually have to boot them. Often revenge is sworn, and with ease of editing, I can see any page I edit getting a special kind of love from 'em. Supporters of the game would come in to rebut their points and ... chaos. I hope I'm wrong. I guess we'll see. Cheers and thank again. StarBaby5 (talk) 20:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's the internet, right? On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog, so folks can do and say whatever you like, it seems. There's plenty of drama to go around here, that's for sure. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 02:37, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. Heard the quote but didn't know the background. Thanks. 04:20, 16 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by StarBaby5 (talk • contribs)

In case you missed it...[edit]

Bgwhite has kindly offered some research assistance. Mid-thread replies can easily be overlooked (I'm sure I've made some that were), so I thought I'd point it out. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:11, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WarriorsPride6565[edit]

He has removed multiple words in nearly every single edit, and tons of the articles which he did it in haven't even been fixed I only just reverted this one.Fixkihitter (talk) 07:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've warned him. Considering he has a long history of doing so, if he continues I may go straight to level 3 or 4 if he does it again soon. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks to both. Dougweller issued a final warning, which I've endorsed. Drmies (talk) 15:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • They just disappear by themselves, I've asked people this problem before and they said I may have an bug in my browser. Those random words and phrases that keep getting removed are always highlighted in blue, I really don't know how it happened. Maybe I should change to an different account, I know how to change my Ip address as-well, maybe that would help HERE TAKE A LOOK AT THIS: http://i40.tinypic.com/2dlvfr.jpg This is the reason why random words keep disapearing and I have too keep editing over and over again. (This is the zoomed version of wikipedia, that I copy and pasted. See the word "" highligted and underlined in blue?) WarriorsPride6565 (talk) 4:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
        • Well, it seems to me that this is an issue you need to address. I've never seen anything like this before--and maybe now you can go back and look at your talk page, where you vehemently denied, in all-caps, that this was happening. Best, Drmies (talk) 01:39, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Have you asked for help at WP:VP(T)? In any case, as long as the problem exists, it is incumbent upon you to check your edits for inadvertent deletions and fix them where they occur. LadyofShalott 05:27, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Templates explanation[edit]

Hello Drmies.

I happened to see your question at Mandarax's talkpage. The meaning of the templates is to collect common info that is (or will be) used in several places in order to save data storage and editing effort.

You'll get the idea if you study the content of Category:2008 Summer Olympics water polo templates and Category:2010 Winter Olympics ice hockey templates.

The 2008 volleyball template category is not complete yet.

Regards

HandsomeFella (talk) 20:19, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stay Forever (Delain song)[edit]

Greetings! Just in the interest of trying to understand G5, which is a CSD rationale I've actually never applied anywhere, can you explain why it didn't apply in this case? I'm not at all suggesting that you're wrong (in case you take this message that way!), just curious to learn why. Thanks in advance. Best, ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 20:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I just read your edit summary on the reversion. Please excuse me for a moment while I slap myself on the head. Obvious. Thanks! ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 20:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem, well, what shall I say--it was the first time I ran into one, and I decided to try and make sense out of it. I may be completely wrong, but bear with me and see if this sounds alright. "Banned" editor really can mean only one of two things: written by an editor with a topic ban in the forbidden area, or written by a sock. Written by a "blocked" editor can only mean written by a sock--if they're blocked they can't write. No? Now, if an editor is indef-blocked, like this one, and the matter concerns an article in the area that they got blocked out of, so to speak, that may be different, but here it doesn't concern a song by Memoria (or whatever the name of that band was).

On a side-note, this sounds like the kind of speedy invented to help with the wholesale deletion of tons of articles created by an editor, and fortunately we don't have that here. Thanks for your remark. If I get it wrong, there will be a dozen corrections within the hour. ;) BTW, your name makes me think of the Wu-Tang Clan: "I'm like a sniper, hyper on the ginseng brew..." Drmies (talk) 22:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of God Wears My Underwear[edit]

Please look at the history of this page - it has been deleted and restored several times. The deletions were made by over zealous people like you who have little sense of the process by which history is recorded. The film is notable - it has won awards, been the subject of articles in various publications by respected reviewers. It is currently in distribution.

It explores serious issues of sexuality, the Holocaust, and how karma influences the present through reincarnation and past life memories. If you don't find this important - that is your problem. Many others feel otherwise and you need to respect their viewpoints.

And it is NOT blatantly infringing on any copyright. I'm the copyright holder in any case. It has no content that I'm not happy to release under CC with attribution.

Mccainre (talk) 00:29, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • You want me to please look at something while you're telling me I'm overzealous and have little sense etc? When I ask Mrs. Drmies for a favor I usually bring flowers or an iPad. Besides, your article was promotional, and Wikipedia wasn't founded for that. As for the copyright, if you are the person owning the website and making the movie and all you probably shouldn't be creating articles for it--see WP:COI. However, a. you can take it up with Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and b. please refrain from using Ctrl+V. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mccainre, I looked when I deleted it, and I looked again, just now. There is little evidence that it would pass our notability guidelines, given the paucity of coverage in secondary sources--see this search. The most relevant of those is a brief note in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune announcing that the movie is to be shown at the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Film Festival in 2006 ("Here is a film of such transcendent ineptitude that it is truly so bad it's good."), but usually it takes more than one review to build notability per WP:N. However, should coverage of the film in reliable sources increase, you are welcome to resubmit the article. Drmies (talk) 01:33, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Star Pirates AfD Discussion[edit]

I've changed my vote from Delete to Redirect, I humbly ask you consider the option I present and change your vote to reflect.Quasi Montana (talk) 03:41, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks![edit]

Thanks for working on suicide survivor. As you've seen, there's a ton of literature on the topic, so notability is unquestionable. LadyofShalott 03:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure thing. I haven't written on those topics, so I honestly wouldn't know what to do, but I'll be glad to follow anyone's lead. I was looking at some related articles and I'm about to do something drastic to Survivor's guilt. Drmies (talk) 03:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'll work on it some more, but maybe you could help prod me along. I think I'll have to work on it little bits at a time, and having collaborators would help a lot. It's hard for me to believe we had nothing at all on the topic. LadyofShalott 04:18, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"AfD is the least fun area of the project"[edit]

Sir!

How harshly you have assessed one of my favorite playgrounds! Either you imply that I am a masochist or that I have no understanding of what "fun" is. Or perhaps both. Or maybe you think that I ought to have my head examined. Or possibly all three. Maybe you are right, but habits are tough to break, and at least AfD is calorie-free, spreads no communicable diseases, and the Highway Patrol is not known to arrest those who participate. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:00, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I must agree. The backlogs like NewPagePatrol are likely the least fun parts of WP.AerobicFox (talk) 04:08, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, I don't even know what NewPagePatrol is--but I have to tell you, I didn't even know that NewKidsOnTheBlock had broken up. Cullen, go write some articles: you're good at it and you see results. Drmies (talk) 04:10, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, for fun, check this out, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luis González-Mestres, and make sure to click on all the "show" buttons. Then send poor Kevin some flowers. Drmies (talk) 04:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Inspired by the Hotel Polen fire, I am working on an article about the "Life net", which involves reading about inspiring rescues as well as gruesome failures. Dealing with plunging human bodies does not always go well, it seems. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Success with that! You should find out why it's called a "net" in English when usually they look like this (a ring with a sail in the middle). SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 13:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I had forgotten you were doing that--my apologies. Well, I went over to AfD, and I dedicate this edit to you. Feel free to prove me wrong--a keep from you goes a long way. Drmies (talk) 04:18, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD closing[edit]

Thanks for closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/USTA Eastern, but how about the bundled nomination for USTA South Carolina ? Isn't it being deleted as well? If not we will have to remove the template on that page. MakeSense64 (talk) 06:36, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Good point--I'm on it. I have to do it by hand, so it will take a few minutes. Thanks for the note, Drmies (talk) 15:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, that wasn't so hard. Thanks again. Drmies (talk) 15:04, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pink panther[edit]

Based on the results of the two AFDs do you think consensus has been made to merge all of the pink panther ep articles, (unless a particular article shows enhanced notability), or do they need to be formally nominated individually? I did include a list of related articles (or links to the category) in the AFDs (and some of the articles were originally explicitly listed in the Cop on Le rocks AFD, but people contested that decision)

Additionally, even on the explicitly deleted pink pest control, editors have been reverting the redirect. I tried to make my most recent redirect comment very explicit, but we will see. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, I saw the four links, and only then did I see the entire category. I've asked a certified technical expert for his advice (see User talk:Mandarax), but for the moment I am somewhat at a loss on how to do that merge (I mean technically speaking already). Moreover, the question of whether the AfD applies to the entire category, rather than just the one plus the other four, is open, as far as I'm concerned. I am not sure how to proceed, but I will merge those four (by hand), since that's what the AfD decided. Drmies (talk) 17:51, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In a case like this, it is useful if you explain the matter on the editor's talk page. Drmies (talk) 17:55, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm making an executive decision: I cannot give you The Pink Phink yet, at least not so easily, since that one has a special and unique claim to notability. As far as the rest is concerned, I'm on it. Oh, I also had a look at the Ant articles and redirected one of them: all that still needs to be executed per AfD. Drmies (talk) 18:05, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Certainly, winning an academy award grants notability for that ep. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, I went through the Le Cop list as well, and issued a warning to Oanabay for undoing those redirects--I found a couple more. Here's what I think you should do, but you are welcome to get advice from others. There is a difference between the two AfDs: the one called for redirects (and that's easy), the other, well, the consensus, in my opinion, was merge. Look at the history of List of The Pink Panther cartoons to see what a mess that is.

    I think you should nominate the lot (the entire category) MINUS the ones that are obviously individually notable. It's a hell of a job, but I don't think we can justify merging over 100 articles based on an AfD with so few participants--and merging all of that is no fun. In your nomination, lay out your case again and ask specifically for delete or redirect: you can easily argue that there is little relevant history to merge (they're all cut and paste jobs anyway!). For such a long list, you'll need folks to show up: go out and 'canvass', but do so honestly, and include all the nay-sayers from the previous two AfDs, and maybe even place a note on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion--maybe you should place a note there before your nomination, just to get advice and make sure everything is above board. Make sure your note there and your note to previous participants is neutral, of course. Does that make sense? Drmies (talk) 18:20, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. Thanks for your assistance in this matter. I will make the posts, and I pity the admin that gets to do all the deletions :) Gaijin42 (talk) 18:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any tools you know of for making the same edit to many articles for the AFD nomination, or any twinklish tools that make that easy? Gaijin42 (talk) 18:33, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not deletions, redirects (that's my advice, anyway). I don't know about tools, sorry... Drmies (talk) 18:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I mean to redirect as well, but weren't you suggesting that I nominate them for redirection via the AFD process? (If there is an AFR process which is separate, I am unaware of it. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:36, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have made notice to the AFD project discussion page of my intent, and asking for advice. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:47, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. (Haven't looked at it, but I will.) No, AfD is the way to go, and you can of course suggest deletion. Sorry if I wasn't clear--it's kind of a double thought, asking for one thing in hopes of another. I mean, they're probably notable as search terms, and preserving that history is not the worst thing in the world. But if you object to the content (the cut and paste quality of it, for instance), you can ask for deletion, sure. Drmies (talk) 18:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On your chime in, did you mean to actually say something? Or just indicate that you were paying attention to it? Gaijin42 (talk) 19:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Chime in" means "agree." ;) Drmies (talk) 20:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Really?[edit]

"Just because stuff isn't always available online and in English doesn't mean it should be disregarded." When did I say that? I never said that there was no reliable sources. I said that I couldn't find any. When articles are brought to AfD, there is a chance of sources being found during the discussion. SL93 (talk) 21:20, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Eh, I said that (at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ion Dacian). You and two others said there was nothing to be found, and clearly there was something to be found--using something as mundane as Google Books. And look at what the regular Google search delivers--look at the third hit, for crying out loud: you don't have to know Romanian to see that it says National Operetta Theater "Ion Dacian". All of that is part of WP:BEFORE. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 23:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I never said that nothing was to be found. I said that I couldn't find them. It isn't common sense to know that the third result is this Ion Dacian. Tell me where I said "there is nothing to be found" in the sentence "I found no reliable sources for this musician.". I always search for sources before I nominate articles for deletion. SL93 (talk) 23:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK--there's a Romanian tenor who sang operetta, and there's a Romanian National Theater carrying *by chance?* the exact same name. Come on: put two and two together. As for "I found no reliable sources"--well, in that case all I can say is that your searching skills are severely lacking and you should maybe stay away from AfD. The best thing you could have said was "sorry for the nomination, let me help improve the article." Drmies (talk) 23:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • What I meant by first two sentences is that I never said that non-English sources and offline sources should be disregarded It's odd that you tell me to stay away from AfD when most articles that I nominated for deletion since 2008 have been deleted. I don't see how you can say to put two

and two together. Just because he is Romanian and the theater is Romanian doesn't make it so automatically. SL93 (talk) 23:54, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

        • Even if I did make a goof, you don't have to be an asshole and say that you think I should stay away from AfD. SL93 (talk) 23:56, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • (ec three times in a row) I take back the "stay away"--your stats are actually pretty good, which makes this all the more puzzling. Drmies (talk) 23:57, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • I am human. Sorry I'm not a perfect robot that doesn't mind when editors put words in their mouth. SL93 (talk) 23:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<--OK, you don't get to come here and call me an asshole if you're too dumb or too lazy to figure out that the National Operetta Theater "Ion Dacian" in Bucharest, Romania, is named for the Romanian operetta singer Ion Dacian. Now do us all a favor and walk away from the horse. I didn't put words in your mouth, I just called you out. Step away from my talk page, please. Drmies (talk) 00:02, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You said that I was against offline sources and you said that I was against non-English sources. Which is why I came to your talk page because I never said those things. SL93 (talk) 00:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thank you for clarifying. I'll take the "asshole" and file it, I guess. Drmies (talk) 00:51, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Even if I did goof which I might have, there didn't need to be so much animosity in your keep. SL93 (talk) 00:58, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is my 2nd argument in a week as a result of AfD. Usually it is 2 a month. Sorry for not being clear. SL93 (talk) 01:00, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm sorry if you're having a hard time--but calling the people who prove something wrong "asshole" is never going to make it easy. I've been wrong before at AfD; the thing to do is to send apologies and flowers and then move on. Drmies (talk) 01:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bold merge[edit]

I have just performed a bold merge, as described at Talk:Verma#Merge. I would appreciate a review of my rationale. Your stalkers are welcome, of course. - Sitush (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, your reason looks fine to me. Those kinds of things are fine until someone protests, however. Also, a history merge is proper here; I'll take care of that. Drmies (talk) 00:59, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done I really don't like doing history merges, BTW, so this is going to cost you--I'll take chocolate. Hey, it was in the 70s here. I rode my bike to school today! How's your toesies? Drmies (talk) 01:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks. I have never really understood history merges, so perhaps now is the time to do so. As I understand things, redirecting preserves the history because a viewer can still get back to the original article & that obviously contains the history + shows who contributed what & when. And so to the Big Question: what is achieved by a history merge and, for that matter, how can I view it? I can appreciate that you might think this is the sort of procedural detail that I should know by now ... but I do not.
The toe is safe, albeit a mess to view. The docs have done their stuff and now it is down to Mother Nature. I can only walk more than a few yards if I wear seriously stiff boots etc but, hey, I can live with that for now. After all, I am one of those who has walked the Pennine Way, Coast to Coast Walk and other minor ambles, doing it the "hard" way with a 40 lb pack/tent etc. Nothing like walking the Appalachian Trail but I am still quite pleased about completing the Lyke Wake Walk inside 14 hours and with a hip full of screws/plates etc! I know that it is nothing cf marathon runners etc but the terrain is a bit different .... and there are no white lines or crowds to guide you! There is a photograph somewhere of me a'top of Eagle Crag. Nothing special, except that an ill wind has caused people to remark on my excitement at seeing some sheep in the distance. We Brits have a fascination with accusing others amongst us of molesting that innocent species.
-2 (Celsius) here now. Not too bad! My worst was camping in Glencoe at - 21C. It was my good fortune to have attended the nearest pub earlier, since that meant that I had a natural means of de-icing the tent zip when I finally staggered back. I reckon that my aim was pretty good on that occasion ... - Sitush (talk) 01:37, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here is one of the umpteen versions of the pic. - Sitush (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh to be young again, and do disgusting things and be proud of them later. Nice shot. As far as merging goes, usually what happens is I do something, someone tells me the histories should be merged, then I merge the histories. History merges preserve proper attribution of the article to all the editors (it usually comes up at AfD, in the "merge and delete" situation), and in a case like this, where both articles have histories with decent, significant contributions, I think that it is proper. Up on this page is some conversation about Pink Panther episodes--the ones that will be proposed for deletion, where a redirect might be left, we're talking about simple cut-and-paste articles that have no significant history and no verified content. Nothing to merge, so to speak. Does that help? Drmies (talk) 02:24, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The distance between pride and good fortune is slim. If no-one has ever said that before then (c) Sitush, 2011 ... and I do not care what the CC-BY-SA etc stuff might say.. I appreciate the explanation: I am not sure where the line should be drawn but, hey, if someone tells me to jump and I respect them then, yes, I probably will. - Sitush (talk) 02:34, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Thackeray probably said it in Vanity Fair, or Austen in Pride and Prejudice, or Dickens in "quite a lot" ... or Shakespeare in every other Act. There is nothing that has not already been said! - Sitush (talk)
Except for this: OITGHMKKKIHYGGHJKMNmnjukl,mh4567. Drmies (talk) 03:06, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
... Nope. I am sure that one of the people at the Manchester Wikimeet said that last weekend, although we might quibble about the US/UK English spelling. After a pint of Throatwobbler (or whatever it was), followed by similar quantities of Festivity, Black Moor (Goose Eye Brewery, very tasty) and Double Chocolate Stout, well, anything sounds sensible. Long gone are the days when I could knock back a barrel! But I must admit to being apprehensive about the event and then proven to be wrong: I quite enjoyed my first WM. It gave me a bit of confidence, in which I was lacking. There appeared to be a general (positive, I must add) desire to see Malleus turn up. I am pretty sure that MF has in the past expressed an interest, but if it should ever happen then the first one is on me. - Sitush (talk) 01:20, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

International Communist Current[edit]

Hi Drimes. Someone went ahead and re-created the International Communist Current article, which you deleted. Sherlock Holmes Fan (talk) 01:59, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks. I've tagged it as G4 and left a note for the next admin on the talk page and consider salting it. I prefer to let someone else do it; a second opinion in a case like this is a good thing, even if I have no doubt myself. Drmies (talk) 02:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, Fastily took care of business. Thanks Fastily--who do you think The Lion of Lannister (talk · contribs) might be? Drmies (talk) 02:41, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that you get an opinion from Carrite. He maintains an archive on the socialist snd communist movements. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:47, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, glad to have been able to help. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 03:30, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just if you're curious: http://libcom.org/forums/general/icc-deleted-wikipedia-16122011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fluffy4550 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • "But wikipedia has become pretty nazi like in its book burning." Indeed. Notice how they throw "they" around like it means anything at all. It's a conspiracy! Drmies (talk) 22:33, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like The Lion of Lannister is trying to contest the deletion, but he isn't going about it the right way. Someone should perhaps say something to help him, but I won't, as I'm not very familiar with the process for reviewing a deletion. Sherlock Holmes Fan (talk) 05:26, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, I'm not either--I don't question authority, I just enforce it, haha. It looks like a complicated process, but maybe someone who's looking on can help out if they're doing it wrong? Drmies (talk) 06:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm completely new to this so I hope you will bear with me if I'm getting something wrong. I would like to request the undeletion of the article on the International Communist Current, for the following reasons:

  1. The arguments given for deletion were trivial or ill-informed (Unfortunately I can't find the article any more to refer to all the arguments that were given for deletion, so I'm relying on memory):
    1. "The ICC is a sect": this is a purely subjective value judgment and as such is irrelevant. And even if the ICC were a sect, this would not mean that it should be removed from an Encyclopedia - which after all deals with all subjects.
    2. Another argument seemed to be that it could not be found referenced on Google - however, this is not really a very profound argument, especially since the "International Communist Current" is almost always referred to as "ICC". If you were to try a search on Amazon or on Google books - you would bring up more stuff.
    3. Another argument was based on the number of different groups related to the "Internationalist Communist Current" - which is something completely different, the argument is therefore irrelevant.
    4. It was suggested that the ICC entry was "web hosting". But the ICC has a web site which publishes in more than a dozen languages with somewhere around 20,000 articles on it all told, so this argument is unfounded.
  2. If I understand Wikipedia guidelines (like I say I'm new to this), then the two main criteria are "notability" and "verifiability": it's true that there could be more "verifiability" in the entry, but it seems to me that the deletion was carried out so fast (after all, people don't spend all their lives checking on Wikipedia entries) that it was impossible to add this in - it can be done if the article is reinstated.
  3. Notability: well, of course this is very subjective (for example, I have no interest whatever in Frog jumping contest, yet there is an article about it), but let's make a case for the ICC's "notability":
    1. The Left Communist tradition is a minority current, but one with a definite "pedigree" (identified by Lenin in his famous pamphlet "Left communism an infantile disorder) and whose organisations at one time numbered their membership in 1000s if not 10,000s
    2. Though much diminished today, the Left Communist political tradition lives on in a number of groups (see Left communism) of which the ICC is the largest.
    3. The ICC has published a trilingual (English, French, Spanish) quarterly since 1975, and publishes today in more than a dozen languages - which IMHO actually counts as being pretty notable in itself.
    4. The ICC's publications have been sourced by solid academic works of history.

I could go on, but this is already long. Please let me know if I need to do something different to get the deletion reviewed and reversed.--Jens1917 (talk) 13:51, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for your message, Jens. The main problem, as I saw it, was the lack of reliable sources that establish notability. The following are the sources in the original article and one brought up at the discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Communist Current. **This article mentions the organization, though it can't spot more than one member, and while it mentions activities, none of those activities were verified anywhere else (let alone by references in the article) and the Daily Mail is not know for being a very high-quality paper.
    • This is probably the strongest claim, but it's really brief and the book contains over 1700 organizations, so inclusion is in itself not a very remarkable thing.
    • This is truly just a passing mention, and while it proves existence, it's not significant discussion as is required by our guidelines.
    • There was also a footnote to Communism: Not a nice idea but a material necessity, but that is published by the organization itself.
  • The article was not deleted because someone claimed it was a sect (BTW, I do religious studies as well, and "sect" is not a bad word, IMO--e.g., [4]), or because of webhosting (though it was obvious that the article contained far too much unencyclopedic information). That the ICC is the largest in the Left Communist movement may well be so but isn't proven (a problem that extends also to International Communist Party, for instance. Now, searching for something on Amazon seems like a futile exercise to me--what could one hope to find? And "ICC" is an abbreviation for a ton of things, including cricket organizations. Finally, "The ICC's publications have been sourced by solid academic works of history"--I'm not sure what you mean with "sourced by," but if the claim is that such academic works have discussed the ICC, we have yet to see evidence of it. So I see no evidence, unfortunately, to reverse my decision; you are welcome, of course, to bring this up at WP:DRV, in a concise manner. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the reply. Can you tell me how I should proceed now? I can see three possible avenues, but would like advice on which one to follow:
  1. Continue the discussion on this page (for example, I did not put in the other discussions of the ICC since I did not want to make my post too long, but could do so here if appropriate.
  2. Open a discussion on WP:DRV
  3. Rewrite the entry with evidence of "notability".
  • On the points you raise:
  1. I realise that one is not supposed to make comparisons with other pages to justify retention of a particular page, however if you refer to the Left communism page, it's pretty obvious that the deletion of the page on the ICC leaves a gaping hole in the middle of its references (actually, having looked at it for the first time in years, I think this page could also do with a complete rewrite).
  2. I would like some advice on why something is "notable" or not. After all, as I said, the ICC has been established since 1975 and has published a regular trilingual quarterly Review since then. Personally, I think this is pretty "notable" (in its own small way, but then that is one of Wikipedia's charms, that it contains information about small things as well as big: maybe this puts me among the "inclusionists"?), and it can be verified by the existence of all those back issues.
  3. I note that the Notability in English Wikipedia guidelines says that "Reliable sources generally include mainstream news media and major academic journals, and exclude self-published sources, particularly when self-published on the internet." I agree with you about the quality of the Daily Mail, but its undeniably part of the "mainstream news media". That said, I take the general point. On the other hand, I'm sure there is a vast amount of material on Wikipedia which is not vouched for by mainstream media or major academic journals (this is not a criticism, rather the reverse).--Jens1917 (talk) 13:53, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, the deletion of the ICC article is currently being discussed at deletion review. I wondered if you might be interested in commenting? Sherlock Holmes Fan (talk) 02:20, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies and flowers[edit]

I am sending you apologies and flowers because you had a rough time with a Romanian AfD. You are an excellent editor and an excellent administrator. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh Cullen, that's very friendly of you! But what would make me happier (ah!) is if you learned Romanian quickly and made that article into something nice... Thanks again! PS, did you see what I'm working on? The Young Men's Magazine--fascinating. I read it on the news this morning and couldn't resist. Drmies (talk) 03:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Unfortunately, I can barely speak California American English and all attempts to learn other languages have resulted in short vocabulary lists in my brain but no functional comprehension. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:18, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • The article about the Bronte children's magazine is delightful. It reminded me that, when Ansel Adams was about ten years old, he started publishing a handwritten neighborhood newspaper in San Francisco called the West Clay Park Snooper. It was a success, other people got involved and it was published for several decades. I recently saw a copy in a museum exhibit showing his personal effects as well as his photos. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:32, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Wow. Yes, as I am researching the topic I find myself wishing I could go back in time thirty years or so and continue that one newspaper I wrote. Cullen, you are such a Westerner. You must be a reader of George R. Stewart! Drmies (talk) 03:47, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • I read Earth Abides many years ago. I've always had a soft spot for distopian novels. More recently, I wrote They Call the Wind Maria, a song inspired by one of his novels. I would like to read his 1959 book about Pickett's Charge at Gettysburg, but have never seen a copy, and I frequent used bookstores. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:45, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • I think it's still in print--I was going to assign it in a class on microhistories, which I never got to teach. If I run into a copy I'll save you one; it's well worth reading. Plus, it has maps, and maps are always cool. Drmies (talk) 01:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you gotta help me out...[edit]

Because neither Google Translate nor Wiktionary are doing so: "Miereneuker"? LadyofShalott 05:03, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[5] :O -FASTILY (TALK) 05:33, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Fastily. Well, then, taking the WP-relevant of those meanings, I'll accept that name with pride. That is a weird term though! LadyofShalott 07:25, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks indeed. You know that's not a reliable source! Actually, the first meaning is correct; the second two are not. Unfortunately, I can find no reliable Dutch-English dictionaries online. "Muggezifter" is a nicer word. Lady, in linguistic discussions, one may also use the term "kommaneuker". ;) Drmies (talk) 21:41, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So, Google Translate gives "faultfinding" for Muggezifter and "nitpicking" for Muggezifteren. Comma euker at least makes some kind of sense, sort of. Who comes up with words like miereneuker? I got a Kindle for a Christmas present, and this discussion prompted me to look for a Dutch-English Dictionary for it. It appears Amazon is not forthcoming, and there's nothing on Project Gutenberg either. If you happen to know of any public domain dictionaries available in ebook format, for whatever languages, I'd love to know about them. LadyofShalott 05:03, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I know nothing. Wish I did. Now, on paper it's easy: this one costs next to nothing in the motherland, and they're the high-school standard. Shall I get you one next summer? ;) Drmies (talk) 05:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll seriously have to think about one of those! Thanks for the recommendation. LadyofShalott 05:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In the mean time you can also use the Van Dale website. In the search bar at the top you can type something, then select NL-EN and click on "Zoek". Van Dale is a more complete dictionary than Prisma and on paper it costs a lot more, but the online version with lesser words is free. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 12:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just found this and this. LadyofShalott 05:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm...old, but looks good, and it's searchable...thanks! Drmies (talk) 15:10, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Those are great sources if you want to learn 18th/19th century Dutch (the spelling has changed quite a bit over the past 100 years). SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 12:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kulangattil Family[edit]

The original author of the Kulangattil Family article keeps reverting back all of the edits you have made to the article. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 05:44, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks--but I figured something like that would happen. But you saw the AfD, and I think that that will take care of it. Getting into an edit war right now is not beneficial, so I'm going to leave it be... Drmies (talk) 21:48, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, I saw it already happened. Here's the thing: I could easily revert, and no doubt they'd revert back, and then they'd get blocked, and I don't think that's sportmanslike. We're dealing with an editor who has limited interests here and apparently little knowledge of the rules, and I'd rather not put them in a place where the hammer has to come down. I hope that the AfD will end in a delete and that will be the end of that particular problem--well, there's at least one more: Kottoor. Drmies (talk) 22:13, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I didn't see any point in continuing to revert them, so I'll just let it be. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 00:18, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for W.R. van Hoëvell[edit]

Orlady (talk) 22:10, 16 December 2011 (UTC) 09:02, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for StarWind Software[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of StarWind Software. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Hu12 (talk) 16:16, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

resenting the resemblance[edit]

Thanks for creating The Young Men's Magazine[edit]

You seem to be very knowledgeable on the subject. Good work. 81.17.18.76 (talk) 21:25, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Me, too. And I couldn't for the life of me figure out what was causing that. Thanks! ==Tenebrae (talk) 01:57, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Inspired by"[edit]

See Template_talk:Did_you_know#Articles_created.2Fexpanded_on_December_9. Is there a source that says that Bien was "inspired" by the fire? It seems to be the main objection against the nomination. I changed it in the article as "referred to" but because I don't know if you can change the hook after nominating. It does seem a bit of wordplay to me "inspired" doesn't necessary mean that she was fascinated by it or something. What do you think? SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 15:53, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I can't make that stick as well as I'd like to. I've tweaked the hook; see what you think. I hope that passes muster. Drmies (talk) 16:27, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • What does this mean: "If your hook is not in the queue or already on the main page, it has probably been deleted. Deletion occurs if the hook is more than about eight days old and has unresolved issues for which any discussion has gone stale."? It is already 11 days since the Hotel Polen fire article was created. But I've noticed there is a backlog on the talk page dating back to 16 November. /me = confused. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 03:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's in the prep area. No worries SpeakFree: ik raad u aan om rustig te gaan slapen. Drmies (talk) 23:55, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: AfD[edit]

It wasn't meant as any kind of below the belt knock to the guy, but rather a small note to those considering the request--so good faith "plus". If you look at this edits you can see him more or less acknowledging this activity on the Talk page of an admin. And his behavior isn't severe enough to warrant an ANI. He's also a fairly regular reported to ANI and such, so I'm sure as an IP user I wouldn't get any action of sympathy. Kind of a lose-lose for this humble editor. Thanks for your concern and happy editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.82.100.8 (talk) 01:06, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I do hope You will give a few of us a chance to clean up that article. It is definitely poor right now, but I am labor to clean it up. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.82.100.8 (talk) 01:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD FYI[edit]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fender Cyclone LadyofShalott 04:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The Young Men's Magazine[edit]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! LadyofShalott 21:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
An image would not go amiss. I'll see if one is obtainable when I am next over at Haworth. That may not be for six months or so, but what is a few months after darn near 200 years? - Sitush (talk) 00:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And, as an aside, I can recall a popular early Victorian magazine sold on railway station bookstalls by the Scottish newsagents John Menzies. I came across it (and a very valuable letter from Charles Dickens, complete with a good condition Penny Black) when working on their archives for a company history back in 1982. I must have a dig to see if Tales Pithy and Pawky can make the Wikipedia grade. A fascinating subject, actually, is how literacy was spread through railway bookstalls etc, and how business empires were built by the same means. - Sitush (talk) 00:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Will you settle for Readings, Pithy and Pawky? There isn't much... Drmies (talk) 14:42, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's the one. I found a fair amount of info about the thing back then but clearly those have still not made the transition to being published online, and I am not likely to be returning to Edinburgh at any time in the foreseeable. Still, I'll stick the idea somewhere for future consideration ... and hope that my research notes turn up. - Sitush (talk) 15:29, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well[edit]

I did it
Fingers crossed... Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:53, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good luck Crisco. Drop me a line when the review starts and I'll hang around to see if I can help. I think you did a great job and I thank you for it. Drmies (talk) 15:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nikkimarra has given her source format review and Brianboulton has touched on the prose (a little). Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:50, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Signature[edit]

...yours works because it links to #top, which is technically different than the talkpage itself. It seems like all of the "User (talk)" now have the talk automatically link to User talk:User#top, rather than User talk:User. Anyway, some random examples... Mabdul's sig on User talk:Mabdul compared to User talk:Fæ, or Fetchcomms' on User talk:Fetchcomms compared to any RfA. "Pep|per" @ 11:11, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, this works here. Interesting--I don't think I ever did that. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:36, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's done automatically for users on their own talk page if they use the default signature. It doesn't work for me on my talk because of my custom signature. This is unfortunate, as it makes my second link bold, and thus not a true mirror image. I'd considered adding a "#top" to my sig, but I didn't want to further clutter up every page I leave my already-long signature on (and with some versions of my sig, I was already at the maximum length), when it only matters on my own talk page. Besides, it looks fine after it's archived. Ahhh, the perfect symmetry → MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:53, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for that dose of knowledge, Mandarax. You are dropping it like it's going out of style. I'm going to take a wild guess and say that the first artist you adored (back in middle or high school, when you were the weird kid that no one understood) was René Magritte. Which reminds me (Belgian + you = beer) that I should dedicate my next sip of this delicious St. Bernardus Prior 8 to you: proost! Drmies (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weird kid that no one understood? Hey, I resemble that remark! Hmmm, I would've guessed that you would've guessed da Vinci because of his mirror-image writing. You said Magritte because 1) everything I say has a surreal quality to it, and 2) you happened to have a Belgian beer in front of you? Let's see... I'm not really sure who it was, but it may have been not a Belgian artist but a Dutch one: Escher. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:25, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I call strawmandarax: I didn't say that's why I thought of Magritte. We've discussed Escher before, but I was thinking Magritte because the obsession with mirror imaging is there (though with Magritte it's the impossibility of symmetry/identity between life and art, or content and representation, or sign and signified) and because you have a slightly absurd quality (or you wouldn't waste your time at Burning Man when you could make tons of money programming databases). Now, as for that beer, I'm at the end of it (it was a big bottle) and it is still delicious. Dinner tonight is pot roast with potatoes and salad, and a blueberry pie for dessert. You coming? Drmies (talk) 00:43, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sink Pink[edit]

Please advise how to obtain the original text from this article that has been redirected. I would like to add it to PinkPedia. Oanabay04 (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vitamin Pink[edit]

Please advise how to obtain the original text from this article that has been redirected. I would like to add it to PinkPedia. Oanabay04 (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Pest Control[edit]

Please advise how to obtain the original text from this article that has been redirected. I would like to add it to PinkPedia. Oanabay04 (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Psst Pink[edit]

Please advise how to obtain the original text from this article that has been redirected. I would like to add it to PinkPedia. Oanabay04 (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Campaign[edit]

Please advise how to obtain the original text from this article that has been redirected. I would like to add it to PinkPedia. Oanabay04 (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Pictures[edit]

Please advise how to obtain the original text from this article that has been redirected. I would like to add it to PinkPedia. Oanabay04 (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pinkologist[edit]

Please advise how to obtain the original text from this article that has been redirected. I would like to add it to PinkPedia. Oanabay04 (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • By clicking on the history. Drmies (talk) 15:14, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Hotel Polen fire[edit]

Orlady (talk) 08:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ania Bien[edit]

Orlady (talk) 08:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sohompramanick[edit]

Just wanted to give you a heads up since you blocked the above user last time for addition of unreliable fan sources, unsourced content. The user is back and did the same thing again. I have explained to him that this is his last chance. Lets see how he deals with it. — Legolas (talk2me) 12:16, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I see it's taken care of. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:29, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some stroopwafels for you[edit]

Thanks for helping on the DYK's. Here is a pack of stroopwafels. I hope you don't mind I ate a few of them already. ;) SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 22:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Academics[edit]

Would it be reasonable to define, using British colloquialism, that an academic of Dutch origin is a "clever clogs"? I would never do it on-wiki, of course. Oops.. This thought came to mind because via one of those lateral thinking moments: Cambridge University is holding some sort of bash next year to celebrate 65 years of teaching Dutch. I am not quite sure since when it has been the case that 65 years is a generally recognised milestone ("big" wedding anniversaries, for example, in my experience go 50, 60 etc, and the UK retirement age - once 65, for men - has been buggered about a lot). However, if you know someone who wants a ticket then I might know some people should have some! It may cost a stroopwafel or two. - Sitush (talk) 01:05, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a made up statistic: 99% of American universities haven't taught a single class in Dutch in the past 65 years. Congrats to Cambridge. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take any excuse to go up there. Drmies (talk) 08:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alas, this may be your last excuse to visit the place in the Dutch language teaching context. The details are published in my college newsletter here. Nonetheless, should you ever desire to travel the umpteen thousand miles to that place then please do let me know ... and I'll try to finance the 500-ish mile round trip, and I'll even buy you a beer and try to educate you (!). Woo-hoo. - Sitush (talk) 00:30, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

For the bottle you placed on my talk page. It's looking mighty tempting. --Orlady (talk) 07:09, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you![edit]


·Add§hore· Talk To Me! is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you for the barnstar! And, I hope you and yours have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! :) Wilhelmina Will (talk) 08:50, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation - Wishes[edit]

Hi there WIKI-friend, VASCO here,

kudos to this guy and this guy, what on earth is wrong with these "people" that go see a mere football game? And the referee (i'll never be caught dead criticizing a ref for a mere technical decision, but this?!)? Quite a case of, as the Romans said, "summum jus, summa injuria" (excess of justice, excess of injustice). In case you have NO IDEA what i was just talking about, message me and i'll elaborate :)

Last but not least, happy holidays for you and your "clan", i'll be "seeing" you around. Regards from Portugal - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 18:55, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ha, I read the Dutch news yesterday and today. I understand that they undid the red card. Look at the redundancy in Alvarado's article: "A 19-year-old Ajax fan who had been drinking." Haha.

    Do you know that I grew up in the Z of AZ? That connection was always tenuous (the team is in Alkmaar; they have a fairly new and very attractive stadium), but the main sponsor in those days was a store in Z. Oh, and I knew (and had a crush on) this guy's sister. Man she was hot, but apparently she married some old and rich accountant. Ah well.

    Hey, all the best to you as well. We're having an expatriate "old and new," so I'll be making oliebollen. Take it easy Vasco! Drmies (talk) 22:43, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would have preferred a picture of the sister but that's OK, in the spirit of the season i forgive you... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:44, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Voila. Drmies (talk) 02:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I got the article[edit]

I got the article from the Creative Camera journal. It was only two columns long. Could you email me your email address and I'll send it to you.

Funny story, the journals were in the A.R.C... a big storage area where robots retrieve the material and automatically send it up. The student taking the information said, "Instead of the normal five minutes, it will take alot longer because we are short staffed for the holidays." I said how it is a robot that brings up the stuff. "I know, but the robots are on break and went home for the holidays." Her tag said she was a history major. Sigh... Bgwhite (talk) 03:33, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you so much! I'll email you via the wiki function. I hope the robots have a great Christmas and I hope you will too. Drmies (talk) 18:20, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Making Hotel Polen fire a Good or Featured article[edit]

Would that be possible? The FA A Rugrats Chanukah from 2 days ago doesn't seem that detailed to me. So what does it take? Or doesn't a non-Anglosphere article stand a chance? SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 21:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm, I didn't know we had Rugrats FAs. Well, the path to FA goes through GA, usually; there is nothing to prevent you from listing it at WP:GAN. No, it's not just for "English" topics, so don't worry about it. But the Rugrats do have a much longer Works Cited than does Hotel Polen (esp. if references are combined); in my opinion, one of the impediments for FA status (not so much for GA status) is the number of available references, and for Hotel Polen that's a more difficult thing. Nominate it at GA: the article looks good now, and wie niet waagt die niet wint. Drmies (talk) 22:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'll be glad to do what I can to help if you nominate it, SF. Keep me in the loop. LadyofShalott 22:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • And a reviewer has picked it up. Drmies, your page is getting looooong. LadyofShalott 23:41, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • You didn't need any further help either - that went quickly. Congratulations! LadyofShalott 02:50, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • So how about moving it up to FA? Though I guess that might require someone with a better command of English than I have to rewrite the prose. That person would of course get Featured Article expansion credits.SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 03:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think copyeditors get the FA credits, especially if there is not much expansion during the copyedit. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:14, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<--Congrats SpeakFree. No, copyeditors typically don't count. Lady, size matters. I'm only keeping this at length because--well, scroll up, I thought there might be something of use for Crisco's FA review in the wall of text. Drmies (talk) 14:23, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Speakfree: Yeah, since expansion and research is like 90% of the work.
@Drmies. I think we've been through all the sources you listed. Unless you are keeping it for me to refer to at the nomination? Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:26, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not holding back anything, Crisco. I checked on the FAR two days ago and all was going well--I'm going to have another look. Drmies (talk) 03:28, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Festive Wishes[edit]

Merry Christmas & A Happy New Year
Wishing you a Merry Christmas, a fabulous Hogmanay and all the best in 2012. Edinburgh Wanderer 22:16, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

/me also extends the best wishes to everyone on this talk page. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 23:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gelukkig kerstfeest! I blame Google if that isn't correct. LadyofShalott 23:49, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You said it right. Merry Christmas to you as well! SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 03:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes--merry Christmas, happy Hanukkah, etc to all you good people who drop by here every now and then. You all make it fun to be here. Cheers! Drmies (talk) 18:07, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Tis that season again[edit]

Happy Holidays!
Hope you and your family are enjoying the holiday season! Thanks for the laughs your talk page brings me. ;-) Your friend, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:33, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Ed--likewise. I'm happy to have met you; it's nice to see what young people look like. I'm glad my talk page is good for something! Take care, Drmies (talk) 17:43, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A new article inspired by the Hotel Polen fire effort[edit]

Warm holiday greetings to you and yours,

I present to you a work in progress, Life net, which mentions, of course, the Hotel Polen fire. It took me a while, partially because I don't work as fast as you, and also because it was really quite horrifying to read the newspaper and magazine accounts of brutal tenement and high rise factory fires of 100 years ago. I could only take so much each time I sat down to research. Anyway, I hope you find the article worthwhile, and next I will try to find some free images. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:40, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well done, Cullen. I hope you had a nice Christmas! Drmies (talk) 02:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Very nice. We went to my sister's house and ate bagels and smoked salmon with a bunch of Jews, atheists and lesbians. My other sister came too. Excellent company. My oldest son let me read his copy of the latest issue of Make magazine. A real treat for a nerd. A wonderful time was had by all. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ha, sounds like fun! I just sat around with my mother-in-law to discuss the finer points of prescriptive grammar. Oh, this reminds me, we never got to the smoked salmon, so I might have that for breakfast tomorrow--unless I shoot myself first, of course, having to explain things that are to me as obvious as daylight. Will you be making oliebollen for New Year's Eve? Drmies (talk) 04:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Truly civilized people are those who love smoked fish. I will have to research oliebollen. Starting now. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:25, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • You know, when I was a kid I had a neighbor who smoked eel over oak chips. I didn't like it or understand it when I was ten, but now I'd love a bite of that, with a beer. Oliebollen are hardly a mark of civilization, but they are tasty, and it's a fun tradition. Drmies (talk) 04:45, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gimme All Your Luvin (Madonna song)[edit]

I don't know how you could possibly see the consensus as keep with 10 statements saying delete and 7 statements saying keep. Answer immediately please.| helpdןǝɥ | 02:43, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Before I bow to your request, re-read WP:GNG. Immediately. And then read WP:NOTVOTE. Drmies (talk) 02:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Don't treat me like a newcomer when I have been here for the past 3 years. Where do you see the word vote? That's why it was not used. | helpdןǝɥ | 02:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Additionally, If WP:GNG was the only guideline music articles had to comply with, WP:MUSIC would have neither been created nor upheld. | helpdןǝɥ | 02:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, have some manners, please, and don't tell me to answer immediately. Respect your elders; it won't kill you.

        I told you where to look and I explained my decision at the AfD. This nonsense about WP:SONGS is out the window when the GNG is passed; it's as simple as that. What that means is that the ten you counted aren't using valid arguments: most didn't address the matter at hand or were erroneous. I'll show you a few, just cause I'm a nice guy: "Way too soon" and "premature creation" are the first two rationales, and those aren't rationales. As for the "per nom", well, "Song has no chart positions or accolades" is not a reason for deletion, certainly not when, as in this case, there are plenty of reliable sources. So the nominator didn't give a valid reason for deletion. In other words, instead of ten against seven, it's one valid argument ("passes GNG") against a couple of invalid ones ("hasn't charted," "too soon"). And what you just brought up, about WP:MUSIC, it is obvious that guidelines can be sharpened or defined per field. What you don't understand is that a song can fail SONGS and pass the GNG, plain and simple. Thank you for your question, and have a nice day. Drmies (talk) 03:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia deletions may not be about votes, but seeing as how there was absoultely no agreement made on the subject (as both sides stated their opinion, and there wasn't much more discussion than that), you closing it seems like a personal opinion in taking one side of it. Especially the closing comment: " Subject passes General Notability Guidelines, as PBurka correctly points out--which renders moot all discussion of WP:SONGS." Nobody agreed on that. Wikipedia may not work on votes, but it sure as hell doesn't work with an admin reading the deletion page and choosing which side he likes best. — Status {talkcontribs 03:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Eh, of course no one agreed on that--it was a closing statement. The closer has the last word. This chit-chat on "opinions" is just that. Not all opinions are equal, dear Status, and when PBurka explained how the GNG in this regard overrides SONGS they weren't stating an opinion: they were making a correct statement of fact. Drmies (talk) 03:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, one more thing: there was agreement of one kind: no one disputed that the guidelines for GNG was met, oddly. Granted, that's not as odd as arguing that deletion via SONGS would override keep via GNG, but still. Drmies (talk) 03:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) It meets the GNG, but (and this is an opinion), it's a poorly written piece of tripe. "...took to his Twitter account to write..." Yuck! LadyofShalott 03:38, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, and a very valid one! All mention of Twitter should automatically be filtered out of WP. Drmies (talk) 03:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • What is the purpose of WP:MUSIC then? Did you even read it? That's what we enforce on music articles. It narrows down and eliminates lots of fancruft. | helpdןǝɥ | 03:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Also, looking at your summary on the article, there is a big difference between the song and the single. Have you edited contemporary music articles before? | helpdןǝɥ | 03:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Instead of bitching about my edit summary, go and slap a warning template on the talk page of the fool who removed the NME reference and another one from the article. If you wish to know the purpose of WP:MUSIC, read it; I can't explain it any more clearly than the brave editors who composed those guidelines. Perhaps, when the Christmas vacation is over, you can ask your English teacher. And of course I know the difference between a song and a single--do you think I'm a moron? You certainly talk to me that way. I think you are an extraordinarily poor reader if you don't understand that it doesn't matter whether an article is on a song, a single, or an asswart, and you should save your commentary for the fool who in this edit removed a bunch of references, claiming that it was an article about a single--when, btw, the opening sentence mentions "song". Yes, I've edited contemporary music articles before. It's hard to get almost a hundred thousands fucking edits without any on contemporary music, thank you very much. Drmies (talk) 04:06, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • The entire article is about the leak of a song, not the official song. The actual song hasn't been released and there is no information about it. There is information about the leak, however. The editor was trying to take a step in the right direction, focusing it on the song. I am insulted by your vulgarities. As a Wikipedia administrator, I'd expect you to hold yourself to a higher standard. My point is that WP:MUSIC was created with full support from the Wikipedia Music WikiProject with full support. I do not believe that it would still be intact if WP:GNG was the preferred guideline in music articles. I also feel that if you think administrator rights equals social superiority, you are in the wrong place. | helpdןǝɥ | 04:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • I saw your comment on User talk:Legolas2186, and it is clear to me that you and I have little more to talk about: you are still talking about opinions as if all of them are the same. I also note that you haven't rehashed the earlier arguments you produced in this section, and you haven't rebutted mine--from which the conclusion is inescapable: you know you were wrong. I'm not holding my breath for an apology, though. Drmies (talk) 04:13, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • When I saw your view on the matter, I soon realized that not much of what I say is going to change your mind on the deletion argument. I don't believe I'm wrong whatsoever. I just feel that you are not seeing the importance of WP:MUSIC and I also feel that you may have a conflict of interest considering that your closing statement did not reflect the consensus of the discussion whatsoever. As closing administrator, you really don't have a hat to throw into the discussion. Your role it to be diplomatic, something I did not see. | helpdןǝɥ | 04:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • You know what, I got nothing more to say: this is too silly for words. Don't come back here, unless it's with a warrant from ANI. Drmies (talk) 04:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oliebollen[edit]

I don't have to speak Dutch to understand "oily balls" of cooked dough. We call a similar treat Sufganyot and eat them during Hanukkah, in other words, right now. The donut shops sell out early. Only ours have fruit jam inside instead of pieces of fruit. Also, no lard. But otherwise, very similar. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Local newspapers add to the excitement by sending out food critics each year to rate the 'best sufganiyah in town.'" Mmmm, I'd take that on as a seasonal side-job. LadyofShalott 05:07, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Dutch wiki on oliebollen has a similar section. In fact, it's a regular thing at the end of the year--the country-wide complaints about the declining quality of the oliebol... It's a good thing they don't come here, because I'm sure mine won't pass muster. Still, I am going to overindulge. Cullen, if I can get my hands on some sufganyot here I can save myself a lot of trouble. Drmies (talk) 05:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't been to Israel at this time of year, but we try to duplicate the spirit here in California. The local donut shops are mostly run by the Chinese, but they make a pretty decent jelly filled donut by my reckoning. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I live in an area that has one of the highest concentrations of Jewish people in the UK. I have attended birthday parties, bar mitvahs, weddings, school etc with them and have suffered injuries on the rugby field at the hands of at least two ... but I have never, ever heard of Sufganyot. Tomorrow I shall again be at hospital and will be passing quite a few Jewish bakeries/delis etc on my way there and back, so perhaps I should buy some? Alas, I know/have known more Belgians than Dutch - a Mr Ondaatje aside - and so my chances of having heard of olie-wotsit are more slim, but they sound good too! In return, I can only offer my mother's bread-and-butter pudding, which is not at all the same but you'd kill for it. - Sitush (talk) 01:22, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The end of Hanukkah is imminent, but you could give it a try. Basically, sufganyot (plural) is just the Hebrew word for jelly donuts, but there is a traditional association with Hanukkah. I have no idea how far back that tradition goes, or whether British Jews observe it as widely as do Israeli Jews and American Jews who follow some Israeli customs. I do know they taste good at this time of year. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:29, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If British Jews follow the custom any less than those in Israel or the US then, well, I'm a Dutchman ;) I'll see what I can find. - Sitush (talk) 01:38, 28 December 2011 (UTC) Phrase is here, for the uninitiated. Only did a quick search but am blowed if I am going to cite the Oxford when there is something from The Other (much better) Place. - Sitush (talk) 01:42, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<--Cullen, did you know about the Judith connection with Hanukkah? (I'm a Judith fan.) Drmies (talk) 01:53, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why delete Jobs in Trinidad and Tobago article?[edit]

This article contributed to the wikiproject Trinidad and West Indies. and it had alot of pertinent information which you wasted. Can you guide me I need help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anirsa10 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Academy of Achievement[edit]

Hi there Drmies, I see that, last month, you were involved in toning down puffery and peacockery in the Academy of Achievement article. Based on my review, your edits were sound. However, since your involvement I'm afraid the pendulum has swung too far the other way, and now nearly half of the article is about a controversy related to a related organization. I've just posted a note to the article's discussion page addressing the issue in a bit more detail, and I'm looking to restart discussion there.

It's worth noting that I've been engaged by the Academy to help resolve the matter; in hopes of doing so efficiently, I've prepared a proposed replacement (in my user space here) that I hope presents an acceptable compromise, or a workable starting point. Hope you can join in discussion on that Talk page. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 18:36, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for your note and for attempting to solve this amicably. I saw the notes you placed on the talk page and on the other editor's talk page; that is the way to go. Further comments on the article talk page. Drmies (talk) 20:22, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

86.40.204.198[edit]

I really messed that one up. I hope my apology was sufficient. Thanks for the note. Jim1138 (talk) 02:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, shit happens. The IP is a little pissed--which is understandable, but I wish they'd be more forgiving. You placed your note on their talk page while I was placing mine on yours, and I really, really appreciate your scrutiny of your own edits. Thanks for that, and for your note here, Drmies (talk) 02:15, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies/Archive_23&oldid=1151048696"