User talk:Drmies/Archive 45

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  • Moving right along, as if nothing ever happened. Let's see. Some editors were blocked and very quickly unblocked. YRC got hisself banned. Malleus has left the building though you can leave a note for him in the foyer. Ed has given up on me as a writer and taunts me with his "meh"s. Crisco wants to get a Ph.D., and Ungcel is messing with asterisks. Have a great new year.

Call me the opposite of Goldmember...[edit]

but I love the Dutch! This is the best thing since sliced bread! No, the wheel, no.... since language! I got the release date for Terang Boelan, and it seems our friend Balink left the Indies in March 1938! Why can't Indonesians do something like this? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm pleased the KB is good to you: that's tax money well spent. I had a bad experience with them a couple of years ago (in the flesh) but they responded nicely to my complaint. I wasn't aware of that archive: that offers great opportunities to really put the motherland on the map. Hey, when you're done with your dissertation you should visit: I'll hook you up with a place to stay and some good food and beer. Pardon me if I don't comment on your member; I'm sure it's lovely. Drmies (talk) 16:17, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah, so the English Professor vacuum eats another pop-culture reference, bringing it to the depths of H-E-double hockey sticks. I've we're going to do articles on Dutch actors or TV shows this will help quite a bit... I ended up playing with the site for an hour or so, and got some decent stuff for Fatima as well.
    • Thanks for the invite... I'll try and keep that in mind, but I may start my doctorate ASAP if funds allow. So I can be Dr. Cooking Oil. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fed up and don't know what to do[edit]

I'm completely fed up and I have no idea what to do anymore when it comes to Neotarf. I encountered him when he showed up at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol#Tag bombing new article within seconds of their creation complaining that 49 minutes after he created it, someone put these tags on it. The discussion there goes round and round and finally got closed because it wasn't going to go anywhere (although I have no idea what AutomaticStrikeout was thinking when he suggested asking someone if they were still editing the page on their talk page). Neotarf claimed translating work had been lost (in the article no less). It was made abundantly clear to him at Talk:Carl Emil Pettersson why the tags where there, but he just doesn't get it. I actually had the Swedish language book sent to my school so I could hopefully work with Neotarf (by scanning pages) to insert inline citations, he refused. I begin improving the article with some English language sources. Adding one section about an upcoming movie based on Pettersson and using a source to add an inline citation to content previously written by Neotarf. In what I'm assuming is an ownership issue, Neotarf removes my edits stating that he's removing counterfactual material. I bring the issue to WP:RSN#Cineuropa where Neotarf begins claiming that the books don't exist, the movie doesn't exist, and the website in question doesn't have any editorial oversight, which, coming from him, is a bunch of bullocks. He shows zero ability to collaborate, which is a huge issue of WP:CIR. I picked an edit at random of his, not having time to go through all of his old edits, he's been here for over a year and he's still direct linking in text instead of referencing [1]. And when I mention WP:CIR, I don't in any way mean that he's "incompetent". He speaks in a relatively intelligent manner, it's more of a WP:I didn't hear that type of an issue and a failure to collaborate. Ryan Vesey 13:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just for the record, I was saying that perhaps before tagging a page, the patroller could leave a note on the article creator's talk page asking if the article creator is currently editing the article. I know, it does sound rather like jumping through too many hopes. (As an aside, I can't remember, was Drmies a Duke fan or a UNC fan or something else?). AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 17:58, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the record it's a drove. The collective noun for a bunch of bullocks is a drove. You may of course be using the phrase as a euphemism. If so, consider clutch (testicles) or drunkenship (cobblers). My mother, bless her, once told me that "you learn something new every day" --Senra (talk) 19:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps I'm incorrect here, but I was neither referring to bullocks as any type of bovine or as testicles. Am I incorrect in using it as a less childish sounding way of saying "baloney"? Oh, and referring to cattle as a drove, is that a British thing? I've never heard anything other than a herd. Ryan Vesey 01:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed. Bullocks is a more polite way of exclaiming nonsense as in "Senra talks a load of bollocks!". In fact, the first quotation (P Larkin 9 Dec 1940) noted in the OED entry for Bollocks, int. is instructively explicit! "Bollocks". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.) Drove comes from our article List of collective nouns. However, in case of doubt, my above post was meant to be entirely tongue-in-cheek. So sorry if I offended you in any way --Senra (talk) 18:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also for the record, I thought AutomaticStrikeout had retired out of protest against admin abuse or something like that. Drmies (talk) 20:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • AutomaticStrikeout left very briefly, but he was back right away. He got stressed out over the whole Malleus issue, it's a shame how that turned out on all sides Ryan Vesey 01:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do nothing. There's nothing you can do to make them collaborate. If you get the book, if you're still going through with that, work on the article. Favonian almost speaks Swedish, he might could help and I know he's a great Pippi Longstocking fan. Theleftorium is listed in Category:User sv, and AlexTiefling in Category:User sv-1. Both of them are good and helpful, as far as I know. Yes, you (and others) stepped on Neotarf's toes, and they're exaggerating, but there's nothing you can do about it. (FWIW, the tagging was not problematic in my view, but the orphan tag is a bit stupid, IMO.) That RS discussion, I saw it and I looked at the Cineuropa website and it looks perfectly reliable to me, given their editorial board and the number of staff they have, or claim to have. You could ask Favonian, Theleftorium, or Alex to look at that discussion and maybe settle it. The other issues--let it go. They don't want to use proper references, so be it. It's not helpful but it's not worth fussing over; the only thing you could really do is an RfC/U or something like that, and nobody wants that, not for this case. The article itself looks very interesting, by the way, worthy of a DYK. You could consider finishing it and nominating it, but drop them a line to tell them that you're considering that. I don't know if they can say no or if they will, and what such a NO might mean. Good luck with it, Ryan--and remember, it's not worth the stress. I know, I'm a fine one to talk like that: do as I say, not as I do. ;) Drmies (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks Drmies. At some level, I brought this on myself, just in that I shouldn't have stepped into the discussion on "tag-bombing" to begin with. I wasn't related to the discussion in any way when it began. I used to have a tendency to seek out arguments when one could be found, but then started a personal policy of avoiding arguments when one could be avoided. Here, I did more seeking than I did avoiding. At what point should I restore my edits to Carl Emil Pettersson? Also, do you know the best way to fix this DAB page? I added Carl Pettersson and Carl Emil Pettersson since they weren't linked from any DAB pages. Would a Carl Peterson (disambiguation) that dealt with Petersons and Petterssons be alright? Ryan Vesey 01:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Bollocks, dear Ryan. I'll get back to you after I put the kids down. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I could be mistaken but I believe User:Bishonen may speak/read/write Swedish. KillerChihuahua 02:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Jag kan äta glas, det gör inte ont.. Ryan, go back to work on that article. As far as I know, your counterpart said they were on strike and even if they weren't it's fair game: we sign away our rights and this is a collaborative project. I quit owning Sakine Cansız some time ago (and no, it's not the next best thing to writing a book!) and that's fine. Multilingualism is a plus here--the FAZ article is great, and I'll see what I can do. As for the dab: you don't have to make Carl Petterson (disambiguation) (note the double T) since there's only two; you could make a hatnote on each article to the other one, and in that hatnote you can add a link to the dab page Carl Petersen, if you like. Mandarax knows the templates, no doubt, and he also knows the rules better than me so he can correct me. Good luck with it; I'll help when I can. Drmies (talk) 03:16, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AR15[edit]

So ill take your statement about extenze as a joke. I like AR15s for the same reason I like my DSLR - modularity. My wife leans anti-gun, so having a large collection of guns is not an option. With an AR15, I can have "one gun", with support for different calibers to handle anything from squirrels to elk, and different stocks and sights for hunting, camping, target practice etc. They are scary, but there are a large number of guns nobody considers an "Assault weapon" that have the exact same capability. Any semi-automatic with a magazine is the same. Being scary, black, and having a pistol grip or an ergonomic stock have nothing to do with the how dangerous the gun is. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a discussion you want to have with Drmies :) Ryan Vesey 19:19, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He started it! Gaijin42 (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
'twas a joke, indeed. I'll tell you one of my problems with gun ownership, though--when your house gets broken into, your gun is the first thing they'll steal, and not likely for the purpose of shooting squirrels. (Our house got burglared and they took my watches; my mother-in-law's house got broken into and they took her guns.) I'm surprised your wife lets you have even one, let alone such a one: she's way more lenient than Drmies. For camping, I suggest a headlamp and waterproof matches, and bourbon of course. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 20:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I hope IronKnuckle doesn't take offense, of course. Drmies (talk) 20:42, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with that. They'd have to steal it off my person. But no offense taken :) IronKnuckle (talk) 05:05, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Main page appearance: green children of Woolpit[edit]

This is a note to let the main editors of green children of Woolpit know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on February 2, 2013. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 2, 2013. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegates Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you can change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Woolpit village sign depicting the two green children

The green children of Woolpit is the name given to two children who reportedly appeared in the village of Woolpit in Suffolk, England, some time in the 12th century. They were of generally normal appearance except for the green colour of their skin. They spoke in an unknown language, and the only food they would eat at first was green beans. Eventually they lost their green pallor, but the boy was sickly and died soon after baptism. After learning English, the girl explained that they had come from an underground world whose inhabitants are green. The only near-contemporary accounts are contained in Ralph of Coggeshall's Chronicum Anglicanum and William of Newburgh's Historia rerum Anglicarum, written in about 1189 and 1220 respectively. Between then and their rediscovery in the mid-19th century, the green children seem to surface only in Bishop Francis Godwin's fantastical The Man in the Moone. The story also provided the inspiration for The Green Child, the only novel written by the English anarchist poet and critic Herbert Read. The main explanations of the story are that it is a typical folk tale describing an imaginary encounter with the inhabitants of another world, or it is a garbled account of a historical event. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Woohoo! Thanks UcuchaBot, and thanks Raul--and thanks to Malleus Fatuorum who, in an ultimate stroke of irony since he was so often falsely accused of driving editors away from the project, was driven off the project. Malleus, I salute you--thanks for letting me ride your coattails on this and other articles. Drmies (talk) 23:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's a great article, but don't give Raul the credit for choosing it ;-) BencherliteTalk 00:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sure thing--thanks! Drmies (talk) 02:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Did you know when Raul scheduled last? (right: 1 December) How many in the last quarter of 2012? (right: 9, one of them should not have appeared.) Thanks to Dabomb (until 23 November) and Bencherlite for all the others! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:36, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • That's the idea of Raul having delegates, it means that he can oversee the process but not have to do the day-to-day work. Same with FAC/FAR delegates. And remember that Raul scheduled every TFA, as far as I'm aware, from 23rd February 2004 until June 2011 when Dabomb was appointed as delegate (and he's done some thereafter as necessary). I doubt I'll have the energy to do it for anything like as long as that! BencherliteTalk 22:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Congratulations! BTW, speaking of Main Page appearances, did you notice that Sakine Cansız is back on ITN after being off for about four days? It's accumulated about 77,000 page views, mostly during its 7+ total days so far on ITN. I'm sure this is vastly more than it would've gotten during 8 hours on DYK. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 02:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Congrats! I'm still in the stage where getting an article into DYK feels awesome. This must be the next best thing to publishing a book. Ryan Vesey 02:49, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Precious again, a great collaboration of three nominators who all received my PumpkinSky Prize already, a first! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:31, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I'm in the club now[edit]

My squeaky clean block log has now been befouled and I even got globally locked by the stewards because of my potty mouth. I got unblocked quicker though, only nine minutes. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm sorry to hear that Beeblebrox. Did you at least get warned? I usually kiss before I get fucked. Drmies (talk) 01:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see. "Compromised account". Odd. What was removed--a big fat FU? Strange call on BWilkins's part, I wouldn't have expected it from them. And I do expect a potty mouth from you--in fact I demand it. Beeblebrox, you're just fine in my book, and I think you should take some pride in the fact that yours was an "anti-civility block". I got blocked for the policy I've always found the most problematic, and I would have never thought that what I said would be blockable--never. I've blocked (I think) for morons going around hating gays and jews and arabs and calling people nazis and shit like that: that's incivility. BTW, my counterpart never apologized to me, haha. Well, looks like we all got some reading and chatting to do. I hope the fajitas were good, and I got a hall closet full of delicious beers if you run out. Take it easy pal, and see you next time. Drmies (talk) 01:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bah. You sprats and minnows! You need to try to aspire to the top tier of the "blocked" club, where such as I dwell in glory. Not so much unblocking going on! Bishonen | talk 00:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC).[reply]
    • Bishonen, your talk page history from 2009 reads like a fucking Who's Who of Wikipedia. I even saw my old pal CoM in there, surrounded by big shots. Well, at least you got blocked by Jimbo--by the top dog--unlike me. I'm still hurting over it: I guess three years was long enough for you to now joke about it. Drmies (talk) 01:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, I take pride in taking him to RFAR over it. (What's that you say? Did the arbcom accept the case? Now you're joking. But I had an unexpectedly good run for my money.) Bishonen | talk 11:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC).[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Original Barnstar
For fixing up Lavender (album) while I couldn't, and furthermore being an all around awesome admin and contributor. Thank you for helping this project in a time of need. Vacation9 18:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure thing. Thanks for your help at AfC: it's an ungrateful task, and sometimes a very frustrating one. Drmies (talk) 18:07, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Serendipity[edit]

Drmies, I may have been the one to give you a for your recent DYK nomination, but I hope I can partially make up for that with a DYK credit which you never expected. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • ? Mandarax, I'm almost too excited to click the button! Let me go to the bathroom before I pee in my pants. Drmies (talk) 00:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is a fine, fine piece of work Mandarax--congratulations, and you deserve all the credit. Drmies (talk) 02:35, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks. But you deserve much credit; for your contributions, sure, but also for the fact that I would have never written it in a million years if you hadn't brought it to my attention. It's good to know that I can occasionally write about something other than art. BTW, I came up with a much better hook than the one I first suggested. It's one of those things where I look at it now and wonder how I could have ever missed such an obvious opportunity to imply that Batman and Clark Kent were lovers.

      Oh, and if you're wondering why I called the nomination page {{Did you know nominations/Throatwobbler Mangrove}}, it's because about three months ago there was a discussion about how one shouldn't move nomination pages, and I pointed out that it didn't matter what you called the page; I gave that as an example nom page name. When I decided to submit an April Fools' Day hook, it seemed like the perfect opportunity to turn that old red link blue. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 03:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

      • Mandarax, you are too smart for your own good. If there is a Mrs. Mandarax (I think you are of the male persuasion, and with "Mrs" I simply mean "partner"--I do not mean to imply that you are or should be, by definition or in any other way, straight), xe must be in stitches all the livelong day (not that I'm implying that you should spend every waking (or sleeping, for that matter) hour with them, far from it--absence makes the heart grow fonder, which you shouldn't read as an incentive for (or even a gentle nod toward) leaving them, of course) (but you know, you being you and them being (I presume) a rational human being, I would think that they would think of you pretty often even if not literally (or metaphorically, that goes without saying) the livelong day, which is nothing but a silly expression anyway though it has a nice ring to it, livelong, like livestrong, but not artificially strengthened with EPO or blood doping--but you catch my drift I hope)! What fun! I do hope they appreciate your sense of humor. I sure do. Drmies (talk) 03:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks! That was an entertaining stream-of-consciousness note; I see that "LOL" is no longer prohibited by your editnotice, so I'll give you one of those. I find it baffling that you seem to think I would be in a relationship with a rational human being. Even more baffling is that it's true. I have no idea what EPO is, but now I want some! I'm gonna guess that that was a timely reference to Lance Armstrong, but I didn't follow that story very closely, and I don't know what he was using. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 22:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Thank you. Yes and no: I was actually thinking of Thomas Dekker the non-poet, whose article I need to return to since today, I believe, NRC Handelsblad ran the second part of a tell-all interview. OK, I see now that this is very Lance-y. Drmies (talk) 05:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect for you![edit]

WP:ANI 2.0
Might as well make it official. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 02:03, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tres gentil--merci. No doubt you'll see it at MfD imminently. Drmies (talk) 02:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Preemptively. Why break a link to a page that works? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • We'll see. WP:AN/K still works (for the first alternative to ANI... back in the day), so you never know... Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your camaraderie is lovely, but I suspect this redirect will have to go. As a new admin, can someone opine on the proper CSD criteria for a link from WP space to the userspace mancave of an old hand? Ocaasi t | c 04:49, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Meh, it's not doing any harm in my view. If someone raises a fuss, sure, but otherwise, I like IAR. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • You'll have to give me a little more credit than that, Occasi. ;) I know my speedy criteria. Unless you wanna take a stab at G3 (which would hurt my feelings), this'll have to go to RfD. But come on, why delete it? It's no worse than WP:You can see Hell from here or anything like that. More importantly, though, now that this is officially ANI 2.0, we can just have the deletion discussion here, since the "2.0" gives it extra powers that ANI doesn't have. Let the !voting begin! The choices are keep, delete, elect to ArbCom, desysop, CheckUser requested and self-endorsed by clerk, indef site ban, or 1-second block. Oh, or create a double redirect and then editwar with the bot ad infinitum. Admins' votes get more weight if they're accompanied with wheelwarring. As usual, synesthesia and sloth are strictly disallowed. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 18:36, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • "Meh" is also disallowed. "Per Malleus" is perfectly acceptable. Drmies (talk) 18:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Without weighing in on the merit of the redirect, I would like to point to examples here and here. --kelapstick(bainuu) 06:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You know you're Dutch when...[edit]

Yup, I'm going there. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:36, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ha! Most of them are indeed true. Ever had vla? It's grrreat. Drmies (talk) 04:40, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nope, and if it's custard, no thanks. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • You don't like custard?? I thought you was from Michigan! It's all Dutch cuisine over there! Vla is usually made with cornstarch as a thickener, so it's not really a custard, IMO. Drmies (talk) 05:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your attention required at The Royal Conservatory of Music[edit]

I've done quite a bit of work on this article, formerly at least partly a copy of the conservatory's website. See the history, specifically this edit, where I marked my (partial) restoration point--I kept the edited lists of notables etc., which were wieldy and fluffy tables. Your help is required in two ways:

  1. Please edit the article and make it better, to the point, preferably, where the tags can go.
  2. Admins and copyright experts, please check to see if the intermediate edits are such gross copyvios that they need to be revdeleted. Of course, if you go back further you'll find a lot more copyvios done in a piecemeal fashion.

This being a formal thread on ANI 2.0, I am notifying the most recent involved editor, here: Hey! Drmies! you're wanted on ANI 2.0! Drmies (talk) 05:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you're Drmies. Please don't talk to yourself. Those who talk to themselves keep bad company. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:39, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shoot[edit]

And I was about to slap a notability tag on this [2]. Nominating it for speedy would have been too obvious. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah yeah. Just get a fucking account already, IP hopping vandal. You know, just cause you don't sign in doesn't mean you're always right, you know. Drmies (talk) 19:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • BTW, I think Huffington Post is considered reliable. And I think something else: a. we should have a list of reliable sources (with links to RS discussion if there've been any) and b. we should have a category, Category:Publications considered reliable on Wikipedia. I know that such a category is a kind of miscegenation, but it would sure be helpful. Drmies (talk) 19:05, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • First, watch your language--what sort of example are you setting for your young ones? Second, unfounded accusations against this IP may be met with a post to some noticeboard or other, or at least high umbrage. Third, I could be wrong about HuffPost, but in the recent past I've seen links to it reverted by others for not being a reliable source. And since a lot of it is made up of blogs, well that doesn't bode well. Me, I've got nothing better to do until the next young loverly shows up at the studio-- shouldn't you be grading papers or something? 99.136.252.89 (talk) 19:11, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

HEL is for heroes[edit]

The second ANI:
Surely some revelation is at hand; Surely the Second ANI is at hand. The Second ANI! Hardly are those words out When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi Troubles my sight:
TURNING and turning in the widening gyros
The Crimson Tide is loosed....
      • Lunch break, that's my excuse. I graded all the HEL homework for today, and class isn't until 3:45, but I'm about to run off and prepare for class, yes. Loverly, huh? Funny--I showed the opening scenes from My Fair Lady in HEL the other day. Drmies (talk) 19:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        You should break out the Chaucer and get medieval on their asses. (Love that Commandment about not coveting thy neighbor's ass, which I re-learned from Catch 22 and recommended at WP:VPP.) Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I can't believe there isn't already a list for reliable sources; I guess it would be a nightmare organizing and patrolling it....good luck in class. Later I'm bringing a canvas to someone: a few years ago, working alongside the class I was teaching, I painted a large informal portrait of a model. The model, a young woman, shuffled off the mortal coil recently, and I'm giving the picture to her mother. One would have liked to have sold it, and the money would have been welcome, but sometimes there's only one thing to do. As I get older I find more of my time is spent on such issues, not at all what I envisioned in youth.... 99.136.252.89 (talk) 19:57, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Here we go: History of the English language (education). Feel free to pitch in. ;) Now I gotta run and teach the mother. Drmies (talk) 21:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            Just checking in to see whether you had jumped ship. The update at the top agrees with my feelings. Gyres and centres not holding....
            Shouldn't you be writing HEL in "Oxen of the Sun" fashion? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:09, 25 January 2013 (UTC) dabbed, a little 11:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            Kiefer, you don't know what you just did to my stomach. It's trying to tear its way to the nearest place which sells tzatziki sauce... and that's probably a good hundred miles away. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:14, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Huffington Post[edit]

Strictly regarding the Huffington Post, I think it's reliable; it used to be AOL News, I believe. I've cited it before... Go Phightins! 22:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't often read that publication (too liberal for me, haha), but I would not cite everything that comes from it--from what I know, there's too much opinion. I could be wrong, but it's not one of the sources I regularly look for when I'm writing articles. Drmies (talk) 05:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I've struck my objection at the talk page. Not that it matters--it's become a piece of puff pastry again [3]. I don't want this to fall on you alone Drmies; if you suggest I'll bring this to the BLP noticeboard. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 00:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've primarily cited it in reference to sports articles; I agree, too liberal on politics. Go Phightins! 23:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I had the opportunity to see the HuffPo owner, Arianna Huffington, speak at Penn. I gladly skipped. It's a reliable source for strict facts (sometimes), the rest of it is trash. Ryan Vesey 00:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • You know I was joking about "too liberal for me", right? Why am I surrounded by right-wingers? ;) My politics probably resemble those of Soman. Not that I care for Huffington personally. Drmies (talk) 00:14, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm not a Tea-Partier...frankly I think that most Tea Partiers are a bit dangerous. By the way, I hadn't noticed your edit notice and wanted to say that I liked it. Does that mean "meh" and "lol" are now allowedJust kidding, I think both are really stupid.Go Phightins! 00:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm not necessarily a "right-winger". I dislike both parties (just not equally). I'm more of a Ross Perot type of guy. In regards to HuffPo, I knew you were liberal but thought you could be telling the truth. Fox is far too conservative for me, HuffPo is far too liberal, the New York Times is a bit liberal, but it's my main news source. I actually much prefer NPR (or MPR when I'm at home) Ryan Vesey 00:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • I was always a fan of Arlen Specter and John McCain; the moderates are always the ones trying to get things done. Go Phightins! 02:06, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • Right, left, I dunno. What astounds me is the pervasiveness of fear. Would be a much better world if people bought dogs instead of guns. Of course, Belgian ale works, too. Just had a nice glass of Allagash, and all is right with the world. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 03:30, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • He's swung far right since he lost, I can't stand him anymore. Ryan Vesey 03:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • We're probably cracking open a St. Bernardus tripel in a minute. Had an Einbecker bock earlier, so I'm feeling fine. Plus, I finished the last sub in the O 12 class, which some people find really exciting. Ryan, you probably didn't see McCain introduce John Kerry the other day before the Senate committee at the hearings that will confirm Kerry as Secretary of State, and that's a shame--you might feel differently about him. He's not always a typical Republican politician. Drmies (talk) 03:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • Had to go dig up a video, as I missed it too. Don't tell me there aren't still a few good statesmen in the U.S. Senate. Go Phightins! 04:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Testing the efficiency of ANI 2.0[edit]

Well, don't you just love it when you try to support someone and it eventually blows up in your face? I don't think talk page access is going to be needed at this point. The IP already assured us once that they would behave and then misbehaved again upon unblocking. I had taken up for them (and Drmies actually shortened their block, in a good demonstration of AGF), but the IP seems to be quite insincere. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 22:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • And, per WP:ROPE, I've locked their access to the talk page. I coulda been a dick and semi-protected the page though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:57, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Crisco. It appears that the efficiency is quite good. Not sure as to why semi-protection would have been mean, though. It would prevent them from editing the page from a different IP. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 22:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see it as a snub. "You're not good enough for a block". Oh well, that's just me being a (weird) Canadian I guess. Cheers, and hei ho, it's off to the hills I go. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Academic articles and three editors[edit]

This was first brought to my attention on my talk page by our good friend 99. I suggested he run it by you because you know more about academics and WP:ACADEMIC than I do, but he seemed not to want to bother you with it. I have no such compunction. The cast consists of one article, one potential article, and three editors. The article is Caroline Heldman; the potential article is Lisa Wade. Two of the editors are apparently the subjects, User:CarolineHeldman and User:Lisawny. I'm not sure who the third is but given the timing I assume she's related to the other two somehow: User:Becca coop. Lisa's account was created on January 21, 2013, and Becca's on January 23, 2013. Caroline's account was created on May 19, 2011, but her first edit was on January 21, 2013. Caroline created the Wade article all by herself (I'm assuming the IP is her not logged in). Lisa created the Heldman article, but it has been edited by all three accounts.

If you're still with me, putting aside the conflict issue and any puppetry issue, do you think these two articles satisfy our notability guidelines?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:20, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not wishing to out anyone, but it didn't take much research to establish that, based on username, Becca coop is a COI account, too. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 00:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Heldman may squeak by if there's coverage (per GNG) or if her work has been reviewed (per PROF). I don't see anything in the article that would lead me to believe she's notable yet--that Gracie Award doesn't really do it for me, and most of the article is the typical resume stuff. My apologies if my liberal arts colleague Prof. Heldman takes offense at that. OK, after checking around, she may pass the notability guidelines in the new Wikipedia, the one written by Tony and Laura, since she's mentioned in the media and has appeared on TV. I'm making some edits. Drmies (talk) 02:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Why does everything go right over my head? Who are Tony and Laura? Thanks for your edits.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:39, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Never mind that. OK, we got a nice set of articles here. Add Sociological Images to the portfolio (and I ran into and pruned Soul Sides along the way), which I'm still working on. Drmies (talk) 02:42, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • OK, Sociological Images has been pruned as well. I made a note on the talk page; a bit of Googling (like, the tiniest little bit) indicates well enough what may have caused the problem. I'm moving on to the next one. Bbb, the real experts in this field are DGG and Randykitty (haha, according to some they are the stereotypical inclusionists and deletionists, in that order). The proof is in the pudding: put it up at DYK. Heldman is still iffy, in my opinion. Drmies (talk) 02:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • I didn't see anything left in Soul Sides to support notability, and have requested speedy. If you think I'm amiss feel free to revert. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 02:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • Oh, I'm perfectly fine with that. Bbb, for Heldman I found articles and book reviews in JSTOR, but no reviews of her work. There's more databases, of course, and they should be perused before considering AfD, for instance. I've pruned the article at AfC as well, and I just left User:Heldman a note on their talk page. Thanks for making me waste an hour or more, time I could have spent drinking or playing with Mrs. Drmies, Drmies (talk) 03:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • Not at all, I'm sure Mrs. Drmies could use a break from you. Please let her know that a thank you gift is unnecessary. And I stand by my original contention that you're much better at this than I am. Are there are others who are better than you? Perhaps, but I'm more comfortable ordering you around.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

75.84.95.229 again[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Deep_Space_Industries&diff=prev&oldid=534766853 --Guy Macon (talk) 03:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merci. Sorry that a block is the best I can do. Drmies (talk) 03:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks! Let's hope that we won't have any reason to have this conversation again in 36 hours. Some of these abusive editors remind me of an ant colony attacking an electric fence. --Guy Macon (talk) 06:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • A trip to WP:LTA should disabuse you of that upbeat comparison... Let me know if this pops back up one way or another. You know there isn't much we can do. There's mole-whacking and semi-protection, that's about it. I doubt that Jimbo would equip a set of Juggalo and/or straight-edge Wikipedians to deal with such editors. Drmies (talk) 00:40, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Actually, I have always been amazed at how short the LTA list is. I wonder what percentage of vandals, spammers, etc. give up after the first block, after indef, etc? I bet someone has done some statistics on that. I tend to edit in the science and technology areas, which aren't really abuse magnets, but it seems like the first block does it most of the time. I would imaging that they are more persistent in, say, the political articles. --Guy Macon (talk) 09:06, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wanna help write an article?[edit]

I am thinking of writing an article on the NY SAFE Act, and also including a section about it on the page of Andrew Cuomo. Would you like to help make this happen? IronKnuckle (talk) 05:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmmm. I don't think I've ever written on any law before--that is an area of Wikipedia that I'll gladly leave to the legal experts, cause I'd get it wrong. I can help with formatting and language, and I'll be glad to, but I'm not the one to write it. In Category:Wikipedian lawyers I saw a few familiar names--Bearian, Bencherlite, and Shirt58, for instance, all seasoned editors who are better at that than I'll ever be at most other things. Give them a buzz if you like? Good luck with it, Drmies (talk) 05:41, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks. I will ask them about it. IronKnuckle (talk) 06:17, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Drmies - I don't want to make any assumptions, but considering your expressed opinions on gun control, I wasn't sure if you were aware of this. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks BMK--but check out his (un)block log. ;) Drmies (talk) 06:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • You're a better man than I am, Drmies, my AGF doesn't extend that far. This editor knew precisely what he was doing, and the intent waa totally political. That he backtracked and prostrated himself to be unblocked doesn't carry much weight with me, but then, I'm a cynical son of a bitch. (Although the guy who almost ran into into me on the sidewalk on Park Avenue today called me a "bitch", even though my gender was not in doubt -- only his sanity.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • I'm still learning, but I think the article that will be made will help right past wrongs. IronKnuckle (talk) 08:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • BMK, the article is a blue link now. The proof is in the pudding: is it on a notable topic? Is it neutrally written and well-verified? Are IronKnuckle's contributions valid? I've worked with editors here with whom I'd have been in shouting matches had we met elsewhere... Drmies (talk) 15:54, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"we should be figuring out a way to get him back"[edit]

I am not sure he wants back. I hope he does not. 76.126.142.118 (talk) 05:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just FYI, the above IP user is Mbz1 (talk · contribs), returning to the fold once again despite being banned by Arbcom. WP:RBI time? Tarc (talk) 16:10, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh sure, now tarc is going to go around screaming "murder", sorry "mbz1". @tarc, I predict you'll be seeing mbz1 anywhere you turn for the rest of you life. 76.126.142.118 (talk) 16:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Tarc, I can't spot banned editors like you can; I have no idea. If the IP is Mbz1--hey Mbz, how you doing? I hope all is well in real life. I can't block on your suspicion, Tarc--but IP, that's a shitty remark/threat and if you wish to continue here on my beautiful talk page (a mandatory happy place), please take it back.

        Right now I don't have much of an opinion on Rob coming back or not. I personally think it's gone on for too long, but that's a thought: I have not followed him closely enough to know if he has been a net benefit or not the last year or so (and I am not interested in anyone making a case for or against him on this talk page). I hate it when long-term editors get removed from the project, or remove themselves. Sometimes it has to be done, I suppose, and I don't agree with Tarc's easy WOW argument, but even if a ban is consensual there's nothing funny or satisfying about it. I could list a half a dozen editors, in seconds, who I don't care for at all and whose net contribution I have serious reservations over but I wouldn't want them banned. I'm going to leave it at that. Re:Rob, the ball is in his court, I suppose, but maybe it should stay there for a while. The community has set standards, as inconsistent as they may be, and is enforcing them, as imperfectly as that may go, and anyone who wants to play here has, unfortunately, little choice but to live by them. Drmies (talk) 16:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

        • I've seen "WOW" a couple of times now, and I don't think I'm familiar with what it means. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • World of Warcraft. Tarc (talk) 16:51, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • The applicability here being that ban (and other) discussions are won by the part that lines up the most orcs (or humans, depending on whether you're the winner or the loser). It suggests that there is no rationality leading the way in such discussions, that they are made arbitrarily and have nothing to do with the policies and guidelines, that it's all partisan politics. It has been frequently applied (though not in those terms) to Malleus and now to YRC. I don't know if Tarc would claim it for CoM (his one-year ban) or for OttavaRima (I don't know Tarc's relationship with the latter); the problem is, of course, that you can't claim an exempt status for the decisions that you agree with. Anyway, it's been fun. I'm going for a walk. Drmies (talk) 16:57, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • See, I don't detest CoM as much as ya think I do. I look at the content he worked on, all the food articles and the bacon stuff, and it's good, funny, and creative. But then he'd put a toe into a political article and it was night and day. Like an old Loony Tunes short, where Daffy would have the angel whisper into one ear and the devil whisper into another? When CoM listened to the devil, he was sunk. It's really the same for Mbz1; if you know her name, google it, you'll see her photography used in literally hundreds of places, and it is all rather stunning. But as soon as she set foot into an Israel-Palestine related article, it was a different person. Perhaps I was a lot better off when I used to pretty much stick to uploading album art and making sure the t's were crossed and the i's were dotted on fair-use rationales. "Angels of our better nature" is somehow applicable here, if I were a wittier fellow. Tarc (talk) 18:04, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, her pictures are stunning. Too bad she no longer uploads them to Wikipedia. 76.126.174.91 (talk) 00:57, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

                • Oh, I didn't say you detested him at all, and what you say you think about him, I knew that already; it's pretty much in line with what I think. I've seen Mbz's good work and really, not the rest of it (before my time, and not in my area of interest), so I'm not speaking out one way or another. I *think* she's active on Wikiwatch or one of those sites (I don't need to be reminded of what they're called--I have no interest), and I didn't much care for the comments, but my interactions with her, here, were positive. Drmies (talk) 18:11, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe we need to make more/better use of topic bans to keep people out of the areas that are problematic for them, but keep them contributing where they do a good job? LadyofShalott 18:02, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is so painful to watch a prolific contributor of content become their own worst enemy. Mbz and CoM being perfect examples. Both of them made some truly great contribs, but seemed to keep wading into areas where they caused disruption. I think that's a shame, as mentioned above Mbz1's photographs were fantastic, but she was attacking users here at meta and commons, and we are now deprived of any future images because the person producing them could not accept the decision of ArbCom and chose to contest it in the worst possible manner, i.e. opening an en.wp bashing RFC on meta and harassing WMF staffers on commons, as if WMF staff are going to do something about a site ban. . And of course harassing me at every opportunity while she was at it, including socking to ask me questions that all had her as the common thread during last years arbcom elections. Lesser sanctions won't work on someone with a "revenge mindset".
CoM, I am pretty darn sure there was more socking going on there than is recorded in the block log, but others were not convinced and CU was unable to provide a clear answer one way or another. At the moment though, CoM does not appear to be blocked, if he wanted to come back right now he could.
Rob, I don't know. I've worked with him a few times, but I have also seen him dig in his heels and refuse to give a few times. While that can sometimes be an admirable quality, one needs to pick their battles with a bit more care and not use it as the default response in every circumstance. Rob seems to see himself as a crusader for the subjects of BLPs and to believe he has the moral high ground, which has led more than one well-meaning person to their doom over the ages. I don't know that he could abide by a BLP topic ban with that attitude, but I'd love to be proven wrong. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:11, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Drive-by stalker wondering who CoM is here. I've been reading through this and still don't know who everyone is referring to. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 23:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:ChildofMidnight. Lover of all things bacon. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:19, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Geez, that was a long time ago. I wonder who will tell the stories like this when wikipedia is 100 years old. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 00:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Beeblebrox, your statements are very misleading. For example you write: "could not accept the decision of ArbCom". There has not been any decision of ArbCom regarding Mbz1 request. They did not even look at it: " But equally, there never was an RfC, there never was a massive Arbcom investigation. Everyone Mbz1 mailed it to looked at it and said "can't see it myself" and left it at that, often I suspect without emailing their response back to Mbz1." So, if you write about a person who has no ability to respond at least try to check the facts before making untruthful allegations. You also write about attacking users. I understand Rob was banned for being uncivil. The only thing I cannot understand why you were not. 76.126.33.237 (talk) 04:46, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above post perfectly demonstrates the attitude I was referring to. Arguing semantics instead of logic, painfully obvious block evasion, the same tired arguments over and over and over again, presenting "evidence" that doesa not actually prove her point, and just the overall tone of clueless arrogance. Anyone can see from her massive block log that arbcom did in fact get involved and is "holding" her block. I don't know how we could get just the good parts of a user like that back without taking the bad parts as well, unless they decided to leave WP alone, as the have promised to do time and again, even claiming 'retired" status, and just uploaded images at Commons. Of course that option is and was open to her all along, but look where we are. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:57, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the best way to make a person to leave WP is treating this person fairly, and with a full transparency, the two things that are missing on Wikipedia. 76.126.33.237 (talk) 18:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

YRC[edit]

I think some people forget that the talk is a place to talk TO a person, not ABOUT him. I a similar case, there was at least a hat on that part, - but I don't feel like the one to do that, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't know, Gerda. There's one IP there with an axe to grind (with me as well, apparently, condemning me for some action when I didn't act at all), but I don't feel comfortable hatting the entire thread and the off-topic comments are interspersed. Rob still has talk page access and can remove what he likes. Someone else, another admin, may well disagree with me and that's fine. Drmies (talk) 16:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • At least I tried to talk TO him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Gerda, I'm enforcing asterisk rules per Ungcel; hope you don't mind. I dropped YRC a line. Off-wiki, I think I like him a lot though I'd need to know, of course, his stance on gun control and Alabama football to see if we would ever get along. At least he's never (to my knowledge) said "meh", and that's a good sign. Bis spaetzle, Drmies (talk) 16:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Radford audio[edit]

Im not sure I understand how the history of an article works but I think you are the person who removed the list of products from the Radford audio page. If you are could you explain why you did it. I and others had gone to some trouble to create the list and I believe it to be accurate. I should know as I was there in the 1970s. Regards Chris Clarke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.174.41.210 (talk) 17:27, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello Chris--yes, that was me, unfortunately--you read that well enough (you know the blue text I'm inserting here is clickable). Here's why, in some detail but maybe not exhaustively. a. mentioning forums isn't encyclopedic (by our guidelines); they may be useful to some, of course, but Wikipedia isn't here for all kinds of information: WP:NOTDIR has some guidelines, and that page as a whole has more that may be of relevance. b. by the same token, a list of models is not usually deemed encyclopedic--UNLESS such a list is accompanied by references (from secondary sources) that help establish why such a list, such models, are notable and worthy of inclusion. If you look at my other edits to that article you'll see that I tried to improve the article by adding and tweaking text and by adding references to (more) reliable sources. Unfortunately I wasn't able to find that much, but I tried to do justice to the company. Note also that most of the content in the article is still unverified, but it's the kind of content that is undoubtedly of encyclopedic value--it just needs sourcing. I'd love to get my hands on one of those amps... Drmies (talk) 17:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ANI[edit]

For some reason, no admins have bothered to weigh in here. [4] If you have a minute, could you take a peek? Niteshift36 (talk) 19:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For Mrs. Drmies[edit]

Found something you could give Mrs. Drmies for Valentine's day, a bacon scarf, bacon roses or bacon lube. Of course if you give one of these wonderful gifts, you will need a bacon coffin. A scarf can be called a foulard, which would be more appropriate in this case. The foulard sure looks real. Bgwhite (talk) 21:38, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks! Bacon lube...if you really want to make sure you'll never get any... Drmies (talk) 21:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meh[edit]

You write me an article on a warship, and I'll stop taunting you with my 'meh's. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:17, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, what have you got against "meh" anyway? I'd never heard of it until I started editing here (never watched The Simpsons), and, just as our article says, I assumed it was Yiddish. Even now, when I use it (you can now put me on your shit list), I always think Yiddish, and I like Yiddish.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb, nice to meet you. I think we'll be good friends here. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:35, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think we've met, Ed, but not quite so formally. There are a great many people who become friends ganging up on Drmies. It's one of the few sports that actually interests me. Perhaps you could interest Drmies in writing an article on a ship that was christened with a rare bottle of champagne.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:46, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the Dr would rather just drink the champagne, but that's just me. Or maybe a warship named after Francis Bacon? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:48, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I find it to be the most entertaining thing I do here, Bbb. I think the good Dr could do without the champagne, though, seeing as he has a new member of the household. Well, unless they soothe his teething with whiskey.... Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:53, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • That ain't gonna happen. He's not gonna let a little thing like a baby interfere with his libations.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) *No doubt you're right, but we could withhold the champagne unless he wrote the article. And please don't mention Francis Bacon - all I can think of is English/Irish/English/Irish/etc. Maybe Drmies could dunk the bacon in the champagne, or given the amount of fat in southern bacon, maybe he could dunk the champagne in the bacon.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:55, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ooh, and at one point the ship was named Professeur Bergonié - the HMS Drmies - he could eat bacon, drink champagne, and lecture. (Boy, that article has a lot of redlinks.)--Bbb23 (talk) 02:23, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is for you, bitches[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. While we appreciate that you enjoy using Wikipedia, please note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a social network. Wikipedia is not a place to socialize or do things that are not directly related to improving the encyclopedia. Off-topic material may be deleted at any time. We're sorry if this message has discouraged you from editing this website, but the ultimate goal of this website is to build an encyclopedia (please see WP:NOT for further details). Thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:31, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly, his account has been compromised.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:41, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you hate it when an editor templates his own talk page (and we're all experienced bitches editors, too)?.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • They say talking to yourself is a sign of mental illness. Postpartum depression? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was busy translating HNLMS O 15 for Ed. Somebody better give me some props: ships are boring. Drmies (talk) 04:49, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Props.  davidiad.:τ
      • Let's all go over to HNLMS O 15 and critique the prose style. Should we recommend that Drmies do more ship articles? EdJohnston (talk) 05:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Oh shit, the Eds have come home to roost...there were a bunch more Os; I picked the first one that didn't have an English version. I'll do the rest when I get around to it, or when I get appropriately rewarded. Drmies (talk) 05:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • I already left one critique, first thing I saw. So, I'm not here to roost? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:59, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • Muahaha, contrary to what they told me in grade school, bullying and peer pressure DO work! (oh, and ... nice article, Drmies!) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:22, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • Crisco, you're great, and you can roost here anytime. It's just rare to have two Eds in one thread, don't you think? Thank you all, by the way, for brightening up my morning with these lovely, friendly messages. It makes coffee, boiled eggs, and rosemary bread even tastier. Oh, Eds, I an going to try and do a bunch more Os, and then home up with the boringest sextuple DYK ever. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Even better than 50+ paleontology articles? What is that, a cinqantette? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About e and ij[edit]

Hi Drmies! Thanks for your message.
To be honest, I probably wouldn't have noticed, except that the word included ij, which always reminds me of a experience from my misspent youth. When I was 16, I spent most of my leisure time playing sports, watching sports or reading art history books. Happened to mention to my long suffering High School art teacher (she had to put up with my 'orrible "art works", after all) a painting that was hanging in the "ridge-icks-museum", and was gently corrected. Gasp! I was suddenly confronted with a shattering revelation: I was not as clever as I thought I was.
And a happy Australia Day to you. I'm usually not much interested in patriotic hoo-hah, but when a fringe-y political party identified as socially conservative dumps two of its candidates for making homophobic comments... well, maybe I'm just a little bit proud to be an Australian.
--Shirt58 (talk) 09:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • i before j except after e isn't a rule, you know. ☺ So … you know one part of the sound that humans cannot utter except in circumstances where someone runs over a Frenchman's foot with an automobile. Don't make Doktoro mi estas (Drmies character) utter it. Xyr Chameleon Arch will shut down and xyr memory will be restored.

    Doktoro: In the spirit of Aussie Day, and to help you forget that M. Sean Denham here brought up the unfortunate subject of mis-spelled names containing alien sounds, you could gain some more of that elusive youth cred by bringing Lightning Point and List of Lightning Point episodes up to snuff. Several of the plot summaries are teasers. M. Sean Denham won't be able to help you, even though xe mentions Kiki on xyr user page.

    Uncle G (talk) 11:21, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    • Sorry Ungcel, I don't do TV shows, certainly not Australian shows. My mom used to watch one of those soaps, and so it's always been difficult for me to take Australia seriously (we didn't have Eastenders or American soaps on TV in those days, excluding Dallas and Dynasty of course). Your soundbyte is right on the money, though--a bit shorter than my mom might say it, and she wouldn't put that 'u' at the end, but real good. Drmies (talk) 03:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Private spaceflight[edit]

The IP is back at it again. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 15:05, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thank you sir ...[edit]

— Ched :  ?  15:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

HNLMS O 12 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Flushing
HNLMS O 13 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Frankrijk

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:38, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Sunday![edit]

Drmies, would you have a look at this one [5]? It has a reprehensible edit history, which I think merited a userblock long ago, and article protection, if not deletion altogether. Makes one's skin crawl. Oh, and cheers on this winter day. Thank you, 99.136.252.89 (talk) 15:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure. I wish ANI 1.0 had as much traffic and as quick a response time as 2.0. I got a thread languishing there. Drmies (talk) 15:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Johnny come lately here. I did nominate it for AfD, and the rest has been handled by others. Sorry, my Sunday got busy all of a sudden. Drmies (talk) 22:03, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for the notice on the AfD. For some reason I'm seeing a lot of autobiographies lately. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 22:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at LittleWink's talk page.
Message added 15:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

LittleWink (talk) 15:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why?[edit]

Hello Drmies, could you please explain to me what is the purpose of this template now, when the block has ended? Why not to welcome this person back by removing the template? Thanks. 76.126.33.237 (talk) 17:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • CoM knows it's there; that's not what's keeping him away. If he wants it gone he can easily take care of it himself. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 22:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your message to JMBZ-12[edit]

Hello. I saw your message to the user JMBZ-12 concerning about the Sakine Cansiz page and, while I do understand that him, putting up the fact template causes disruption was unintentional, the only reason why he did so is because Sakine's DOB has yet to locate a source of the date of birth, as there is only the date of year, but no dates of month and day, so I fear that the page still remains of low quality, in my sincerest opinion. Thank you. 70.45.109.54 (talk) 18:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • You can't seriously claim that a page is of low quality because it misses a precise date of birth. Drmies (talk) 02:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Got Time?[edit]

....to deal with a pair of disruptive accounts, pretty clearly the same person? I've filed a report at AiV, where it languishes [6]. Thank you and cheers, 99.136.252.89 (talk) 21:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Staying hip[edit]

So, how about a Dutch film to keep you hip? No need for self-sacrifice, though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Maybe tomorrow, Crisco. I'm dealing with a few things, such as an abdication and a broken sewage pipe. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:39, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • And editing celebrity articles in an effort to stay hip. I hate plumbing problems - there oughta be a law. Who abdicated? Mrs. Drmies?--Bbb23 (talk) 02:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Queen Bee. davidiad { t } 03:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Why? Did she have plumbing problems, too? I thought my speculation was much more interesting. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 03:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Mind your manners, Bbb. You're American so I can't expect you to care for something higher than your state representative, but you're hurting me feelings, you know. I remember her coronation vividly (though I was a republican in those days, of course). Drmies (talk) 03:24, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • I'm American, so clearly I don't have manners. If you mean my congressperson, I don't care much about them. You were a child when Beatrix became queen. Does that mean you're now a monarchist?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ugh. Sorry about the plumbing. Should I be sorry about the abdication too? LadyofShalott 06:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • Must be shocking to hear. And I do hope you call a plumber trained in these matters, rather than a meatball thrower. So you were at the coronation, or was it on TV? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:44, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TV, Crisco. I wasn't old enough to travel to Amsterdam myself. Yes, it was clear that she would abdicate, but it's kind of a shock anyway. She has been a terrific queen; the papers agree on that as well. I can't say I'm glad to see PWA get to the throne: I'm fed up with men being in charge. (How much he resembles his mother on our picture!) Y'all keep your fingers crossed that they dig up and replace that main drain today--I'm tired of peeing in the yard. Drmies (talk) 13:46, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Isn't abdication a Dutch tradition? Just wait twenty years and you'll have another woman on the throne. :-) Now, if only Queen Elizabeth would abdicate in favor of Prince William and not Charles... Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • And yet it never caused a constitutional crisis... by the way, Drmies, did you know that blood has a voice? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, it pretty much is. The Dutch papers read that in the tradition of Dutch royalty not considering their status as divinely ordained, which is fine with me. That little girl looks just like her father, by the way. Crisco, we called a certified one, and since they're charging us $5000 they must be good. Insurance doesn't cover a penny. DYK...that Drmies hates crepe myrtles? Rosie was in the yard at 7, peeing like a champ; my oldest daughter of course had to pee on her feet, with not a jellyfish in sight. Oh, kids, please respect Ungcel's plea for asterisks, not colons. You might break the world. Drmies (talk) 14:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ah, I see. That is... not something I want to imagine. Sounds like Jakarta earlier this month. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Speaking of constitutional crisis, you can guess why I got my coffee from the coffee shop this morning instead of making it myself. :) Drmies (talk) 14:47, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Gawk, a pun! And yes, I can imagine quite well. BTW, I hate how hard it is to find someone with only an initial. Haven't found a first name for G. Kruger anywhere, and Ph. G. "Flip" Carli is having the same issues (although it appears he was also a football player) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • There's a book/article (the citation in the footnote isn't clear) entitled Indonesian Cinema: A Glance of History by Misbach Yusa Biran that might have the answer. Uncle G (talk) 00:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • 82 pages, so a booklet. Might be able to track that down in Jogja, although it's quite old so I won't be getting it at a bookstore. Doubt it has Kruger's first name, but this might deal with the 50s and 60s (which would be nice to have) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:42, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the asterisk thing - I use a variety of browsers in different locations (not always within my control what's available) and get odd-looking results in anything but Firefox when there is a string of multiple asterisks. Now I do prefer Firefox, but that isn't always an option for me. LadyofShalott 19:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • They work if they're not interrupted, so to speak, by colons or hard returns. Look, I'm just doing what he tells me to. He's got seniority. How's the book business, Lady? Have you replaced all of those dusty things with computer terminals yet? Drmies (talk) 19:44, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, if there is a long string of asterisks, I see either several dots (Safari) or a big white space (IE) unless I'm in FF. If there are several colons and then an asterisk, it looks normal anywhere I am. Anyway... bite your tongue! We have in fact greatly increased the number of computers we have, but we'll not be one of those horrible bookless places in the foreseeable future, thank goodness. You'd be amazed how many people have still never touched a computer, and now they have to do online applications to get jobs in fast food or book a cheap busride somewhere. LadyofShalott 20:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Really? Just to get a place at McD? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sorry, I missed this until now. Yeah seriously (not sure about McD, but several fast food joints)... and if you haven't ever touched a computer, online applications suck. LadyofShalott 03:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Facepalm Facepalm. And the airport terminals too... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:41, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm editing with Safari 5.1.7 right now. There's exactly one square bullet for each list item, and no dots. Uncle G (talk) 00:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • The way to get multiple bullets with Safari 5.1.7 is the same way to get multiple bullets with everything else: erroneously put a blank line between what are supposed to be successive list items, as here. That ends all of the lists and then starts a new set of lists. In this case, one gets 
        </li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
<ul>
<li>
<ul>
<li>
        in the HTML. Hence the bullets. They're the bullets for the first items of three new lists. A blank line ends all lists. This is why Help:List says not to put blank lines between successive list items. Uncle G (talk) 00:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Klassen[edit]

Did you hear that This Is Not My Hat won the Caldecott award for illustration? LadyofShalott 06:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lisa Wade[edit]

Hi Drmies, I see you did some (decent!!!) subtantial edits to this article- I was just about to review it at AfC, do you want me to hold off? I wasn't sure about her WP:NOTE to be honest. Cheers! Basket Feudalist 15:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey, thanks for your note. You can review it, if you like, but in my opinion, right now, she does not pass: the article contains no secondary sources at all except for the one award. Here's the thing: her position (and awards) do not qualify for inherent notability per WP:PROF--see criteria 2, 3, 5, or 8. That she edits that blog does not make her notable; notability is not inherited in that sense, though it would validate a redirect from her name to the blog (which is a notable publication, in my judgment). So, what needs to be added (and I commented on that at [User talk:CarolineHeldman]], but that seems to fall on deaf ears) are secondary sources commenting on her as a person (a famous person, maybe, so WP:GNG applies) or as a scholar--reviews of her work would help. JSTOR is a good place to search, though I doubt it'll produce much since she has no books published, from what I could tell. Does this help? (If not, ask the experts--say, DGG or Randykitty.) Drmies (talk) 16:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's really useful, thanks. Apologies for only checking your page now, I forgot to watch it earlier.Basket Feudalist 19:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Again?[edit]

Pardon me for troubling you again, Drmies, but with this edit ten days ago you made clear to all concerned the terms of an interaction ban. I began editing articles again a few days later, on Jan 22, being careful to avoid any article previously edited by the other party. Unfortunately, he/she, with this edit, has announced their disagreement with those terms stipulated by you originally at WP:ANI and reaffirmed by you on that user’s talk page at my request. Subsequently, he/she, with this edit, reverted your reversion of an edit they had previously made in violation of the ban. He/she has now, in further violation of the terms, offered these edits: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. These edits touch upon five different articles that I’ve recently worked upon. A look at the history of each article will demonstrate that the other party showed no prior interest in them but apparently has pointedly followed me to each of these pages, despite your previous final warning. So much for respect for the spirit and letter of the ban. What can be done?Tristan noir (talk) 05:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Madonna[edit]

Hi[edit]

I responded to your post[7] on my talk page explaining why I had done that revert. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I saw--thanks. Right back atcha. Drmies (talk) 17:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism? I hope so, but...[edit]

We need to find out for certain. See the recent addition and my revert on Ehsan Sehgal. LadyofShalott 03:26, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I googled it and found nothing; I checked CNN and AP, and also found nothing. Go Phightins! 03:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Unban[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

  • This is probably related to "Request for interaction ban-lift", which is being made by Elvenscout742, and which involved a decision you recently made. Nyttend (talk) 07:36, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, but methinks there's also a little need for an explanation of sorts by Drmies :-) (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:24, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Well done"[edit]

Why are you protecting vandalism? Check the history of the article and you'll understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.244.75.87 (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Check the history and you see an edit war. Besides, it's obvious that you're blanking an enormous amount of verified and valid information, so I think you should say "thank you" because I haven't blocked you. Drmies (talk) 19:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you block me for discussing bad actions?

  • Have you stopped beating your wife? Don't answer that. Just keep in mind that what I just gave you was a final warning. Also, I don't wish to impugn your eyesight, but both edit warriors are blocked. If I hadn't protected it, you'd probably be blocked too since you can't seem to stop yourself. Drmies (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guess Who's Back?[edit]

Yup, [8], the IP of our ol' friend Zimmermanh1997/Hollisz. More problematic edits and since I was leaving all Zimmermanh1997/Hollisz edits up to you, I bring this to your attention. Hope all is well in your neck of the woods. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure thing Homer. I reverted and warned them. It's really of a level of untellect that's hard to believe. Drmies (talk) 02:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't know if you typed "untellect" on purpose, but what a great coinage. LadyofShalott 02:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I claim it, yes. It's a meager attempt at not saying a bad word. You may have it, and "untelligent" as well. Drmies (talk) 02:36, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • "Untellect" and "Untelligent"....I like it. :) Reminds me of the heavily-quoted "Me Fail English? Thats Unpossible." Anywho, thanks for the warning and revert. I will keep an eye out any further edits from the anon or his socks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:36, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks?[edit]

Nothing conveys Wikilove quite like a severed head covered in snakes... Yunshui 雲‍水 02:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who wants to see a nuclear tag bomb?[edit]

Boom. Drmies (talk) 03:54, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief! Are you kidding? Were there any tags left he didn't use? Go Phightins! 03:57, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No deletion tags were harmed in the process, I believe. Now, it wasn't a great article, and I've had to, ahem, trim it some. Drmies (talk) 03:58, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is tag bombing and then there is tag bombing! Aye–yi–yi! AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 04:14, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "rocks fall, everybody dies" of Wikipedia. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:31, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd be afraid to edit that article for the next 50 years, I don't want any glowing children. Ryan Vesey 04:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • What in the heck is that? There are tags that make no sense at all. (BLP tags? It's about a book!) LadyofShalott 04:54, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unsourced (with two references), autobiography, metricate (no measurements), out of date... I'm surprised he didn't add "Cabal approved" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why doesn't Twinkle require approval for use? For many things, it's easier than using standard rollback, and it can cause a lot of damage. Ryan Vesey 05:14, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The account has 52 edits and has done nothing except edit their userpage and delete/tag/speedy articles. Their talk page has 7 warnings from the past two days. Obviously a person who doesn't care. Twinkle is not the only thing that doesn't require approval... AfD, Speedy, NPP, and AfC all have problems with new editors.
  • I can't believe a Starfleet Officer would do something like this. The educational standards of Starfleet Academy have really dropped. Makes you want to return to before 2161, when the Academy was founded. In the 2050's during and after WWIII, you had to kill to stay alive. That's how you educate somebody. Whippersnappers these days. Bgwhite (talk) 05:55, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Starfleet Officer is about to get indeffed. That's probably the longest a vandalism only account has lasted without being deleted. Ryan Vesey 18:45, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • You mean blocked. Well, it happened. Drmies (talk) 18:52, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

bca.....again[edit]

Drmies,

I am trying not to get sucked back into the madness of that talk page, but if I don't hold the ground, then they are going to go ahead and make some changes that I believe will be very damaging to the article. Most importantly, they are trying to remove the NPOV tag(s), which I think is the most important thing because it alerts editors that stumble upon the article of the dispute.

Do you have any suggestions? I was really happy with the way that talk page was diffused, how things became civil, how I was editing only intermittently and about specific things, and avoiding the nonsense, abstract TL;DR conversations. Now things are just as bad as they were before, and I am certainly not happy with the way I've been editing, but I don't see much of an alternative.

Thanks.

Sincerely, Charles35 (talk) 05:36, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Slight misunderstanding[edit]

Hi! Thank you SO MUCH for your continued good faith despite my failure to be fully coherent sometimes. TN really gets under my skin sometimes.

Anyway, regarding this, you actually have misremembered. The user who is personally linked with TN, Kujakupoet, served as his meatpuppet/tag-team partner last September. He is also the one responsible for the mess of text in Tanka in English that you so diligently cleaned up. (Again, Kudos!) If he was still actively pursuing such things, he would probably be in the same place as TN now. The recently indef-blocked user who I told you about is User:JoshuSasori. He has no connection to TN whatsoever, apart from the fact that they both followed me around a bunch of articles. While in the process of preparing an attack page against me, he apparently read every entry on my talk page, and found one message from TN. Not bothering to check the context, he assumed TN had been in the right and cited him in the attack page. That is why I replied to that, and that was one of TN's recent complaints that he made to you.

Anyway, sorry for not pointing this out on AN when you first posted it. I figured it was too long/off-topic to mention there. Although, now a huge chunk of text is just factual misrepresentation from TN. Still, I figured it best to tell you on your talk page.

Thank you again for all your guidance, and happy editing!

elvenscout742 (talk) 13:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Good morning Elvenscout--I'm sitting with my coffee here and haven't yet looked at the AN thread. What I did was mixremember: I combined that user with the block for Joshu--I knew it wasn't Joshu because I checked, but for some reason I thought that that earlier one got blocked. Anyways, thanks for pointing that out and I'm glad to see you. I'm sorry things went the way that they did, and I am hoping to pop over to AN for good news. BTW, speaking of old things: I got a few books in through Interlibrary Loan related to Tanka in English but unfortunately Google Books' blurb promised more than the book delivered and they were useless (and one of them turned out to be not reliable, well-written, or on the topic--I have developed a new lack of appreciation for university presses from the Philippines). I'm somewhat surprised to see so little (reliable, academic) attention paid to the poetry produced in those concentration internment camps. Alright, back to business I suppose. Again, I'm sorry for the way things went and I hope it's smooth sailing from here on out. Drmies (talk) 14:33, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
On a largely unrelated note, I e-mailed M Kei the same link I posted on Talk:Tanka in English and he thanked me for it. Apparently he had been looking for the book for years -- why he had published a bunch of documents claiming it was a poetry anthology when he in fact only knew its title and its author, he didn't say. Umm, I guess the article stays as it is for the time being then. :S elvenscout742 (talk) 18:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a lot of money for it. Nicely scouted! Drmies (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move Request[edit]

Could you move WXBQ back to WXBQ-FM where it belongs, please? The article was moved earlier today, for reasons unknown. The station's official callsign is "WXBQ-FM" and per naming conventions, we go with the official callsign, not the station calls itself, in naming articles. You may also want to let the editor who moved the article know of the problem, he's a newbie, so probably just needs a little guidance. Help all is well in your neck of the woods. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:08, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Sir. Much appreciated. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:33, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing. A not-well conceived edit of theirs (on a wikilink) led me to a new creation, Desire the Right, just to up my stub count. Drmies (talk) 18:45, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have plenty of stubs to my count, probably. I never keep count as to what is or isn't a stub, too much work keeping up. I just keep a big ol' list. :) Well done, though, on the added stub. If I knew more about the Falklands, I could add to it, but alas, I only know about US type articles. :( Oh well. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like you are going to have to move WXBQ back to WXBQ-FM again as the same user moved it back with the edit summary "STATION DROPPED THE (FM) FROM THE CALL LETTERS". This isn't true, as you can see from their FCC listing, the official callsign is "WXBQ-FM". Might need to talk with that user as I would probably throw a warning at him at this point. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, go for it Homer: explain it on their talk page, preferably with a link to a. their name (as above) and b. our policy. If they don't listen or don't move it back, I will. Drmies (talk) 21:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Okie Dokie, didn't want to get in trouble. Will post the warning in a moment. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I posted this, which isn't a warning in itself, but could be considered a Warn1 warning. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:53, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Homer, don't you think those edits have a familiar flavor to them? Look at the edit summaries, the occasional use of all-caps--I could be wrong... Drmies (talk) 16:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • I checked Zimmermanh/Hollisz and they didn't use much all-caps edit summaries, neither did my previous nemesis DreamMcQueen (aka Rollosmokes). Just not ringing any ding-dongs, but then again, the door bell is broken. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:42, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Thank you for identifying the WP:COI at Sociological Images, Caroline Heldman and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lisa Wade. I work at Occidental College with Lisa and have been a Wikipedian for a long time. I discussed with her the potential downfalls of having a Wikipedia page and she has decided that having one is not in her best interest. Could you delete the sandboxed article? Also, I'll be working in the coming days and weeks on at least Sociological Images to make it conform to Wikipedia standards (I'll be adding a COI statement to my userpage and the talk page of the article once I start). I would appreciate any help you are willing to offer - I would like to have someone reviewing my edits, of course! Thanks again for your hard work! Wadewitz (talk) 22:42, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey Wadewitz--how you doing? the COI wasn't really my problem. I am convinced that people ought to be trusted a bit; unfortunately this here is a matter of not realizing fully what Wikipedia is and is not--see User talk:CarolineHeldman. Plus, I looked for evidence for her notability per our guidelines, but couldn't find any. As for SI, they got written up very reliably so they must be notable, no doubt, but that article needed some pruning. I'm glad you're on the case. And I don't think you need to stick COI tags anywhere: if you can't be trusted to edit neutrally then we might as well give up. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:49, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm doing great! I work on Wikipedia at my job! Nothing better than that. :) I did see that exchange - sorry about that. Part of what I'm trying to do here in academia is explain precisely that issue of "what Wikipedia is not" but I wasn't able to preempt that. I'm going to post COI tags just in case - better to be safe than sorry! Wadewitz (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, again, don't do it on my account. Your resume speaks for itself. I made a placeholder for your colleague--she has some internet presence which warrants a redirect to the blog. Please tell your other colleague I meant nothing personal by it, but I've edited hundreds of academic biographies and so I like to think that I know something. Glad to see you around: it seems that the content contributors are leaving in droves (Malleus is retired), leaving charlatans like me to pretend we care about knowledge. Drmies (talk) 23:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'll do that - thanks for being so patient. I've noticed that many of the editors I knew years ago are gone. Sad to see that. Wadewitz (talk) 23:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion welcome[edit]

Nothing dramatic here, just a little COI and questions about notability. Some concern Sharon Exley, and whether she is notable, or whether it's her firm that gets the credit. I think husband Peter Exley more clearly passes the test (this is tricky, because they are the firm, which poses an interesting dilemma notability-wise), though I'm not so certain that the cover of his children's book needs to be included. Anyway, at this point I'm requesting a consultation, rather than major invasive surgery. Good weekend and cheers, 99.12.243.171 (talk) 01:56, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, I agree (after a quick read). The book cover needs to go, yes. A good solution is to write up the firm and make redirects. Drmies (talk) 02:03, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ha, I figured you liked baseball. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, but I have neither the desire nor steam left to look over every image switch they've done. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 02:20, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Maybe there's a rationale to the book cover image, which wasn't made clear in the article, in that I think it depicts the interior of one of the firm's designs. Hmph. Losing my edge, clearly tired and sick. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Kick back, put the netbook down, open a nice brew, and watch the end of Batman. That's what I'm doing. Drmies (talk) 02:23, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Dunno about Batman, but they put on a good show in New Orleans tonight. And lately it's been hot totties here, at least until all returns to normal. Haven't been bold enough to redirect per your suggestion, but after removing the aforementioned material from both Exley biographies, and being reverted at one of them, I've started a discussion at the notability noticeboard [9]. Cheers, 99.12.243.171 (talk) 04:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Crash Course (YouTube)[edit]

What do you think of the detailed list of episodes? I'm torn between listcruft and NOTPAPER. I sort of hate to even suggest it, but List of Crash Course (YouTube) episodes? LadyofShalott 03:53, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well now. That's a pretty promotional article with a huge lack of references and a couple of SPAs providing content. The lists are faulty (the wikilinks all need to go as silly, counter-MOS, original research) and fall foul of NOTDIR, as far as I'm concerned. Drmies (talk) 04:31, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah. I'm probably way too hesitant to chop big blocks of stuff, even when it needs it. You're better with the ax. LadyofShalott 04:45, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't like doing it, Lady. But here goes. Drmies (talk) 04:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is talking about the annoying secret compartment really encyclopedic? I understand that it's in every show, but I don't think it's imperative to an understanding of the show. I think the article would be best limited to information regarding the history, intended audience, lecture delivery style, and reception. I don't know what I think about the lists of episodes. They're certainly useful (I've actually used them), but again, I'm not sure if they're encyclopedic. On a note related to the "secret compartment", I didn't do a thorough examination (ctrl+f only), but I don't believe Blue's Clues mentions mail time. Ryan Vesey 04:51, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • You can use the episodes, but how can you use the list of episodes? It's gone now anyway. Yeah, I got nothing against the article/subject, but this was too much. BTW, is there a single printed reference in there? Drmies (talk) 04:58, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • The list mostly to remember where I'm at in the series. It's still possible to do by going to the channel's uploads and sorting them by date. I'm not finding too many this was the only one I found easily. The focus Crash Course makes (at least in their first episodes) with "comparisons" to the Mongols would probably be worth inclusion if someone would write about it, but write now, it's not worthy. Ryan Vesey 05:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I would guess that the Wired and Mental Floss articles were printed and not only online. LadyofShalott 05:10, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I came across a similar case with a YouTube series. My approach was to use a couple examples and summarize the theme of the show, without listing each one.

This was a memorable case for me, because I was trying to help an obvious PR participant by spending the time to clean up their promotionalism and explain my edits. As soon as AfC approved, they re-inserted the promotionalism like I wouldn't notice. Now I am less helpful, even though I myself should be sympathetic as a frequent COI contributor and PR person - it's frustrating. CorporateM (Talk) 17:14, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's weird--I just saw your name somewhere in some history and thought I looked into the edits (since you have a suspicious name, haha), but now I can't find it. (No: I saw it in DGG's talk page history.) I've just been going through Vlogbrothers and man, the promotionalism is all over the wiki. Your approach seems valid to me: an example (or two) is fine, a list usually not. Yes, those contributors need to realize that they are not helping Wikipedia (they don't care, of course) or the companies they edit for (officially or not), since at some point those articles will be pruned, tagged, scrutinized, etc. (Did you revert on that article? I'll be glad to have a look.) Which reminds me of a grammatical joke by one of my HEL students: what's the past tense (really, preterite) of "Facebook"? Suggestion box will be open until nap time. Drmies (talk) 17:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • BTW, we have both been active on Gibson Guitar Corporation, an article that still, despite your best efforts and my weak ones, still needs much improvement. I like the statements on your user page. Drmies (talk) 17:37, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • You closed an obviously poor RfC for me here, where I was accused of having a COI and you probably looked into it. Since you are active in RFCUs, you will probably come upon a related issue here. Though, if I did have a COI with PRSA, I should be praised for adding so much contentious material despite it and improving it from its original link-bait status[10] But I do actually have a COI in other areas, like this and this

      Oh yah, you can bet I reverted it. If I could have reverted it harder I would have. If you like, try my custom COI notification template User:CorporateM/COIuser and let me know what your luck is with it. It worked pretty well here.

      I think the eventuality argument is weak. It presumes we have infinite eyeballs and resources, but in actuality spam often sticks for years and so does sourced promotionalism like this. I have found the legal argument to be much more effective in persuading companies to use Talk. The FTC and the German court ruling. I also use what I call "vengeful editing" and other excuses - whatever reasoning I can find really. CorporateM (Talk) 18:01, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

      • My eventuality argument may be weak but it's not the only tool in the box. For that RfC (closing it was easy) I didn't look into much at all: it was such a poorly phrased attempt at shutting another editor up that it could be closed on formal grounds. I saw that RfC/U go by in Recent changes the last few days but hadn't looked at it yet--I may go through the diffs and weigh in; it's pretty clear that this is a troublesome editor. Drmies (talk) 18:10, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, of course all of the RFCU participants have our own faults like any editor, but I tend to agree mostly with the IP's conclusion. On the other hand, we all deserve hand-slaps for civility, edit-warring, promo, COI, etc. Anyways, nice chatting. See you around. CorporateM (Talk) 19:19, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oh yes, I met an editor in person at a meetup that was working on their controversy. He was involved in a lot of nature conservation efforts, so I figured he had a slight personal bias and it could use some clarifications from a corporate goon. I'll take a look. I see a lot of neutrality issues such as promotional sub-heads, but also UNDUE and CRITICISM regarding the controversy. CorporateM (Talk) 18:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I feel the need to comment that I'm more interested in John's novels than any of their vlogging? video stuff, although if they actually manage to educate people that way, more power to 'em. LadyofShalott 03:07, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Slightly bigger misunderstanding...[edit]

I already replied on AN for the purposes of everyone else, but regarding this edit: you used the phrase it was Elvenscout revert of those edits that prompted my first warning. I hope we already clear on this, but I never reverted TN's edits to the Mokichi page. That would have been a violation; but it was impossible for me to revert TN because I had forgotten TN had ever edited the page. I understand TN probably misled you with this edit. Additionally, he has claimed that the other edit mentioned him by name: you will notice that nowhere in the prose of any past version of User:Elvenscout742/JoshuSasori rebuttal did I use TN's name. I linked to his edit history for clarity, but it was a piped link.

Hope that's those cleared up! :)

elvenscout742 (talk) 09:14, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:IBlueChelsea/sandbox[edit]

Hi, I'm leaving in two hours but will be completely internet-free until Sunday night / Monday morning (UK time) - regarding User:IBlueChelsea/sandbox, yep it's fantasty, all the dates are in the future, probably the editor's record at a computer simulation game such as Football Manager 2013 or similar. GiantSnowman 09:34, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I saw the future dates, yes, but I wanted confirmation so thanks for the note. It'll be gone when you get back: enjoy your break! Drmies (talk) 13:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, I'm back now and playing catch-up - the page was re-created so I have re-deleted. GiantSnowman 12:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ANEW and Green children of Woolpit[edit]

You deal with the main page more than I do (which is pretty much not at all). Could you take a look at the most recent report at ANEW? I don't know how the "rules" impact an article on the main page. Despite my ignorance, I commented, but it might be useful to have someone less ignorant do so.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:29, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another admin commented, who seems to agree with me. I guess sometimes common sense works, even at Wikipedia.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I know it looks like I'm having a conversation with myself, but actually I'm not. Thanks much for your help, Drmies.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb, I even talk to you in my sleep. Thanks for weighing in on that report. I trust all is well--I was absent to do my recycling and pick up a delicious grilled grouper po-boy. Drmies (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Starship9000/ Tornado (Parque ded Acciones ded Madrid)[edit]

Dear Drmies,


I made improvements on a draft about the Tornado roller coaster found at Parque ded Acciones ded Madrid.Please go check if the draft article about the Tornado roller coaster is ready for the mainspace. I actually uploaded a image on WikiMedia Commons of the Tornado roller coaster so go see if the roller coaster is ready for the mainspace. If yes, then I will move it to the mainspace. If not, I will try to improve it more. You can leave a note on the roller coaster on my talk page if you need anything. Thanks! --Starship9000 (talk) 20:35, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Have you been on it? It looks spectacular. It needs some polishing. In my opinion you need to scratch the external links (the videos) and I think you need more reliable sources. That sentence about the rankings needs to be rewritten (what rankings? when?) and the source needs to be solid. I can't really judge the quality of that listas site: Pagina no encontrada, but it looks like a website, not a print publication. But if you like, submit it and see what kind of feedback you get. Drmies (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Page not found in Spanish.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, I have not been on that roller coaster. What do you mean by polishing? --Starship9000 (talk) 22:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A gift for you and your talk page stalkers[edit]

[11]

  • You're welcome. My father was interviewed by King several times on local radio, before he hit it big on TV. I'm not aware that any inappropriate advances took place.99.12.243.171 (talk) 22:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, great gossipy stuff--thanks. So King didn't make a move on your father, is that what you're saying? Drmies (talk) 20:44, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, gossip is pretty base theater, but I got a kick out of that video clip. And yes, that's my gist. Not that King isn't devilishly chiseled. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 20:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nuno Miguel Prata Coelho[edit]

Hi there MIES, how's it going?

please don't revert me here again, i could be mistaken but i doubt there's any other club in professional football named ARIS, hence the FC is not needed in box. Please bear with me on this one.

Plus, this greek guy that edits this club's players is really annoying, engaging in no conversation whatsoever and writing no summaries (his IP address also seems pretty standard). Have a great (rest of) weekend - --AL (talk) 00:21, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Whatever you say--I looked at the Aris article and saw that the FC was in their name. Same to you, VASCO! Drmies (talk) 00:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Paramus High School[edit]

Over the past several days, extensive portions of sourced content have been removed from the article for Paramus High School. I have no issue with the removal of Steven Howard Temares as a notable, as there is no article yet and the sources need to be improved. But I do question the haphazard and arbitrary removal of descriptive material and quotations from the article. I can point you to hundreds upon hundreds of articles that provide more detailed descriptions (longer than two to three words) for notables and that provide quotations within references. I understand that you feel otherwise, but I have seen no Wikipedia policy that would forbid their use. This article had been stable until the entry for Temares was added, and the recent activity is disruptive of longstanding consensus on this and other related articles. In the absence of any blanket prohibition mandated by policy, I will use other similar articles as a model and restore the deleted material to the article in the near future along with appropriate additions and cleanup. Please feel free to contact me on my talk page to discuss. Alansohn (talk) 05:39, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dear Alansohn, the longstanding consensus is that such lists contain very little information. A name, year of graduation, a word or two--what more is necessary? The rest easily turns into fluff tripe, and I've seen thousands of school articles, outside of New Jersey too. Besides the problem of fluff (and every school will want to add the "Grammy-Award nominate" kind of stuff) there is the problem of maintenance. A list of notables on a school article shouldn't list whether someone plays with the Pirates or the Penguins, just that they play a certain sport. As remarkably busy as you are, you can't maintain all those articles: less is more. Oh, don't say "haphazard and arbitrary", please: it is rather insulting. Drmies (talk) 16:31, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh--"who was originally a caller who won the only contest for listeners to get their own show on the station". That's the sort of thing that no article should have. Drmies (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Too often, "longstanding consensus" means what you think the standard should be, not the results of any discussion or the standard set by any policy. Take a look at the featured articles for Amador Valley High School and Plano Senior High School, and see some examples of lists of notables, where the descriptions are substantially longer than two to three words. Again, I will be happy to trim the text, but unless you have a relevant policy that you can point to, I am happy to maintain this article and a few thousand others with the material that was present before the sourced content was removed. Please let me know if you have any issue with any of the sourcing in any of them. Feel free to reply or leave a talkback indicator on my talk page so that I can see the response as I do not monitor any talk pages. Alansohn (talk) 22:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Too often, the pot calls the kettle black. There's no policy preventing you from doing what you do, Alansohn, of course, except for common sense and arguments which you don't seem too interested in, and I suppose I should have known better than to edit a NJ article. Feel free to not read this; I usually try to keep an eye on an conversation I start, but that's just me. Also, person x was originally a caller who won the only contest for listeners to get their own show on the station, and all that. Drmies (talk) 03:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks for all of your constructive suggestions, as well as for your meaningful comments. The article has been updated, with many revised sources, trimmed descriptions, shorter quotations, removed notables and other cleanup. Please let me know if you have any more constructive ideas on improving the article. Alansohn (talk) 23:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When I die...[edit]

My apologies to Onion Lady, but I advance you this Dr Mi Esta: How would our wives behave here? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:16, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's anyone's guess, Crisco. I don't think xe would approve. On the other hand, it'll be the first time that I see a strip act. And the last. If I get to see it at all. Drmies (talk) 16:39, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn must've had fun in China. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:49, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I say...[edit]

That makes two people who've now said kind things about me (I'm presuming you referred to me here, if not then ignore this post). Those two comments have turned a shitty day into a rather good day, so thanks for that :) Parrot of Doom 20:58, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's my job, to turn dung into tulips. Enjoy it while it lasts, Parrot: if knowledge of the past is worth anything, tomorrow is probably going to suck again. :) to you too!

Confirmed? I think so.[edit]

Hollisz posted two new posts to the WICL page with the edit summary "WICL Changes Permanent I am a Wikipedia User HZ" and "WICL Changes I am a wiki user HZ but account deleted! Do NOT DELETE!! & These are updates". Obviously, "HZ" is for "Hollisz", so I think you can safely block User:Zimmermanh1997 and User:Hollisz as sockpuppets and block User:98.204.145.138 (the IP) for 2 months (as part of the block escalation). - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:17, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since you were offline, I asked User:Diannaa to do the blocking. She blocked the IP for 3 months, no word on whether she will block the other accounts yet. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:44, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Diannaa says she doesn't think a block for Zimmermanh1997 or Hollisz is necessary as she has prevented anyone from editing from the 98.204.145.138 IP. She wanted me to "confirm with [you] later and confirm whether these accounts need to be blocked" but she felt that her "feeling is that this will be adequate". I think it will be too. As long as Zimmermanh1997/Hollisz can't edit, I'm happy, but I will leave this one up to you. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:31, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me, Homer. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 05:02, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okie Dokie. Guess we will see what happens in 3 months...like we don't already know. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:39, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Serial comma[edit]

Would you care to weigh in here? Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:58, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About Super Bowl XLVII[edit]

Baltimore Ravens - nice mixture of two of my most favourite things: sport and Eng. Lit.
There should be more sports teams with literary references in their names.
My wish-list:

--Shirt58 (talk) 13:17, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There once was a dick from Nantucket.... Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Who chased a white whale till it tuckered
Young Starbuck was drowneded
As "The Pequod", she foundered
And "I only am escaped alone to tell thee" Job 1:15. This last line doesn't scan at all. Oh fuck it.
--Shirt58 (talk) 09:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"And only I/am escaped alone/to tell thee of it"--if you read this line as containing three very speedy phrases, each one with one main stress, it scans and runs a bit better. Shirt, that is really, really fine work. Also, Moby-Dick is of course the greatest novel in the world, no matter what the Russians say. Drmies (talk) 15:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't mind the "Minnesota Mainstreeters" or something along that line. The New York Knicks are another literature inspired team. Ryan Vesey 14:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Haha, I love it. Didn't know you cared for sports. I watched the second half, but I really only care for the Broncos since Peyton Manning is my sportsmancandy. I am appreciative of the Ravens' name, and I am very pleased that you sought to include one of my all-time favorite poems, The Sot-Weed Factor, which doesn't nearly get taught enough. "Thus naked Pict in battle fought, / or undisguised his mistress saught..."; "And knowing well his ware was good / refused to screen it with a hood." And for the Bacon cabal: With hominy, or bacon fried, / or with molasses dulcified." What we still need is the Connecticut Corngods. Drmies (talk) 15:14, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, friend[edit]

I have written a proposed remedy to the Richard Arthur Norton affair, to be taken to AN/I in the event that ArbCom defers the case. Since the original thread is hatted, the proposal has been made on his talk page (User_talk:Richard_Arthur_Norton_(1958-_)). As you were a participant in the original thread, I would very much appreciate your comments as to whether the proposed remedy satisfies your concerns. Thanks, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 23:24, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks Carrite. I've looked it over and tentatively agree, but I am not so deeply versed in the issue that I can say right now whether I agree with this. For now, though, I don't see a reason to prevent RAN from getting back to work. Thanks for working on this, Drmies (talk) 23:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:CountryRadio[edit]

Well, looks like you were right. An SPI has confirmed that CountryRadio is indeed someone else. I haven't crossed paths with User:Jenny28GS or User:DU2010OR though, but good call. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Pure luck, I suppose. It's possible that I ran into their socks' edits the last couple of weeks and some bell went off. Drmies (talk) 02:31, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Still a good call. :) At least we are rid of two sockpuppets for the time being, CountryRadio and Hollisz. Now what do we do? :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Now we beef up The Hasty-Pudding. Drmies (talk) 20:34, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, for one, "Notes" and "Bibliography" could be removed from under "References" and all references updated to {{cite book}} format. One could see if there is a connection between the Hasty Pudding Club, Hasty Pudding Theatricals and the poem. A direct link to this or this, the text of the poem. Though this link would be better as it is from the University of Minnesota. Analysis of the poem would also be a good idea. That is available from several sources. Beyond that, I would take it for a peer review if you plan on going for a GA or FA. That's what I'd do anyway. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Impressive first article?[edit]

How often do new editors produce first articles as impressive as this? If you agree, please respond on his talk page. Shameless promotion I know but I like to encourage new editors. The intention is to move this user-draft article to Roy Chaplin but the author does not yet feel it is ready for such a move --Senra (talk) 14:22, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, my first article was this, so... but watch for possible COI. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I believe I alerted this editor to potential COI the day the article was first posted. I covered COI again today (last paragraph) just to be sure. Do let me know if my COI advice is adequate in this context --Senra (talk) 15:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, you've got the bases covered. Now to go to someone's talk page. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Indeed. Hey, one thing--I know from experience that people want to write about their fathers. Sure, that's a COI, but that term really doesn't cover it well. Personal (emotional) involvement is really where it's at (I wouldn't even use the term COI), and I'm glad to see that you all didn't bring some kind of hammer down. Drmies (talk) 15:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)I guess my first article was this, which is pretty embarrassing. Today I would AfD the same article as WP:NOT#CRAP. I felt the COI on Chaplin showed, but nothing that couldn't be mostly fixed with a little help. CorporateM (Talk) 03:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Crash Course redux[edit]

Howdy, Drmies. You have messages at Talk:Crash Course (YouTube). LadyofShalott 16:28, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

George Grantham (economic historian)[edit]

Dear Drmies, I have made a new little page on George Grantham as his h-score seems enough now to me for notability. Hope it is OK. The old afd is here (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George W. Grantham) and I have put a note on the new article's talk page. Hope this is OK and best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 16:39, 5 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]

  • Thanks for the courtesy note; I appreciate it. I gotta say, it's still thin: the prize is the only thing that suggests notability. If you can find more, you should add it. Wait--now I see it, there are book reviews. If you could redo those citations, to where the title of the review says "Rev. of Grantham and MacKinnon, Labour market evolution", that would be helpful. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! done the Rev. of... I think the h-index of 12 now should be enough in an Afd if someone doens't want it! Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 17:19, 5 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Is this common?[edit]

I obviously can't say too much as it's for an upcoming paper, but I'm curious as to whether or not this is normal in college writing. I've always had classes require citations for quotes/ideas used from a source, but this is the first time I've had a professor not require citations for general facts. Is it normal for a prof to not require citations for facts? On another note, I need to learn Chicago Manuel of Style for the citations, I wish universities would select one citation format and require that all professors use it. Ryan Vesey 17:32, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) The way my schoolins did it was: quotes (obviously) and anything that's a specific bit of information that's not common knowledge. So, saying general things about (say) the subject of a history paper (Abraham Lincoln was a famous public speaker in Illinois) or common knowledge (Abraham Lincoln was the 18th President of the United States) wouldn't require a citation, but something specific (Abraham Lincoln drew larger crowds to his election debates with Stephen Douglas than any other public gathering in Illinois to that point) and especially figures and statistics (Abraham Lincoln's debates had an average 89% attendance rate by the voting population in their respective host towns in Illinois) would require a citation. (Those facts are pretty much made up, btw; I didn't bother to check whether 18th is right or anything). EDIT:Damn! 16th! So close!Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What WK says. It's highly context-dependent, of course. If someone in my presence requires a citation for stating that Casablanca is one of the most highly-rated movies ever made I'd raise my eyebrows, but students today probably don't even know that it's a city in Morocco. The more detailed, the more likely it is that citation is necessary. As for format--yeah, well, I think all people of the world should write in MLA style, but that's not happening. At least for now those Chicago (and APA!) fascists haven't won yet. Drmies (talk) 17:46, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Writ, I don't think Garry Wills, Lincoln at Gettysburg: The Words That Remade America, verifies your claim re:crowds, though it does make the "crowds" point on p. 24. At any rate, it's a book that every American student (of life, of rhetoric, of anything) should read. Plug! COI! I'm advocating things I like! Drmies (talk) 17:52, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)It also depends on the level/focus of the class. At the freshman comp level, one of the functions of references is to demonstrate the student consulted sufficient secondary sources (and as Drmies suggests, the flip side of that is that their access to "common knowledge" in the field is relatively lacking). As one moves up the chain to higher-level courses, the threshhold for citation naturally rises, but if anyone is still teaching the research paper in comp in "content-based" courses, they complicate the picture, especially if the adjunct doing the teaching is from the English or Comp department and teaching, say, folklore or history. Also there's the second-language issue: EFL students in English-language institutions and students writing about FL lit. It's a different ball of wax in most countries outside America, though, since paper-writing skills are taught pre-college in most places. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:28, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Let's face it, the goal of such (freshman, sophomore) classes is not to get students to produce publishable writing. It's to teach them things like how to cite, how to document, how to organize, etc. It's an exercise, and it's possible that certain instructors don't want everything cited because then you can't see the forest for the trees in the Works Cited--can't see what's really important and on the topic, and what's general reference whose purpose is to verify that Lincoln was indeed the 14th/16th/18th vampire hunter of the US. Yngvadottir, imagine how different the US college system would be if not everyone went to college. I mean, we have a nursing program here, and physical education, and accountancy. In Europe, those areas would fall under the domain of trade schools. And it's those students that I am supposed to teach the glories of poetry and Old English literature and the sonnet and religious hymn and the power of Marlowe's mighty line. Drmies (talk) 18:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Awww, pauvre Drmies. But yes, it is weird that, in the US, everyone is "supposed" to go to college. It's done some weird things to the lives of my friends who aren't as who should say the college type, but need to go anyway because it's a thing. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have written on this elsewhere, and explained it to refugee students. Note that the peculiarity extends to early school leaving: in most of the world the last 2 years of publicly funded education are a refuge for the academically inclined with a separate technical education and/or apprenticeship track for those not university-bound, whereas in the US and by imitation Canada, "drop-outs" are excoriated. Then of course we have the iterative nature of US college education, where in theory one can enter as many times as desired, at whatever age (funding being the gatekeeper) and the radically different structure of lower-level employment because of the tradition of working part-time to save money for college and during college, causing a huge proliferation of part-time jobs. Aaaaand the whole "liberal arts requirement" issue arising out of the different conceptualization of high school and college, and the tension between that and the increased professionalization of college. I'll shut up now :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:04, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll shut up in a minute--after I bemoan the fact that I'm teaching business students how to write (a junior-level class), which apparently they can't learn in their own department despite faculty there being paid twice as much as me. Drmies (talk) 19:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But don't you know they will have secretaries to do that for them? (Sorry to remind you of that old chestnut that I am sure you hear multiple times a semester.) Also that Business Writing is a specialty requiring its own MA to teach because one cannot possibly get English Dept. cooties upon it? (And yes, all of this is not entirely unrelated to observable phenomena in Wikipedia editing.) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:47, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Look lower on the totem pole, Yngvadottir. My students aren't likely to have secretaries. We supply the kind of academic degree that gets people jobs as hotel clerks and t-shirt salespeople. Drmies (talk) 20:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
One company I worked for sent me on a three-day business report writing course, which wasn't about writing at all really. It was about how to summarise and present information to senior managers in a way that wouldn't tax their little brains too much, or cause them to doze off after the first two sentences. Malleus Fatuorum 20:43, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)The Oxford system settles for nothing less than total domination-! Basket Feudalist 19:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's what you get for learning your style from a bloke named "Chicago Manuel". You won't receive much sympathy, especially as it isn't a proper mobster name. Doktoro Mi Estas, you will note, is a Meat and Livestock Australia fan. All citations must be meaty. Uncle G (talk) 08:39, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the most important cause of them all?[edit]

User_talk:GiantSnowman#WP:WER (oh no, canvassing?!) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A Belgian beer for you[edit]

A Belgian beer for you
For cleaning up promotionalism wherever you find it LadyofShalott 00:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delicious! Thank you! Now...can you come by and wash the girls' hair if you have a moment? Drmies (talk) 02:13, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well I missed last night's bath time. tant pis LadyofShalott 18:46, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Guess what time it is, Lady. And you don't even have to wash their hair tonight. Drmies (talk) 01:46, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I suspect the driving time would put me there way, way past their bedtimes. LadyofShalott 02:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

request[edit]

I recently created Theatre Cedar Rapids but when I look at the page view statistics, there appear to be page views from before I created the page? Is there a previously deleted version? If so, could you userfy it for me so I can see if there is anything worth salvaging? Gaijin42 (talk) 14:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) There is no previously-deleted version. It could've been people looking up the title and finding a redlink; the pageview system is based on title requests, so it's not tied to the page's content. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
thanks Gaijin42 (talk) 14:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Missing?[edit]

Wondering if one of us needs to be on this carton.

Holy cow, been a while. I see both of us have an odd taste in our mouths about things. I've actually been busy at work, my job being a seasonal business. This is probably a good thing, as I need a break anyway. Give myself a chance to miss the place. We still need to catch up in the real world sometime. I can't remember the exact reason or instance, but I remember you offering to buy me a beer and I'm hoping to take you up on it eventually. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:16, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Got a couple of nice ones right here for you, American and Belgian. Always good to see you Dennis. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 15:34, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Civil vs Battleground[edit]

You raise a very good point and I am as guilty of this as anyone. Battleground is really the problem for most blocks made for CIVIL. In the case of HiLo, it would have been much more appropriate. Thanks for pointing it out. I will put that into practice in the future. Toddst1 (talk) 17:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I appreciate your note, Todd, as I appreciate your response to TParis's closing. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:56, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Starship9000/ Tornado (Parque ded Acciones ded Madrid) redux[edit]

Is the draft article ready for the mainspace? We actually made improvements on the draft article so is it ready for the mainspace? Please leave a note on my talk page if you know.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Starship9000 (talk • contribs)

  • As I said before, it needs some polishing: copyedits. For instance, the first reference looks odd--probably an incorrect template or so. In general I would say it needs sources: the only reliable source it seems to have is a database of roller coasters, and I don't if that's enough for the editors who edit such articles. I said before to go ahead and submit it, by which I mean clicking on the link that says "Submit", which sends it to Articles for Creation. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 05:33, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Psst I stuck some sources on Starship's talk page. Starship, add those! --Yngvadottir (talk) 13:06, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This from "putted"[edit]

  • Rosie is a bit less linguistically gifted. She still says "putted"--but then, she just turned four. Lady, I'm doing some fascinating work (did you see the cold, hard science on my Facebook page?), and I'm surprised to see we don't have an article on the sound "ma", or on Lalation. Drmies (talk) 16:31, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • The existence of words like "putted" are some of my favorite things linguistically, because it shows that children understand the rules of the language. The big question is why are there so many irregular verbs in English and who decided that you could say "putted" pʌtəd (golf) but not "putted" pʊtəd (past tense of placing something). Ryan Vesey 18:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK, now you're asking the linguist. First of all, I'm going to be formalistic and say that one should use the term "preterite", not past tense, when discussing grammar. Second, the answer is easy for those who have studied HEL: "put" isn't irregular, it's strong. There's only a couple of "irregular" verbs in English (it's a very loose term and usually means "it's not working the way I want it to work"), and I see now that our article needs an overhaul: the term "irregular" (a matter of perception) is used to describe "non-weak" (a matter of grammar and historical linguistics), but they're not the same. Drmies (talk) 18:30, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • from Preterite: "...(in American English also preterit)..." Ugh, really? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:44, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Well know. It turns out that my own textbook uses "irregular" in the way Ryan did. Glad I found this out before class--I use it in the strict, old-fashioned sense. Drmies (talk) 18:49, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • So do you go along with that usage, or tell the students the book is wrong? LadyofShalott 18:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • I have to believe in WP:RS, Lady! Drmies (talk) 18:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                • My LING profs specifically told us whenever the book said something they didn't, ignore the book. Ryan Vesey 19:11, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • I feel that's how my LING profs used it as well. Something like 86% of the top 1000 verbs follow the rule where a verb is put into the preterite by adding -ed. Using terms like "putted" was referred to as overregularization. My profs also mentioned Over-irregularization which occurs in less than .2% of cases. Having this discussion made me think to look it up, it's a very University of Pennsylvania specific thing. As in, a google search turns up primarily University of Pennsylvania reports/sources. In regards to the regular vs. irregular split, it seemed that my professors used regular to describe the predominant form and all other forms were irregular, basically the same way a phonological rule is created. Are you actually a linguistics professor Drmies? If you are, see if you have any Minnesotans and find out if /æ/→[eɪ]/__g Ryan Vesey 19:11, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                • I tried to find some examples of what I'm talking about, I found people mentioning how bag rhymes with flag, tag, or rag when they pronounce it. That produces nothing, because I say bag like flag, tag, rag, wagon, and similar words, but I say it nothing like my friends here say bag, flag, tag, rag, or wagon. It's a common misconception that it sounds like beg, it really sounds like the beginning of the only way I've ever heard anyone say bagel. Ryan Vesey 19:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I am in fact a linguistics prof, I suppose, by default, but I'm no expert on dialect. For that, we have DARE. As for irregularization, if "strong" (historically) means "irregular" (today), then dive is an example: it has a complicated history, but our meaning of "dive" was a strong verb in Old English, had become a weak verb by 1300, and is now strong again (by analogy with drive-drove and such verb systems, probably). Drmies (talk) 19:28, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Well, it's turtles all the way down: how do you pronounce "bagel"? I pronounce it "bay-gle", but I've heard people say "beg-gle". Do you know, this is weirdly similar to some thoughts I've had about color. How do we know that the visual stimulus I call "red" looks the same as what you see as "red"? I've always thought that the color green doesn't "fit". I can see how red + blue = purple or red + yellow = orange; I can see the yellow and the red in orange, or the red and blue in purple. But it's never made visual sense to me that yellow + blue = green; I've never been able to see the yellow or the blue in green. The rest of the rainbow always seems like a natural progression of colors, but the yellow-green transition always looked jarring and out of place to me, and I've always wondered if that's because my "green" looks different from everyone else's. (Disclaimer: I may or may not be insane.) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                        • So, I held a belief for a long time that I created when I was around 12. I used to think that everyone might perceive color differently so that the color that I perceive to be blue, if you could put that exact image in someone else's mind, would be perceived as red. We are each taught; however, that the color is blue. That person's red, could be my purple, but we are each taught that the color is red. Basically, colors are determined by wavelength, but my theory was that the actual perception of a given wavelength could be different. I don't know that there's any way to test that belief and I'm not sure how it holds up to things like the Checker shadow illusion. If anything, we might perceive colors slightly differently, one shade of green could look darker or more blue to one person than another. I don't know that there's any way to test that though. On the baygle issue, I pronounce it "bay-gle". I searched forever for an example, the best I could find was this. It's not a throughout the state dialect though, some of us say it, some don't. My mom and I say beɪg my youngest brother and sister say bæg. I don't know what my closest sister and my dad say. I don't know if this sounds abnormal at 1:09 (Wagon) or at 1:17 (Ragtime), my change is probably a bit stronger than his. Ryan Vesey 20:50, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I did and wondered what you were working on - cold, hard science not usually being your thing. LadyofShalott 18:25, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, wasn't that cold? Baby Sam and his bear? Loverly. Drmies (talk) 18:30, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (re: irregular versus strong: you're betraying your antecedents, Drmies. The strong/weak conceptualization belongs to Germanic linguistics; in descriptive terms it's irregular/regular, so unless students have a grounding in Germanic linguistics, the latter two will be the familiar terms (they are also the ones used for Latin and the Romance languages, which is of course the other half of the heritage of English, because it's a creole). And as to "putted", it's a backformation, so naturally it's regular (kind of like "felled", to open a can o' worms). But beyond that I shall not go; Ablaut series and stuff, there be monsters. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]
    • Ha, my antecedents are in HEL, whose (article) history you're conspicuously absent from. We're starting on OE today. Don't tell King James about this creole thing--we have bumper stickers about his English. Seriously, I refuse to accept that "strong" is no longer a useful term, or that "irregular" is completely accurate since, as you well know, lots of strong verbs are (still) perfectly regular, just not in a way that the everyday/average user would recognize. Which reminds me I need to re-memorize my strong classes...in the next ten minutes... Drmies (talk) 21:16, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there something wrong with felled? Do you happen to be a linguistics prof as well? Ryan Vesey 20:53, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • sit-set; lie-lay; fall-fell. They are a notorious little quirk of English; in each case the second, transitive verb derives from the past tense of the first, intransitive verb, and has a weak past tense rather than a strong; but there was enough time in Anglo-Saxon and Middle English for the first two to mutate a bit, obscuring the pattern that is still clear with the third one. Either fun or agony depending whether one is teaching remedial English, ESL, or history of English. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:13, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • DYK that OE had a transitive version of dive also, "to submerge something", conjugated in the same way? Drmies (talk) 00:27, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think so, there's certainly a lot of aspects to that shift that I've never heard anyone exhibit at all. Specifically the cut being similar to caught. We've got the whole cot-caught thing going, though. There's an article about it over at Minnesota accent that states "Some speakers exhibit raising of /æ/ before voiced velars (/ɡ/ and /ŋ/), with an up-glide rather than an in-glide, so that bag sounds close to beg or the first syllable of bagel in other dialects (other examples of where this applies include the word flag and agriculture). Sometimes the two are merged." It's wrong about bag sounding close to beg, because it really doesn't. It doesn't mention any specific term for the dialect/phenomenon though. Ryan Vesey 21:25, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Connor Cruise and Garry Wills[edit]

Thanks for the friendly remark, but I am not sure that I will have time to study Milton to repay your kindness. My Wikibreak is over. I agree with you on the notability of celebrity offspring and also on that excellent book mentioned above that devoted far more words, justifiably, to analyzing the speech than Lincoln himself uttered at Gettysburg. Sometimes, seemingly simple things require and deserve deep analysis. Warm wishes to you, my friend. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:44, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

University of Florida material previously deleted[edit]

Ahem: [12]. Please note that I left the newly registered user a message regarding these additions on his talk page. You may want to add your comments there as well. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:56, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the revert, the comment, and the note here. You're a Gator! Good for you. I miss the good old days of the fun and gun. Drmies (talk) 20:00, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • As do I. The University of Florida and its sports program will always owe a huge debt of gratitude to the Evil Genius. As a three-time Gator alumnus, I cheer for Spurrier's Gamecocks in 12 of 13 games every season.
FYI, a major rewrite of the University of Florida main article has been on my long-term Wikipedia to-do list forever, and I will return to that long-tabled project soon after my RfA is finished. I know you have some expertise and a lot of perspective on university topics, and I would appreciate any assistance in revamping and upgrading the UF article you might offer. After a lot of work, it might be fun to take it through Good Article review. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BLP and Facebook external link[edit]

Drmies (or a friendly stalker): I rarely touch BLP's so I am unfamiliar with all the issues. I stumbled on this article recently. Is an external link to her Official Facebook site allowed? --Senra (talk) 21:04, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in a nutshell, WP:EL says no here. Normally, Facebook pages are not allowed. Official Facebook pages (controlled by the subject of the article) are an exception to this, and may be allowed as an official website link. But in this case, the article already has a link to a normal official webpage, so having both that page and the Facebook link is overkill. (After all, each probably has a link to the other.) One should probably be removed, and it should probably be the Facebook link that gets removed. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:11, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've got to disagree with you. WP:EL only prohibits multiple links if they are prominently linked from the official site. I couldn't even find a link to the Facebook page from the official site, it certainly wasn't prominently linked. Ryan Vesey 21:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, but "significant unique content"? A matter of editorial judgment, I suppose. Also, web sites these days are so full of links and buttons and hovering things that I often can't see shit anymore--that's what you get when everything is prominently linked. Drmies (talk) 21:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I think that restriction is the other way around; it reads to me as if the "no prominent links" restriction is in addition to an otherwise-compelling reason to have multiple links, not instead of an otherwise-compelling reason, per "If the subject of the article has more than one official website, then more than one link may be appropriate, under a very few limited circumstances" (emphasis mine). The footnote appended to this makes no mention of a lack of prominent links. Still, it's no biggie either way. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:20, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all. I'm thus judging the existing five external links as only just complying with WP:NPOV --Senra (talk) 21:40, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

adopt me[edit]

What should I do to not be blocked anymore? I could sign up for adopt me to become a good editor. I do not want to be blocked indefinitely. Thanks! --Starship9000 (talk) 23:02, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, I have three kids already so count me out. But I looked at Talk:SkyScreamer today and that is not a joyful reading experience. I don't know if you actually read those comments, but it doesn't sound like you did. Or, if you did, that you didn't understand them. Drmies (talk) 00:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pruning[edit]

Dr M, a few days ago I happened to be reading the article on Leonard Bernstein, the most prominent photo within which has a link to an article on its photographer, an article that was then horrific. I'm uninterested in dance and celebs, but interested in photography, and this man Mitchell was clearly "notable" in both the Wikipedia and the sane sense. Temptingly glinting in the moonlight: the surgical steel of my editorial machete. I unsheathed the latter and got to work. But while I dislike the result less than I disliked what I first saw, I think it's still flabby (too much of the not so interesting about one or more photos of Lennon+Ono). However, I worry that my impatience with celebrity-obsession may be carrying me away. You seem to have a nose for this kind of thing; could I invite you to pay a visit? -- Hoary (talk) 01:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ha! I think you did an excellent job, Hoary, and I couldn't improve on it very much. (I do agree that it can be trimmed a bit more...) You have, of course, managed to totally destroy a perfectly beautiful resume, and for that I sentence you to a Hail Mary and a half, and a one glass of a delicious dessert wine of your choosing. Thanks for the note, and keep up the good work. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you for your further nipping and tucking. Erm, if I may, I'll opt for Anaisa Pye instead. She sounds more fun. (Although I do realize that this may bring on a fate similar to that endured by St Victor.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah, being massaged with EVOO would really suck. BTW, I saw a distortion pedal, a guitar effect, called "Crunchy Frog". Drmies (talk) 14:47, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is this too academic?[edit]

Can you take a look at User:Lambertiana/Assisted Migration and see if it seems to be too academic for a move to the mainspace? If it is, any advice for the author to modify it would be welcome. Ryan Vesey 03:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • One could argue that phrases like "The science is clear that climate change will drive many species extinct" are POV-y. The lead needs to be split, and some other paragraphs are a bit long, and I can't judge the content and references--but it looks ready, yes, and please buy the editor a beer: we can use sciency writers like them. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:12, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for looking though it. Those issues look like ones that can be fixed once it's in the mainspace then. Can you do the history merge? The entire thing needs to be placed over top of Assisted migration. Ryan Vesey 04:15, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

USARedneck et al.[edit]

Is there anyway to put a rangeblock on this guy so he doesn't keep popping up? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure (Dennis will know) there are ways. IPs aren't usually linked from accounts though. Socks come in different kinds. While all of them have lost something (even if just the "privilege" of working here), some of them are just losers. Drmies (talk) 14:41, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Any time a rangeblock is needed for a registered account, you need to get a CU to do it. The rest of us don't know what a registered users IP address without a CU, who won't publicly link, but will privately do the rangeblock if needed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:30, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcoming NJIT* users[edit]

Thanks for starting the process of reaching out to the group of new NJIT users. Again, college students are a wonderful target audience and it seems clear that this was part of an assignment of some sort to introduce editing, although I wonder if we Wikipedians are the subject of some sort of study on how we respond to these visitors. We failed with one of the edits, where it was reverted twice despite being correct. Thanks for actually doing something to make these prospective editors welcome. Alansohn (talk) 17:20, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you Alan. I've seen many of these cases, and only sometimes do we seem to manage to rope them in. If we could find the teacher we could accomplish something--you, with your New Jersey connection, would be an excellent conduit for them. But if we don't find any more of these students and if they don't make other edits, then it's a fruitless exercise. (Oh, I'm doing too many things at the same time today and hadn't actually checked the correctness of the edit; my experience is that usually they are indeed correct!) Thanks for checking, and for your note, Drmies (talk) 17:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've reached out to all of the NJIT* editors I could find, which covers those editors who have edited articles on my watchlist. So far each one has exactly one edit and none have responded to any welcome that either you or I have posted. I'd love to make a connection, if I could. I am trying to work my way through the NJIT website and have found some interesting leads on the university's library web pages, but let me know if you have any other ideas of how to actually connect with these editors and their presumptive instructor. Alansohn (talk) 18:13, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I saw what you did, Alan, and may God reward you for it; I don't think you'll get much else out of it. If there is so little interest in responding to your messages then it's probably pearls before swine (or golden retrievers). I think the best thing to do is for you to quit your day job and become a teacher and Wiki-missionary. Thanks for the efforts, and thanks for the update, Drmies (talk) 18:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'd give up my day job, but offering passersby copies of Awake! magazine and The Watchtower is just too darn rewarding to quit. The pay stinks, but the value of a fine quality soul is incalculable, though after ten years no one has yet accepted a copy of either one of my fine publications. Praise the Lord, who may one day enable some of these NJIT editors to speak in tongues (if not talk pages). Alansohn (talk) 03:35, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013[edit]

This is unbelievable. I made the edits in good faith. I just removed contentious materials from BLP Praveen Togadia to establish neutrality. Wikipedia shouldn't be a place for political activism/campaign. If you look at the content I removed, it is more about Salman Khurshid and questions on secularism than about the subject. The citations provided are not to the point and are unreliable (mostly from right wing blog posts). The only mistake I did was not adding the edit summary. 117.196.132.169 (talk) 20:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Two things: a. you're barking up the wrong tree, as a quick look at the history should tell you (if you can't tell, you shouldn't be editing here): I agree with you. b. edit warring is edit warring even if you're right. If you weren't so quick to anger you might have seen that I gave your opponent one as well and that I asked for full protection of the article. Drmies (talk) 20:34, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you. Apologies for my behavior. 117.196.132.169 (talk) 20:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • No worries. Cooler heads should prevail in such situations. I can't fault you for not leaving the edit summary (and I have mentioned this to the editor who warned you) since you did that earlier. If you made a mistake it was to get carried away by the back and forth reverting; there are better ways to deal with that, like a report at WP:ANEW (I'll grant you that that's a slow process, but you won't get yourself blocked that way.) Note I did some trimming on the article: we must be very careful here given our policy, WP:BLP. Best, Drmies (talk) 20:40, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Drmies, Thanks for your advise. But I need some clarification on the issue. I agree that I was involved edit warring but as far as I know there are exceptions to the 3RR policy. I seriously thought that the reason for my reverts were covered in those exemptions. I had even warned the other user before making the revert. What do you have to say about that? 117.196.132.169 (talk) 20:55, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • 3R makes (I'm citing from memory) exemptions for BLP reasons, this is true, but that applies only for clear or blatant BLP violations. Honestly, I don't know that this is the case for those edits, it might well be. If I were getting ready to block someone for 3RR (or edit warring) I would make sure I'd know that precisely beforehand, but I wasn't in that position. What I did see, quick enough, was that we were dealing with poor writing and sourcing in a BLP, and while that's not necessarily a violation of BLP policy it was enough for me to side with you in the dispute. And because I took a side in the dispute I asked for protection without doing it myself, and for the same reason I wouldn't have blocked either one of you. In case you're wondering why you got the template even though you might claim exemption: I just make it a habit of warning both sides. Drmies (talk) 22:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • Many thanks for the explanation. Please have a look at this version of the page on February 3. It was absolute bull and more importantly it was like that for months. It was me who cleaned it up. 117.217.134.134 (talk) 06:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dewan357[edit]

This is Dewan357, hope all is well. You were kind enough to give a Standard Offer in August 2012; I happily accepted. As such I did not edit wikipedia for the last 6 months, now I request to be unblocked.

1) I understand what you have been blocked for: which was edit warring. I promise to not continue, was in high school when the behavior started, now a careered individual. 2) I will not continue any such activity that causes damage or disruption to wikipedia. As seen for my edit history, they were in good faith. 3) As my edit history shows, I make useful contributions to wikipedia.

I look forward in hearing back from you.

Regards, (24.184.37.87 (talk) 20:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]

  • Tell me honest: have you edited in the meantime, and if so, which articles? Drmies (talk) 00:16, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I can assure you, I have edited none! (24.184.37.87 (talk) 00:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]
      • OK, I posted a note on WP:AN. In the meantime, limit your edits with this IP to my talk page; I'll be glad to copy to AN if needs be, and if they decide there that you can respond (briefly, to the point) in that thread, then you can. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 00:56, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Dewan, I'm racking my brain--where did we interact? Drmies (talk) 02:49, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • You made the Offer to me in September on [13] the offer was made to me after those September edits. I wrote August by accident. But as you can observe the Offer was made in September. (24.184.37.87 (talk) 15:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]
        • You gave me the Offer after September 8 when you intercepted these [edits http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kww#Gota_Work_etc.]. I wrote August by accident. You gave me the Offer in September. I wrote August by accident. I kept my word. (24.184.37.87 (talk) 15:21, 13 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]
          • Gotcha--I remember now. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 16:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What do you recommend me to do? I see from the discussion my "August" statement made the community not give my OFFER. I guess I can hopefully request another request this August 2013. (24.184.37.87 (talk) 17:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]
  • I can't speak for Drmies, of course, but my bit of advice is: next time, you should probably log in and post unblock templates directly to your talk page, and avoid any and all editing from IP addresses, even to request an unblock or respond to questions. Although your account is blocked, it still has access to post on its own talk page, and unblock request templates will generate a bit less needless drama, and considering your block is for sockpuppetry, it will at least help to demonstrate your willingness to abide by the one-person, one-account rule. Good luck, Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Writ Keeper knows his policy. I personally don't care if you post here, it's fine with me, but other admins feel differently. For now you should sit this out and wait for the discussion to close: if it does not support your return, then do what WK suggests. There's already editors criticizing me for allowing you to post here; again, I don't care and I don't care for that criticism either, but if that may affect your case negatively you're probably better off not posting here and sticking to your registered talk page. Follow WK's advice: his mind is sound. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 18:00, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • The wiki, she is a fickle mistress. Sometimes it's better to just go with the flow; sigh, shake your head, remember to cross those 't's and dot those 'i's next time no matter how wacky they seem, and go on to happier pursuits in the meantime. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

107.4.229.24[edit]

Posted a warning to an IP user who was causing some problems (one could say vandalism) on the WTCF and WTRM pages. Another took care of the vandalism warning before I got online. I did, however, warn the anon about 3RR (which they broke big time on the WTRM page) and COI, which I admit I am surmising. I just want to make sure my warning (written, not TWINKLE edited) isn't going over any lines. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:41, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • They certainly were edit-warring so I don't see a problem with the warning, Homer. If it continues (with a different IP, perhaps), and the spirit moves you, you are welcome to file a report at ANEW: edits don't need to be vandalism to lead to an edit-warring block (I know you know this; I'm saying this for the record). Thanks, and take care, Drmies (talk) 01:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am keeping a close eye on the pages. I doubt anything will happen tonight, since it is late here, but I suspect we will see action on the WTRM and WTCF pages tomorrow. If there is, and there isn't any dialog on the talk page, I will take it to WP:AN3. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Found this interesting post on AllAccess, a big national radio business website. About 4am on Friday, this news blurb was posted on AllAccess about the sale of WTRM. The news of the sale was out on a public website before I posted it on Wikipedia 24 hours later. Not sure how you want to proceed in light of the new information, but I will still try for the dialog with the anon. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Another IP removed that one section from the WTCF page again. Since there seems to be a little IP vandalism problem (I think I can correctly call it that, I think) would temporary semi-protection of the WTCF page be out of the question? Maybe 48 hours? Don't think there is enough to warrant the same on the WTRM page, but I will let you decide there. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:15, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Since John of Reading reverted the IP (and for now we're dealing with only two IPs) I don't support protection at this time. You can always revert with a relevant summary, "rv rm of cited information" or some such thing. The same goes for the other one, IMO. Let me know if it continues, and if it does I'll semi-protect. Drmies (talk) 19:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • Okie Dokie, I will keep an eye on it. I have been trying to avoid reverting as much as I can so I don't get in trouble or get close to 2RR. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:21, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Iowa[edit]

"I love bacon more than I love my job" seems a no-brainer.  davidiad { t } 02:04, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, professor[edit]

The consensus number one recruiting class, who'd a thunk it? :) Anyway, to business. Would you mind reviewing your indef block of YDHbulldog (talk · contribs)? It would appear on a cursory exam that they were edit warring in an over-enthusiastic crusade against an individual intent on inserting unsourced opinion. Your kind attention would be appreciated. Tiderolls 03:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)Bama 60, LSU 57...just finished...merely an observation.[reply]

  • I saw. We did our best to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Comment left. Drmies (talk) 03:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Military Police[edit]

hey man, noticed you went in and undid most of my edits on the MP page. just wanted to clear up some confusion regarding my intentions there:

I noticed the very lengthy page paid no attention at all to American MPs (Army and Marines) combat roles. As a Marine field MP myself, I felt this deserved to be remedied. I fully intend to flesh out the section on American MP forces with some concise and relevant info about our roles in the combat zone. I also saw you plugged in some stuff about this after my edits. That's good, but I'd prefer if you didn't so casually delete my contributions, especially when they are well-cited and backed by personal experience.

Thanks for reading. Hopefully we can cooperate to make the MP article a better one. A topic near and dear to my heart! -wrathchild

PS. I am a longtime reader of Wikipedia but brand new at contributing.

  • Hello Wrathchild. Thank you for your note. Your information was deleted because I reverted to a much earlier version of the text, to undo the needless addition of those flags. My edits thereafter were to restore some of the useful edits made in between the addition of those flags and my revert. Your edits were undone before, by another editor, and I think the problem is that they lack proper, independent verification by reliable sources: see WP:RS. I don't have that much of a problem with them, not enough to revert, but I didn't see enough reason to reinstate them given that the references aren't very strong. Anyway, improving the article (which, you are right, needs a lot of help) will have to come from better references, for all the sections. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:20, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rhinotomy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frederick II (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

I apologize for my part in hijacking your thread, professor. Sometimes issues prompt me to reflexively pound the keyboard. I'll attempt restraint. Tiderolls 18:51, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Tsagaan Sar[edit]

Happy Tsagaan Sar!
According to Mongolian tradition, on Bituun you are to eat until you are full, which will prevent you from being hungry in the coming year. Have these hearty buuz. Also note I read that to mean that you should also drink until you are full, so you will not be thirsty in the coming year. kelapstick(bainuu) 21:08, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks K! That's lovely! We're having chili tonight and I'm drinking a delicious Cisco lager (and every time I drink one of their beers I think of User:Crisco 1492), so we should be capable of filling up. What are you all having tonight? DYK...that the Lady of Shalott has edited Buuz? Drmies (talk) 23:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Haha Bill, Mongolian lesson! Drmies (talk) 23:08, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well it is the new year today, but last night it was Korean beer. We have a limited selection. --kelapstick(bainuu) 23:25, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • And I much prefer khuushuur, however buuz is the more traditional new year meal. They make them by the hundreds/thousands (depending on the number of visitors.) --kelapstick(bainuu) 23:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I know, and now the article knows it too. Hey, is this accurate? I want to go, you know. Drmies (talk) 23:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • I have heard that Nomads is really good, but I have never eaten there. One of my coworkers goes there usually. Millie's is close to where I stay and it is the best cup of coffee in town. It's run by a Cuban who has been over here for a long time (probably since the communist era). Food is good too, and relatively cheap, it's a typical expat hangout. There are a couple other good places to go too, Veranda has excellent Italian, MB Beer Plus is a microbrewery that has decent food and good beer (of course brewed on site), or for something harder, on their drink menu there is the "Adios Mother Fucker". I usually stick close to Sükhbaatar district, and wherever I can get on foot. The most popular spot (especially for expats) is the Grand Khan Irish Pub, but it is wearing on me, I don't tend to frequent it so much anymore. --kelapstick(bainuu) 00:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • Further, I have never been to a restaurant that has not had a bilingual menu. However once you get away from the city core, I imagine that they are only in Mongolian. --kelapstick(bainuu) 00:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • That sounds like a fun drink, K. I still can't believe we have a man in Mongolia. I'm jealous! Drmies (talk) 17:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

S9000[edit]

Have you been following the adventures of Starship9000 on his talk page and Kudpung's? My AGF waffles about this person. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I can't believe GoPhigtins wants to take this up. The list of requirements, while reasonable in itself, strikes me as more prose than the editor has probably ever read in his life. His English isn't even close to remedial, and isn't he supposed to be from Kentucky? But besides that, yeah, I don't see any productive edits there, and no promise whatsoever. Drmies (talk) 23:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, his IP Geolocates to Lexington, Kentucky, which is a bit odd because the feel I get is of someone very young for whom English is not their first language, or, alternately, someone trying to put across that impression. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, the only reason I'm willing to take this up is that he reminds me of myself, when I was at the very beginning. I was probably written off by most; heck looking back I'd have written myself off. The way I see it;s worth giving him a shot. If it doesn't work out, I've only invested 20 minutes of my time into it, if it does, Wikipedia could have an enthusiastic, clueful, young editor...we need more of them. Go Phightins! 03:04, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • My hopes for mentoring success in this situation have dropped. That'll happen when you look at a bright yellow list of problems with an article which is answered with, "I don't see any issues on this page..." LadyofShalott 06:35, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yeah GP, I wish you luck, but I won't be holding my breath. Some people are just straight-up not old enough for Wikipedia yet, and nothing can fix that but time. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 07:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, he's yet to even say if he wants to accept my offer, so we'll see. Go Phightins! 20:06, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

edit neutrality[edit]

You have nothing to do with what I do and what I write in someone else talk page talk of Ravindra . I will do whatever I want. It is not you who decide the neutrality of the article. I have added with reference from news, read and judge.--atnair (talk) 16:08, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Commented there. Drmies (talk) 16:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • BTW, I agree with this absolutely. I don't understand why you come riding in here like some crusader--you yourself are making judgment calls on neutrality. Pity you didn't see all of the problems with Irfannaseefp's edits. Drmies (talk) 16:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]


  • my comment is in reply to the accusation on me regarding the edit in talk of ravidra. and I did not complain to you regarding anything. Did I at any point ! --atnair (talk) 17:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commented in reply to you. --atnair (talk) 17:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I stopped. --atnair (talk) 17:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting your help...[edit]

....to either support or shoo me away from Dan Coombs. I think it's replete with unacceptable sources, piled on by the article's creator. I've kvetched at a couple of noticeboards to no avail--your objective input would be welcome. Cheers, 99.136.254.88 (talk) 01:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Shoo. Away now. There's an AfD, it's headed for deletion. Nothing to get worried about. Things could be worse: you could have survived a plane crash in Alaska and make it down to the river, only to have to stop cause your knee is so busted you can't walk anymore and you got nothing to live for in the world anyway. And I think there's wolves coming. Now shoo. Drmies (talk) 02:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks. What a ridiculous scenario, especially after all the email petitions I've signed to save the wolves. 99.136.254.88 (talk) 02:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I finished watching the movie. I was hoping for a happy ending; American action movies should have happy endings. Liam Neeson should never have gotten on a plane without checking if Bruce Willis was even in the same state. Those wolves are mean! Does Colbert know about this? I'm sure the controversy section is full of commentary but haven't yet looked at it. Drmies (talk) 14:55, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • If you're referring to this [14], sounds a bit like updated Jack London to me, or perhaps a depressing alternative to Wiley Post's last flight. I can't watch anything more intense than Born Free, and even that was pushing the envelope. As for the article, I don't have a horse in the race, just want to see it done right. But that's my problem. 99.136.254.88 (talk) 16:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yep. And yep, totally Jack London. It was a bit intense for my taste too, and after reading the article I realized I had missed a post-credits scene. I don't think I care for a "grunge guru of 3D bricolage"--I don't get installations, usually. Unless it's the nativity scene of course. I'm old school. Drmies (talk) 17:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pre-Maori settlement of New Zealand conspiracy theories[edit]

The article Pre-Maori settlement of New Zealand conspiracy theories has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non notability

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. Kleinzach 11:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Photon Infotech[edit]

I agree with your commentary for the photon infotech article. Would it be best for you to make the correct edits and get the article approved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericjcarrmiddletownde (talk • contribs) 18:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's not my article and I have no interest in it, so that's not really an option. I am also not convinced that the company is notable. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • (talk page stalker)There should be a way to reject an AfC that says Wikipedia does not want an article on this topic, rather than stringing along submitters who keep trying to find sources that don't exist. CorporateM (Talk) 19:34, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • :) Drmies (talk) 19:38, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm always pushing for more clear "nos" to PR COIs. I have a distant relationship with Monika who submitted at: Wikipedia:Articles for creation/3RD Home. Because of the way it was closed, it gave her the impression she needed to improve the submission. I often use this example where a PR made bad edits because there were "no objections." Sometimes a "no" is really valuable, but that's just not really part of the Wikipedia culture to give people a clear no. CorporateM (Talk) 02:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Plate wobbler[edit]

The article Plate wobbler has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I merged all the material into Monster Fun. This was a one-time novelty prize in that magazine in 1975, has no other application and no potential for future expansion.

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. Herostratus (talk) 09:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Party pooper. You know it was a beautiful little topic in an exhaustive article. The Plate wobbler can't help it that Tweeter wasn't around yet. (Also, you don't need to template me; a note is good enough.) Drmies (talk) 14:36, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Pablo X deprodded it. LadyofShalott 18:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      •  who me? Surely not, I am a notorious deletionist, allegedly. Must have been an impostor. pablo 22:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm glad it won't be rubbished (and you've avoided your first deletion). But I sure prefer "plate wobbler" to "plate lifter"! Oh, well.... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 22:26, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, I agree, Mandarax. I also don't really like that the article now has two topics. I may come back to it. Drmies (talk) 03:52, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since you mentioned me specifically ...[edit]

Hopefully you realize that I did not imply or insinuate that you encouraged socking. Hopefully you noticed that I prefaced my comment "@Kww" and simply stated that it was a serious accusation. Now if you inferred from my statement that I was making or supporting an accusation, then either you misread what I was saying, or I expressed myself poorly. If it's the later, then my apologies. Moving on - I did read his reply to my post, read the thread he linked to, and followed up by reading through a relevant thread in your talk page archives (#37 I believe). At that point I saw 2 adults perfectly capable of discussing things out themselves if either felt there was a need of further discussion (and I have no desire to inject myself into anything that on the surface looks like: 1) none of my business, and 2) is of little consequence or value.) For my part, I simply was suggesting that a high profile drama board might not be the place to accuse another administrator of "encouraging" socks. More explicitly: I do not believe that you encouraged anyone to sock at any time; and if I in some way gave that impression - again, my apologies.

Now as far as the mentoring part goes - I did say "if" (perhaps I should have typed IIF), meaning only that I was willing to reconsider my "oppose" should it be something you wanted to do. I had no intention of suggesting that you "should" or even had any desire to.

I could also express my own personal views on "socks", especially the practice of removing perfectly good and valid material from the 'pedia simply because the editor who inserted it is or was "banned" at any point in time; but it's likely not relevant to anyone.

So, since I get the impression that you've had better days, I'll trouble you no further; but you are always welcome to stop by if you think I've misunderstood something. I'm always open to reevaluating a situation. Best always. — Ched :  ?  18:38, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Real quick, on my way to class: no, absolutely not. Only the "mentoring" part was in response to your comment--sorry for any misunderstanding, Ched. But that i don't wish to mentor anyone should not be held against Dewan either. I don't think he needs mentoring--he needs to control his urges. Later!Drmies (talk) 18:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Coolio ... have a great day buddy. — Ched :  ?  19:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe thanks. After teaching this sophomore survey class it can only go up. Drmies (talk) 20:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, ya could always take the night off to go plate tipping ... errr, I mean cow wobbling ... oh whatever - go "tip" a few, then "wobble" a bit. Hey - growing up my mom was a teacher too; and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have the patience for that. :-) — Ched :  ?  22:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I shared a big bottle of Delirium Nocturnum with Mrs. Drmies. I feel a bit better now. Thanks Ched, Drmies (talk) 01:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

unprotection of Valentine's_Day[edit]

See Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Valentine.27s_Day_.28edit.7Ctalk.7Chistory.7Cprotect.7Clinks.7Cwatch.7Clogs.29 and the request I made above it. Please don't protect the article unless there is so much vandalism that we can't deal with it. We are losing lots of incremental edits by unregistered editors. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't understand the question. "Protection" isn't an ongoing act but an ongoing situation and in this case it was well warranted, methinks. But I responded at the board; good luck with it. Drmies (talk) 01:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

D Brown suggested I come to you[edit]

Hi. I was just cruising around Wikiland today and came across this which led me to this. Seems like an obvious violation of the one user to an account rule, not to mention some academic using editing for his purposes rather than the betterment of the encyclopedia. That might not be the best description of the professors intention, but his apparent contempt and lack of understanding for how wikipedia works troubles me. I am not gonna worry about it long term, but I thought someone who knows about these things should take a look at it Dennis suggested you and I came here hoping you would look and take whatever action you see fit. Aren't school projects supposed to go through someplace here? Anyway, Thanks! Gtwfan52 (talk) 02:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks. Well, one isn't obligated to go through the Education project though it is helpful, and I left a note at Wikipedia:Education noticeboard, which is about the only thing that I can do in this case; seems like a pretty well-organized set-up already. I am not convinced that there is abuse of multiple accounts, or "some academic using editing...etc": it's a course project where the assignment is to create articles. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:48, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would have looked closer and handled it myself, but I'm jammed with overtime right now. Not all of us are professors and get to sit around all day, failing students who disagree with our political philosophies and such ;-). I just noticed the "consider bothering Dennis Brown, who is a really nice guy" note on your talk page notice when editing. I must have really pissed you off. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Dennis, you totally nailed it. I just dropped the kids off, flirted with the moms at Montessori, and now I'm sipping coffee on the patio. I'm considering failing whoever is even remotely related to our paper's new columnist. Q: How do you recognize an Air Force mom at Montessori? A: They don't have to go to work and drive a new BMW. Anyways, I'll trade jobs with you for a day--I can plagiarize some PowerPoints together and pretend to sell a product that someone can pretend they need just as well as you can, I bet. Thanks for the note; that made me smile. Hope you don't work yourself into an early grave in the Bahamas. Much love, Drmies (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC) Some of my best friends are conservative. OK, maybe just one, and I have to be nice to him cause I have been borrowing his PRS and a Marshall combo for the last three years. [reply]
        • I'm more of a Libertarian type conservative. I want to legalize everything and let Darwinism take over and thin the herd, and have the feds do only those things the states literally can't do, like nukes and interstates. Technically, that is classic Liberalism if you view it from a global perspective. But I'm not one to judge a man just because he is a tree hugging, granola eating pinko. ;-) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:45, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • My granola supplier is a one-woman operation, Dennis--not the kind of multinational that would be likely to buy you a Republican president. She is an Auburn fan, though, and that's never a good sign. Now, in classic communist pinko fashion, I believe some trees are more equal than others. I hate crepe myrtles, for instance, and I believe they should be mandatorily aborted with taxpayer money. "There is unrest in the forest, there is trouble with the trees..." Oh, and I want the federal government to come in and mandate bicycle lanes and sidewalks, since Southern state and local governments are just too blind and incompetent to do it themselves. Where do I go to demand that I can walk my children and dog safely around the block? WWGWD? (As a side note, can you guess why we don't have sidewalks in my part of the city, and why the interstate, ironically called MLK Freeway, runs where it runs? I'll give you a hint: I'm white and middle-class.) Drmies (talk) 15:59, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • Those damn maples! Always whining about not getting enough sun. Why can't they be happy with their shade? Oak Keeper ⚇♔ 16:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • We don't have maples here, Yankee. We have live oaks. Drmies (talk) 16:05, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                • I'm shocked you have nice homes near MLK Freeway. As Chris Rock noted(5:50), back in the 1970s they usually just took the most the most dangerous, drug infested road in town and named that one MLK. Place sounds down right progressive. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:03, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                  • In our case the good white citizenry decided on some payback for desegregation[original research?] and ran a six-line road right through the (only) black middle-class area, shops and all. I note you didn't try for the bonus question: it's cause back in the days white folk had cars and didn't need sidewalks. The others, well, why would they be in our neighborhoods unless they're cleaning the house? (See the first direct quote in the "History" section of First Baptist Church (Montgomery, Alabama).) Oh, and the west side, that's toward Selma, and who would want people from there to come over here? And that's why I'm a firm believer in hardcore federal action. Booyah! Drmies (talk) 17:30, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Arguably, that is an area that the state's couldn't fix, so I won't disagree there. That is a national issue, not a state one. This is one reason I have high hopes for younger people, who weren't born and raised with as much overt and essentially state sponsored racism as you and I were. Since I live in Lexington, NC, I still see plenty from the small town folk, but it is moving in the right direction, albeit slower than it should. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:37, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies/Archive_45&oldid=1212440605"