User talk:Drmies/Archive 45

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

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

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

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:

 

The green children of Woolpit is the name given to two children who reportedly appeared in the village of WoolpitinSuffolk, 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 ;-) Bencherlite^Talk 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! Bencherlite^Talk 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
    • Congrats Drmies, nice work on a really ... weird interesting topic! :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
      • True story Ed, since it's on the internet. Drmies (talk) 15:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
        • They can't put anything that isn't true on the internet (my favorite: the Upper Peninsula War) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:16, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
          • Ha yes, I remember that one. DYK...that I edited that one too? Imagine all the things I could have done with my life were it not for this infernal time sink...I could have been a contender... Drmies (talk) 23:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
            • You could have been a fiction writer! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
              • Drmies must have done something right... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:26, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
                • I made him a Facebook page, hoping it will go viral and I'll acquire notability that way. TonyTheTiger will have written him up by the time he gets 100 likes (he's at 32 now). There's great pictures of poopy onesies on that page, even some cleavage (not his, obviously). Drmies (talk) 05:12, 24 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

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

• 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

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 (Ithink 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

• 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 probably want to discuss this at ANI 3. Drmies (talk) 04:57, 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

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

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

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

• • • 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

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

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

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

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

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
            • The article looks good to me - congratulations to you both! Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:41, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
              • Thanks. IronKnuckle (talk) 12:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

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

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

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

Found something you could give Mrs. Drmies for Valentine's day, a bacon scarf, bacon rosesorbacon 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

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

• Apparently we've got a bacon ship too, the HMS Richard Bacon. There you go Drmies, a freebie from me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:10, 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

  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

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

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

— Ched :  ?  15:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Happy to oblige, Ma'am! Drmies (talk) 15:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

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

LittleWink (talk) 15:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

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

....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

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 HistorybyMisbach 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. 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

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

• No, thanks--it's well deserved. Drmies (talk) 14:44, 29 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Caldecott Medal and honor books. LadyofShalott 19:48, 29 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

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

• (Discuss) – Madonna (art) → Madonna I am notifying you because you were involved in writing this article. Kauffner (talk) 11:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

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

• Edit conflict: Nothing in Google News — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Yeah, the only recent thing I've found is this book review. Justice007 has edited as recently as the 28th, and I've asked him to check in (though I didn't say why). LadyofShalott 03:44, 31 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
    • He posted an update on Facebook 16 hours ago. I'll keep checking. Drmies (talk) 14:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
      • Al-Jazeera has nothing on it either, and they would probably be the first. Basket _Feudalist 14:42, 31 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
        • All is well. See User talk:Justice007#Hi. LadyofShalott 16:37, 31 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

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
    •   Done Thank you all. Drmies (talk) 16:43, 31 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

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

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

• That's what I thought! Drmies (talk) 02:54, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

• Photon torpedoes ready, Captain. Targeted. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:58, 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

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

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

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

Thank you for identifying the WP:COIatSociological 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

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

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
      • My glass is half-empty, Lady. Actually, it's 2/3 empty! Drmies (talk) 05:11, 2 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
        • BTW, if you aren't otherwise familiar with John Green (author), he's worth knowing about. LadyofShalott 05:14, 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

• Of course, all this talk of YouTube is designed to lure Dr Mi Estas, ever pursuant in xyr quest for youth cred, away from the old-fashioned music-making instruments such as acoustic guitars. However, anyone interested in that subject is welcome to help Aymatth2 with the Gibson Advanced Jumbo (AfD discussion) and the Gibson Guitar Corporation product list, some sources for which can — amazingly — be found at User talk:Uncle G#On the notability of dogs. Look away, Doktoro. It's not AutoTuned, or even electric. And you cannot play it with a mobile telephone in one hand. Uncle G (talk) 16:26, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

• Yes, thanks. Drmies (talk) 14:00, 2 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

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

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

[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

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

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

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

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!

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

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

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:

• "New Orleans Streetcars"
• "Boston Bostonians"
• "Mississippi Sound and Fury"
• "Manhattan Psychos"
• "Nantucket Dicks"
• "New York Mirth"
• "Indiana Slaughterhouse"
• "Chicago Augies"
• "New Hampshire Hotels"
• "Maryland Sot-Weeds"
• And my personal favourite, "Los Angeles Quartets"

 --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
    • As long as we don't get the Bayport Dicksons or the Seattle Steele and Grey (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:30, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
      • Aren't they already playing in the Lingerie Football League?Drmies (talk) 15:35, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply