I recently read a post from NYB here, and it weighed on me. I don't claim to always understand all the the things you say - but I know you are an honest person with a great deal of integrity. I ask that you please consider offering your services to the community in a role as a member of Arbcom. Please consider this. — ChedZILLA02:39, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was reading this having followed some link to it and I thought I was reading something I had written myself until I saw the signature. I would have replied but when I saw what page it was on, I thought better of it. Anyway.... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:52, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can I ask you a question? While reading Malleus's talk page, this came to mind. I saw you added a bright idea barnstar for the Mongo incident. How (and this isn't meant to badger, I just don't always immediately pick up on others' thinking and am relatively new so I may have missed a prior incident) is posting that message on Malleus's talk page productive or helpful in any way? It seems to me that, at the moment (and I have some of the same thoughts, though to a far lesser degree than you apparently) you're fed up, and I am curious as to why, and how posting that helped the situation. Sorry for the "ramblingness" of this question, I am just curious as your an editor that I have come to respect in my short time here. But the barnstar on Malleus's talk page rubbed me the wrong way...thanks. GoPhightins!03:05, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was wondering the exact same thing. Seeing as you are an administrator, I believe you are entitled to the benefit of the doubt (the community having previously determined that), but giving someone a brilliant idea barnstar for getting blocked and lacking civility seems almost inexplicable to me. AutomaticStrikeout03:16, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The irony of it is that this is exactly the sort of thing Malleus would complain about: admins getting away with personal attacks when he is held to a different standard. Too rich... Doctalk 3:56, 21 October, 2012
(ec)I read the barnstar as a kind gesture and a show of support. I'm curious how it could be read otherwise, and if the above editors read the text of the barnstar in full. If it still does make sense read this. Drmies is concerned about the impending loss of Malleus. Regards, Sun Creator(talk)04:01, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Take out the "idiot" and "fool" comments in the barnstar, and I can see where you're at. Sinking to the level of personal attacks out of frustration is a poor example for any admin. Theoretically, right? I truly don't give a crap what either of these editors say about others, but just think about the irony for a second. Doctalk05:16, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That was my interpretation as well, and that MONGO is allowed to get away with the kind of vindictive nonsense you linked to above is quite simply disgraceful. MalleusFatuorum05:15, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
MONGO is not an admin anymore. John and Drmies are. If they weren't supporting you it would be just more admins getting away with personal attacks, something you have long decried. You can't have it both ways. Admins are supposed to be above this sort of thing, and I know a good many of them that would not go there. Many others go there readily. FWIW, I think a 6-month ban on you is quite lame, especially when you've accurately pointed out for some time that others get away with personal attacks with no repercussions. Meh. Doctalk05:39, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I thought so too. Just an unsupported dismissal of a peon like me. If you can point out my dishonesty in what I've said above, I'd love to hear it. Cheers... Doctalk06:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Doc, if I ever need your advice, or your commentary here, I'll ask for it, thanks. For anyone here looking for my measured reason, or for anyone here wittily commenting on irony (as if I can't recognize the irony in my own comments--I'm not that dumb): once a majority of arbitrators decides that it's a good idea to ban an editor for supposed violations of some little thing (and the baiters get away scot-free), and once one ArbCom member thinks it's a good idea to claim that said editor, who has done more for this project than most people I know (and I have met a lot of editors), is "outside of this community", then all bets are off. In fact, I should be congratulated on not telling a whole bunch of people what I really think.
I'm going to remove myself again: it's more fun to watch Alice in Wonderland with my kid, who is sick at home, than to be "part" of a community that allows a couple of baiters--no more than half a dozen--to pollute the entire atmosphere. I wish the admins and arbitrators who endorse civility blocks would develop a wider field of vision. Malleus, I'll drop back by at some point to see how your case is going; I understand from an email that the ban may be off the table, but frankly I'm too disgusted with the whole thing to stomach looking at it. I'm a lousy advocate for you, I know, but then there's little I can do anyway, given the number of folks who outrank me and seem to think Wikipedia is better off without you. Whatever I do or say won't matter much anyway. In the meantime, I wish you the best, of course, and please convey my apologies to Dr. Malleus for having inappropriately addressed her. Drmies (talk) 14:50, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fun, ah yes, fun. Who ever said wikipedia was meant to be fun? I iz serious editor, we iz serious professional community. You need a wikibreak by the sounds of it fellow evil doctor, go do some crayoning and playing with lego, recapture your youth, but don't spend too long away!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld14:01, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that should be a block. It would be more productive to talk to the editor and explain what is required. There are references in the BLP so the problem is one that a domain as a reference is not enough - but how would someone know if it's not explained to them. Regards, Sun Creator(talk)05:04, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The comment was stricken. That the person who made it would recuse themselves or be otherwise deposed is probably too much to ask--though I'm sure that the Mongos of this world would say the same thing. Ah well. I guess we're back, though again more disillusioned. Drmies (talk) 22:29, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seen your category. It is very similar to the redlinked version I posted here yesterday. Want a bet on how long your bluelinked one will say blue? - Sitush (talk) 22:42, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Pablo, I wasn't being too serious - just winding-up the prof. It is not often that I am ahead of the game anywhere and to be ahead of Drmies is just, well, the most pleasing thing. He was, of course, engrossed with Alice at the time. ;) - Sitush (talk) 23:14, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Some admin will delete the cat. Another admin will restore the cat. Both will be brought before ANI where some will snarl and others will purr in a familiar caterwaul.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:42, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It hasn't been a good month, has it. Escaped rabbits. A request for the clarification of a (poorly thought-out) remedy turning into a lynch party. An arbitrator getting all Catch-22. Coming soon - a plague of frogs! pablo14:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}}or{{ygm}} template.
Friggin' Doctor Who. One time in college, a roommate of mine and I stayed up all night watching it. In the morning we made chocolate chip pancakes on a cookie sheet on the stove. Burned the hell out of the cookie sheet, but the pancakes were delicious. I forgot where I was going with this. Writ Keeper⚇♔23:38, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See Writ, if you had a TARDIS, you could have gone back in time and prevented the cookie burn. Crisco, we do have BBC news, but I have to wait until I get to Canada, where it is on Space. I do get a ton of CSI shows here though. --kelapstick(bainuu) 23:43, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Context, Dennis: Kennedy spoke in Berlin, where they call the BerlinerPfannkuchen (that is, pancake). And then he had a beer with Reagan, postponing foreign policy meetings for 100 days so they could play the stock market with capital borrowed from Bain. Do I have to explain everything here? Sigh. Drmies (talk) 01:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very nice. BTW, I should be blocked for sloth: I still haven't done a single useful thing except for rubbing some editors the wrong way. Drmies (talk) 03:03, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Atleast you have come to your senses and will not do any work. Unfortunately, Dr. Blofeld was too prideful and didn't admit it until he was blocked. Thank You again Dennis for blocking that dangerous editor. Bgwhite (talk) 04:13, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Professor, forgive my intrusion with frivolous and totally picayune clap-trap, but you should keep in mind that the Tide are facing a particularly grueling three weeks. Alice in Wonderland certainly has its place, but attempt to maintain your focus..."when mama calls" and all that. Tiderolls23:55, 24 October 2012 (UTC) Did ya notice I hyphenated "claptrap"? Is that anachronistic or just bad grammar? :)[reply]
Haha, homecoming this weekend, but I'm headed to T-Town earlier--tonight's the night. Don't worry, I'm focused. One game at a time. Finish the play. Keep breathing. Hold your position. There's no I in team. We just need to tighten up on defense. Rah rah. Etc. Drmies (talk) 14:34, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Drmies, to be fair your close was a little off. I edit warred to unblank the page 10 or so minutes ago (done now) so technically the page isn't blanked. Sædontalk01:41, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh also, did you mean to archive the thread? You said you were closing it but you left half an open template bracket and I didn't see any actual templates to fix...Sædontalk01:43, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You said the issue was closed because the user page was blanked. Unfortunately, some editors have edit-warred to put it back. Enemies lists are against the rules. Maybe the best thing would be for you to blank it and full-protect it for a while. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 02:29, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bugs, I guess I'm heading over to ANI to see what happened with my apparently incorrect closing of the thread. No doubt there's more excitement. Thanks for the note, Drmies (talk) 14:18, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to post an all-encompassing, very general, Thank You to Drmies. While I am not oblivious to comments about me not being "at a loss for words" (I laughed), and I may feel cheated that you backed out of our discussion about edit warring, nothing you have done comes close to earning a spot on an imaginary "enemies list". But don't try telling that to the crackpots insisting you are a listed enemy of mine. You were only listed on my page because of our discussion in which some policy references were made that I wished to study further. Nothing more dramatic than that. I hope Young rocked.Sally Season (talk) 00:28, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I appreciate the note. Sometimes I am at a loss for words also, voluntarily or not. Young was absolutely amazing, best concert I've seen him play, and Alabama Shakes made me proud of being an (adopted) Alabamian. BTW, I was thinking of writing a shitlist, but I couldn't come up with a funny enough reading of the acronym S H I T. I still think you're looking for trouble, and chances are you will find it (in the shape of crackpots, maybe), but nothing should happen for the wrong reason. Then again, sometimes this place is just plain crazy. Drop me a line if I can help. All the best, Sally, and thanks again for stopping by, Drmies (talk) 00:40, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sally Season[edit]
Thank you for your kind remarks; I too find it a pleasure to edit-conflict with you. I have been meaning to ask you, was there large-scale Dutch immigration to the US? I knew about the Norwegians in Minnesota, but recently I looked up a school IP to do a {{sharedipedu}}, found it was New Groningen School, Zeeland, thought "I know where that is", and then found it was in Michigan. JohnCD (talk) 15:56, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Michigan has a large Dutch population--farmer and truckers, apparently (I frequently go to Kalamazoo for the medieval conference, that's how I know that). The countryside looks very Dutch, actually. Many of them went, I believe, after WWII to practice agriculture where land was aplenty--they went to Canada as well in great numbers. I don't have numbers at hand, but there's also a Holland, Michigan, and no doubt others. Drmies (talk) 15:02, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, much later--that early stage is 17th century. We have History of immigration to the United States, for instance, but the section "Postwar immigration" has little to say on European immigration (emigration?) outside of displaced persons. I'm not sure how great the numbers were for the post-WWII period; maybe they're not that high relative to the US population or even the Dutch population (which must have been around 10 million at the time). Anecdote: one of the farmers in Alabama supplying to Organic Valley came from Friesland a decade or two ago, to start a dairy farm. I'm sure they weren't the only ones. Drmies (talk) 17:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lest I continue to sound like the idiot I apparently did, my "later?" was just meant as 3rd or 4th, rather than 2nd wave; I am descended from some of that 17th-century wave.
Understandable Lady. The Dutch genes are hard to overcome and does make you stupid every once in awhile. If you were full Dutch, then might as well call you a Zombie because you wouldn't use much more brain power than they do. Bgwhite (talk) 18:08, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bgwhite, now that this one fictional woman is dead, you have time to watch other things. Might as well go check that counteroffer Stephen Colbert made to Donald Trump: I have something similar in mind for you. ;) Drmies (talk) 22:13, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After the last ArbCom noticebored remark about the sign having slud off the signified of "grow a pair", I was sorely tempted to invite him to lick my ball, but my self-discipline and edit-conflicts stayed my hand. Kiefer.Wolfowitz22:25, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After one day creating his articles in English, he reverted to Dutch and now he's been reported to ANI. If you go there to pour balm upon the waters, please note that at least one other editor stepped up to the plate to translate when I was in the dentist's chair, and that others have been helping out mightily with references. I'm all embarrassed, plus it's past my bedtime. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:01, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I giggled reading your comment on ANI about color coded lines and what not. I've been here longer than most and have to frequently remind myself that others don't necessarily know the inside baseball of who used to be who and what fights they had in the past. MBisanztalk15:31, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And bear in mind that there are other editors/admins (like me) who have even less history than Drmies. So many people assume everyone knows what they're talking about or referring to, and I end up being hopelessly lost. Of course, Drmies articulates these problems far better and far more entertainingly than I ever could, but that's one of his many gifts.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:44, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
True, if I were you I would be constantly terrified of wandering into a nest of hornets. And no one ever forgets on Wikipedia. It doesn't matter if the Arbcom case was in 2005 or the edit war was in 2007, someone always remembers and knows just when to pull it out for maximum effect. MBisanztalk16:01, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, at least you don't have the history. I know if I ever make a misstep, everything I've done over the last eight years; every person pissed at a block or upset about an AFD close, will be baying for my head. MBisanztalk16:09, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, knowledge isn't bliss. I am leery of the hornets at ANI, but I don't let it stop me. Even if I wasn't around when the Americans won the revolutionary war, I still have to know what happened, or at least what people think happened. Like Drmies, I don't care if some people think I'm "stupid"; ignorance has little to do with intelligence. @WK, there are, of course, admins (congrats, btw) who avoid ANI, but I wouldn't let your relative newness stop you. Everyone takes potshots at everyone else at ANI; you might as well pick up a few wounds. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 16:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
MBisanz, I've pointed at my faulty memory in various places already, and I would need such a color-coded setup even if I had been familiar with those conflicts. I was only marginally aware of it, though I was keeping track of sanctorum--ah the good old days. So I knew that Cirt was against Jayen and Rob (now YRC) was with Jayen for supposed BLP reasons, and on and on. I used to be on Cirt's side as well until it became clear to me that they were here for very specific reasons that had little to do with improving the project, and I got tired of the emails. But Kolbe's commentary on that Wikipediocracy thing, that's just disgusting. I'm sometimes loyal to a fault, and maybe I'm wrong, but airing the dirty laundry like that is not kosher and will do nothing to solve any problems we have. And there also there's the camps, as in the ongoing Malleus case (which only flares up when one of the haters finds something to latch onto): you're with one and thus you're against the other. Well, I don't like either Cirt or Kolbe anymore. I think a new RfA for me might break WP:100--with over a hundred opposes, from every side in each dispute, in half an hour. BTW, I think AN is the real hornet's nest: many of the editors on ANI are gnats and one learns to ignore the buzzing. Thanks for stopping by, MBisanz: I'm honored by your visit. Writ Keeper, I left you a little note somewhere on your talk page, but flowers are on the way, and I do wish to thank you for that lovely bribe, the 60" flatscreen HDTV. I noticed it was only lightly used. All corrupt admins are welcome to come by and watch the Alabama game tonight. Drmies (talk) 20:49, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your house isn't big enough for all the corrupt admins. Airing dirty laundry may be inherently "unclean", but it's all that bacon that is tref.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:26, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, it's not small, Bbb--it's not like those little babyhomes in Southern California, where half a million dollars gets you 1500 square feet. There is at the moment no bacon in this house, and there might not be for a while (though there is a copy of Bacon: A Love Story, an underwhelming GA and a rather cheesy book). Also, the pool is looking good, and can't be much colder than 55 degrees. I assume you saw that Mississippi State scored on us, marring an otherwise perfect humiliation. A bottle of Chimay Red made that bearable, though. Writ Keeper, good luck riding out your storm... Drmies (talk) 13:20, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, closing out RFCs is not a thankless job. Someone has to do it and it needs to be done. I for one appreciate it, so thank you. :) • Jesse V.(talk)18:41, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciated it, thanks. But I tell you, you get few positive remarks afterward, and the dirty taste of a Move request and its subsequent review is still in my mouth... Drmies (talk) 20:32, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're not here much lately, but your talk page is almost as good as an admin noticeboard what with your page stalkers. Do you think the username violates WP:IU (misleading usernames)? Misled me.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Action on that name was already declined on UAA, I believe. I wouldn't say it's problematic myself; the policy says that names with "Wikipedia" or derivatives are inappropriate if they give the impression that the account is associated with the WMF or Wikipedia in some official capacity, and this doesn't seem like that to me. YMMV, I suppose. User talk:Drmies, the friendly admin noticeboard. Writ Keeper⚇♔20:28, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
UAA doesn't get archived, does it? It's not hard for any place to be friendlier than some of the admin noticeboards, but Drmies's talk page is one the best places on the whole project.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:36, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, thank you both. Yes, I'm not so excited anymore, and after following the Gibraltar discussion on various pages, including Jimbo's talk page and the DYK talk page, followed by the YRC mess, even less so. Bbb, I was going to A7 Logan Edgar until I saw you turned it down already. Consider a speedy close per SNOW: there is no way that article will be kept. As for the name, well, the person may have a Dutch background. "Wipkip" has a nice internal rhyme and means "fuck chicken"--it's a word that at some point was and maybe still is a kind of euphemism for "woman", or for a specific kind of woman, I suppose. So, misleading, probably not--but it's pretty obscene, yes. Drmies (talk) 20:38, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
LOL, what about that song from Music Man? I haven't done a single AfD closure since becoming an admin, and I ain't gonna start with a SNOW delete. You can, though.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As an aside, UAA doesn't get archived; a bot comes along and removes entries periodically, I think. The diff of the response to this guy's report is here. Writ Keeper⚇♔21:01, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you or one of your admin stalkers has a moment, please see this discussion. The creator makes a persuasive case. I almost restored the article myself, but I'd like at least one more set of eyes.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:27, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, Bbb. "Virginity" has become a rather technical term, which I'm sure they started tweaking in your neck of the woods. We actually have a redirect for "Technical virgin". Good thing they don't out people on other websites. DYK..."that there's really weird forms of breast augmentation involving water-absorbing string?" Wikipedia has pictures! (BTW, thanks Draco. I'm a girl too, sometimes, but after the edits I made today, prompted by DC, I was feeling a bit weird.) Drmies (talk) 01:01, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it's nice to be posting more on your talk page again. Much of it amuses me (with apt and inapt illustrations to boot); some of it is educational; and some of it leaves me absolutely lost. Sorta like real life but a higher proportion of lost. I have no idea what you mean by the tweaking, but it sounds like another jab at California. As for technical virginity, in the context of a block log, regardless of what definition you use, it's binary.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:37, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"It's binary". What does being bisexual have to do with this? Are you saying you can be virginal while having coitus with one sex and not the other? :) Bgwhite (talk) 23:49, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, it is generally considered rather rude to address people by their surname alone. Please don't do it; it's not a trait admins should model. Regards, AndreasKolbeJN46601:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I don't really see a reason to treat you with special courtesy: where I'm from, it's considered rude to proclaim that there is inherent corruption in the project you claim to be involved in, as the opening page of that Wikipediocracy states. What is your name anyway? "AndreasKolbe" or "Jayen466"? I was brought up to not name people by their first name unless you're properly introduced, and I don't know if your a Mr. or a Mrs. Or a Dr., for that matter. That this comes up in a discussion about outing makes it even more ironic.
Now, Jayen466, I don't know what to believe anymore, but if it is true that Draco E. is indeed your better half (she being of the female persuasion, and given the possibility that "Andreas" is your first name, which in most cultures would signal you male), than I will mind my words more carefully, since I think she's a pretty nice person. Which makes it all the more difficult to hit Save page, since I am seriously, seriously bothered by those Wikipediocracy claims, and by the way in which you are preaching against Gibraltar. And you know what makes that even worse? I probably agree with you on the Gibraltar matter. Draco, if I am correct, please accept my apology. Drmies (talk) 02:04, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
She most certainly is my better half. ;) Andreas is my first name and will do fine, Drmies. (And I don't have any Dr, I am just a Mr.) By the way, that book by Johnson is a pretty good read. AndreasKolbeJN46602:25, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As for that corruption reference, I didn't write that, and if it had been up to me, I would have written it differently. However, I can assure you WP is not free of corruption. It would be very surprising if it were, as it's a large crowd of mostly pseudonymous people, driven by the most varied motivations – some noble, some not so; some openly displayed, others not. Wikipediocracy is a group effort, and the people involved in running it represent a pretty wide spectrum – from banned users to inactive editors to active editors to active WP admins and a current checkuser and oversighter. Several WP arbitrators have active accounts in the forum, which you're very welcome to visit, if you ever feel you can't get your day's worth of arguments here (pretty unlikely, I know). Here is a blog post I wrote for the site: if you hate it, you'll probably hate the rest of the site too. If you think there is merit to it, then progress past the sign on the door. Regards. AndreasKolbeJN46602:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[ec] Alright, Andreas--if I may. My apologies. You don't suggest I'm dumb anymore (re:outing, for instance), and I'll address you more courteously. Now let's put that aside; we have a ton more things we disagree on, and they're much more important. Again, I just don't agree with how you try go about certain things. The santorum business taught me something important: I can agree with editors on issues while disagreeing with means and motives. I learned something else from watching ANI: the manner in which things are presented matters in these public forums. You, and I guess Cla68--the more vocal you are in your defense of YRC, the more likely you are to draw attention to your all-too personal conflicts with Prioryman, and the more suspect your comments are. Surely you know that. At some point, and I think that point was reached a while ago already, the subject matter became less important (at least to bystanders like me--the not too smart ones) than the spectacle of the battle royal. I wish all of y'all would leave each other be, and let the community deal with problems. I assume there is a problem, a content issue, underneath all this? Or is this like with a married couple, and it's the one time that you forgot to pick her up on time and she got rained on and it gets brought up every three months?
The bad-case scenario is that a bunch of you will lose various rights and privileges. Cirt's adminship is gone, YRC will possibly lose his existence here, and Prioryman and you and Cla68 just look like you're going to keep it up until you're all blocked or banned. And then what? [Then the socking starts!] I just don't like the thought of it. Well, you have better things to do than to hang around here. Your wife already dislikes me ("macho"--that hurts), but I suppose that's par for the course, and I'm not sure I can do anything more for DC. Alles gute, Drmies (talk) 03:01, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. But what am I to do? Youreallycan is a wiki-mate (I've never actually met him in person). Prioryman says he was outed, cries murder to the oversighters, and bang YRC is indeffed. Now, it sucks, but I am one of the few people (apart from YRC) who knows that you can't out the dude because he outed himself years ago. I was there, I have the T-shirt. YRC can't make that point, because he's indeffed. So what am I gonna do? Sit on my hands and watch my mate be indeffed, and site-banned on top of it for an evil outing that wasn't? But I understand that it must look very tiresome who someone who has never been involved. Believe me, it feels tiresome here too. PS. The wife says, she doesn't hate you. She's just rather fond of DC. Regards. AndreasKolbeJN46603:11, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was not there, and the same goes for many others: for me and for them, it's outing. You can plead your (Rob's) case, but you can't say "it's not outing, dumbass--the diffs are right there". "Your" side should recognize that these things are context-bound. And no, you don't have to sit on your hands--at least not all the time. Make your righteous and well-phrased comment, and then let it be. Have a little faith. But you have to realize that making frequent comments (aka badgering) won't help, it just raised the temperature, and serves to derail the discussion to where it's not about YRC and whether or not something was technically outing, but about you, and Prioryman, and all the others, and your motives and previous interactions and interaction bans and ANI threads and hidden diffs. It makes people upset--look what you made me do: I started two sentences in a row with a conjunction, and I might be guilty of a run-on as well. Anyway, DC got me onto plastic chesticles, and now, thanks to you, they're bound as well. Surely Draco E. will understand my being disturbed. Drmies (talk) 03:25, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry to be messing with your grammar. That is awful, and I will see to it that I will have my breasts ... er ... bound. But even the arbs at RFAR have now begun to accept that it was not outing (see JClemens' most recent comment). Those arbs that were on the committee in ARBSCI ought to know already: because Roger Davies effectively outed him in his draft finding of fact, by linking to all his off-wiki writings. You have to understand, it is very frustrating when you provide a diff to a previous self-declaration, and another five "Support site-ban" votes roll in at ANI, with the indignant rationale: "outing", providing clear evidence that no one has read or understood what you wrote half an hour ago. Or when people say, "You're wrong, it's not there. Support site ban." It doesn't inspire faith, or a relaxed confidence that all will be right in the end. But enough for today, it's late. I wish you a good night. AndreasKolbeJN46603:47, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is breasts a kind of red thread here? The tit torture article was interesting enough--but did it help? The article is now a redirect, but the editor is not blocked or banned, and I just deleted another "reference" to that "book". Drmies (talk) 03:15, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I was trying to cotton on to the thread you had going here. :) The article, as it was before the redirect, was profoundly unencyclopedic. It was more like an unreferenced how-to guide and picture book on a fairly dangerous and painful sexual practice, an "amateur's" original research combined with spam. Besides, its was also a POV fork for breast bondage, which I fear will be much the same as the other one was. Even so, it was accessed well over 15,000 times a month, probably mostly by 16-year-olds. That piece of "original research" being gone is an improvement in itself. As for blocking the writer, AGF would probably militate against it. But a warning, and a close watch of his edits might be useful. AndreasKolbeJN46603:47, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your work on breast bondage. In the past, when I still had enthusiasm for such work, I was usually accused of being an evil Bible-bashing censor within a fairly short time frame. :) Articles with similar problems (unsourced how-to-cum-gallery) are [2] (funny how all the pictures in these are always of women) and [3] (ah, finally one that gives males their due!). Probably best viewed after breakfast. AndreasKolbeJN46613:38, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just to make sure: with "the tit torture article" I meant the Wikipediocracy article. For some reason or other I've looked at that cock and ball article, and I feel queasy thinking about it. I did have breakfast, thank you, but I'm still not clicking right now. As for the above: I did look at a whole bunch of links and diffs, as I hope you could tell, and we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll look at the recent discussion later today. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:13, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did think it would probably have been better advice to wait until after dinner, rather than breakfast. That well-referenced encyclopedic gem is viewed about 1500 times a day. Speaking seriously for a moment: All these articles are well linked through topical nav templates, beginning with the one at the bottom of the Fuck article, which we can rely on our teenage audience to reward with particular interest based on the time-honoured teenage tradition of looking up rude words. The fact that rather than offering them genuine encyclopedic information based on university research, including a psychological analysis and indications of the prevalence of the practices concerned, Wikipedia rewards their curiosity with fetishists' and thrill-seekers' original research is ... suboptimal. Regards. AndreasKolbeJN46615:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I've been enjoying your edit summaries. The wife says Hi. She's been too busy for Wikipedia ... work ... but she came within a ball of beating our local pool champ tonight. I'm so proud of her! First time she racked up the courage to play him. He was worried. AndreasKolbeJN46600:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Drmies. Are non-admins allowed to close threads like this one? It just seems inappropriate. I mean, if anyone can close a thread at ANI, then that means anybody can close a thread if they are tired of a debate there, including anyone involved in the debate. I always see people waiting for administrators to close these kind of threads at ANI. 106.187.37.167 (talk) 21:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, a question of conscience. Enough editors are convinced of my disruptiveness and bad faith already, so I might as well give an honest answer: I guess they're allowed to, and I wish that non-admins would do a better job of staying away. It's typically the non-admins who put the dramah in dramah boardz. Not that most non-admin contributions are not helpful, because many of them are very helpful, but ANI is going back to being a free-for-all. It's a cyclical thing. On the other hand, if a closing is really wrong--if it's done by someone with a COI, or just stupidly done, or whatever--it typically gets reopened. And here's the flipside: if anyone can close it, it stands to reason that anyone can reopen it, no? (Did you have a specific problem with this one? I've not been following all threads recently.) Thanks, and I hope that helps, Drmies (talk) 22:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, I have no stake in that dispute. It just struck me as odd and wrong to see a non-admin closing that thread. For example, how do we know that the user who closed it doesn't have a conflict of interest? And even though the same can be stated of admins at times, I'd at least feel comfortable knowing that an admin closed the thread. If I were to get into a dispute and take it to ANI, I'd hate to see some random user deciding to close a thread willy-nilly. Not to mention, those who close threads there are thought to be admins unless a person knows otherwise; therefore, it gives the false impression that these random closers are admins.
Non-admins should be very cautious about closing discussions at ANI. If a non-admin closes a discussion and another non-admin reopens it, the first non-admin should leave it alone. (Disclosure: I used to close discussions at ANI before becoming an admin.) IPs should never close discussions at ANI. I haven't followed the particular topic you link to.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:15, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll bite as another admin talk page stalker here. without speaking to this particular case, it is entirely dependent on context. Sometimes an issue brought to ANI is so patently ridiculous that it is entirely proper for the first person who sees it, admin or not, to close it. Anything less obvious probably should be closed by an admin, for the same reason that other discussions asking for administrative action should be: the person making the close should honestly have the option to take the action being requested. Admins (generally, there are certainly exceptions) are aware their actions are subject to scrutiny. They tend to consider using their admin tools carefully as there can be serious consequences for even one act that is obviously not appropriate. Therefore they are likely to have put more real thought into what an appropriate response administrative response is to a particular request. Nobody who is directly involved in a situation at ANI should be closing discussion of it. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:48, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No baiting here, so no biting, Beeblebrox; I always appreciate your comments. I don't mind discussions being closed, usually. My larger gripe is with the peanut gallery, so to speak, for whom ANI is a source of amusement. For the record, again, there's lots of useful comments being made by non-admins--Bbb's, for instance, and Dennis, and lots of others who know policy and are good at mediation. Remember a couple of months ago we had those long talks about closing discussions and lowering the drama content? That worked well for a while. I don't really like that ANI is also a testing ground for future admins, though I reckon that's inevitable. Also, my kid and I are watching Survivorman, and the guy is out in the Canadian Rockies--probably very much like the view from your house! Drmies (talk) 00:52, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if it's a rule, Bbb, but I do agree that IPs shouldn't be closing such discussions, and editors who do close one should not of course be the subject of discussion--"involved" can be tricky to define, though... Drmies (talk) 00:54, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe. Self appointed survival experts tend to have a bad day in my neck of the woods. Just ask this guy. Oh wait, you can't because a bear ate him. It amuses Alaskans that people like him and Christopher McCandless get movies made about them, as if there is something noble and heroic about wandering into what you know is a dangerous wilderness utterly unprepared. Then again I got yelled at in college because I wrote a paper on the Song of Roland entitled "Roland: macho jerk or just plain stupid?" So maybe there is just something I'm not getting here... Beeblebrox (talk) 01:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Continue with that anti-literary bullshit and I'll ask an uninvolved IP editor to close this discussion. For Roland, this is mandatory reading. Do you think (Bbb, I'm asking you as well) that some rules need to be formulated, or is the current ad hoc approach (of reopening a thread, for instance) sufficient? A thread I closed a month or so ago was reopened (not by an admin) and I was quite very much pissed. And then of course after some more drama nothing happened, as I foresaw. Drmies (talk) 01:11, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So, Bbb, a non-admin shouldn't be able to close a thread saying "no action is likely to be taken" or something like that? Because that also involves a weighing of the consensus, etc--it's OR, so to speak. Drmies (talk) 01:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) If we were going to do anything about non-admin closures, it would best be spelled out in the instructions on the noticeboards (ANI and AN). The discussion of whether and how could take place at AN.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What we have here is: "I concur with Nobody Ent that we should deescalate this situation. Pass a Method talk 21:03, 30 October 2012 (UTC)" That is problematic, though. Neither Nobody Ent nor the concurrer is an admin, and that begs the question of what "we" stands for. If Bbbeeblebrox closes something, the "we" is a kind of royal we, and has weight (and is open to scrutiny, as was pointed out above). Drmies (talk) 01:17, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the analogy to an uninvolved admin closing a discussion with a declaration as to the "result" is an apt one. BTW, at ANI, if you click on Show next to "How to use this page", it talks about marking an issue as resolved. Never even saw that before.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:19, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And, of course, it doesn't have the same comment/instruction at AN. I've long bemoaned the fact that the distinctions between ANI and AN are not clear to the untutored and even the tutored. Both sets of instructions could do with some housekeeping and, heaven forbid, consistency.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:22, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One more thought before I go off-wiki. If we don't permit non-admin closures and we insist on uninvolved admin closures, we will have to accept the fact that some discussions that clearly deserve closure will remain open because no uninvolved admin is paying attention.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:29, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Adding a new tattoo artist to the Tattoo artist list[edit]
Hi, I would like to add to the table List of tattoo artist an Italian tattoo artist Tom|Tattoo, real name Tommaso Buglioni, one of "the fathers" of modern tattoo art in Italy, working since 1982. He has long worked in the USA, partecipating to several conventions in the States, as, for instance, The NYC Tattoo Convention since his first edition in late '90s. He has a page in the Italian Wikipedia: can I add him to the list even if he has not an English page? I guess I'd mention some reliable sources, how about if I add a list of English language pubblication mentioning Tom Tattoo? Where should I do it? How can I add his name to the list and make it appear in the table? Thanks--Giulia Visci (talk) 10:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Giulia, thanks for your question. The general principle here is that such lists should contain links to Wikipedia articles (on the English wiki), for a couple of reasons--one being that the presence of an article is at least some guarantee of notability and verifiability, a related one being that we need to avoid such lists becoming business directories. My suggestion to you is to write up the article (the easiest thing would be to start with translating the Italian wiki) and submit it through WP:AFC, where another editor will look at it, offer advice, and move it to the main space if it's OK. If you choose to go that route, drop the link to the draft here--it'll look like "Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/xxx", and I or someone else can have a look as well. I know for a fact that many of my talk page stalkers have tattoos, hidden or otherwise: not me, of course. Some of the folk watching this page actually have entire Dr. Who episodes on their bodies. Drmies (talk) 14:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! I wrote an article and follow the way you suggested, but I've no idea how a can drop the link to the draft and I'd really like to have suggestions for my article, above all for my English! Entire Dr. Who episodes on the body?? Big folks.....--Giulia Visci (talk) 17:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)Hi, Giulia! The link to your article is here: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tom Tattoo. The way it works is that, any time you surround the title of a page on Wikipedia with doubled brackets, Wikipedia will create a link to it. So, the page you were working on is titled "Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tom Tattoo", as you can see at the top of the page. While you're editing a page (article, talk page, anything), if you take this title and put it between double brackets like this: [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tom Tattoo]], it'll make the link. Does that help? and yeah, we got some pretty big folks around here; not to stereotype too much, but this is the Internet... Writ Keeper⚇♔17:44, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! Writ Keeper! Thanks for taking care of that. Giulia, I made a few little edits and left you a link in the edit summary. As for Dr. Who, some people think that I'm interested because I'm brilliant as well as a doctor, and they keep coming here to proclaim their love for someone I can't name, since it makes them cry--but they are useful editors with hundreds of thousands of edits combined, some of them even to real articles. Writ Keeper, I have it from a reliable source, has the map of the Inferno tattooed on his broad back. Drmies (talk) 17:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My friends call me Virgil. (no they don't.) Anyways, the thing I'd say about your article, Giulia, is that it's a bit flowery for an encyclopedic article. Saying things like "the colours break the barrier of the form and express themselves in striking chromatic alchemy" isn't really the tone we're trying to hit. (Though in passing, I do really like that turn of phrase on its own merits; "chromatic alchemy" is excellent.) It's better to just stick to the plain facts without trying to embellish it with things like that. It makes for a dryer, more boring article, I know, but them's the breaks: it's just how encyclopedias are. Writ Keeper⚇♔18:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted the most pov portions of the article, but it needs a lot more citations and fleshing out. One of the references is literally "Various internet articles" lol. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)r[reply]
Play nice, Gaijin, or I'll have Tom Tattoo make a nice one on your lower back, saying "Yes I am an..." with an arrow pointing down. I did see a few mentions while Googling--can you find anything useful? Drmies (talk) 18:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi everybody!Thanks againg for helping me with this article and my English(!!!) I do appreciate it a lot!. I'm grateful for some editing but sometimes I do not agree for some interventions (and I've brought to the user's attention my doubts in his talk page) and some others are incorrect. That's why I made some changes myself. I've reported "articles on the web" as I don't think is useful to mention all the article I can find by making a research (just a few days ago I found an inteview for H2Ocean at a convention in the States!). I just wanted to suggest that by searching Tom Tattoo on the web it is easy to find articles that mention him. My article has received a warning for violation of copywrite: I've found all the materials in the book I've reported, on the official web site, on facebook page and asked for confirmation to the artist's staff. All the article deals with facts and facts can be found on the official materials dealing with the artist. That's why I do not agree with the warning and I wish to know how I can report my explanation to the on who put the warning him self.Thanks--Giulia Visci (talk) 10:04, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion at Talk:Nichkhun#Driving under the influence controversy[edit]
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sally Season. Viriditas (talk) 07:53, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The wife says Hi. She's been too busy for Wikipedia ... work ... but she came within a ball of beating our local pool champ tonight. I'm so proud of her! First time she racked up the courage to play him. He was worried. 
AndreasKolbe JN466 00:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
