User talk:Drmies

Cheers...

...for the recent ANI closure, although I am beginning to notice a serious issue over the direct personal attacks. I can be abrasive, sure, and I don't really care about that to an extent, it's life's rich tapestry, but directly referring to someone as an "asshole" usually don't go uncensured. Allowing it to do so is an unhealthy precedent. I would challenge anyone to find a diff where I have been so directly and inappropriately offensive. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

• I understand, but you know I can't block someone over the mere word "asshole", especially not after the problems editors signaled with what they call your incivility. I like life's rich tapestry fine, and sure, I don't know of examples where you resort to direct namecalling, but we all know that it doesn't take a bad word to insult someone, and I think that belittling other editors, not showing them good faith, pigeonholing them as this or that kind of editor because of their background, etc. are much worse than calling someone something bad. Mind you, I'm not saying you did those thing, not at all--it's a general point of a kind of behavior that I see all over the place (though mostly at ANI, of course).

  Or, to put it another way, BMK calling you something is not likely to keep you away from ANI if you have business there, and some variety of "sticks and stones" (or, "I like the gift as I like the giver") is appropriate: I am certainly not going to think better of him for having said that (if you like: Beyond My Ken, you can be blocked for such comments, and they do not improve the atmosphere or help the discussion along--no need to respond). But if NYB is halfway truthful in his remark, and I have no reason to doubt him, then in my opinion we have a problem. Just saying, TRM. You can put this in your pipe and smoke it, or shrug it off. You and I have had our disagreements and we will probably continue having them, but I am telling you this as a colleague who appreciates your good work: that tone does not help you or us. Thanks, thanks for your good work, and thanks for coming by. Drmies (talk) 17:52, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

  • I appreciate your temperance. Brad is one of those guys who upset the apple cart by swinging by ITN with his super vote and ignoring things, especially article quality, and it pissed me off. He knows that and so do many others, but there you go. BMK uses every possibility to declare me to be the worst person in humanity, and has exceeded his remit this time, by directly calling me an asshole. I would appreciate a quiet word in his ear please, or else this sorry story will roll on as I take him back to ANI, we both get blocked etc etc. I will not and have never resorted to such pathetic and directly offensive name-calling exercises and I will not and will never tolerate it. If you're not prepared to at least nudge BMK in the right direction then I guess we'll just keep this rolling and we'll see the whole sorry shitstorm go through ANI for yet another round. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:59, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
    • The Rambling Man, the ANI thread was about you, not about Beyond My Ken or Newyorkbrad. You are assuming bad faith among everyone who said something about you that didn't smell of roses--at the very least you seem to deny that their points, and by extension the points that everyone else raised, have any validity. In other words, you are shrugging it off. That's fine, that's your choice--but don't turn this into "you should reprimand or block BMK and have a word with NYB or this conversation is over". The thread was about you. Not NYB, not BMK, not me. Drmies (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Happy Valentine's Day Drmies!

Ferdinand Fagerlin Girl in front of a mirror

The artist depicted by Günther Gensler Die Mitglieder des Hamburger Künstlervereins,in 1840

File:Hermann Kauffmann - Hermann Kauffmann und Georg Haeselich in Kauffmanns Atelier in München (1830).jpg

Hans Bachmann Rast bei der Ernte

Desire Thomassin

(Last chance please accept now) Yihaaaaaaoohooo!!! Hafspajen (talk) 08:42, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Johann Georg Haeselich - Holsteinischer See, Mondschein (1847).jpg

I am seriously sincerely - almost haunted. Blasted Herman doesn't have an article either. ARRR, not Georg either..... Please, do you think guy I have thousand hands? Hafspajen (talk) 11:32, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• And Günther Gensler ...Desire Thomassin in German and Hans Bachmann too. Hafspajen (talk) 02:19, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Told you this is fishy. Hafspajen (talk) 02:43, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

• What BORING GENRE PAINTERS?

• You know EXACTLY who I mean. The lady with the oxen, that was much more exciting. How many are left? And then the Hamburg art colony, and the Hamburg art society... Drmies (talk) 04:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
• Hey, I am innocent. And I can't nominate a pic without an article ... but you are making a fine progress. Hafspajen (talk) 05:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Werke von ihm befinden in der Hamburger Kunsthalle und in Museen in Darmstadt, Hannover und Leipzig. Ein Gemälde von großen Hamburger Brand hängt im Hamburgischen Rathaus.' -means... Works of him are on display in Hamburg and in the museums at Darmstadt, Hannover und Leipzig? Hafspajen (talk) 06:15, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

…and his painting of the Great Fire of Hamburg is hanging in the Hamburg Rathaus. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Rathaus = "town hall". :-) —George8211 / T 17:29, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

David och Saul

Basil Dearden

Perhaps someone more deft than I can get through to the IP who is editing this article. I paid them the deserved compliment for finding a reliable source, but my other comments, which were partly critical and partly in disagreement with what the IP wanted to include, have ticked them off. Putting aside the issue of place of death (accident site or hospital), it's easy enough to fix all this, but I can't revert anymore as I don't feel like invoking the copyright exemption. Reword the way he died (avoid the copying of the text from the book), lose the unrelilable ancestry/primary source (not needed anyway with the book), keep my template for the book instead of the bare ugly URL, and change whatever US term the IP is claiming I added (automobile??)--Bbb23 (talk) 18:42, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• Automobile? Pinging Ritchie333 since that is customary whenever Alexei Sayle's name comes up. Drmies (talk) 18:54, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• From the source; he was driving a car, he had an accident in which he suffered multiple injuries, at some point he died and was then declared dead at the hospital. What's that Dutch detective's name? The one who stands beside a dead body waiting for a doctor to tell him it's dead (not Van de Valk). Still haven't done my verdammt tax return. Alexi Sayle's story about the man in the white Fiat in a tunnel in Paris is pretty good. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:09, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• The truth of the matter is we don't know where he died. He could have been dead at the scene but not declared officially dead until some doctor said so. Personally, I hate putting in hospitals for death locations unless the person is clearly admitted to the hospital alive. At the same time, I don't really care one way or the other, and my guess is that neither does he.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• Yes, and anything else about the accident other than he was driving a car on the M4 heading to London, and he had more than one injury. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:26, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• Why is it important to include the number of the roadway he was on? That's the kind of precise information that is recorded on police reports, but does it matter in terms of his biography?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:29, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• Nah, probably not. On the other hand, maybe "He died driving" is a bit too brief Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:37, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• Well, from unreliable sources- the film involves a crash on the A4/M4 (?) Dearden was driving on the M4 when his car left the road and burst into flames (Montreal Gazette). According to Roger Moore, speaking in 2012, Dearden was decapitated in the accident, which happened on the exact spot used in the film. (Basingstoke Gazette) Spooooky Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 20:40, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• Indeed! No doubt we'll find out that, in hindsight, the accident also predicted my own death in every single detail, once read allegorically of course. Drmies (talk) 22:54, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

One car crash in the film happened on Richmond Bridge, London, with the car crashing through a polystyrene balustrade into the Thames. Whether there's another one I don't know. So you're going to die crashing through the false barrier of ignorance into the ever-flowing river of truth? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:26, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @User:Xanthomelanoussprog The dutch name of that detective is an expletive in english, de Cock and for that reason was changed to Dekok (thecook) in the english translations. His contacts with the british police must have been fun though.

Thanks! And now I've found the writer- A. C. Baantjer. It seems about 40 of his DeKok stories have been translated into English- if the TV series Baantjer has 123 episodes, there must be plenty more untranslated. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 11:35, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

• Yeah, Baantjer--I never watched that: it was on the TROS, and my religious convictions got in the way. Drmies (talk) 19:09, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

• I nearly had a religious conviction, but I managed to outrun the religious police. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:21, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I know there's a deletion category for this but...

Can someone more experienced than me take a look at this page (Miss Supertalent of the World) and see what deletion criteria it might fall under? Be sure to look at the name of the user who created the page. Thank you. :) Shinyang-i (talk) 21:51, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• Speedy deletion as promotional spam (G11), with a free block thrown in. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:13, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
  • No, thank YOU. :P Shinyang-i (talk) 22:01, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Valentine Greets!!!

Valentine Greets!!!

Hello Drmies, love is the language of hearts and is the feeling that joins two souls and brings two hearts together in a bond. Taking love to the level of Wikipedia, spread the WikiLove by wishing each other Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm love on the eve, Happy editing, Hafspajen (talk) 01:48, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Valentine Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

• Likewise Hafspajen! Tell you what, I'll try not to block anyone tonight. Drmies (talk) 03:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Threats

Regarding the Randykitty/IP nonsense, this might qualify as a threat. 70.60.119.199 seems inclined to cause more trouble in the future. There was plenty of support in the ANI discussion for a block of the IPs and I think enough is enough. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 04:55, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

• Yes, I saw that, and it's unsavory, but I don't see much use in blocking an IP which is most likely dynamic anyway. Whether the comment is enough for a block in its own right is somewhat questionable, but plenty of users think I'm way too lenient. Further disruption will most likely lead to a block, by me or someone else, but that comment, on their own talk page, is not serious enough in my opinion. If you are correct about their trollish nature, then don't feed them. BTW, I 'preciate you sticking up for ole Randykitty. Lord knows he needs all the help he can get. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:59, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

• Fair enough. I suppose it is better for an admin to be too lenient as opposed to too trigger-happy. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 05:03, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks, I appreciate that. Unfortunately I couldn't stay on my best lenient behavior very long. Drmies (talk) 05:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

ANI is not for behaviour?

Hi Drmies, I happened to be browsing ANI, and noticed your recent comment, "ANI is for incidents, not behavior". You previously made a similar policy statement in a discussion I was involved with. I wrote a general observation about some confusion over this policy, which you may not have seen. My reading of current policy is that ANI is precisely the right place to make reports of user behaviour. If you know different, I would appreciate a pointer to the policy that says otherwise. Burninthruthesky (talk) 10:03, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

• The case of Dan56 is about longterm behavior. Maybe I should have spoken Bradspeak. I see that you said "If a user feels conduct is the overriding issue, they are entitled to have their concerns about conduct heard" (my apologies for having missed your post at AN)--well, I don't really care for much for what one feels; I care much more for what someone can argue. This is not group time where we can open up about our feelings: you're talking about a board where, at heart, editors go to get other editors blocked. I don't understand what you see in the J Doug McLean closure: there was nothing actionable there, at least the discussion didn't show that--it didn't even conclusively show highly problematic (read, blockable) behavior. What you seem to miss is that longterm conduct can become disruptive of course, highly disruptive even, but it rarely revolves around incidents, and in most cases the individual instances by themselves do not rise to a blockable level. And whether the accumulation of individual instances may well rise to a blockable level, an ANI discussion is often not the best place for such a discussion because of the nature of ANI.

  Now, I'm not one for policy: I prefer to keep my eyes closed and be guided by my feelings. But the notifications on top of AN are quite clear: "Issues appropriate for this page could include: General announcements, discussion of administration methods, ban proposals, block reviews, and backlog notices. If you are seeking administrator intervention for a specific issue or dispute, you should post it at the Administrators' noticeboard for incidents (ANI) instead." We may quibble over what "specific issue or dispute" may mean, how "specific" it needs to get, but I am not sure it was ever clear what was desired in the Lift case. The most reasonable thing one can ask for in a case like that is a topic ban, and those typically are decided by consensus of some sort, on AN ("ban proposals"). If one wants an admin to step in (into what?) and say something--well, it greatly depends on what someone wants to say, but ANI is just not a great forum for that either. Policy has little to do with that: it's a matter of strategy. Or strategery, if you will. Was an individual administrator, with some content knowledge, ever asked to look into it? That could have been a much faster and much less cumbersome way to go. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 19:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtful response. What I wanted I suppose was relief from the time and effort spent unpicking arguments in order to defend myself, others, and the article. I didn't care what the remaining disputed sentences said (provided they were correct), but I did care about the way we were being treated. I thought it would be irresponsible to the community if I just walked away without at least informing you all what had happened.

Of course hurt feelings are irrelevant to any investigation, which can only look at behaviour. I agree that admins need a feel for what's right, in exercising good judgement; they are also required to follow policy. Requesting a conduct evaluation is advised by WP:CONDUCTDISPUTE, and WP:CIV#Dealing with incivility step 8. Admins "are very capable of identifying policy-breaching conduct if their attention is drawn to clear and specific evidence." Having seen some more discussions at WP:ANI, I see it's common for users to propose a specific admin action, but I haven't seen any guideline which says that is required.

You ask about others becoming involved. Originally there was a dispute between two users, which I joined to try and assist. Specialist help was sought from project noticeboards which brought extensive help from an experienced and knowledgeable editor. There was also a close by an admin which silenced discussion for a while, but it flared up again. For reasons I think I've explained, I was uneasy about discussing strategy with other users. As things progressed, I felt that ANI was the only option.

I notice you also raised the question of what replaces WP:RFC/U now it's gone. Yes, we need a venue to discuss longterm behaviour issues. The advice given at the time was, "Other components of the dispute resolution process should be used, such as ANI and ArbCom." If you think that ANI is not the best place for such a discussion, where is? Burninthruthesky (talk) 10:40, 17 February 2015 (UTC); edited 11:10, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

If a specific administrative action is not required (it doesn't have to be a block, I suppose--it could be a slap on the wrist, or a revdel, or whatever) then there is no point in bringing it to ANI. ANI is for administrative action. I am clearly less concerned with finding guidelines for everything than you are. As for the close of the RfC/U discussion, well, you'd have to ask Cenarium. I do not know if that comment, "bring it to ANI or ArbCom" followed from the comments in the discussion or whether it was their own comment. We obviously can't go to ArbCom every time an editor farts in a packed room, and the atmosphere of ANI is simply not conducive to discussions that require lots of evidence of patterns etc. and don't necessarily end with a ban or a block. I participated in that discussion, though briefly; Floquenbeam's comment in that thread has the right tone of despair. Drmies (talk) 15:25, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Heather Bresch

You previously thanked me for not pinging you about this page; I didn't know if that meant I was becoming too much of a pest? I was trying to get advice here on how to proceed productively with two editors with strong negative opinions about COI participation, but just got a "no comment" type of response and was wondering if you could take a look; maybe give some advice on how an editor in my position can proceed productively to bring it up to GA CorporateM (Talk) 02:56, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Here's what I don't understand about paid editing on Wikipedia; maybe you, or Drmies, or someone else can explain it to me. How is it ethical, or appropriate, for an encyclopedia to present material written by paid PR people without disclosure to the reader? The average reader, coming upon Bresch's biography, will have no idea that large parts of it may have been drafted by a PR person under her employ, just as they would have no idea that significant parts of our coverage of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill were written by BP's PR department.

It seems to me that any serious publisher would be ethically obligated to disclose that to the reader. Certainly no academic or scholarly publisher would find the lack of disclosure acceptable. I don't think any other reputable encyclopedia would accept it. If we aspire to be a serious, reputable reference work, then why do we accept this? Isn't there some ethical duty to inform the reader that significant parts of a given article were written by paid PR people? MastCell ^Talk 05:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

• MastCell, if I may intervene real quick: I have no answer for any of these questions, not having been involved on the policy side and not having a good opinion on what underlies this: the question of identity disclosure in the first place. I don't disagree with you, but in the meantime, absent clear policy and since I myself am not even getting paid by the WMF, I'm trying to help this nice Corporate Minion out by helping make stuff as neutral as it should be. (The flipside is, "if it's neutral and well-verified it doesn't matter who wrote it"--but I think the 1960s did away with that idea of neutrality.) Drmies (talk) 15:28, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@MastCell: The reason this is not a good analogy is because most serious publishers provide a clear and unambiguous disclosure of who the author is and content is discretely authored by a single person. Whereas on Wikipedia, we do not clearly identify any information about who wrote the article and lack the concept of authorship entirely.

However, regardless of the analogy's shortcomings, I think there is a compelling argument to provide such a disclosure to readers. You seem to presume that the lack of such disclosure is due to unethical paid editing, and not because of lethargy and a lack of consensus among the community. On the contrary, I actually proposed a disclosure template at Village Pump a while back and no meaningful discussion ensued. I am supportive of providing a disclosure to readers. I think a large part of why prior proposals along these lines have failed is because they were often raised in an attack-style and proposed distasteful, over-sized templates.

CorporateM (Talk) 07:29, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't agree that we "lack the concept of authorship entirely". Individual editors take great pride in their authorship of specific articles, and some people (ahem) even receive well-deserved real-life credit for their authorial work here. And of course we provide information about who writes our articles, through the "History" tab attached to each page. In fact, we provide a great deal more authorship information than any conventional published work, since it is literally possible to identify which author wrote any given word in any given article.

However, if a PR person (following our guidelines) provides text on the talkpage which is then incorporated into the article by other editors, then they've effectively ghost-written the article without leaving a direct trail of accountability or transparency, even for readers astute enough to review the official authorship record of the article (via the page history).

I didn't intend to place blame entirely on paid editors. I have never failed to be amazed by the lethargy (as you put it) and the ineffectual cluelessness (as I would put it) of the Wikipedia community when it comes to addressing serious, nuanced, grown-up issues. I think we both recognize that this issue isn't going to resolved by "community consensus". It's the role of the Foundation to develop a coherent conflict of interest policy, but in the meantime I think the best option is to talk directly to people who seem sensible and ethical and to try to understand why they don't see a problem here, when it seems blindingly obvious to me that a problem exists. MastCell ^Talk 07:53, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@MastCell:Regarding transparency in the edit-history, this can actually be achieved through an edit-summary from the merging editor or by using the Request Edit | G template to give the editor permission to make the edit themselves. Allowing corporate accounts would also aid in this purpose. However, I still see that as disclosure to editors, not readers.

What the community has been able to achieve consensus for is how to handle individual paid editors, even if not for an over-arching policy. Naturally it is not WMF's role to create and enforce policies, but what I personally would like to see them do is enforce the Terms of Use against paid editors that have already been banned via community consensus, but continue to astroturf the site persistently. It is these cases where the community needs legal resources to go after the source of these accounts, rather than chasing them down individually. Also, it has always been WMF's role to handle certain limited, extreme cases.

Certainly there are shortcomings to what I do, but I can think of no better way to handle it. The difficulty with such issues is that there is no solution that is without its drawbacks. CorporateM (Talk) 09:33, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

" the lethargy (as you put it) and the ineffectual cluelessness (as I would put it) of the Wikipedia community": someone pinged me? Drmies (talk) 15:30, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Are you confessing to something Drmies? Har har. Personally, I'm looking to expand out of Wikipedia; I've been looking into starting a deck-building business and/or a similar service on Yelp, which I feel is generally more advanced in its feature set and dealings with businesses represented on the site than Wikipedia is. (might be a bit awkward as they are also a client). CorporateM (Talk) 17:13, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Sarplaninac

I understand your concerns about the copyright, but you removed correct information about the breed, and returned incorrect. For example, the correct size of Sarplaninac is one from FCI Standard - not the information you returned to the site. In addition, you removed picture of purebred dog and returned the one that does not properly represent the breed. Also, some links that I corrected are broken again. If you want to describe physical appearance of the breed in detail - the only relevant description is the one from FCI standard. On dog shows, it is not open for interpretation. The other option is to reduce that section to one paragraph (as description of German Shepherd). But what you returned back to that page will disqualify dog from dog shows and for breeding. I'm sure that was not your intention. Please let's work together to improve this article.--N Jordan (talk) 16:28, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

• Sorry, but that is totally not my job. I have a dog, it has very short hair. You can improve to your heart's content but you cannot just copy and past. By the way, we are not here to describe what this or that dog ought to look like according to this or that organization lest it be disqualified from something; I assume there's a link to the organization's site in the EL section. As a personal opinion I'll add that I dislike racism when it comes to dogs as well as people. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 17:27, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Do not be to harsh on standards and purebred dogs, their original idea was to help people and dogs. If you decide to to buy a puppy, it would be a good idea to know what is the size and character you may expect. The idea of dog shows is to select best dogs for breeding purposes. Some details are not part of standard just for esthetic reasons. For example, the size of dogs is very often limited in order to maintain working capabilities and health. Short hair is perfect for apartments, but not for snowy mountains. My first dog was Sharplaninac, it was disqualified from breeding (missing tooth, too big, too long, short hair). I didn't stop to like him, he was my pet. There is no need for a pet dog to be purebred at all. You can find a great mixed-breed companion in SPCA shelter. But if you decide to breed that dog, you wouldn't be sure about the size, appearance, and character of her offsprings. BTW, do you have Sharplaninac? --N Jordan (talk) 18:19, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Sadie is a mutt. The best dog in the world. Drmies (talk) 18:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Sjaak Troost

Hi there MIES, all well? Hopefully so.

How do I solve this conundrum? With the help of the mighty Google Translator, I found out that "commissaris" in Dutch is also similar to "director". Thus, how to translate the reference in this guy's article properly?

Happy Carnival (here I am, disguised as a man of "not half-measures"), kind regards --84.90.219.128 (talk) 17:51, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

• Wait--you asking me about a Feijenoorder? I'm sorry, but I have some convictions. Randykitty, I think you hail from a bit closer to Rotterdam, don't you? I lived a million miles away. Drmies (talk) 18:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
• Hey, that link is going nowhere. In all honesty I'm not exactly sure, as a liberal arts kind of person, what a commisaris is. I know what they do: they collect a paycheck, drive a Mercedes, and live in Het Gooi. Drmies (talk) 18:02, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Cracked me up, as always my friend, keep it up. Here's worse (about a PSVer), can you pitch in in Andrés Guardado's reference #30? Please forgive me for this unspeakable action :( --84.90.219.128 (talk) 18:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

• Oh man. Come ON! Drmies (talk) 18:10, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Peter Ruckman

Hello Drmies,

There is a discussion at WP:BLPN about long-term editing patterns at Peter Ruckman. Attention from an administrator is needed. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:56, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:46, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

My ban appeal discussion

Hi,

I noticed that Nick-D selected Peacemaker67 to invite to discussion about my ban appeal (diff). Was that canvassing?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:30, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I would have thought that, given I reported you in the first place, it was quite reasonable that I be advised that you were appealing your TBan. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 23:34, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

That is not true. It was Joy who reported me (link).--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:03, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Ah. my mistake. In that case, did you inform Joy that you were appealing? Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 00:31, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

No. Is that relevant for possible canvassing issue?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:38, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

In order to avoid any suggestion that a TBanned editor "slipped one past" editors with an interest in the outcome by not advising them of their appeal, I would expect that procedural fairness would see that those most likely to be affected by a decision should be advised of an appeal. I am one of the editors most likely to be affected, and it is only reasonable that I be aware of your appeal and have the opportunity to comment on it. While there may be no requirement for you to do so under WP policies or guidelines, I consider Nick-D's action in alerting me to your appeal was in accordance with principles of procedural fairness, and does not in any way constitute canvassing. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 00:53, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• Let's have Nick-D explain. I can see some sense in Peacemaker's words (though I wish they would strike a friendlier tone). Drmies (talk) 04:26, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• We have a lot of history, Drmies. It's not reasonable to expect me to erase my memory, is it? Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 09:36, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• I do it every week--I erase my Wiki hard drive. Drmies (talk) 15:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I notified Peacemaker67 as they had been significantly involved in the thread which lead to the ban being enacted, and were likely to have an interest in the appeal but not likely to have been aware that it had been made they're not an admin and are unlikely to follow WP:AN (I am an admin, and do follow that page and ping people who might be interested in discussions there from time to time). It's perfectly standard stuff, and I agree that Antidiskriminator should have notified the editors involved in the ban anyway to demonstrate good faith. Nick-D (talk) 10:37, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I think the "standard stuff" would be "to inform editors on all "sides" of a debate" or members of relevant wikiproject (WikiProject Serbia) not "by selectively notifying editors who have or are thought to have a predetermined point of view or opinion". Taking in consideration that editor Nick-D selected only one editor (Peacemaker67) who was their fellow coordinator at WikiProject Military History and presented their !vote based precisely on !vote of Peacemaker67 I am concerned that this was canvassing. The basis for my opinion is WP:CAN behavioral guideline.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:28, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

"Standard" wikilawyering from Antid. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 12:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• I think that Peacemaker67's comments in this discussion probably can additionally justify my concerns that any editor who would select only Peacemaker67 to invite to discussion about my ban appeal would violate WP:CAN behavioral guideline. Especially if that editor would have presented their oppose !vote (diff) almost immediatelly after the oppose !vote of Peacemaker67 using also Peacemaker67's !vote to justify their !vote (diff).
• I might be wrong here and in that case I would sincerely apologize. I accept suggestion to invite "the editors involved in the ban" to ban appeal discussion. If this advice was followed by all involved parties here there would be no violation of WP:CAN guideline. If I decide to appeal again I intend to follow this advice and to invite all involved editors to eventual future topic ban discussion.
• In the meantime I hope that now, after all editors involved in this issue presented their explanations, Drmies can reply to my question if Nick-D followed WP:CAN when they selected only Peacemaker67 to invite to discussion about my ban appeal (diff)? With hand on the heart.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:02, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• Well, I have nothing to add here, except this signature: Drmies (talk) 15:39, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey! You! Imagemaker!

Octopus The Verdict 1899

Albert Arnz - Jagdgesellschaft auf einem Waldweg (1879)

Albert Arnz - Blick auf die Burg Regenstein im Harz

Albert Arnz - Reisende vor dem Golf von Neapel

Albert Arnz - Heimkehrende Langhornrinder in der Campagna Romana (1879)

Whoever you are, if you're good with images and can tweak one for a valued contributor, please mosey on over to User_talk:Rosiestep#Kate_Brown and do a good deed. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 04:20, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but I lack the requisite skills. BTW, are they really holding Women's History Month on Mars? EEng (talk) 04:48, 18 February 2015 (UTC) Please don't send me to ANI for that. Please don't send me to ANI for that. Please don't send me to ANI for that. Please don't send me to ANI for that. Please don't send me to ANI for that.

• It'ld take me about 15 minutes to replace the text and put the background to black, but then you'd have something which said "8 March" next to an image of a female trepanner, with a symbol on her sleeve somewhat reminiscent of this lot. Did someone think "Hmm… drill down!". I've got to spend 3 hours at a funeral tomorrow with a professional designer; I'll print the Swedish banner out and show it to her. Stating the bleedin' obvious, San Francisco's a leading centre of graphic design; maybe they should ask Alexandra Fischer. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 12:46, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

"Female trepanner"? What, only men are allowed to put holes in heads? EEng (talk) 13:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Trepanning is boring. --Dweller (talk) 13:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Not for the trepannee, I would think. EEng (talk) 15:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

No, the trepannee, by definition, is bored. --Dweller (talk) 17:06, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Facepalm Oh. I get it now. EEng (talk) 17:25, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Or ... Hafspajen (talk) 15:15, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Um, I don't get it. EEng (talk) 15:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

File:SMirC-ass.svg Hafspajen (talk) 15:46, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

The asshole of a sentient orange??? It's at time like this I realise I'm not alone in the world Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 15:58, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Um, I still don't get it. EEng (talk) 17:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, Engie, in that case I better will not enlighten you. I prefer you in your innocent ways. |Hafspajen (talk) 17:43, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• How come we don't have any user yet called User:Octopus The Verdict 1899 ... ? Hafspajen (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• Hafs is just saying I'm a bit of an ass for not thinking of Californian orange crate labels. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 17:53, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

^{No, it was more pornographic.} Hafspajen (talk) 09:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• EEng, I don't get half of what's going on on this page. Perhaps we should discuss this on the meta talk page. Drmies (talk) 18:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you and I back slowly away and when we get to the door TURN AND RUN FOR IT! EEng (talk) 22:15, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• I feel a right eejit now, for mistaking Ariel for Baskerville. I've done the banner in Old Baskerville. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• emotional tone or general attitude: right eejit now, Hafspajen (talk) 20:19, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• emotional tone or kind of rictus: door's locked, can't run Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 00:05, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

We are tucked here left to discuss the sexual severances of the oranges. Hafspajen (talk) 09:22, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• Isn't it about time some Herr Doktor showed up to tell us all our edits-by-dummies place unnecessary load on WP's servers? EEng (talk) This page is an insane asylum. And Dr. M, I really am serious in my request for comment here (just in case you didn't see it).

Engie, even if you know nothing about sexuality, you are the worst popinjay + flibbertigibbet that filled Wikipedias talks - so behave. Hafspajen (talk) 13:01, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Come here and I'll point the spout at YOU!

Don't call names, you ruttish onion-eyed flirt-gill!

You have been noticed using opprobrious epithets. It's payback time from the Shakespeare Insult Generator! To activate the Insultspout and receive fresh insults, click here. Note that all insults generated by the Spout are guaranteed literary and cultured, unlike the nasty things you said, you vain fat-kidneyed clack-dish.

Please note, also, that I prefer to be addressed by the more formal E Engie. EEng (talk) 13:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC) EEEEEEEEEEEEEEngie, kiss me. (secretly, so Martinevans123 wont notice, Hafspajen (talk) 14:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Just to say

Even though you annoyed me a bit during my last trip to ANI before this one (or was it the one before that? -- no, wait -- there have been so many recently...) I must compliment you on you evenhandedness. EEng (talk) 04:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• Hehe, the feeling is mutual. I should have checked, though, before I closed that thread: Edokter is an admin so he's always right. Anyway, all the best to you. Hey, you're a bit technical, aren't you? Perhaps you can have a look at the section above and see if you can give Rosiestep a hand? I'd appreciate it. Drmies (talk) 04:49, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Which feeling is mutual -- the annoyance, or impulse to compliment? EEng (talk) 14:38, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• Yes. :) Drmies (talk) 15:30, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• I see I should have typed faster. Thanks for checking it out, though. Drmies (talk) 04:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I DONT WANT TO DESTROY THE FUN BUT THIS IS ANN ARTIST WITH NO ARTICLE, Albert Arnz http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Arnz ...or maybe an Ann Arbor artist? ... "Is You Is or Is You Arnz My Painter"?

• Whooaah! Edokter is an ADMIN??!! Martinevans123 (talk) 14:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Standards were lower in the past. Presciently, given the origin of the contretemps, someone there complained that he seemed averse to edit summaries. EEng (talk) 15:24, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, that comment was made at my RfA also. Hey y'all, nobody's perfect, and I should know. Drmies (talk) 15:30, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, a great relief we're not seeking perfection, really. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:33, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Stoking fires

Actually wasn't really trying to stoke the fire. Should have just messaged you directly though about that NPA violation. Will do so next time. Thank you for handling this. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 05:06, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Just a thought but maybe he was drunk or something at the time? I don't agree with his actions but haven't seen him go off like that before spouting non-sense. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 06:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Meltdown in progress

Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Angels_on_the_head_of_a_pin EEng (talk) 05:22, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Miss Super Talent of the World redux

Page is back, user is back. Somehow they managed to incorporate a source from a JYJ fansite, which has nothing at all to do with their little pageant. So weird. Anyway, do what you will. And thank you, as always. Shinyang-i (talk) 05:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• Done--thanks. Drmies (talk) 20:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

There is also Supertalent of the World 2015 Season 6. Same editor, but this time the AfD-template was removed... The Banner talk 22:32, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• MelanieN, congrats on your new magic wand; can I give you some advice? Don't do what I just did--speedily delete that article (even if for all the right reasons). Better: go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Supertalent of the World 2015 Season 6 and close it there, speedily--that saves at least two or three mouse clicks. Most likely cause of injury for admins: RSI. Drmies (talk) 23:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I have made some New Admin Mistakes, but speedy-deleting something that could have been speedy-deleted more efficiently hasn't been one of them. Or if it was, I was too New-Admin to realize it. I have been careful to avoid injury so far - for example, putting on gloves so that I can hygienically delete a sandbox (see User talk:Dennis Brown#Chicken shit). --MelanieN (talk) 04:23, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, that was stinky. Hey, welcome aboard, Melanie. I hope you enjoy. Drmies (talk) 01:53, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Herr Doktor Mies!

Urban Priol German 007

My W#aterloo. Hafspajen (talk) 13:07, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

As a lover of the German language in all its glorious verbaciousness, I thank you for coming to its defense, and to the defense of German-speaking people. Vielen Dank. Softlavender (talk) 07:01, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Verbaciousness??? Surely you mean verbaciouschnellzertutmirleidverlorenungkeitnisness. EEng (talk) 14:43, 18 February 2015 (UTC) Presumably you've seen this but occasionally I run into someone who hasn't.

• Well, I didn't mean to be too hard on anyone and I'm sorry if I was. Drmies (talk) 16:45, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Ohferchrissakes don't take it back now. <frownieface>. Vee haf vays off dealing mit people like you, und zey're not very pretty. Softlavender (talk) 02:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC) Yes, EEng, I didn't just crawl out from under a rock.

You mean Not-Pretty Fairy? EEng (talk) 07:14, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Very interesting EEng (talk) 04:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, I didn't realize until afterward that I closed an ANI on a fellow Dutchman. Doesn't change the underlying facts of course. Drmies (talk) 02:45, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

That was the grand irony of it all. Dramatic irony -- it'll fuck you every time. As they say. Softlavender (talk) 02:48, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• I think I'd pay some Dutchmen to set fire to Lord Snowdon. See also Talk:Prawn_cocktail#Degrees_of_irony. EEng (talk) 02:54, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
  • I learned something: a prawn cocktail is what we call a shrimp cocktail. It comes with a lot of irony and a lot of water if you get them from Walmart, the big ones with ten dozen shrimps. Drmies (talk) 03:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• Oh look! Mrs. Molesworth is on the case. (Might be one for the Museum.) Softlavender (talk) 05:08, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Whose Museum? EEng (talk) 05:34, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• I can't help it, but this headline made me think of "Herr Doktor Klöbner!". De728631 (talk) 10:22, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• Wait--Müller-Lüdenscheidt denies Klöbner the simple pleasure of a rubber duckie? That's mean. Drmies (talk) 16:01, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• Let the record reflect that I did not add that disturbing photo to this thread, which I started in all sincerity. My faith in Hafspajen's unfailing good taste is starting to ... fail. -- Softlavender (talk) 01:51, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Stop at 4

Help me understand how this works: A couple of days ago, I redirected an article I nom'd for deletion (Parker Reck) as that article didn't meet notability guidelines. A sock of a currently blocked user (Kbabej) removed the template to contest its deletion (he had created the article). As a suggestion from an administrator, I redirected the article to Stop at 4 after rewriting it to focus on the campaign rather than the deceased child whose parents started the campaign. I'm not convinced the Stop at 4 article meets notability guidelines, either, and feel it will be of no loss to the encyclopedia if it's deleted. Once deleted, does that also mean the article it was redirected from will also be deleted? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• First things first: I only figured out you were involved when I saw the AfD notification. :) Yes, I did see the SPI, after I blocked a related account. I haven't looked at what was "under" the redirect, but in general such a move (to focus on the campaign) is right and proper. So yes, if the Stop at 4 article gets deleted, the redirect should be deleted as well. BTW, that's a fine mess, that SPI and all those accounts and the articles they're involved with. Drmies (talk) 02:44, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I know, right? I'm amazed the blocked editor was allowed to operate in such a fashion for so long without anyone challenging the articles being created. I was also amazed that the SPI I filed yesterday was dismissed, but -- that's another story. Anyway, there are a bunch of those articles created by one editor that are - shall we say - "related". Yes, a fine mess, indeed. And thanks for the reply to my question. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 02:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

DoRD was nice enough to run CU and confirmed the sockness of that Kittykane account. Drmies (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I saw it! Just the result I expected. My thanks to DoRD. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 18:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Alan Baker (philosopher)

I noticed that you've nominated "Alan Baker (philosopher)" for deletion. As you probably saw, I nominated "Alan Baker (shogi)" for deletion almost a year ago, but the result was a "no consensus" keep. My nomination was based upon Baker's notability (or lack thereof) as a shogi player which was the primary focus of the version of the article I originally saw . Others, however, felt that Baker was notable for his academic record, so the article's name was changed and the focus shifted in that direction. While I think Baker's shogi achievements are commendable and such info is probably OK to be included in the article if properly sourced per WP:NNC, I personally do not feel that shogi contributes in any way to his Wikipedia notability. I guess I should post this on the new AfD page, but I'm not sure if it's really acceptable for me to do so since I have previously nominated a form of the article for deletion. My arguments then were solely based upon any notability derived from shogi and, in all likelihood, would probably be what I would argue this time around too. - Marchjuly (talk) 02:45, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• I didn't know, but meanwhile another editor commented on the AfD about the subject's academics. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:11, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

No problem. The article has actually been renamed a couple of times since the last AfD so it's kinda confusing. - Marchjuly (talk) 04:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

ZZIIPPRA accept

Константин А. Савицкий - Подозрительные люди

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Labrador_Retriever&diff=647752880&oldid=647750993

Hafspajen (talk) 14:13, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

There are loads of them

Dropping the oranges

• Where the welcome was coming from, I dunno. AGF squared, just givehim a Simplified Manual of Style. Hafspajen (talk) 14:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• I'm out of GF (sorry Yngvadottir) but left an unblock condition on their talk page. Drmies (talk) 15:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Ah, that is slightly misleading - the so called good one - you know, it is a rather mixed editing. Because there are some good edits mixed with less intelligent ones. And some are just stupid, reverting to a previous version long time ago. And again some are just pure vandalism. Hafspajen (talk) 17:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The vanguard by Pippich. Here we see Hungarian soldiers forced to take point by their Austrian commanders. They are looking for the field marshall of the field mice.

No problem, Herr Dr. Habil. Mies. They made an unstellar edit without edit summary after my final warning. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't like it much; I'd rather this editor be brought into the fold, which is (perversely) why I made it such a long block. Drmies (talk) 01:48, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I guessed as much, and I see I was hopelessly confused yesterday after wrestling with Swedish sources and Laocoon-like prose - it was another editor who ignored my final warning. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:29, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

BEFORE you go to your Bear-Ball - He's back. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Contributions/2601:B:AC80:7B6:C1A9:B209:AE1F:9748 - Hafspajen (talk) 20:27, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Well, I took care of the Labrador, but Yngvadottir was the big dog with the block. Well, medium to large dog, I'd say. I mean I say--sorry Floq. I'm sorry, there's no point in saying "I say" when I'm already saying it, isn't there. Sorry Floq. Shit, I could have left the previous apology--sorry for the extra redundancy. Drmies (talk) 20:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

A medium to small dog - with a medium-large one

He is back again. https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Labrador_Retriever&curid=79280&diff=648091897&oldid=648086741 Hafspajen (talk) 21:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• And again ... Labrador. SagaciousPhil - Chat 21:17, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Start seriously ask myself the question if this is a) someone mentaly retarded - 0R - b) someone just teasing us, because they think it's fun. Hafspajen (talk) 21:20, 20 February 2015 (UTC).

Wonder if they change IP adress this easy if not easier to just protect article. But then of course will find an other. Range- block, is that something that can be used - not that I really know how it works. Hafspajen (talk) 21:31, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• A range block is needed for the IPv6s. Hopefully one of the stalkers who's looking will know how. If not, Drmies knows who to ask. For now, pending changes helps, except when untechnical clots like me try to disallow changes and get all tangled up. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) Took care of that. :) Elockid ^(Talk) 21:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• "Praise the Lord" - Hafspajen (talk) 22:29, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hm, what a weird redirect... Hafspajen (talk) 22:31, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• I think I'm going to cry soon ... ... yet another IP address. SagaciousPhil - Chat 16:07, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Twas in that place o' Scotland's isle,

That bears the name o' auld King Coil,

Upon a bonnie day in June,

When wearin' thro' the afternoon,

Twa dogs, that were na thrang at hame,

Forgather'd ance upon a time.

The first I'll name, they ca'd him Caesar,

Was keepit for His Honor's pleasure:

His hair, his size, his mouth, his lugs,

Shew'd he was nane o' Scotland's dogs;

But whalpit some place far abroad,

Whare sailors gang to fish for cod.

(Burns)

That makes complete sense to me except I don't get that bit at the end about gangs of sailors burning the cod. Also there are a lot of misspellings. EEng (talk) 00:18, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

To fish for cod. Burns is the poet. Continues in next part of the poem. Hafspajen (talk) 01:54, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Please tell me you knew I was joking, else I'll be forced to cod you. EEng (talk) 03:12, 22 February 2015 (UTC) possibly with the Sacred Cod.

That was a joke, no need to spoil it, an old joke. But don'y yo ever come close with a damn fish like that. Hate trout slapping. Hafspajen (talk) 12:06, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:EXCESSALLCAPSWORDS

What does ZZIIPPRA mean? Christ, the number of weird all-caps "words" in thread titles on this page is getting irritating. <frown> Perhaps I'd best unwatch this page. Softlavender (talk) 02:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

"Zipra lip", obviously. EEng (talk) 03:12, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

• Softlavender, if you'd been born some twenty years earlier you could have learned your Chaucer from John Hurt Fisher, whom I just wrote up. Who was your teacher there? David Aers? Drmies (talk) 03:29, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

You admins -- always writing someone up. EEng (talk) 04:18, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

• And please discuss the talk page in the proper forum: User talk:Drmies/talk. Drmies (talk) 03:32, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

• WP:ZZIIPPRA goes exactly NOWHERE. In terms of my alma mater, I never studied Chaucer there, having had good enough tutelage in highschool. I was there during the middle of the Reynolds Price era, but never studied with him, even though by my junior year I had moved into what I would quickly discover was the "gay dorm" (it was informally billed as the "non-frat" or "artsy" dorm -- the latter being why I moved in). James Applewhite was also a big name when I was there, but I didn't study with him either. I'm trying to remember my various English profs' names. I don't think any are on wiki. One was Victor (Hugo) Strandberg, who wrote an interesting thing on The Sound and the Fury and the Eroica Symphony. Wallace Jackson, who taught 18th C British lit but also wrote cool articles in the Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. A Shakespeare prof whose name I have thankfully forgotten, as he had me come to his office so he could scope me out [to possibly proposition me] for S&M after I wrote a term paper on the grotesque in Shakespeare (I don't make this stuff up; and I only figured out his intentions years after the fact and after hearing reliable info that he was into that with students). I recall having a crush on my Victorian Novels prof my freshman year; his minor specialty was Thomas Hood but I don't recall his name. I was actually pre-med for 15 seconds, that is until I hit Organic Chemistry; I was in James Bonk's huge lecture class that fateful day when a pie was thrown at him (LOL it's even mentioned in his wiki article!). Softlavender (talk) 04:54, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Which tire--that's brilliant. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 05:14, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Haha, hadn't heard or read that story ... Bonk seems somewhat evasive in the Snopes article; I wonder exactly how much is true. :) Softlavender (talk) 05:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

• Bonk: The Curious Coupling Of Sex And Science by Mary Roach. Must be Archy's daughter. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:34, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

PEPOLE - (translate -people) kindly give up logic. Don't start looking for it. Look up creativity, dadaism, abstract - and freedom. Hafspajen (talk) 12:15, 22 February 2015 (UTC)^{And don't autosign, if not signed it was meant to be so- this pages owner knows who's who.}

• the anti-philosophy of spontaneous acrobatics. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 12:26, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

• For the record (apparently I like records), EEng did not sign, auto or otherwise, his addition of this subthread's title. Let that now be revealed. Softlavender (talk) 12:30, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #13216

I'd like to speak you (privately, unless you insist otherwise) about an open UTRS ticket. It's a long-winded one, so do you prefer requesting an account on UTRS to read it first hand? Otherwise I could e-mail you. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 20:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• Hmm--I don't know if a UTRS account is useful to me. Yeah, let me go ahead and do that. It's probably more exciting than MyActiveHealth.com or whatever. Drmies (talk) 01:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Alright, I activated your account. Whenever you have time, it would be appreciated if you could read the appeal I linked to and let me know what your thoughts are (you can e-mail me or leave a "Quick Comment" in the appeal itself). Thanks in advance. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 02:57, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Query: Can the Uterus tool be used to deal with editors blocked for being dicks? EEng (talk) 06:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The Uterus tool deals with all kinds of blocked editors, regardless of what body part they act like. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 06:06, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Is it warm and inviting, or creepy and menacing? EEng (talk) 06:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

UTRS Account Request

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. Drmies (talk)

Precious again

reviewing eyes
Thank you for reviewing in the Contributor copyright investigations/PumpkinSky, you did a lot to clarify! Paraphrasing (I hope not too closely): If everybody who read this looked at one more article it could be over today. - You are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Three years ago, you were the 32nd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize. (Remember the line you approved for DYK: "The calm already contains the catastrophe", and from Great Dismal Swamp maroons: "These groups are very inspirational. As details unfold, we are increasingly able to show how people have the ability, as individuals and communities, to take control of their lives, even under oppressive conditions."?) - If I had to praise you today, the size of the sapphire would outgrow the words, so I single out the edit that impressed me as most constructive (ever). Seek joy, boy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you Gerda! I appreciate your kind words, and your many contributions to the project. I like the gift as I like the giver, and I like this gift. The boy in question, by the way, needs to start peeing properly--in the pot. Drmies (talk) 15:59, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
• And I just came across a remark by Rosie (then aged 5): "Men can't even MAKE children". Drmies (talk) 18:19, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Wise little person! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Please let Rosie know that men trigger the process. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:31, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll agree only if you agree...

...to change such unnecessary verbosity as "unnecessary modal verbosity" to "unnecessary verbosity". Otherwise, what you are requesting would seem unfair. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:40, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• You're not an arb anymore so I can speak my mind: it's the modality of the verbosity that brings out the mother-in-law in me. Answer me this, Professor Floq, do you really want to sound like an ESPN commentator? "He will catch the ball" when the guy actually already is catching it? Surjuzly. Also, we're going out to a fancy beer bar tonight: you are happy to join. The place is so loud that any verbosity is lost immediately. Drmies (talk) 20:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Well, you're the professional English expert, so maybe you're right. But I was describing a conditional occurance - someone meaner than me *might* do something, but *if* they did, it would seem pointless. Isn't that what "would" is for? I assume that's what "modal" means? Of everything that's ever been said about me on WP, "talks like an ESPN commentator" hurts the most. Even more than "seems to work for the Santorum presidential campaign", which up until now I thought would never be equalled. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
    • (*warms to subject in righteous indignation*) In fact, isn't what you're suggesting i should have said the thing that sports guys usually do? "If he catches that ball, he scores a touchdown" - the problem with ESPN is a lack of modality, isn't it? --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:17, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Floquenballs? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:48, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• No, Floquenbeam, I'm talking about modality used in a situation devoid of it. "She will score"--at the very same time the gal is running it in. (OK, there's no girls' football on ESPN, nor Floquenballs, but hey.) There's a fine example in here in the preterite--or what should have been the preterite all along. BTW, I didn't mean to insult you, and I had no idea I could have topped my Sanctorum remark. Sorry. Drmies (talk) 22:59, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• "Jackson was married to a woman named Ruth until divorce." Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 23:16, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

  Yeah, by that time I was a bit out of energy. It needs fixing. Drmies (talk) 23:25, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Well, I read the relevant part of the source, and it's probably libellous- I don't think anything more could be added other than "Jackson was married", and even that might not be notable. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 23:46, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Done- there's no article for Dave Houghton, drummer. Runs the Drum Shop at Southsea apparently, according to his fan, who asked if there were any other Houghton fans out there. The conversation quickly veered to a discussion on how great Graham Maby was as a bass player (and this was on Drumforum, for the Vintage and Modern Drumming Community). List of collectibles. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 09:40, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

• Hey, thanks for looking over my shoulder. "Was"? I had to look Maby up, to make sure he wasn't dead--this was Farinata's mistake too, of course. Yeah, they can't all be Neil Peart or Simon Phillips, but I would have thought this guy could pay the bills, working for The Man. Drmies (talk) 19:51, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

translation

Hi DrMies, have you had a chance to look at the draft of my article in my sandbox yet? here. If you are too busy or if this is beyond your expertise, I can submit it for review? What would you advice me? Best wishes, Pigmentkleur (talk) 10:28, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

• Hey, sorry, it totally slipped my mind. I'll get to it, I promise. Drmies (talk) 19:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
• OK Pigmentkleur, I had a quick look. I think you can move it to mainspace, though it's not perfect yet. If I were you, I'd ask Mandarax if he could have a look at it--he is not only a top-quality editor, but also one of the most generous and goodlooking human beings I've ever known. Drmies (talk) 02:00, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I changed some more things, but I'm not sure what you mean with the reference template... I also contacted Mandarax. Regards, Pigmentkleur (talk) 09:47, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Shaygan_Kheradpir

Any interest in taking a look here before it gets archived without response? Or have you reached your CorporateM limit for the month? It is unfortunately a byproduct of following WP:COI that I end up begging editors endlessly to spend time on effected articles and I very much doubt anyone at COIN is going to have an interest in moderating between two paid editors. You'll see on Talk that @MelanieN: chimed in, but didn't want to be a decision maker and told us to work it out between ourselves, but the ed is just repeating the same arguments over again and I am not allowed to edit the article (though the other ed is not following the same rules). CorporateM (Talk) 00:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

The Teahouse

Hello Drmies,

It is always nice to see respected administrators like Drmies stop by the Teahouse. We even had an arb, DGG, drop by a day or so ago. But we have a developing problem that may require use of the administrative toolkit. Yeah, I know I could undergo an RfA myself. All in good time. Now is now. So, I would be deeply grateful if you would take a close look at Frogger48. I know this editor is on your radar screen. I am very pleased about that. Thanking you in advance. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

• Very much a troll, likely a sockpuppet from what I've seen. At the least I'd remove both sections. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:56, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
• I noticed the activity at WT:Child protection; that led to the user's contribs/talk which led to the Teahouse. The irrationally pleasant responses there led me to not my mention my conviction that the user is trolling, but what is actually needed is an indef. Johnuniq (talk) 09:36, 22 February 2015 (UTC)